Africa

Nigerian-French singer Asa talks about her new album, Five, and the 'pressure' to be commercial.

The world population is already using the equivalent of 1.6 Earths to maintain the current way of life. Credit: Mario Osava/IPS

By Baher Kamal
MADRID, Jun 2 2022 (IPS)

As an introduction to this year’s World Environment Day on 5 June, this report deals with how the excesses of the world’s population, mostly in the wealthiest countries, are causing so much harm to Planet Earth.

For this purpose, the following account of some of the major facts and figures that the world’s largest multinational body–the United Nations Organisation– has been successively providing, should be enough to complete the picture.

It takes about 7,500 litres of water to make a single pair of jeans -- from the production of the cotton to the delivery of the final product to the store. And 85% of textiles end up in landfills or are incinerated; much so that every second, the equivalent of one garbage truck full of textiles is landfilled or burned

To start with, the fact that the richest 1% of the global population account for more greenhouse gas emissions than the poorest 50%.

In contrast, in the specific case of Africa –54 countries home to 1.4 billion humans– causes a negligible 2% to 3% of all global greenhouse emissions, however it falls victim to more than 80% of the world’s climate catastrophes.

Meanwhile, in high-income countries, the material footprint per capita – the amount of primary materials needed to meet the world’s needs — is more than 10 times larger than in low-income countries.

And the Group of 20 major economies (G20) accounts for 78% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Now see some major examples:

 

Fashion

Fashion is one of the most demanded and consumed in the world’s high-income countries.

The fashion industry (clothing and footwear) produces more than 8% of the greenhouse gases and 20% of global wastewater annually.

Example: it takes about 7,500 litres of water to make a single pair of jeans — from the production of the cotton to the delivery of the final product to the store.

And 85% of textiles end up in landfills or are incinerated; much so that every second, the equivalent of one garbage truck full of textiles is landfilled or burned.

Moreover, some 93 billion cubic metres of water — enough to meet the consumption needs of five million people — is used by the fashion industry annually.

 

Gobbling up the Earth’s resources

The current demand for natural resources is at an all-time high and continues to grow — for food, clothing, water, housing, infrastructure and other aspects of life, the UN reports.

Specifically, the extraction and processing of materials, fuels and food contribute half of total global greenhouse gas emissions and over 90% of biodiversity loss and water stress.

In short, resource extraction has more than tripled since 1970, including a 45% increase in fossil fuel use.

 

Fossil fuels

Greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector alone have more than doubled since 1970, with around 80% of this increase coming from road vehicles.

Currently, the transport sector is almost completely dependent on fossil fuels. It contributes approximately one quarter of all energy-related carbon dioxide emissions.

In spite of that, politicians continue to subsidise fossil fuels with 6 to 7 trillion dollars a year.

 

Food

Every year around the globe 1.3 billion tonnes of food is lost or wasted, that is 1/3 of all food produced for human consumption.

Food losses represent a waste of resources used in production such as land, water, energy and inputs, increasing the greenhouse gas emissions in vain, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) reports further

 

Water

Less than 3% of the world’s water is fresh (drinkable), of which 2.5% is frozen in Antarctica, the Arctic and glaciers. And humans are misusing and polluting water faster than nature can recycle and purify water in rivers and lakes.

With one shower of about 10 minutes a day, an average person consumes the equivalent of over 100,000 glasses of drinking water every year.

Severe water scarcity affects about 4 billion people, or nearly two thirds of the world population, at least one month each year.

 

Waste

Every year, an estimated 11.2 billion tonnes of solid waste is collected worldwide, and decay of the organic proportion of solid waste is contributing about 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Where waste cannot be avoided, recycling leads to substantial resource savings. For every tonne of paper recycled, 17 trees and 50% of water can be saved.

Recycling also creates jobs: the recycling sector employs 12 million people in Brazil, China and the United States alone. However, only 9% of all plastic waste ever produced has been recycled. About 12% has been incinerated, while the rest — 79% — has accumulated in landfills, dumps or the natural environment.

Around the world, one million plastic drinking bottles are purchased every minute, while up to 5 trillion single-use plastic bags are used worldwide every year. In total, half of all plastic produced is designed to be used only once — and then thrown away.

From 2010 to 2019, e-waste generated globally grew from 5.3 to 7.3 kilograms per capita annually. Meanwhile, the environmentally sound recycling of e-waste increased at a much slower pace – from 0.8 to 1.3 kilograms per capita annually.

 

Conclusion

In short, the world population is already using the equivalent of 1.6 Earths to maintain the current way of life.

But the fact is that ecosystems cannot keep up with such demand. Consequently, should the world continue to consume the resources at the rate it now does, at least five Earths would be needed.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series to mark World Environment Day June 5

Dead trees form an eerie tableau on the shores of Maubara Lake in Timor-Leste. Credit: UN Photo/Martine Perret

By Kwan Soo-Chen and David McCoy
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Jun 2 2022 (IPS)

It is increasingly clear that human health and wellbeing are being threatened everywhere because of global warming and environmental damage. Extreme weather events, sea level rise, increasing scarcity of freshwater, drought and high temperatures, combined with loss of biodiversity and other aspects of ecological degradation such as soil erosion and coral bleaching are all features of anthropogenic self-harm and an increasingly inhospitable planet for human society.

The 2015 Paris Agreement established a target of limiting global warming to no more than 1.5 °C above pre-industrial temperatures. We are now at 1.1°C of warming. A special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) paints a grim picture of what we would face should we reach 1.5°C of warming.

Crucially, failing to limit global warming to 1.5°C could result in the planet being pushed over a number of tipping points that would see accelerated and irreversible warming, with a variety of cascading effects (e. g. loss of the polar ice caps and massive dieback of the Amazonian rainforest) that would see billions of people facing an existential crisis.

Such concerns are not alarmist or exaggerated. The most recent set of Assessment Reports by the IPCC, released over the past few months, presents clear evidence that we are in trouble. Among other things, it projects that average global surface temperatures will most likely reach 1.5°C above pre-industrial averages before 2040.

The theme of World Environment Day this year – “Only One Earth” – correctly points out that all of humanity shares a common dependency upon a single planet. Perhaps nothing is more emblematic of the need for global solidarity and international cooperation than the planetary crisis we face. However, there are also regional differences in terms of both the impacts that will be experienced and the contributions that can be made to averting the crisis.

So, what can be said about South East Asia?

For one, in line with global warming trends and the continued rise in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the region has seen its annual mean temperature increase at a rate of 0.14°C to 0.20°C per decade since the 1960s. It is hotter than it used to be and the region can expect further increases in temperature. South East Asia is also expected to see an increased frequency of heatwaves.

The high humidity of the region will compound the high temperatures and increase the incidence of heat stroke and heat-related deaths. According to one study, heat-related mortality has already gone up by 61% in Thailand, Vietnam and the Philippines since the 1990s.

Higher temperatures and heat stress at 3°C warming are expected to reduce agriculture labour capacity by up to 50% and reduce agricultural productivity and food production. According to one study, this will lead to a 5% increase in crop prices from increased labour cost and production loss.

Rates of malnutrition will likely rise in the region, especially as crop production in other parts of the world come under stress. An example is the drought caused by 2015-2016 El-Niño in South East Asia, Eastern and Southern Africa which resulted in 20.5 million people facing acute food insecurity in 2016 and 5.9 million children became underweight. Rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere will also reduce the nutritional quality of certain crops and increase the likelihood of greater micronutrient deficiency.

The higher levels of energy and moisture in the atmosphere, produced by global warming, will translate into changing rainfall patterns. Increased annual average rainfall has already been observed in parts of Malaysia, Vietnam and southern Philippines.

Paradoxically, some parts of the region would observe a reduction in the number of wet days. According to the IPCC, the Philippines had observed fewer tropical cyclones, but they were more intense and destructive.

Changes to the hydrologic cycle will also impact on the availability of freshwater and undermine water security in the region. This will in turn lead to associated health problems due to lower levels of sanitation and hygiene.

In the Mekong River basin, due to both climate change and unsustainable levels of water consumption, it is projected that groundwater storage will reduce by up to 160 million cubic meters and that this will be accompanied by delta erosion and sea level rise, affecting coastal cities such as Bangkok and Ho Chi Minh City.

Three quarters of the cities in the South East Asia will experience more frequent floodings, potentially affecting tens of millions of people every year by 2030. In 2019, South East and East Asia had already recorded the internal displacement of 9.6 million people from cyclones, floods, and typhoons, representing almost 30% of all global displacements in that year.

Climate change and extreme weather events will also increase mental illness. Children, youth, women and elderly are particularly at risk of developing anxiety and depression, as well as post-traumatic disorder associated with extreme weather events and the loss of homes and other assets.

A recent nationwide survey by UNICEF Malaysia in 2020 found that 92% of young persons are already worried about the climate crisis (ecoanxiety).

These forecasts highlight the importance of GHG reductions and the preservation of vital ecosystems services. Unfortunately, progress on this front remains inadequate across the region. Between 2010 and 2019, the region saw an annual average increase of 1.8% in carbon intensity, and of 5.1% in CO2 emissions from 2015 to 2019 in the energy sector.

South East Asia also recorded the fastest per capita growth in transport emissions (4.6% per year) in the world, and saw its forest cover decrease by a whopping 13% between 1990 and 2015, with mangrove forest loss growing by 0.39% per annum between 2000 and 2012.

One ray of hope, according to the IPCC, is that South East Asia has the potential to rapidly reduce as much as 43% of GHG emissions by 2050 from reduced energy demand and increased energy efficiency in the building sector, and that further GHG reductions would be possible with more investment and research on decarbonization.

This is critical. If the world is to have a decent chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, we need to achieve net zero CO2 emissions by 2050 at the very least. Presently however, policy makers and politicians are either not taking the problem seriously enough or feel unable to break out of our dependency on fossil fuels as indicated by an ASEAN report that shows a gap between current country commitments and the necessary GHG reductions.

Similarly, the radical change required to the way we treat and use the land currently appears to be beyond the capabilities of society.

The last United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow last year that brought together 120 world leaders saw some welcome commitments from governments. For example, Indonesia, as one of the world largest carbon emitters through deforestation and land use change, made a commitment to the Glasgow Leaders Declaration on Forests and Land Use.

A number of countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam) signed the Global Methane Pledge to cut 30% methane by 2030, and a portion of ASEAN countries (Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, and Vietnam) fully or partially signed the Global Coal to Clean Power Transition Statement. These pledges and commitments must still be translated into action. But even if they are, more rapid and radical change is needed.

Kwan Soo-Chen is a Postdoctoral Fellow and David McCoy is a Research Lead at the United Nations University International Institute for Global Health (UNU-IIGH).

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Independent power projects (IPPs) are essential to electrify Sub-Saharan Africa, according to the World Bank. Credit: World Bank

By Emily Karanja
NAIROBI, Kenya, Jun 2 2022 (IPS)

A global transition to lower-carbon energy sources is crucial for our species’ survival given the worsening effects of climate change. With many people increasingly advocating for a rapid shift from an energy system dependent on fossil fuels, questions on how to make this transition arise – one that is just and equitable, especially in the developing world.

There are many questions that need to be answered. How do we make realistic and enforceable policies that support energy transition in an equitable way? What changes do we need to make to existing infrastructure and in storage technologies?

How can we increase funding and investments to develop clean and effective energy sources inclusive of clean cooking technologies? How do we ensure employment, prosperity and other opportunities are maintained and increased during this transition?

According to CDP Africa report (2020), Africa accounts for the smallest share of greenhouse gas emissions at 3.8% of the total global emissions but experiences harsh climate change effects. Even with continued growth in industrialization and development activities in Africa, emissions remain low.

The energy sector is a major contributor to growth and development of a country but also accounts for high emissions with burning of fossil fuels needed for building roads, cold storage facilities and transport in and out of the cities.

There is need to focus on where we can reduce emissions and start on climate mitigation while providing reliable, affordable, and sustainable energy.

Transport Sector

Two-thirds of the global greenhouse gases emitted today are linked to the use of fossil fuels in the generation of energy for lighting, transport, and in industry. The transport system in Africa is highly dependent on fossil fuels, recent price increases of which have had a knock-on effect on food prices and more generally, impacted negatively on living standards for many in poverty-stricken areas.

Furthermore, the transport system contributes largely to outdoor pollution, especially in the East Africa which has seen in recent years, an increase in the road infrastructure and the acquisition of motor vehicles (most of which are imported ‘reconditioned’ from Europe and the Far East, and whose tail-pipe emissions would not be considered acceptable in those countries).

African countries are consolidating mitigation approaches to reduce the effects of fossil fuels from the transport sector. This includes a shift from fossil fuel-powered transport, an example of that being Kenya launching electric shuttle buses in the public transport system this year (CitiHoppa and East Shuttle) and motorcycles (Ecobodaa).

While these shifts are appreciable, they still have a long way to go in terms of replacing traditional vehicles, as the costs remain prohibitive for most, and the support infrastructure needed for electric vehicles is still largely absent.

Clean cooking

In Africa more than half the population has no access to clean and reliable energy sources which results in the use of biomass (charcoal and firewood) for their heating and cooking needs, in turn contributing to environmental and health complications.

Clean cooking is an integral aspect not to be left behind in this transition. According to latest SDG7 (IEA) tracking report, 2.5 billion people worldwide do not have access to clean cooking facilities and rely on kerosene, coal and solid biomass for cooking.

This number has increased with population growth and challenges levied by the COVID-19 pandemic which led to governments shifting priorities, and increase in poverty with loss of employment opportunities making basic energy services unaffordable.

The use of biomass not only increases pollution, and affects the total forest cover globally, but also poses serious health risks to users, particularly women and children who are the most vulnerable segments of the population.

Encouraging clean cooking innovations seeks to provide alternative technologies that are sustainable, efficient, reliable, and affordable to these communities. Incentives towards adoption and use of liquified petroleum gas can greatly reduce illness, deaths, and indoor air pollution.

Awareness creation and training initiatives by both governments and civil society groups have yielded some results with more households adopting clean cooking technologies. This has been further made possible through government incentives and policies that create a conducive environment for the production and/or importation of these technologies as well as facilitating access to them.

Government Policies

Government policy is a key component in addressing energy-related issues and ensuring that a just transition can be achieved. In particular, governments have a crucial responsibility in ensuring that innovations and technologies are developed and delivered. Well thought out strategies and policies are required for this transition to work.

The policy development process should be participatory and inclusive of all stakeholders to ensure equal and adequate representation of interests, ideas, and issues in the transition plans. This means governments working together with local communities, businesses, the labor market, and development partners to identify areas for improving and developing clean effective sources of energy and clean cooking technologies and develop policies to encourage innovation, investments, and new markets.

Strategies to support incentives for technology transfer and development and reduced taxation are also a requirement to accelerate this shift.

During this year’s SE4All forum held in Kigali, Rwanda, conversations around a just and equitable transition were held with ministries and high-level delegates of several African countries agreeing on seven transformative action points of implementation.

Governments committing and actioning these seven transformative actions would ensure that Africa is on a path towards economic prosperity and achieving a net zero future. These action points look to making modern sustainable energy available, pursue a modern energy of up to 6000kWh per capita in Africa which prioritizes clean cooking, scale up private and public sector investment in new energy technologies, infrastructures, and distribution systems.

They also point out support to Africa in deployment of gas as a transition fuel and green hydrogen for industrial development with the sustainability aspect checked, prioritizing local job creation in the energy sector for local economies, lifting development finance restrictions limiting project in Africa to ramp up domestic resource mobilization and make changes towards technology transfer mechanisms to ensure Africa has access to latest energy innovations.

These transformative actions offer opportunities to engage local communities and better meet the needs of the disadvantaged and those that lack modern energy services.

Renewable energy

Energy generation from renewable sources is one of the ways we can achieve net zero emissions by 2050. Replacing conventional forms of energy generation with new energy sources has boosted the sector and energy decarbonization, thus, ensuring reduced carbon emissions and costs while providing reliable, affordable, and sustainable power.

Technology innovation and investments in new technologies must be put to work to respond effectively to arising challenges in consumption and power generation. Adopting new technologies will ensure that power generation is more efficient and that the power grid is more secure and resilient to support and supply consumer needs.

With a huge population in Africa living in rural areas coupled with poor infrastructure development, there is need to accelerate the green mini grids and off grid plans in the sector for enhanced and reliable energy access.

Green mini grids are flexible, and their designs can be altered to fit specific sites and are deployed in closer proximity to the user hence more reliable and accessible.

Renewable energy technologies and green mini grid systems must be included in energy policies and plans to address the barriers that hinder the adoption of these new, more reliable, efficient, and sustainable technologies worked out.

Governments should put in place and support policies that promote technological advancement in renewable energy generation and distribution while facilitating financing and investment opportunities in the sector.

Energy planning should leverage existing data to develop demand-based plans to ensure energy needs are met. Decision-making in the energy sector must be data-driven to ensure useful information is captured and analyzed to reflect and support the advancement of and forecast predictive maintenance.

Today 759 million people live without electricity, with many millions living with unreliable and insufficient access. Though significant progress has been made, gaps in this sector are daunting, and more needs to be done.

To accelerate progress, Africa requires support through stronger government commitments in terms of adequate policy and incentives and long-term energy demand planning. This will spur fast uptake of sustainable energy solutions while supporting innovations and investments in technology development.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Excerpt:

The following article is part of a series to commemorate World Environment Day June 5
 
The writer is Program Associate, Sustainable Energy Futures Program, Society for International Development (SID)

Xenophobia leads immigrants in Alexandra to live in fear.

Felix Afena-Gyan scores his first international goal as Ghana secure a 3-0 home win over Madagascar in their opening qualifier for the 2023 Africa Cup of Nations.

The Iraqi capital of Baghdad covered in a layer of dust during the third dust storm in two months, 24th May 2022. Credit: Zaid Albayati/Oxfam 2022

By Sally Abi Khalil
BEIRUT, Lebanon, Jun 1 2022 (IPS)

We are in the midst of so many crises across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region: the most unequal, water scarce, least democratic region in the world, with the widest gender gap, multiple armed conflicts raging across it, and fragile states on the brink.

For weeks, the region has been struggling with sand storms and dust, affecting the health and well-being of all, especially women and their children. Back in January the images of snowstorm hitting refugee camps in Syria were haunting.

Women shoveling snow and melting it to use for washing and cooking was a jarring insight into how women in our region will be burdened by the climate emergency. Increasingly people here are feeling the burn of the climate crisis, through extreme weather conditions, heat waves, snowstorms, desertification and draughts.

The International Panel on Climate Change has projected that the MENA region will be one of the world’s regions hit hardest by climate change in the 21st century.1

On this World Environment Day, June 5, the urgency of the climate emergency is creeping closer and closer to home. Oxfam’s recent report “Inequality kills” warned that 231,000 people each year could be killed by the climate crisis in poor countries by 2030. This is a conservative estimate, millions could die in the second half of this century.

The root of many of challenges in MENA is the patriarchal nature of societies and the woeful level of participation of women. From the formal economy to government, women’s representation and participation rates are some of the lowest in the word.

Women in MENA are removed from the core of public life and political engagement, therefore, our ability to manage the next looming challenge of a climate catastrophe is set to fail. Unless climate change is seen as a feminist issue- in need of a feminist response- its impacts cannot be managed effectively.

Vital to addressing the climate crisis is recognizing the inequalities that perpetuate it and the impact of such inequality on men and women in the region. There is no shortage of evidence that climate change is incredibly gendered.

The UN estimated in 2018 that 80% of people displaced by climate change were women. It leads to internal displacement and migration where women disproportionately suffer different forms of gender-based violence, shoulder the bulk of family responsibilities like water collection and care work, and further entrenches poverty.

Water scarcity impacts women’s ability and accessibility to basic water and sanitation services, leaving them heating snow or walking long distances to find household water. Climate change increases women’s existing difficulties accessing assets and resources.

Women in many countries across MENA are already pushed to cultivate less fertile land, diminishing their ability to produce food and limiting their voices.

As the climate crisis takes hold at breakneck speed, we are grossly underprepared and underequipped to manage and adapt to its impacts as long as women lack the agency they need to be part of an effective response to this new climate normal.

As goes the long-worn rally cry, there cannot be climate justice without gender justice. One cannot be achieved without the other. We know women in the region will be most impacted by climate change. It leads to internal displacement and migration where women disproportionately suffer all forms of violence as they shoulder the responsibility of care work and household responsibilities.

The layered crises we face here in the region of gender disparity, inequality and climate are all interlinked, however the intersectionality of climate change and gender in MENA is ignored. It is often absent from the government and civil society responses and even from the agenda of feminist movements and women rights organizations, with concerns that this may divert feminist action on poverty and gender-based violence for example.

However, the linkages are important because they are at the cutting edge of addressing systemic and oppressive power structures that favor rich nations over poor nations, urban centers over rural areas, those with education versus those without, those who have access to technology verses those who do not and, ultimately, men over women.

For far too long in the hierarchy of needs across the region, climate change as been seen as the least pressing issue effecting lives, however we cannot triage what competing crises can and cannot wait.

As droughts dry up farmland, water sources evaporate as rivers shrink, and rainfall becomes more scarce, the impacts of climate on the region are becoming increasingly dire. More dire still is that women are not on the forefront of conversations about the future.

They are left behind the same way they are ignored in conversations related to peace and security, reconstruction and economic recovery. Such conversations are controlled by the same power structures that created them This time, they cannot be left behind.

Climate justice cannot be seen as an issue of the west, or of the privileged. It is an integral, cross cutting issue that must be coupled with gender equity for us to be equipped to battle the growing challenges it is bringing us.

There is no doubt women are the key to addressing these challenges. The evidence is clear. By organizing, mobilizing and building voices and agency, women can lead the climate conversation and set an agenda for change.

1 MEI (2017). Climate Change: The Middle East Faces a Water Crisis. Available at https://www.mei.edu/publications/climate-change-middle-east-faces-water-crisis

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Excerpt:

The following article is part of a series to commemorate World Environment Day June 5
 
The writer is Oxfam Regional Director for Middle East and North Africa (MENA)

An apparent social media ruse suggests digits are being sold for thousands of dollars to beat poverty.

Customers are struggling to buy items they used to in one of the busiest markets in Uganda's capital Kampala.

Farms surrounded by arid lands in Kangirega Village, Turkana County, Kenya (March 2022). Credit: UNCCD

By Ibrahim Thiaw
BONN, Germany, Jun 1 2022 (IPS)

Land is our lifeline on this planet. Yet ‘business as usual’ in how we manage land resources puts our own future on planet Earth in jeopardy, with half of humanity already facing the impacts of land degradation.

As we mark the 50th World Environment Day, let us accelerate efforts to meet global pledges to restore by 2030 one billion degraded hectares — an area the size of the USA or China — to stem the loss of life and livelihoods and secure future prosperity for all.

We need to move fast—and together—to realize these commitments through tangible action and effective investments. In doing so, we may find that the answer to some of humanity’s biggest challenges is right beneath our feet.

It was against the backdrop of multiple global challenges, including the worst-in-40-years drought in Eastern Africa, as well as food and economic crises fuelled by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and conflicts, that 196 nations came together in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire from 9-20 May for the 15th Conference of Parties (COP15) of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).

At the 9 May Summit convened by Côte d’Ivoire President Alassane Ouattara, leaders adopted the Abidjan Call, which reinforces the commitment towards achieving land degradation neutrality by 2030. Simply put, this means ending land loss by avoiding, reducing and reversing the damage we do to our forests, peatlands, savannahs and other ecosystems.

The leaders’ call to action comes in response to a stark warning by the UNCCD’s flagship Global Land Outlook report that up to 40% of all ice-free land is already degraded, with dire consequences for climate, biodiversity and livelihoods. Business as usual will, by 2050, result in degradation of 16 million square kilometres (almost the size of South America), with 69 gigatonnes of carbon emitted into the atmosphere.

But it is not all doom and gloom. The report underscores that investing in large-scale land restoration is a powerful, cost-effective and viable pathway to restore our communities, economies, health and much more.

Restoring one billion hectares of degraded lands will add 50% to the global GDP, help tackle climate and biodiversity crises, boost water and food security, and chart a new path to post-pandemic recovery. It would also attenuate seemingly unrelated crises such as forced migration: land restoration would help reduce the estimated 700 million people at risk of being displaced by drought by 2030.

At the conclusion of two-week negotiations in Abidjan, countries sent a united call about the importance of healthy and productive land for securing future prosperity for all and for boosting drought resilience the world longs for.

Exacerbated by land degradation and climate change, droughts are increasing in frequency and severity, and may affect an estimated three-quarters of the world’s population by 2050, according to the Drought in Numbers 2022 report from UNCCD. Recognizing drought as a serious threat to humanity, UNCCD parties agreed to step up collaboration to explore new policies at the regional and global levels, working together towards COP16 in Saudi Arabia.

With 38 decisions taken at COP15, the Convention will be able to anticipate and act on the changes to the land that may unfold in the years to come. As one concrete example of COP15 decisions, a global database will be developed to help countries to map the exact location of the one billion hectares earmarked for restoration, and to track progress of their restoration in a systematic manner.

This will help the international community to check action against the targets at the national level. More importantly, it will help countries to make well-informed decisions.

Future-proofing land management will also help boost agricultural productivity, avoid supply chain disruptions, and withstand future environmental shocks. The US$ 2.5 billion Abidjan Legacy Programme launched by President Ouattara in Abidjan is one example of investing in long-term environmental sustainability across major value chains in Côte d’Ivoire while protecting and restoring forests and lands and improving communities’ resilience to climate change.

At this year’s World Economic Forum in Davos, which came hot on the heels of UNCCD COP15, I argued for greater involvement of food and land-use sectors, which represent about 12% of global GDP and up to 40% of employment, in land restoration and drought resilience efforts.

Stronger governance for better land management

The Abidjan COP15 was transformational in many ways, not least of them a growing recognition of the essential role of good governance for effective land restoration and drought resilience.

COP15 agreed on policy actions to enable land restoration through stronger tenure rights, gender equality, land use planning and youth engagement to draw private sector investment in conservation, farming and land use practices that improve the health of the land.

Take gender equality, for instance. Although women make up nearly half of all agricultural workforce, they only hold 18% of the associated land titles in sub-Saharan Africa. Furthermore, women are twice more affected by desertification, land degradation and drought compared to men, according to a new UNCCD study released at the Gender Caucus at COP15.

Yet, when empowered, women can be at the forefront of global land restoration efforts, as examples from around the world—from Nepal to Jordan to Paraguay—demonstrate. Decisions taken at COP15 seek to promote women’s involvement in land management and restoration efforts by strengthening their rights and facilitating access to finance.

UNCCD is a trailblazer among international environmental treaties in acknowledging that we cannot reverse land degradation without secure land tenure. People with secure tenure know that when they invest in the land, they will reap the benefits; they are more motivated to protect the long-term health and productivity of their land.

Secure tenure is not only important to small-scale farmers, indigenous peoples and local communities—it is just as important to those making large-scale investments in land degradation neutrality and restoration. Otherwise, it can become a source of tension or conflict over natural resources. At COP15, countries agreed to build on existing guidance on land tenure to ensure the inclusive and meaningful participation of all actors in efforts to combat land degradation.

Youth makes up most of the population in countries affected by desertification, land degradation and drought. And in many of these countries, land-based sectors are the mainstay of the economies. That’s why the Youth Forum at COP15 focused on supporting land-based youth entrepreneurship, securing decent land-based jobs, and strengthening youth participation in the Convention. Beyond better land stewardship, it could go also go a long way towards reducing social unrest resulting from high youth unemployment rates.

Addressing climate, biodiversity and land crises together

Climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation pose existential threats to nature and humanity. The linkages between them have been clearly established. Our actions to address them must also be interlinked and coordinated as there is no pathway to achieving our goals on climate, biodiversity or land without tackling them together.

UNCCD is one of the three global treaties that emerged from the Rio Earth Summit 30 years ago, along with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

As the international community gathers in Stockholm this week to mark the 50th anniversary of the landmark United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, the three Rio Conventions issue a joint call to make this decade one of urgent action, restoration and transformation, uniting the land, biodiversity and climate agendas for the survival of people and the planet.

This World Environment Day with its theme “Only One Earth”, let us have the same sense of urgency and solidarity that guided our predecessors at the historical Stockholm 1972 conference. Fifty years on, this truth still holds — this planet is our only home.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Excerpt:

The following article is part of a series to commemorate World Environment Day June 5
 
The writer is United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary, United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)

Local singers and instrumentalists joined rights activists and politicians in a protest against Afghan musicians' arrest in Peshawar. They fear that there could be serious repercussions if the musicians are deported back to Taliban-led Afghanistan. Credit: Ashfaq Yusufzai/IPS

By Ashfaq Yusufzai
PESHAWAR, Jun 1 2022 (IPS)

The arrest of Afghan musicians in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan has elicited protests from local politicians, artists and rights activists who demand their release and say they should be allowed to stay as refugees.

“Four musicians arrested by police in Peshawar, the capital of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, for lack of visa and travel documents have been sent to jail and will be deported under the 14 Foreigners’ Act,” a police officer, Nasrullah Shah, told IPS.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) is one of the four provinces of Pakistan located on the border with Afghanistan.

Police arrested the artists on May 27. They had been performing on TV and radio for years in Afghanistan, but the Taliban government’s opposition to music silenced them. The group includes Saidullah Wafa, Naveed Hassan, Ajmal and Nadeem Shah.

According to Shah, they crossed into Pakistan illegally.

The musicians, however, insisted that there was a ban on music back home, and as a result, they faced economic problems.

“Since the Taliban took power in Afghanistan in August last year, there was an unannounced ban on musical activities, which has landed the singers and musicians in hot water,” Saidullah Wafa, one of the arrested singers, told IPS. Taliban are notorious for killing musicians, and they will murder us if we go back,” Wafa said. Before fleeing to Pakistan, he lived in the Afghan capital, Kabul.

He claimed that Taliban militants consider music against Islam and have killed many singers and others associated with it in the past. Fearing prosecution, we came to Pakistan to seek refuge, the 25-year-old said.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan has condemned the arrest and possible deportation.

“HRCP is concerned to learn that four Afghan nationals have been arrested by the KP police under the Foreigners’ Act 1946; the court has ordered they be deported. All four face significant threats from the Taliban government in Kabul,” it tweeted.

Local music journalist Sher Alam Shinwari, who writes for Dawn newspaper, said the seized Afghan musicians are refugees. He said they cannot and should not be deported to the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan.

“Afghan musicians, since they arrived in Peshawar and elsewhere in KP, have never been involved in any unlawful activities. Secondly, they have re-joined their relatives already living in refugee camps or rented homes in and around Peshawar,” Shinwari said.

Most have valid documents or ration cards, while some of them carried artists’ registration cards issued by local artists’ organisations, he said.

Deporting Afghan musicians to the Taliban is tantamount to throwing them to the wolves because the Taliban had murdered several artists in the recent past, Shinwari explained.

Families of most of the musicians were already living in Pakistan, and their deportation would be a human rights violation.

Rashid Ahmed Khan, head of Honary Tolana, an organisation striving for musicians’ rights, told IPS that the arrested musicians would be in danger if sent back.

“They were taken into custody by police without a search warrant, sent to jail and be handed over to the Taliban – which is an inhuman act. These famous artistes moved to Peshawar last year when Taliban seized power in Afghanistan to save their lives,” he said.

On May 30, local artists held a protest demonstration against the arrest of Afghan musicians in Peshawar and urged the government to allow them to stay in Pakistan as refugees.

Politicians also joined the protest.

Sardar Hussain Babak, a local lawmaker, assured them that they would raise the issues on the floor of the parliament.

Some Afghan artists present at the protest said they had come to Pakistan for their safety and could not continue their profession in their own country.

They demanded police stop their action against the artists because they were guests in Pakistan and their lives were at risk in Afghanistan.

Local artists, including Saeeda Bibi and others, condemned the police action against the Afghan musicians and demanded their early release.

“Taliban have resorted to violence against the musicians, destroyed their equipment at different places, and shot dead people even participating in the wedding ceremonies in Nangrahar and other provinces of Afghanistan,” Saeeda Bibi told IPS.

“We have applied for bail of the detained artists with the hope to get them released at the earliest,” she said. “We have set a three-day deadline for police to stop action against the artists. Otherwise, Afghan and Pakistani artists would march on Islamabad and stage a sit-in until their demands were heard.

“We also appealed to UNHCR to take notice of the ordeal of Afghan artists so that they could live in Pakistan as refugees.”

KP Information Minister Muhammad Ali Saif told IPS that the artists should be prosecuted in terms of the law.

“We have been hosting 3 million Afghan refugees for the past four decades, which is the glaring example of hospitality. They will be treated as per the law,” he said.

There were no instructions to police regarding the arrest of Afghan musicians, and the court would decide about their deportation, he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• UN Plea to Save Afghanistan from Full-Blown Humanitarian Crisis
• Afghanistan’s Girls’ Education is a Women’s Rights Issue
• Pakistan’s Campaign to Contain Polio in Face of Vaccine Hesitancy

Over 1,600 schools and universities have been damaged or destroyed since Russia’s invasion on February 24, according to Ukraine’s Education Ministry. Credit: UNICEF

By Jerome Marston and Marika Tsolakis
NEW YORK, Jun 1 2022 (IPS)

Conflict has taken a horrific toll on civilians in Ukraine over the past three months with many families struggling to meet even their most basic needs, including education. Over 1,600 schools and universities have been damaged or destroyed since Russia’s invasion on February 24, according to Ukraine’s Education Ministry. Armed forces on both sides have reportedly bombed schools or used them as bases or for storing weapons.

In just one example, a Russian airstrike reportedly hit a school on May 8 in Luhansk, on the front lines in eastern Ukraine, injuring or killing dozens of civilians who had sheltered there.

Education is fundamental for students during war. Beyond teaching, schools and universities can provide a safe space, give students routine, and connect them to life-saving resources such as meals and mental health services.

Fortunately, 3.7 million Ukrainian children have been able to access online and distance learning since February despite school closures. This has reduced gaps in instruction and, perhaps more critically, maintained a sense of normalcy.

Repairing schools will require significant time and resources, and many students and teachers will experience stress and trauma that affect learning and teaching. That is, if they return to class at all – children in conflict- and crisis-affected areas are twice as likely to be out of school as those in other places

Yet, the war’s longer-term impact on the quality of and access to education remain worrisome. Repairing schools will require significant time and resources, and many students and teachers will experience stress and trauma that affect learning and teaching. That is, if they return to class at all – children in conflict- and crisis-affected areas are twice as likely to be out of school as those in other places.

Unfortunately, Ukraine is not alone. Education is under attack around the globe, and armed violence against students, teachers, and education facilities is on the rise. In fact, we found in research for our new report an average of six attacks on education each day in 2020 and 2021. In all, we identified more than 5,000 cases of attacks or military occupation of schools during that two-year period.

These attacks harmed, injured, or killed over 9,000 students, teachers, and academics. Nine countries each had more than 400 attacks or over 400 students or educators harmed. Attacks increased in Mali, Myanmar, and Colombia compared to the previous two years, but decreased in countries such as Syria and Yemen, where conflict de-escalated. Shelling and rifle fire damaged dozens of schools in Ukraine in 2020 and 2021, in the eastern Donbas region where conflict began half a decade before.

In attacks on education, militaries and armed groups bomb, burn, and loot schools and universities and kill, rape, arbitrarily arrest, and recruit students and educators. They occupy schools and universities to use them for non-educational purposes such as for bases, barracks, or training grounds.

Explosive weapons, which were involved in one-fifth of all reported attacks on education globally and were used in many of the attacks in Ukraine, had particularly devastating effects. Airstrikes, shelling, and other explosives are especially dangerous because they produce a large blast that can propel bomb fragments a great distance, in all directions, often indiscriminately harming civilians and civilian buildings.

There are several key steps that can be taken to protect education in Ukraine and elsewhere.

First, allies of the warring parties mustneed to press them to stop attacking schools or using explosive weapons with wide-area effects near schools or universities. Warring parties should also avoid occupying schools and universities and using them for military purposes. Occupation damages schools and universities and puts students and educators at risk, but it may also place the educational facilities in the crosshairs of enemy forces.

Second, governments should endorse and implement the Safe Schools Declaration, an intergovernmental political commitment to protect students, teachers, schools, and universities in armed conflict. Though Russia has not endorsed the declaration, Ukraine did in 2019. It has taken important steps to fulfil Declaration commitments in the midst of conflict, such as instituting remote learning and collecting data on attacks on education facilities.

Third, the attackers need to be held to account. Governments, the United Nations, and national and international organizations should support efforts to collect reliable evidence of attacks on schools and universities, and their students and staff, and to put those responsible on trial in fair national or international courts, as well as to provide assistance to victims of attacks.

Finally, funding must be raised and –crucially– directed toward rebuilding schools and universities destroyed in attacks as soon as it is safe. Education is chronically underfunded in humanitarian response. However, donors and governments can ensure funds are directed toward rebuilding classrooms, playgrounds, and libraries, since distance learning, while exceptionally important, is no long-term substitute for quality in-person education.

Destroyed and occupied schools and universities not only upend learning, they also jeopardize the post-conflict rebuilding of communities and economies. Education needs to be safeguarded in Ukraine and globally.

 

Jerome Marston and Marika Tsolakis are senior researchers at the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack, an inter-agency coalition formed in 2010 to address the problem of targeted attacks on education during armed conflict.

By Daud Khan
ROME, Jun 1 2022 (IPS)

Developing countries – in Africa, in Asia, in Latin America and in the Middle East – are facing a combination of crises that are unprecedented in recent times. Over the last three years they have had to face the COVID-19 crisis, the food crisis, the energy crisis, the climate change crisis, the debt crisis and, on top of all this, a global recession. The crises have overlapped, and each has added to the problems created by the previous ones.

Daud Khan

First among the crises relates to food – the most basic of human needs. Even before the events in Ukraine there were shortages and uncertainties. International food prices rose by 40% over their level of 2020 – with increases of almost 90% in the price of vegetable oil – pushing up domestic food prices in both importing and exporting countries, and driving millions towards food insecurity. And then came the Ukraine crisis; and price of cereals and cooking oils spiked yet again – up 20% for cereal and 30% for vegetable oils.

And it is not just an issue of prices. Supplies are hard to come by. In April 2022 Ukraine exported only 1 million tons of grain as opposed to a normal export volume of 5 million tons and Indonesia banned exports of palm oil. On top of this came climate change. Low rainfall and drought-like conditions have also affected production in several major wheat exporting countries such as France and the USA. Scorching temperatures across northern India and Pakistan have reduced wheat output by 20% and in response, India has now banned exports of wheat.

The second crisis relates to the price of energy. Energy prices before the Ukraine crisis has risen 75% in twelve months and another 25% since then. This has raised costs of transport, manufacturing and services. Prices of natural gas, which drives the prices of urea fertilizer, rose by over 140% and this will impact plantings, yields and output of food crops in coming years. The prices of phosphate fertilizers have also risen – by over 200% the last year – with about a third of the increase coming since January 2022, mainly as a result of disruption of supplies.

The next punch in the belly for developing countries came from interest rates increases. Developing country debt has boomed in over the past decades years, fueled by the easy availability of savings and real interest rates of virtually zero. With rising inflation, the US Federal Reserve Board has hiked up interest rates. This has not only increased interest payments but also the value of the US$ in which much developing country debt is denominated. This is making debt servicing vastly more expensive and balance of payments problems are looming large for many countries. Higher debt servicing is also putting pressure on Government budgets and is resulting in large cuts in development and social spending.

And we are not finished yet. Global GDP and trade are slowing down. This reflects the recessionary cocktail of high energy prices, supply bottlenecks, rising interest rates and political uncertainties around the globe, as well as COVID-related lockdowns in China.

This perfect storm is mostly the result of the policies of the big economies – the ongoing US/Russia/China rivalry; rapid globalization followed by the strict COVID-related lockdowns; and easy monetary policies which first pumped in huge sums of money into the economies and are now raising interest rates to rein in inflation. Climate change has much to do with large and continued emission of GHGs, the bulk of which comes from the big economies, including China. And now, speculative capital, mostly originating in the developed world, is further aggravating the situation in food, fuel and other commodity markets.

But the interlinked nature of the globalized world implies that in relative terms the financial and human burden of these actions falls heaviest on developing countries. After all it is one thing for food and energy prices to rise, or for GDP growth to slow in rich countries such as the USA, Europe and Australia, or even in China. In these countries living standards are high, infrastructure and services are well developed, and often well designed social safety nets are in place. It is quite different in developing countries, where large numbers continue to live with poverty and hunger; where basic services such as education, health and clean drinking water are scarce; and those facing old age, illness or loss of earnings can only rely on the goodwill of friends or family.

There is, quite rightly, much concern about the situation. Several high level meetings have been convened, including by the UN, and there are strong calls for increased aid flows and debt relief, as well as for the creation of special funds for the countries most affected by high prices, debt burdens or climate change. These actions are needed and necessary to avoid widespread suffering, political turbulence and increased migratory flows. And the developed countries will likely bear most of the financial burden of these measures.

But many of the measures, even if implemented, are short term palliatives and will not solve underlying problems. Moreover, developing countries cannot continue to rely indefinitely on goodwill and charity. The risk of doing this became very clear during the COVID crisis where little of the vaccines available and none of the vaccine production technology were shared.

However, times of crisis also create opportunities. There is a need for new thinking and for paradigm shifts in developing countries but also for Governments to undertake reforms that they have been postponing for years, if not decades, due to fears that such reforms would hurt vested interests and national elites. It is now time to act bravely.

Part two of this article will discuss some of the concrete measure that developing countries could take to address the various crises.

Daud Khan works as consultant and advisor for various Governments and international agencies. He has degrees in Economics from the LSE and Oxford – where he was a Rhodes Scholar; and a degree in Environmental Management from the Imperial College of Science and Technology. He lives partly in Italy and partly in Pakistan.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The Pentagon. Credit: Military Times

By Norman Solomon
SAN FRANCISCO, USA, Jun 1 2022 (IPS)

New outcries for gun control have followed the horrible tragedies of mass shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo. “Evil came to that elementary school classroom in Texas, to that grocery store in New York, to far too many places where innocents have died,” President Biden declared over the weekend during a university commencement address.

As he has said, a badly needed step is gun control — which, it’s clear from evidence in many countries, would sharply reduce gun-related deaths.

But what about “gun control” at the Pentagon?

The concept of curtailing the U.S. military’s arsenal is such a nonstarter that it doesn’t even get mentioned. Yet the annual number of deadly shootings in the United States — 19,384 at last count — is comparable to the average yearly number of documented civilian deaths directly caused by the Pentagon’s warfare in the last two decades. And such figures on war deaths are underestimates.

From high-tech rifles and automatic weapons to drones, long-range missiles and gravity bombs, the U.S. military’s weaponry has inflicted carnage in numerous countries. How many people have been directly killed by the “War on Terror” violence?

An average of 45,000 human beings each year — more than two-fifths of them innocent civilians — since the terror war began, as documented by the Costs of War project at Brown University.

The mindset of U.S. mass media and mainstream politics is so militarized that such realities are routinely not accorded a second thought, or even any thought. Meanwhile, the Pentagon budget keeps ballooning year after year, with President Biden now proposing $813 billion for fiscal year 2023.

Liberals and others frequently denounce how gun manufacturers are making a killing from sales of handguns and semiautomatic rifles in the United States, while weapons sales to the Pentagon continue to spike upward for corporate war mega-profiteers.

As William Hartung showed in his Profits of War report last fall, “Pentagon spending has totaled over $14 trillion since the start of the war in Afghanistan, with one-third to one-half of the total going to military contractors.

A large portion of these contracts — one-quarter to one-third of all Pentagon contracts in recent years — have gone to just five major corporations: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman.”

What’s more, the United States is the world’s leading arms exporter, accounting for 35 percent of total weapons sales — more than Russia and China combined. The U.S. arms exports have huge consequences.

Pointing out that the Saudi-led war and blockade on Yemen “has helped cause the deaths of nearly half a million people,” a letter to Congress from 60 organizations in late April said that “the United States must cease supplying weapons, spare parts, maintenance services, and logistical support to Saudi Arabia.”

How is it that countless anguished commentators and concerned individuals across the USA can express justified fury at gun marketers and gun-related murders when a mass shooting occurs inside U.S. borders, while remaining silent about the need for meaningful gun control at the Pentagon?

The civilians who have died — and are continuing to die — from use of U.S. military weapons don’t appear on American TV screens. Many lose their lives due to military operations that are unreported by U.S. news media, either because mainline journalists don’t bother to cover the story or because those operations are kept secret by the U.S. government. As a practical matter, the actual system treats certain war victims as “unworthy” of notice.

Whatever the causal mix might be — in whatever proportions of conscious or unconscious nationalism, jingoism, chauvinism, racism and flat-out eagerness to believe whatever comforting fairy tale is repeatedly told by media and government officials — the resulting concoction is a dire refusal to acknowledge key realities of U.S. society and foreign policy.

To heighten the routine deception, we’ve been drilled into calling the nation’s military budget a “defense” budget — while Congress devotes half of all discretionary spending to the military, the USA spends more on its military than the next 10 countries combined (most of them allies), the Pentagon operates 750 military bases overseas, and the United States is now conducting military operations in 85 countries.

Yes, gun control is a great idea. For the small guns. And the big ones.

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction.org and the author of a dozen books including Made Love, Got War: Close Encounters with America’s Warfare State, published this year in a new edition as a free e-book. His other books include War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death. He was a Bernie Sanders delegate from California to the 2016 and 2020 Democratic National Conventions. Solomon is the founder and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The decision comes after the election of a new president, and a surge in attacks by al-Shabab.

The Home Office begins issuing formal paperwork to migrants, but legal challenges are expected.

Chris Hughton wants Ghana to build the "best team possible" ahead of the World Cup, and is keen for members of the diaspora to join the national squad.

By Anis Chowdhury and Jomo Kwame Sundaram
SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, May 31 2022 (IPS)

US and allied economic sanctions against Russia for its illegal invasion of Ukraine have not achieved their declared objectives. Instead, they are worsening economic stagnation and inflation worldwide. Worse, they are exacerbating hunger, especially in Africa.

Sanctions cut both ways
Unless approved by the UN Security Council (UNSC), sanctions are not authorized by international law. With Russia’s veto in the UNSC, unilateral sanctions by the US and its allies have surged following the Ukraine invasion.

During 1950-2016, ‘comprehensive’ trade sanctions have cut bilateral trade between sanctioning countries and their victims by 77% on average. The US has imposed more sanctions regimes, and for longer periods, than any other country.

Unilateral imposition of sanctions has accelerated over the past 15 years. During 1990-2005, the US imposed about a third of sanctions regimes around the world, with the European Union (EU) also significant.

The US has increased using sanctions since 2016, imposing them on more than 1,000 entities or individuals yearly, on average, from 2016 to 2020 – nearly 80% more than in 2008-2015. The one-term Trump administration raised the US share of all new sanctions to almost half from a third before.

During January-May 2022, 75 countries implemented 19,268 restrictive trade measures. Such measures on food and fertilizers (85%) greatly exceed those on raw materials and fuels (15%). Unsurprisingly, the world now faces less supplies and higher prices for fuel and food.

Monetary authorities have been raising interest rates to curb inflation, but such efforts do not address the main causes of higher prices now. Worse, they are likely to deepen and prolong stagnation, increasing the likelihood of ‘stagflation’.

Sanctions were supposed to bring Russia to its knees. But less than three months after the rouble plunged, its exchange rate is back to pre-war levels, rising from the ‘rouble rubble’ promised by Western economic warmongers. With enough public support, the Russian regime is in no hurry to submit to sanctions.

Sanctions pushing up food prices
War and sanctions are now the main drivers of increased food insecurity. Russia and Ukraine produce almost a third of world wheat exports, nearly 20% of corn (maize) exports and close to 80% of sunflower seed products, including oil. Related Black Sea shipping blockades have helped keep Russian exports down.

All these have driven up world prices for grain and oilseeds, raising food costs for all. As of 19 May, the Agricultural Price Index was up 42% from January 2021, with wheat prices 91% higher and corn up 55%.

The World Bank’s April 2022 Commodity Markets Outlook notes the war has changed world production, trade and consumption. It expects prices to be historically high, at least through 2024, worsening food insecurity and inflation.

Western bans on Russian oil have sharply increased energy prices. Both Russia and its ally, Belarus – also hit by economic sanctions – are major suppliers of agricultural fertilizers – including 38% of potassic fertilizers, 17% of compound fertilizers, and 15% of nitrogenous fertilizers.

Fertilizer prices surged in March, up nearly 20% from two months before, and almost three times higher than in March 2021! Less supplies at higher prices will set back agricultural production for years.

With food agriculture less sustainable, e.g., due to global warming, sanctions are further reducing output and incomes, besides raising food prices in the short and longer term.

Sanctions hurt poor most
Even when supposedly targeted, sanctions are blunt instruments, often generating unintended consequences, sometimes contrary to those intended. Hence, sanctions typically fail to achieve their stated objectives.

Many poor and food insecure countries are major wheat importers from Russia and Ukraine. The duo provided 90% of Somalia’s imports, 80% of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s, and about 40% of both Yemen’s and Ethiopia’s.

It appears the financial blockade on Russia has hurt its smaller and more vulnerable Central Asian neighbours more: 4.5 million from Uzbekistan, 2.4 million from Tajikistan, and almost a million from Kyrgyzstan work in Russia. Difficulties sending remittances cause much hardship to their families at home.

Although not their declared intent, US measures during 1982–2011 hurt the poor more. Poverty levels in sanctioned countries have been 3.8 percentage points higher than in similar countries.

Sanctions also hurt children and other disadvantaged groups much more. Research in 69 countries found sanctions lowered infant weight and increased the likelihood of death before age three. Unsurprisingly, economic sanctions violate the UN Convention on the Rights of Children.

A study of 98 less developed and newly industrialized countries found life expectancy in affected countries reduced by about 3.5 months for every additional year under UNSC sanctions. Thus, an average five-year episode of UNSC approved sanctions reduced life expectancy by 1.2–1.4 years.

World hunger rising
As polemical recriminations between Russia and the US-led coalition intensify over rising food and fuel prices, the world is racing to an “apocalyptic” human “catastrophe”. Higher prices, prolonged shortages and recessions may trigger political upheavals, or worse.

The UN Secretary-General has emphasized, “We need to ensure a steady flow in food and energies through open markets by lifting all unnecessary export restrictions, directing surpluses and reserves to those in need and keeping a lead on food prices to curb market volatility”.

Despite declining World Bank poverty numbers, the number of undernourished has risen from 643 million in 2013 to 768 million in 2020. Up to 811 million people are chronically hungry, while those facing ‘acute food insecurity’ have more than doubled since 2019 from 135 million to 276 million.

With the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, OXFAM warned, the “hunger virus” could prove even more deadly. The pandemic has since pushed tens of millions into food insecurity.

In 2021, before the Ukraine war, 193 million people in 53 countries were deemed to be facing ‘food crisis or worse’. With the war and sanctions, 83 million – or 43% – more are expected to be victims by the end of 2022.

Source: 2022 Global Report on Food Crises; 2022: projected

Economic sanctions are the modern equivalent of ancient sieges, trying to starve populations into submission. The devastating impacts of sieges on access to food, health and other basic services are well-known.

Sieges are illegal under international humanitarian law. The UNSC has unanimously adopted resolutions demanding the immediate lifting of sieges, e.g., its 2014 Resolution 2139 against civilian populations in Syria.

But veto-wielding permanent Council members are responsible for invading Ukraine and unilaterally imposing sanctions. Hence, the UNSC will typically not act on the impact of sanctions on billions of innocent civilians. No one seems likely to protect them against sanctions, today’s weapons of mass starvation.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Without Peace, Hunger Will Continue to Increase
• War or Peace, Barbarism or Hope
• Ukraine Incursion, World Stagflation
• Agricultural Trade Liberalization Undermined Food Security

By Matti Kohonen
LONDON, May 31 2022 (IPS)

At this year’s World Economic Forum (WEF) at Davos which ended last week, the attention of the world’s financial and economic elite was captured by the war in Ukraine whose president Volodimir Zelensky used his address to call to “complete withdrawal of foreign businesses from the Russian market”, despite 380 of the largest multinational companies still operating in Russia.

Many companies still present in Russia were sitting in the audience while Zelensky spoke including HSBC that still maintains operations for existing clients, and Credit Suisse that is scaling them back without signalling that it would pull out of Russia due to the invasion. This is especially troubling given the leaked data in Suisse Secrets about how Credit Suisse oiled the wheels of many oligarchs prior to the Russian Invasion in Ukraine.

The banks at Davos are likely to hold assets of many of the over 6,163 sanctioned Russian individuals and entities despite anti-money laundering efforts to trace these funds hidden behind shell companies. This money in turn is often held in accounts in banks participating at the annual Davos meetings and their assets may never even be revealed due to the lack of stricter banking and financial transparency laws.

Ironically, even talking about these secretive accounts, and the leaks related to these is a criminal offence in Davos under draconian Swiss banking secrecy laws, so raising the issue could get you arrested and fined. Credit Suisse only committed itself to “stop new business in Russia while meaningfully cutting exposure by 56%.” The imbalance is striking, and none of the panels at Davos addressed this uncomfortable issue.

Alarmingly, this signals a business-as-usual approach by many of the top companies represented in Davos, not only failing to tackle Russian oligarchs but more broadly ignoring the issue of offshore funds held by powerful individuals and politicians from the global South.

Revealingly, the event only had 52 participants on the official list from Africa, out of a total of over 1,500 disclosed participants. Winnie Byanyima, director of UN AIDS, was one of them. She called out vaccine inequality and asked delegates to “stop pushing Africa to the back of the queue in terms of vaccine access” and called the patent protection laws a form of institutional racism in times of a global pandemic like COVID-19.

The debt crisis should also have been on the Davos agenda, as on the eve of the opening of Davos on 19 May we saw Sri Lanka descend into a balance of payment and debt crisis as their 30-day grace period to make debt payments to its creditors expired. The dues are mainly due to private creditors who form the largest single creditor group to Sri Lanka, many of whom again such as JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs were sitting in the audience at Davos, unwilling to commit to debt restructuring of private creditor debt.

Some of these issues were picked up by the annual Global Risk Report, where the key global risks that are identified in the next two years include extreme weather and livelihood crisis, followed by risk of not tackling climate change. Debt ranks as the 8th greatest risk, not something picked up by many of the respondents to the annual survey – of whom 63% were male, and 41% were from the business sector, largely overall represented by Europeans with 44% of all respondents drawn from the region, with only 6% from South Asia.

Why then the media focus on a Davos meeting that fail to deliver anything meaningful? It is a symbol of our age, and a place where the corporate elite get together and offer their view of the world – and where a few critics get to express their opinion about how it is failing to deliver each year. Given the mounting crises we are currently facing, and the role of responsible big business should take, this is plainly not enough.

Matti Kohonen is the director of the Financial Transparency Coalition and previously worked at Christian Aid as the Principal Advisor on the Private Sector, working to ensure that the private sector is a responsible and accountable actor in global development.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Despite efforts to eradicate child marriage, the practice still persists in Chad which has one of the highest rates in the world.