Africa

Nigeria's Olympic basketball team is set to go from wins over the USA and Argentina to arriving in Tokyo without kit.

People wade through water during floods in the Kurigram district of Bangladesh. Credit: UNICEF/G.M.B. Akash

By Beatrice Mosello and Adam Day
NEW YORK, Jul 13 2021 (IPS)

Could the next wars be triggered by climate change?

Until recently, the question might have seemed like science fiction, but now it is very real. Ethiopia and Egypt are locked in an upward spiral of tensions over the Nile, as a combination of dams and shifting weather patterns pose existential risks to both countries.

In the Sahel region, climate-driven changes in pastoralist patterns have contributed to a massive spike in conflicts, while oscillations in the size of Lake Chad are influencing recruitment into the terrorist group Boko Haram.

From coral bleaching driving Caribbean fishing communities into organized crime to the drought that preceded the Syria war, a large and growing evidence base points to the fact that climate change is a real factor in today’s and tomorrow’s violent conflicts.

How can the UN – an organization established to prevent the kind of wars witnessed in the first half of the twentieth century – reshape itself to address the growing security risks posed by climate change?

The UN needs to undergo three related shifts to tackle climate security: (1) from sectors to systems, (2) from exclusivity to inclusivity, and (3) from sovereign rights to global public goods.

Taken together, these shifts will require the UN as an organization to transform from an exclusive club of powerful States making decisions behind closed doors into a hub that generates leverage by connecting different actors at local, national, regional, and global levels.

Systems not sectors

The UN system is structured as a series of loosely affiliated sectors, with bespoke agencies focused on single issues like refugees, food, health, migration, and the environment.

While there have been meaningful efforts to bring those actors together around common objectives – not least the Sustainable Development Goals and universal human rights – in practice the UN continues to operate largely on the basis of sectoral approaches to risks.

As a result, information and programming tends to be linked to a single agency’s mandate, driven by siloed sources of information.

But climate change cuts across these issues, exacerbating underlying socio-economic tensions and making indirect contributions to the risk of conflict. Erratic rainfall causes crop failure, leading to increased tensions over natural resources.

Extreme weather destroys arable land and displaces entire communities, driving conflicts over land and contributing to unplanned urbanization.

The pervasive and interdependent ways in which climate change is driving security risks should galvanize a shift towards a systemic mindset across the UN.

This means producing cross-cutting analysis that brings together disparate sources of information, as well as establishing effective ways to do multi-scalar risk analysis in which local, national, regional, and global trends are examined together. In short, it means thinking in terms of complex systems, rather than separate sectors.

Inclusivity not exclusivity

When responding to climate change, national governments are highly susceptible to various forms of maladaptation that may increase rather than decrease conflict risks. Facing massive land loss due to extreme weather, a government may reclaim land from the sea (e.g. in Bangladesh), or invest in new agricultural sectors (e.g. in Nigeria), without considering how these actions might create new competition over land, disrupt existing livelihoods, or contribute to large-scale demographic shifts.

And there is clear evidence that the UN’s support to State-led development and peacebuilding programming is highly susceptible to elite capture, potentially contributing to precisely the kind of inequalities that are a root cause of violent conflict.

If the UN is to tackle the growing climate-security challenge, it must place inclusivity (i.e. providing equal access to opportunities and resources for people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized), at the heart of its work.

There are good examples of this, as in the ways in which UN peacebuilding has conditioned its support on gender inclusivity. The UN should place clear conditions on international support, by demanding that national governments account for potential risks to marginalized communities, clearly track whether funds are being captured by a small elite, and ensure that their national programming is inclusive.

Global public goods not sovereign-owned commodities

Despite clear evidence that our carbon-driven consumption is unsustainable, we still treat the environment as a commodity: something to be exploited for the benefit of human societies.

The commodification of the environment not only poses existential risks for humanity, but also drives conflict, as States and societies compete to own increasingly scarce natural resources, or use them in a way that negatively affects others.

The UN has to become an advocate for a shift towards treating the environment as both a global public good and an essential aspect of our peace and security architecture. As the COVID-19 pandemic response acutely demonstrated, collective responses to shared threats are not only the most effective approach, they are often the difference between large-scale life and death.

Last year, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution on our Common Agenda that committed to “transformative measures” to address climate change. To deliver on the commitment, the transformation needs to include a repositioning of the environment within the multilateral system.

This can take many shapes. Ecuador has given the environment legal personality, allowing for claims to be brought on its behalf for environmental destruction.

In May, a court ruled that a Royal Dutch Petroleum (the world’s ninth biggest emitter) was bound by the provisions of the Paris Agreement to reduce global emissions by 45%, demonstrating that our obligations to the Earth can have legal effect.

The Biden Administration has placed climate change within its national security strategy, giving real weight and clear priority to the links between climate and security. And there are interesting and dynamic proposals for transforming the UN’s Trusteeship Council into a guardian for the environment, or creating a Commissioner for Future Generations tasked with protecting the environment for the coming 100 years.

Regardless of what path is chosen, the UN should play a growing role in advocating for the environment to be exempt from the Westphalian mindset of sovereign ownership, pushing instead for a collective approach to our climate.

Just as, 75 years ago, the founders of the UN came together to build a multilateral system based on collective security responses, today the UN should reconstitute its institutions toward collective climate-security action.

Climate change is already bringing nightmarish science fiction scenarios into reality; only radical changes in our conceptions of collective action will help us wake up.

Beatrice Mosello is Senior Advisor at adelphi, the German think tank and organizer of the influential Climate Diplomacy project and Senior Fellow at the UN University Centre for Policy Research (UNU-COR); Adam Day is Director of Programmes at UNU-CPR.

 

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');  

Logistic and communication challenges to rolling out the COVID-19 vaccine are immense in the rural and remote highlands region of Papua New Guinea. Credit: Catherine Wilson

By Catherine Wilson
CANBERRA, Australia , Jul 13 2021 (IPS)

CANBERRA, Australia – Papua New Guinea (PNG), like many other Pacific Island countries, successfully held COVID-19 at bay last year, aided by early shutting of national borders. However, by March this year, the pandemic was surging in the most populous Pacific Island nation, and by July, it had reported 17,282 cases of the virus and 175 fatalities.

PNG has a steep battle against the virus ahead, made more problematic by a high rate of refusal by health workers to take the vaccine. PNG’s Health Minister, Jelta Wong, stressed in an interview with Australia’s Lowy Institute for International Policy in April that “the vaccine will be the key to containing COVID-19 in our country.”

But in Eastern Highlands Province in the country’s rural interior, Dr Max Manape, the province’s Director of Public Health, told IPS that “in our province, there is a huge COVID-19 hesitancy due to so much negativity of COVID-19 vaccinations in social media and we are finding it very hard to convince our fellow frontline workers, including health workers.” By early July, only 23.3 percent of all health and essential workers in the province were vaccinated, including 329 health workers.

The situation is causing wider community concern. “Health workers are the frontline and first responders in this pandemic, and their refusal places them at a greater risk to contract the virus. This will lead to the feared collapse of our struggling health system, and the roll-on effect of other deaths from preventable diseases and maternal health issues created by a lack of manpower,” a spokesperson for the PNG National Council of Women told IPS.

In April, the country was supplied with 132,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine, the first batch of a total supply of 588,000 doses by COVAX, the global alliance of organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO), working to achieve equitable vaccine access. The Australian Government also supplied eight thousand doses. The national vaccination rollout began in early May, with priority given to frontline responders.

Yet progress has been very slow. By this month, only 59,125 people in a national population of about 9 million had been vaccinated, including 7,844 health workers. The largest group of healthcare recipients, about 1,150, were located in the capital, Port Moresby.

PNG’s Health Minister says there are numerous challenges to achieving widespread inoculation. “In this country, we’ve never had an adult vaccine go out, we’ve always had the children’s ones, and that has worked really well. It is going to be a real challenge for us to do this vaccination rollout…The biggest thing will be education. Our people need to be educated enough to know that this vaccine will help them in the future,” Wong said.

More than 80 percent of people in PNG live in rural and remote areas where logistic and communication challenges are the greatest. Here scepticism of the vaccine is high. Only 12 percent of all health and essential workers in remote Enga Province in the northwestern highlands region have been vaccinated. “The uptake of the vaccine is very poor in Enga Province. Frontline health workers at the hospital have mostly refused the vaccine,” Dr David Mills, Director of Rural Health and Training at Kompiam District Hospital in the province, told IPS.

However, it’s a nationwide issue. PNG’s newspaper, The National, conducted a public online survey last month, reporting that 77 percent of respondents did not want the vaccine. In May, a survey of students at the University of Papua New Guinea by the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University, Canberra, revealed a high level of indecision among respondents. Only 6 percent said they would accept the vaccine, 46 percent had not decided either way, while 48 percent planned to refuse it.

Doctors and health care leaders claim that major reasons for the low uptake are cultural and religious opposition, misinformation and conspiracy theories being touted on social media. And lack of public trust in the country’s health system, which, for decades, has struggled with an insufficient workforce, very poor infrastructure, and resources.

However, Dr Mills said that the government was very active in responding to conspiracy theories with facts and authoritative health information. “There is plenty of information, too much information. It’s a blizzard of information but sorting it out is the hard part. Keep in mind that there is a high level of mistrust and scepticism generally in this society. People don’t take anything at face value. It’s fertile soil for believing alternative hypotheses,” he said.

Confusion was one of the biggest reasons for indecision among respondents to the Australian National University’s survey. And they were more likely to trust the information provided by local Christian leaders (32 percent), followed by family and friends (31 percent) and the WHO (29 percent). In contrast, faith in the government as a source of information was negative (-8) percent, leading to the study’s conclusion that ‘distrust of institutions of authority and vaccine hesitance goes together.’

Despite having an economy based on natural and mineral resource wealth, PNG has a relatively low human development ranking of 155 out of 189 countries and territories, and basic service delivery beyond urban centres, hindered by lack of investment and corruption, has been deficient for decades. There are 0.5 physicians and 5.3 nurses per 10,000 people in the country, according to the WHO.

Distrust of the vaccine by healthcare staff has consequences. “High vaccine refusal amongst health workers, particularly nurses, confuses the general public and fosters vaccine scepticism. And unvaccinated health workers can be a danger to the very vulnerable patients that we have as inpatients in hospitals,” Professor Glen Mola, Head of Reproductive Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the School of Medicine and Health Services, University of Papua New Guinea in Port Moresby, told IPS.

Although uptake by health staff in the capital could change following a new ruling at the Port Moresby General Hospital. “Recently, the hospital board approved a policy of the hospital management that any new health workers, contract renewals and trainees, like interns and medical students, must be vaccinated before they can enter the clinical care areas of the hospital,” Professor Mola said.

However, in the highlands, Dr Mills said the challenges were too great for vaccinating everyone. “For the broader population, vaccination was never going to be the way out (of the pandemic). The uptake is too small, the delivery too small, and delivery mechanisms too weak. We will get to herd immunity the hard way, which is by getting most people infected,” he claimed.

Nevertheless, in June, further funding of US$30 million was approved by the World Bank to boost PNG’s COVID-19 inoculation program, where it is now being offered to all citizens aged 18 years and over.

 

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');  

Nigeria's Joel Obi says he feels 'sorry' for Pisa's Michele Marconi, who racially abused him last season.

Violence continues following the jailing of former President Jacob Zuma last week.

At least 30 people have died following days of unrest sparked by the jailing of a former president.

Roda tries to salvage usable items from the debris of her teashop which was destroyed by fighting in Gumuruk last May. Credit: WFP/Marwa Awad

By Marwa Awad
GUMURUK, South Sudan, Jul 13 2021 (IPS)

With her bare hands, Roda clears debris and forages scraps from her wrecked teashop after attackers scorched Gumuruk, a town in the Greater Jonglei region where conflict frequently disrupts daily life and stifles progress.

The 36-year-old mother of six is just one of countless South Sudanese stuck in a tiring cycle of destruction and rebuilding.

Roda’s teashop is — or was — situated in the heart of a local market in Gumuruk. Made of a few simple metal sheets held together on the unpaved ground, before the attack it was a place where locals could enjoy each other’s company over the steady supply of sweet, warming tea.

But all of that was destroyed when violence broke out and the market was stripped down with Roda’s teashop in tow. In one day, she lost all the investment that she had worked so hard to build over a year.

Last week marked the 10th anniversary of the world’s newest nation. Born of decades of struggle and a persistent desire for self-determination, South Sudan has had its share of ups and downs in the first decade of its existence. WFP and its UN partners have been on the ground in South Sudan since the beginning, helping its people achieve their dream of developing their nation.

More than 7 million people — 60 percent of the population — are uncertain of where their next meal will come from due to intensified conflict, the effects of climate change and, more recently, the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.

Insecurity, ambushes and violent raids are also hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance and endangering lives. In Gumuruk alone, some 550 metric tons of food, enough to feed 33,000 food-insecure people for one month, were looted or destroyed. The food included cereals, pulses, cooking oil and nutrition supplements for the treatment and prevention of malnutrition in children and women.

The World Food Programme (WFP) and other UN agencies have been on the ground in South Sudan since it first gained its independence on 9 July 2011, providing millions of people with a lifeline of food and nutritional assistance, and helping them achieve the dream of developing their nation.

In many parts of South Sudan, a country of 12.2 million people, women, men and children have benefited from food security projects as well as WFP’s long-term programmes such Food Assistance For Assets and an extensive school feeding initiative.

This year, WFP plans to reach 5.3 million people with food assistance and over 730,000 people with livelihoods projects which build resilience against shocks and promote self-reliance.

Despite the progress that has been made through these and other ongoing projects, fighting among communities in the country has eroded many of the benefits experienced by South Sudanese, resulting in a host of missed opportunities for the young country.

Roda’s teashop is one example. After working hard to make a living for herself and her children, she is heartbroken by the loss of all her efforts and income.

“There is nothing to be happy about,” she says, tearfully. “Violence destroyed my hometown, my shop. And now — there is no water.”

Before the attack in Gumuruk in May, WFP was making steady progress reaching the most food insecure families in the town with life-saving food and nutrition. Roda and her community relied on a local water source to cook food for themselves and their families.

“My children and I would not be able to survive without this [WFP] food,” she says.

Then raiders destroyed the water treatment tank in the area, leaving Roda, her family and hundreds of others without access to clean water for cooking or sanitation. The nearest water point is a half day’s journey on foot, and she can only carry so much. Her husband is elderly and unwell.

On some days Roda cannot carry enough water back home to cook for herself and her family. The day I met her, she had gone without eating for the entire day, choosing to ration the little water she had that day to cook for and feed her children.

This is an example of how conflict between communities has wasted resources and opportunities for the people of South Sudan. That’s 10 years of wasted opportunities to grow, develop and build happy and fulfilling lives. It leaves people like Roda, who are working hard to build their lives, stuck in a pattern of one step forward, two steps back.

Longevity is a luxury in places like Gumuruk. The ability to imagine and plan for one’s future is built on stable foundations not only of hard work but also hope and confidence that are nurtured by small, incremental successes.

The cycle of building and destruction makes life for Roda and many others in South Sudan a Sisyphean task that derails their dream for a brighter tomorrow. No matter how much hard work she puts in, instead of being able to gradually build on her achievements, she finds they are back to square one.

“If only the fighting would stop, then maybe a better future will come,” says Roda.

Little can be done to change the past but experience can be used to ensure that the future is brighter for people like Roda and for all South Sudanese people. But while we cannot go back and change the last decade, we can make sure the next one is better for Roda and her people.

As she continues to clear the debris from her store, every now and again, Roda’s dirt-stained hand finds a small pot or a spoon buried underneath heaps of ash.

“I can still use this,” Roda says to me while slipping the blackened scrap in a bag she carries at her side. Despite its paltry contents, her resolve grows stronger.

Lives can be saved and improved in South Sudan if sufficient funding is made available. For the next six months, WFP requires US$ 170 million to continue delivering food assistance to the most vulnerable and promoting livelihoods projects which encourage self-reliance.

Marwa Awad, head of communications in WFP South Sudan, worked previously in Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Egypt.

 

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');  

By Anis Chowdhury and Jomo Kwame Sundaram
SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, Jul 13 2021 (IPS)

‘No one is protected from the global pandemic until everyone is’ has become a popular mantra. But vaccine apartheid worldwide, due to rich countries’ policies, has made COVID-19 a developing country pandemic, delaying its end and global economic recovery.

Systemic inequities
Most rich countries have been blocking the developing country proposal to temporarily suspend relevant provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) for the duration of the pandemic to more affordably and effectively contain it.

Anis Chowdhury

Needed to quickly scale up production and affordable access to relevant diagnostic tests, medical treatments, personal protective equipment and prophylactic vaccines, the proposal – by South Africa and India in late 2020 – is now supported by more than two-thirds of WTO members.

The Biden administration has reversed Trump’s opposition to the proposal, albeit only for vaccines. Without necessary complementary measures, and with continued opposition from European governments, the US partial policy reversal has not had any real impact so far.

As the World Health Organization Director-General notes, the pandemic is being prolonged by the “scandalous inequity” in vaccinations. “The global failure to share vaccines equitably is fuelling a two-track pandemic that is now taking its toll on some of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people”.

With new, more infectious, even lethal variants spreading rapidly, experts fear the worst for poor countries is yet to come. Meanwhile, vaccines will generate astronomical profits. Soaring vaccine earnings have created at least nine new billionaires, with executives becoming very rich as share prices shoot up.

Leftovers now charity
Rich countries have been hoarding far more vaccine doses than they need. The European Union (EU) secured three billion doses, or 6.6 per person, while the US got 1.3 billion, or five each. Canada got 450 million for 38 million, or twelve each, the UK over 500 million, i.e., eight each, and Australia 170 million for 25 million, or seven each!

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

With mainly adults vaccinated, the actual ratios are even more obscene. UNICEF found most high-income countries had acquired at least 350% of doses needed. Agreements for vaccine delivery to low- and middle-income countries up to 2023 will only cover half their populations, at most.

The headline grabbing G7 promise of a billion doses actually involves 870 million doses, far short of the 11 billion needed. Some of this involves double-counting: 130 million was previously pledged to COVAX, the arrangement to supposedly ensure equitable vaccine access.

Supplies will not begin until year’s end, i.e., after their domestic vaccination programs are largely done. Most are doses ordered well in excess of needs. Clearly, the G7 does not have a serious plan, let alone commitment to vaccinate the world.

European hypocrisy
Although most EU parliamentarians support the TRIPS waiver proposal, the European Commission (EC), the EU executive, adamantly opposes it, offering half-truths as excuses. European leaders block progress by claiming that increased production and exports are more urgent, and require patent protection.

EC President Ursula von der Leyen sees the pandemic as a chance for vaccine-producing countries to export more, while dismissively asserting that waivers will “not bring a single dose of vaccine in the short and medium term”.

Although world-class facilities in the global South have long produced medicines and vaccines, French President Macron added insult to injury. “Can we really entrust laboratories that don’t know how to produce [vaccines] with this intellectual property and expect them to be producing tomorrow?”.

Now, the EC has legalised world vaccine apartheid by only recognising four vaccines – AstraZeneca (only if produced in Europe), Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson. Hundreds of millions in the global South vaccinated with AZ manufactured in India and many others will thus be banned from Europe!

New North-South divide
By 7 July, more than 3.32 billion vaccine doses had been administered worldwide, with 85% going to high- and upper middle-income countries, and only 0.3% to low-income countries. Africa’s vaccination rate (4% so far) is the slowest of all the continents, with some countries yet to start, while infection rates are rising fast.

Thanks to much higher vaccination rates, deaths in rich countries fell from 59% of the official world total in January to 15% in May 2021! The developing country share of pandemic deaths are underestimated at 85%, but nonetheless increasing rapidly.

The United Nations Secretary-General has warned, “Vaccine equity is the greatest immediate moral test of our times. It is also a practical necessity. Until everyone is vaccinated, everyone is under threat”.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has proposed investing US$50bn to help immunise at least 40% of the world population by the end of 2021 and the balance by mid-2022.

Ending the pandemic would accelerate economic recovery and generate US$9tn more in global output plus US$1tn in tax revenue by 2025. Yet, last weekend’s G20 Finance meeting refused to endorse it.

Reject new apartheid, cooperate
Outraged former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown has rhetorically asked, “vaccines for all or vaccine apartheid?”. Scaling up vaccine production to immunise the world quickly requires unprecedented international cooperation.

Suspending patents can help contain the pandemic, but the selfish policies of the global North have made COVID-19 a pandemic of the South. This is also impeding its end and recovery for all, besides deepening the North-South divide, and inevitably, associated resentments.

Meanwhile, the IMF warns of a ‘dangerous divergence’ in economic recovery between rich and poor countries. With their limited fiscal resources, high debt burdens and weak health systems, countries in the global South must urgently reconsider their options to address the escalating catastrophe.

 

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

• End Vaccine Apartheid Before Millions More Die
• IP, Vaccine Imperialism Cause Death and Suffering, Delay Recovery
• Intellectual Property Cause of Death, Genocide
• Caught in Tangled Web of Vaccine Nationalism
• Intellectual Property Monopolies Block Vaccine Access

He's got rock star fans and two sold-out shows to his name, but Kojo Marfo prefers life's simple joys.

Dozens of people have died in recent protests calling for reform of Eswatini's absolute monarchy.

Credit: Unsplash, Adli Wahid

By External Source
KIRIBATI, Vanuatu, Jul 12 2021 (IPS-Partners)

Between 2010 and 2020, many Pacific Islands and Territories have updated their traditional data collection processes, embracing new technologies. The island nations Kiribati and Vanuatu, among others, successfully switched to computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI), a new data management system and a survey monitoring dashboard. The innovations implemented with support from the Pacific Community helped to weather the impact of the pandemic on census activities and to become fit for the purpose of tracking the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

“With limited internet access in the Pacific Island region, and the additional training required, the decision to switch to an electronic collection process was not an easy move to make initially. However, we and other national statistical offices across the region have reported a handsome payback,” says Aritita Tekaieti, Republic Statistician in Kiribati.

The CAPI format, for example, is cost effective and user friendly. The interviewers use a tablet, mobile phone or a computer to record answers. The technology’s self-correcting function means inconsistencies and mistakes are picked up and resolved during data capture, making the post-enumeration phase much more efficient.

In November 2020, Kiribati and Vanuatu embraced other technologies as well to conduct their national population and housing census. Both countries halted international travel following the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, which meant technical assistance had to be provided remotely. To overcome some of the challenges, the Pacific Community developed a real-time, online data management system and interactive monitoring dashboard for both the national statistical offices in Kiribati and Vanuatu.

The technologies are critically important for island states like Kiribati, which comprises numerous islands dispersed over millions square kilometres of ocean. The survey monitoring dashboard, for example, addresses challenges in conducting face-to-face surveys in the region’s remote villages and communities.

“Surveys often require monitoring during data collection to ensure progress. Monitoring interviewers in face-to-face surveys is necessary as individual interviewer behaviour often contributes to the quality of surveys. Thus, accurate fieldwork monitoring is becoming more and more important,” explains Epeli Waqavonovono, Director of the Statistics for Development Division of the Pacific Community.

As part of the monitoring dashboard, geographic visualisation of fieldwork can be an additional way to monitor progress and potential problems. In an ideal situation, the map-based tool can enable survey supervisors to provide the census coordinators with valid evidence of difficulties or poor performance in fieldwork. The timely discovery allows for faster interventions such as replacement or retraining of enumerators or the reinforcement of problematic geographic areas with additional interviewers. The benefits of monitoring the performance of censuses and surveys through a well-designed dashboard are evident.

“The dashboard is superbly helpful for our monitoring. The maps with red and orange points really help us in spotting errors. I viewed the dashboard every day and managed to download the check files and send them over to my headquarters to deal with any errors and inconsistencies in the interviews from the field,” says Agnether Lemuelu, Deputy Government Statistician at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development in Kiribati.

The tools help to improve data timeliness, field monitoring, better supervision, and data quality checks, for example, through external dashboards and data quality systems, as well as the communication between headquarters, supervisors, and enumerators.

“The Pacific Sub-regional Office of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) supports the Pacific Community in its roll-out of CAPI and remote monitoring systems because in addition to promoting efficient and timely data collection, the technology can help to ensure adherence to international census methodology and standards. This facilitates data comparability among the Pacific countries and with the rest of the world,” says UNFPA Pacific Director, Dr Jennifer Butler.

“UNFPA recognizes the value of having tools that can be rapidly modified and tailored to national level needs while encouraging sharing of experiences across countries. Furthermore, the tools can also support the development of innovative approaches to data analysis and dissemination including visualization of results which can help to build the case for those furthest behind, particularly women, young people and the disabled.”

Censuses for the SDGs

Censuses count everyone and they therefore collect information on important populations, such as those with disability. Censuses are the data source for populating 15 percent of the Pacific SDG indicators. In lieu of comprehensive population-based administrative databases in the Pacific region, the census is the fundamental denominator for all population-based indicators of the SDGs. Censuses therefore contribute data towards 45 percent of the Pacific SDG indicators. This initiative was in the spirit of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) given it was a joint collaboration with the national statistical offices, UNFPA and the Pacific Community.

Data produced via the conduct of a Population and Housing Census are used in a wide array of planning and policy applications, ranging from education and health care to infrastructure and food security. Census data are used in the preparation of population projections, which are fundamental for social and economic planning. The census also serves as the sampling frame for other population-based social and economic surveys, complementing the collection and use of other population-based development microdata for applications such as ending poverty (SDG 1 – No Poverty) and hunger (SDG 2 – No Hunger), ensuring equal and sustained access to good health, education, water, sanitation and hygiene services, energy and work for all (SDGs 3 to 10).

Censuses are designed to provide information for policy and planning purposes across a broad spectrum of sectors and themes, which is intended to be used to guide social, economic and cultural development of the Pacific nations. The initiative aims to leave nobody behind.

Data is not evidence until it is in a useful format and in the hands of the decision makers, whether it be for policy development, prioritization for resources allocation or for designing program interventions. It is only then that the importance of timely and high-quality data becomes apparent. The Pacific Community, with UNFPA support, hopes to accelerate the process of putting the data in the right hands by continuing to build on these initial achievements.

Source: The Pacific Community (SPC)

Still a work in progress, the Global Biodiversity Framework will ultimately advance to UN Convention on Biological Diversity’s COP15 for consideration by 196 member parties
 
21 targets, 10 ‘milestones’ proposed for 2030 en route to ‘living in harmony with nature’ by 2050; Include conserving and protecting at least 30% of Earth’s lands and oceans

By External Source
Jul 12 2021 (IPS-Partners)

The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat today released the first official draft of a new Global Biodiversity Framework to guide actions worldwide through 2030 to preserve and protect Nature and its essential services to people.

The framework includes 21 targets for 2030 that call for, among other things:

• At least 30% of land and sea areas global (especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and its contributions to people) conserved through effective, equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas (and other effective area-based conservation measures)
• A 50% of greater reduction in the rate of introduction of invasive alien species, and controls or eradication of such species to eliminate or reduce their impacts
• Reducing nutrients lost to the environment by at least half, and pesticides by at least two thirds, and eliminating the discharge of plastic waste
• Nature-based contributions to global climate change mitigation efforts of least 10 GtCO2e per year, and that all mitigation and adaptation efforts avoid negative impacts on biodiversity
• Redirecting, repurposing, reforming or eliminating incentives harmful for biodiversity, in a just and equitable way, reducing them by at least $US 500 billion per year
• A $US 200 billion increase in international financial flows from all sources to developing countries

More than two years in development, the Framework will undergo further refinement during online negotiations in late summer before being presented for consideration at CBD’s next meeting of its 196 parties at COP15, scheduled for Kunming, China October 11-24.

The Four Goals for 2050:

The draft framework proposes four goals to achieve, by 2050, humanity “living in harmony with nature,” a vision adopted by the CBD’s 196 member parties in 2010.

Goal A: The integrity of all ecosystems is enhanced, with an increase of at least 15% in the area, connectivity and integrity of natural ecosystems, supporting healthy and resilient populations of all species, the rate of extinctions has been reduced at least tenfold, and the risk of species extinctions across all taxonomic and functional groups, is halved, and genetic diversity of wild and domesticated species is safeguarded, with at least 90% of genetic diversity within all species maintained.

Goal B: Nature’s contributions to people have been valued, maintained or enhanced through conservation and sustainable use supporting the global development agenda for the benefit of all;

Goal C: The benefits from the utilization of genetic resources are shared fairly and equitably, with a substantial increase in both monetary and non-monetary benefits shared, including for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

Goal D: The gap between available financial and other means of implementation, and those necessary to achieve the 2050 Vision, is closed.

Milestones to be reached by 2030

The four goals each have 2-3 broad milestones to be reached by 2030 (10 milestones in all):

Goal A:
Milestone A.1 Net gain in the area, connectivity and integrity of natural systems of at least 5%.
Milestone A.2 The increase in the extinction rate is halted or reversed, and the extinction risk is reduced by at least 10%, with a decrease in the proportion of species that are threatened, and the abundance and distribution of populations of species is enhanced or at least maintained.
Milestone A.3 Genetic diversity of wild and domesticated species is safeguarded, with an increase in the proportion of species that have at least 90% of their genetic diversity maintained.

Goal B:
Milestone B.1 Nature and its contributions to people are fully accounted and inform all relevant public and private decisions.
Milestone B.2 The long-term sustainability of all categories of nature’s contributions to people is ensured, with those currently in decline restored, contributing to each of the relevant Sustainable Development Goals.

Goal C:
Milestone C.1 The share of monetary benefits received by providers, including holders of traditional knowledge, has increased.
Milestone C.2 Non-monetary benefits, such as the participation of providers, including holders of traditional knowledge, in research and development, has increased.

Goal D:
Milestone D.1 Adequate financial resources to implement the framework are available and deployed, progressively closing the financing gap up to at least US $700 billion per year by 2030.
Milestone D.2 Adequate other means, including capacity-building and development, technical and scientific cooperation and technology transfer to implement the framework to 2030 are available and deployed.
Milestone D.3 Adequate financial and other resources for the period 2030 to 2040 are planned or committed by 2030.

21 “Action Targets” for 2030

The framework then lists 21 associated “action targets” for 2030:

Reducing threats to biodiversity

Target 1
Ensure that all land and sea areas globally are under integrated biodiversity-inclusive spatial planning addressing land- and sea-use change, retaining existing intact and wilderness areas.

Target 2
Ensure that at least 20 per cent of degraded freshwater, marine and terrestrial ecosystems are under restoration, ensuring connectivity among them and focusing on priority ecosystems.

Target 3
Ensure that at least 30 per cent globally of land areas and of sea areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and its contributions to people, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.

Target 4
Ensure active management actions to enable the recovery and conservation of species and the genetic diversity of wild and domesticated species, including through ex situ conservation, and effectively manage human-wildlife interactions to avoid or reduce human-wildlife conflict.

Target 5
Ensure that the harvesting, trade and use of wild species is sustainable, legal, and safe for human health.

Target 6
Manage pathways for the introduction of invasive alien species, preventing, or reducing their rate of introduction and establishment by at least 50 per cent, and control or eradicate invasive alien species to eliminate or reduce their impacts, focusing on priority species and priority sites.

Target 7
Reduce pollution from all sources to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity and ecosystem functions and human health, including by reducing nutrients lost to the environment by at least half, and pesticides by at least two thirds and eliminating the discharge of plastic waste.

Target 8
Minimize the impact of climate change on biodiversity, contribute to mitigation and adaptation through ecosystem-based approaches, contributing at least 10 GtCO2e per year to global mitigation efforts, and ensure that all mitigation and adaptation efforts avoid negative impacts on biodiversity.

Meeting people’s needs through sustainable use and benefit-sharing

Target 9
Ensure benefits, including nutrition, food security, medicines, and livelihoods for people especially for the most vulnerable through sustainable management of wild terrestrial, freshwater and marine species and protecting customary sustainable use by indigenous peoples and local communities.

Target 10
Ensure all areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, in particular through the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, increasing the productivity and resilience of these production systems.

Target 11
Maintain and enhance nature’s contributions to regulation of air quality, quality and quantity of water, and protection from hazards and extreme events for all people.

Target 12
Increase the area of, access to, and benefits from green and blue spaces, for human health and well-being in urban areas and other densely populated areas.

Target 13
Implement measures at global level and in all countries to facilitate access to genetic resources and to ensure the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources, and as relevant, of associated traditional knowledge, including through mutually agreed terms and prior and informed consent.

Tools and solutions for implementation and mainstreaming

Target 14
Fully integrate biodiversity values into policies, regulations, planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies, accounts, and assessments of environmental impacts at all levels of government and across all sectors of the economy, ensuring that all activities and financial flows are aligned with biodiversity values.

Target 15
All businesses (public and private, large, medium and small) assess and report on their dependencies and impacts on biodiversity, from local to global, and progressively reduce negative impacts, by at least half and increase positive impacts, reducing biodiversity-related risks to businesses and moving towards the full sustainability of extraction and production practices, sourcing and supply chains, and use and disposal.

Target 16
Ensure that people are encouraged and enabled to make responsible choices and have access to relevant information and alternatives, taking into account cultural preferences, to reduce by at least half the waste and, where relevant the overconsumption, of food and other materials.

Target 17
Establish, strengthen capacity for, and implement measures in all countries to prevent, manage or control potential adverse impacts of biotechnology on biodiversity and human health, reducing the risk of these impacts.

Target 18
Redirect, repurpose, reform or eliminate incentives harmful for biodiversity, in a just and equitable way, reducing them by at least US$ 500 billion per year, including all of the most harmful subsidies, and ensure that incentives, including public and private economic and regulatory incentives, are either positive or neutral for biodiversity.

Target 19
Increase financial resources from all sources to at least US$ 200 billion per year, including new, additional and effective financial resources, increasing by at least US$ 10 billion per year international financial flows to developing countries, leveraging private finance, and increasing domestic resource mobilization, taking into account national biodiversity finance planning, and strengthen capacity-building and technology transfer and scientific cooperation, to meet the needs for implementation, commensurate with the ambition of the goals and targets of the framework.

Target 20
Ensure that relevant knowledge, including the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities with their free, prior, and informed consent, guides decision making for the effective management of biodiversity, enabling monitoring, and by promoting awareness, education and research.

Target 21
Ensure equitable and effective participation in decision-making related to biodiversity by indigenous peoples and local communities, and respect their rights over lands, territories and resources, as well as by women and girls, and youth.

* * * * *

Says CBD Executive Secretary Elizabeth Maruma Mrema: “Urgent policy action globally, regionally and nationally is required to transform economic, social and financial models so that the trends that have exacerbated biodiversity loss will stabilize by 2030 and allow for the recovery of natural ecosystems in the following 20 years, with net improvements by 2050.”

“The framework aims to galvanize this urgent and transformative action by Governments and all of society, including indigenous peoples and local communities, civil society, youth and businesses and financial institutions. It will be implemented primarily through national-level activities, supported by subnational, regional and global-level actions.”

“This is a global, outcome-oriented framework for the Convention’s 196 Parties to develop national and regional goals and targets, to update national strategies and action plans as needed, and to facilitate regular monitoring and review of progress at the global level.”

Implementation

The draft Global Biodiversity Framework notes that effective implementation requires mobilizing resources from both the public and private finance sectors, ongoing identification of risk associated with biodiversity loss capacity development, technical and scientific cooperation, technology transfer and innovation.

It also calls for integration with relevant multilateral environmental agreements and other relevant international processes, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and strengthening cooperation.

Successful implementation will also depend on effective outreach, awareness and uptake by all stakeholders, a comprehensive system for planning, monitoring, reporting and review that allows for transparent communication of progress, rapid course correction, and timely input in the preparation of a post-2030 Global Biodiversity Framework.

* * * * *

Background

Biodiversity and its benefits are fundamental to human well-being and a healthy planet. Despite ongoing efforts, biodiversity is deteriorating worldwide and this decline is projected to continue or worsen under business-as-usual scenarios.

The post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework builds on the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and sets out an ambitious plan to implement broad-based action to bring about a transformation in society’s relationship with biodiversity and to ensure that, by 2050, the shared vision of living in harmony with nature is fulfilled.

The draft framework reflects input from the second meeting of a Working Group managing the framework’s creation, as well as submissions received. The draft will be further updated in late summer with the benefit of input from the 24th meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice and the 3rd meeting of the Subsidiary Body in Implementation, as well as the advice from thematic consultations.

Relationship with 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

The framework will contribute to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. At the same time, progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals will help to provide the conditions necessary to implement the framework.

Theory of change

The framework’s theory of change assumes that transformative actions are taken to (a) put in place tools and solutions for implementation and mainstreaming, (b) reduce the threats to biodiversity and (c) ensure that biodiversity is used sustainably in order to meet people’s needs and that these actions are supported by (i) enabling conditions, and (ii) adequate means of implementation, including financial resources, capacity and technology. It also assumes that progress is monitored in a transparent and accountable manner with adequate stocktaking exercises to ensure that, by 2030, the world is on a path to reach the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity.

The theory of change for the framework acknowledges the need for appropriate recognition of gender equality, women’s empowerment, youth, gender-responsive approaches and the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the implementation of this framework. Further, it is built upon the recognition that its implementation will be done in partnership with many organizations at the global, national and local levels to leverage ways to build a momentum for success. It will be implemented taking a rights-based approach and recognizing the principle of intergenerational equity.

The theory of change is complementary to and supportive of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It also takes into account the long-term strategies and targets of other multilateral environment agreements, including the biodiversity-related and Rio conventions, to ensure synergistic delivery of benefits from all the agreements for the planet and people.

* * * * *

About the UN Convention on Biological Diversity

Opened for signature at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, and entering into force in December 1993, the Convention on Biological Diversity is an international treaty for the conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of the components of biodiversity and the equitable sharing of the benefits derived from the use of genetic resources.

With 196 Parties, the Convention has near universal participation.

The Convention seeks to address all threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services, including threats from climate change, through scientific assessments, the development of tools, incentives and processes, the transfer of technologies and good practices and the full and active involvement of relevant stakeholders including indigenous and local communities, youth, NGOs, women and the business community.

The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing are supplementary agreements to the Convention. The Cartagena Protocol, which entered into force on 11 September 2003, seeks to protect biological diversity from the potential risks posed by living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology.

The Nagoya Protocol aims at sharing the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources in a fair and equitable way, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies. It entered into force on 12 October 2014.

Excerpt:

Still a work in progress, the Global Biodiversity Framework will ultimately advance to UN Convention on Biological Diversity’s COP15 for consideration by 196 member parties
 
21 targets, 10 ‘milestones’ proposed for 2030 en route to ‘living in harmony with nature’ by 2050; Include conserving and protecting at least 30% of Earth’s lands and oceans

By Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana, Kanni Wignaraja, and Bambang Susantono
BANGKOK, Thailand, Jul 12 2021 (IPS)

If the world wants to beat back the COVID-19 pandemic and ensure no one is left behind in the recovery, two issues thrown into sharp relief by the pandemic need attention: digitalization and regional cooperation.

Ensuring the digital transformation reaches all in Asia Pacific is one of the greatest challenges we face

Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana

Even before COVID-19, the digital revolution was transforming how people and businesses work. As the pandemic unfolded, the accelerated adoption of digital technologies helped governments, education, private enterprise and people keep activities going amid social distancing, lockdowns and other containment measures. High-speed internet connectivity and financial technology hold immense promise for deepening financial inclusion, and keeping local economies alive, even in times of crisis. Yet many poor households, women and vulnerable groups have been unable to afford or access the benefits of digitalization.

Digital divides within and between countries in the region threaten to exacerbate existing gaps in economic and social development. We need more equitable access to digital technologies to drive innovation and create new business models.

Regional cooperation must refocus on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Regional cooperation plays a critical role in managing the transition out of the current crisis, and a renewed focus on environmental and social dimensions of cooperation is essential. Working together can also help countries achieve digital transformation for all, including through joint efforts to develop and expand digital infrastructure, and legal and regulatory reforms that make these services more accessible.

Kanni Wignaraja

The pandemic has exposed the inadequacy of the region’s health, education and social protection systems, making life even more difficult for the poorest and socially excluded, and deepening inequalities within communities and countries, particularly for women. The crisis has shown the value of building universal social protection systems for all members of society — from infancy to old age — which can be bolstered to provide additional relief in times of crisis. There have also been huge disparities in the ability of countries to insulate themselves from the pandemic and roll out vaccines. This is widening development gaps. A renewed focus on people, their well-being and capabilities is needed through regional cooperation.

In recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental sustainability needs to become much more central to economic, social and global value chain integration efforts. By building low-carbon economies, including through a new focus on industry and tourism sectors to generate green jobs, we can help create a more resilient region. While governments recognize the potential to pursue more environmentally sustainable development as part of recovery, much more needs to be done if we are to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and protect our planet’s natural capital and biodiversity.

Meeting the needs of people and planet

Bambang Susantono

These issues, highlighted in a recent joint report by our three organizations, warrant greater emphasis as countries meet this week to review implementation of the SDGs at the United Nations High-level Political Forum. Policymakers have necessarily focused on containing the pandemic and meeting peoples’ immediate needs. Tangible action on the multiple interconnected dimensions of the SDGs poses difficult policy and fiscal choices. Regional collaboration around financing can help countries raise and expand resources to meet the SDGs. Key priorities include cooperation on tax, through common standards, and efforts to address tax havens and avoidance. In addition, countries in the region can work together to design incentives to align private investment with the SDGs and expand the use of sustainability-focused instruments that tap regional and global capital markets.

Another form of international cooperation is worth noting. Governments, multilateral organizations, development banks, philanthropic organizations and the private sector have joined forces in unprecedented efforts to fight the pandemic, such as through the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) initiative. Science, technology and innovation enabled by such partnerships will continue to drive countries’ efforts to recover and build resilience.

Today, what begins as highly local can soon become a global phenomenon. A reinvigorated multilateralism can and must respond faster to take on new challenges and expand provision of public goods. Together, our organizations will seek to nurture such cooperation to achieve the SDGs.

Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is the Executive Secretary, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
Kanni Wignaraja is the Assistant Secretary-General, United Nations Development Programme
Bambang Susantono is the Vice-President, Asian Development Bank

 

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');  

Shops are looted and buildings set on fire as the former president challenges his prison sentence.

A child carries empty jerry cans to fill water from a nearby tap providing untreated water from the Nile river in Juba, South Sudan. Credit: UNICEF/Phil Hatcher-Moore

By Rajab Mohandis
JUBA, South Sudan, Jul 12 2021 (IPS)

The declaration of independence of South Sudan was a great historic moment that gave hope to South Sudanese on July 9, 2011. It brought a sense of satisfaction, indicating achievement of a life-time dream for which millions of our people across generations paid the ultimate price.

Now, after the celebrations marking 10 years of independence, we need to reflect and recommit to how to move forward together.

Following the declaration of independence South Sudanese who were internally displaced and those in refuge in neighboring countries returned to the country, settled, and started rebuilding their lives. Many built houses, produced their own food, and engaged in business.

Local governments were operational throughout the country. In most parts of the country, movement of people, goods and services were safe, day and night. The country had resources and international good will to support development in all sectors.

The country had legal frameworks necessary to govern itself. The laws attempted to address historical gender injustices and imbalances by providing for 25% affirmative action for women at independence, which has since been raised to 35%.

In summary, South Sudan at independence had resources, institutions, professionals and legal frameworks to govern itself, deliver basic services and set the country on the path to development.

Unfortunately, all these potentials were quickly squandered, leading to increased state fragility and failure.

Aspiration Betrayed

Power struggles among South Sudanese political leaders led to an outbreak of a civil war in December 2013, barely two and a half years after declaration of the country’s independence. Whereas literature on South Sudan presents many reasons, I attribute the crisis and lack of progress in the country to two main reasons.

First, it was ineffective political leadership at delivering on the mandate of government. This caused a meltdown in all other sectors including politics and governance, security and the economy.

Leadership is almost everything a country needs in order to make progress. It defines a unifying national vision to set a direction for a country, provides the means and creates the environment necessary for realization of the vision.

Firearms laid down by child soldiers associated with armed groups in South Sudan. Credit: UNICEF/Rich

This has been grossly lacking in South Sudan since the country became independent and as it stands now, there is no clarity as to where the country is heading.

The second was complete neglect of principles that guided the struggle for South Sudan’s liberation and independence. South Sudan is a product of decades of liberation struggles with clearly defined purpose and principles.

The text of the declaration of our independence recalled that our people led a “long and heroic struggle for justice, freedom, equality, human dignity and political and economic emancipation.” The declaration further states that we, the people of South Sudan “resolved to establish a system of governance that upholds the rule of law, justice, democracy, human rights and respect for diversity.”

However, these principles were not meaningfully pursued and realized, causing our country to descend into the civil war and consequently multiple conflicts.

The net effects of the leadership failure and neglect of the principles that guided our struggle for liberation and independence are severe. At the top of these effects is state failure.

The South Sudanese state is unable to perform its basic functions of government, like maintaining security for itself and for all citizens, enforcing law and order, delivering services to the population, and meaningfully resolving the multiple conflicts in the country.

The status of the Peace Agreement

The Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS) provides a reasonable framework for peace in our country. Consistent and full implementation of this peace agreement would enable South Sudanese to restore peace, security, and stability; address the humanitarian crisis, reform and strengthen effectiveness of public institutions, deliver transitional justice, write a permanent constitution and conduct credible elections within the agreed implementation schedule.

Unfortunately, 33 of the 44 months of the original timeline of the peace implementation have elapsed without achieving key milestones of the peace agreement. Transitional Security Arrangements, which were supposed to have been accomplished in the first eight months of the peace agreement are collapsing.

Not a single soldier of the initially agreed 83,000 necessary unified forces, has been graduated. Due to acute shortage of food and medicines, the forces have been deserting their cantonment sites and training centers. Needless to say, the functioning of all the security mechanisms created by the peace agreement is severely impaired due to lack of funds.

While these delays persist, civilians continue to pay the price of insecurity in the country. It may be noted that women have been among the main victims of this situation. In a nation-wide public consultation with women in all ten states of the country in March this year, they strongly expressed concerns about the slow implementation of the peace agreement and poor delivery of basic services like health, education, and water.

They felt that implementation of the 35% affirmative action would help increase the voices of women in the public decision making that would result in a resolution of the crisis in the country. However, most of the parties to the peace agreement have not been meeting their share of the 35% in the institutions of the unity government.

The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) is the mediator and main guarantor of the peace agreement, but its effectiveness with regard to the peace agreement, appears to be diminishing.

First, almost all the member states of IGAD are more involved in their internal issues rather than regional response to conflicts in the last twelve months. Second, the South Sudanese parties to the R-ARCSS have become fairly immune to pressure from IGAD.

For example, IGAD called on them to dissolve the parliament within two weeks, but it took over 10 months for this to happen.

Expectations Moving Forward

The current situation of ineffective leadership and deliberate neglect of the purpose of our independence have maintained our country in crisis for the last ten years. Without a change in this status, the future can only be expected to remain the same or even worsen.

The volatile political, economic, security, and humanitarian situations are likely to remain mutually reinforcing. This will further complicate the situation for civilians in the country and stifle efforts to address the crisis and restore peace, security, and stability.

It is also highly likely that the civil population, civil servants, and political groups will get increasingly frustrated. These public frustrations risk causing instability of their own, in demand for improvement especially in the security, economic, and humanitarian situations in the country.

IGAD member states are likely to remain occupied in their internal national issues. This will only leave the parties on their own, without robust regional oversight and support.

The Way Forward

Learning from the past decade, South Sudan needs to chart a new and clear path for the next ten years.

First, South Sudanese, who genuinely represent the suffering masses need to be at the core of the solutions moving forward and not just those who wield power by the barrel of the gun.

On this note, the full spectrum of civil society – civil society organizations, faith-based leaders, women, youth, professional groups, and business community – must demand of the leaders in the unity government, effective discharge of their mandates as stipulated in the constitution and the peace agreement, or accept a reconfiguration of the political order into one that is capable of meaningfully resolving the problems in the country.

Second, the South Sudanese in their diversities should demand and ensure that South Sudan is governed by the principles that informed the struggle for the liberation and independence of the country. These initiatives must be deliberate, concerted, and sustained to ensure the next ten years is not another wasted decade of our independence.

The UN Security Council (UNSC) should support the efforts of South Sudanese from the categories outlined above, in any initiative to address the crisis in the country. The support from the United Nations may be in many forms.

The UNSC may work jointly with IGAD, the African Union and other actors in the international community, to raise the cost of willful sabotage of peace implementation, including perpetuation of violence, human rights abuses and restrictions on the civic and political spaces.

Rajab Mohandis is the Director for the Organization for Responsive Governance and the Civil Society Representative to the R-ARCSS peace process and Coordinator of the South Sudan Civil Society Forum (SSCSF).

 

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:

Ten years after South Sudan achieved independence, more children there are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance than ever before, the UN Children’s Fund, UNICEF, said on July 6.

Some of the delegates at the Intergenerational Dialogue of the Asian Parliamentarians and Youth Advocates on Meaningful Youth Engagement. Credit: APDA

By IPS Correspondent
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa, Jul 12 2021 (IPS)

Youth advocates from Asian countries called for an overhaul of a system that excluded young people from participation in policymaking.

During an interaction with parliamentarians from 23 countries, youth representatives considered an enabling political framework to be the most crucial reform required to remove inequities.

More than 100 youth representatives and parliamentarians participated in an Intergenerational Dialogue of the Asian Parliamentarians and Youth Advocates on Meaningful Youth Engagement. The webinar was organised by the Asian Population and Development Association (APDA) and supported by United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and Y-PEER Asia-Pacific Center.

Hitoshi Kikawada, Secretary-General of Japan Parliamentarians Federation for Population (JPFP), welcomed the delegates at the “innovative” dialogue, which would serve as a platform for “listening to the voices of young people, incorporating the needs of younger people and building a better future.”

Björn Andersson, Regional Director of UNFPA, said the dialogue would give impetus to the sentiment “nothing about us, without us”.

“Too many young people are still being left behind significantly. Inequality and inequities still exist, particularly in education, employment, access to services and political participation,” Andersson said, adding that the impact of COVID-19 had exacerbated the challenges and inequalities.

Migrants, young people in poor urban areas, girls and young women, people with disabilities, members of the LBTQI+ community, and those living with HIV all faced higher exploitation, violence, and mental health issues. They had poor access to health services and protection.

Youth needed to be involved in all stages of policy development, from design, planning, and implementation to evaluation, Andersson said.

Youth representative Situ Shrestha reported the results of a quick survey which showed that more than 50 percent of the respondents said they “not involved in any kind of consultation or dialogue with government at any level.”

She said there was a lack of good platforms for youth engagement, ineffective communication, and often youth did not trust government policies. Only meaningful engagement could reduce these gaps, Shrestha said.

Some of the delegates at the Intergenerational Dialogue of the Asian Parliamentarians and Youth Advocates on Meaningful Youth Engagement. Credit: APDA

Pakistani MP Romina Khursheed Alam said the young parliamentarian forum included members until they were 45 years old.

As lawmakers, there were attempts to ensure youth engagement in the parliamentary process – through internships for university students. She said as a member of the human rights standing committee, she was also concerned about the isolation of the transgender community.

She welcomed an international collaboration and expressed concern about the impacts of COVID-19 protocols, which included lockdowns where the mental health issues became prominent and violence, drugs, and other social problems increased.

Youth representative from Sri Lanka Ram Dulip told the gathering that youth used social media to raise socio-economic issues their communities experienced during the pandemic. He also said COVID-19 demonstrated the leadership potential of young people.

“Not only are they on the frontlines as health workers, but they are also advancing health and safety in their roles as researchers, as activists, as innovators, and as communicators,” Dulip said. Decision-makers should consider this and commit to ensuring youth voices are a part of the solution for a healthier and safer society.

Likewise, Sri Lankan parliamentarian Hector Appuhamy called on countries to use the innovative nature of youth to their economic benefit – and believed the youth parliament would be the most helpful mechanism.

Youth should be involved in critical decision-making Siva Anggita from Indonesia said. This included access to budgets – whether national or district to ensure that programmes for their development were funded.

Anggita was concerned that where young people were included in political participation, it “wasn’t a secret that they come from the privileged backgrounds”.

“So, it is important to make (changes to a) political system that includes all young people. So, all of the young people have the same opportunity,” she said.

Moderator Ayeshwini Lama said the youth survey during the preparatory consultation had confirmed the views expressed and put political reforms as one of the top three recommendations.

Sarah Elago, from the Philippines, expressed concern that while internet connectivity had ensured workers were connected to their work environments, it had some negative connotations, including “digital surveillance and privacy” issues.

However, she commended the youth in the Philippines for their involvement in many projects like community kitchens during the COVID-19 pandemic, which helped “combat hunger and poverty as exacerbated by the massive loss of jobs and livelihoods.”

Youth advocate Fura Sherpa called for a direct connection with policymakers – it was time to ditch the systems where youth were legislated about without being consulted.

“There was no actual participation of youth in creating policy about youth,” Sherpa said, and this needed to change. Policy should be written with direct “actual participation” of the younger community.

The forum called for three main changes – an enabling political framework that involved collaboration and dialogues between governments and young people. Secondly, needs-driven reform with policies reviewed and revised with emerging challenges; and thirdly, inclusiveness in including youth and marginalised groups in decision making.

The dialogue was welcomed by parliamentarians. Ananda Bhaskar Rapulu, an MP from India said the discussion had given him hope because, as lawmakers, they had learnt from the youths’ observations and aspirations.

Mariany Mohammad Yit, a former MP from Malaysia said while there was a National Youth Policy in her country, there was no data to assess its success. She commented that she was not sure the government was serious about youth participation – confirming a dominant theme of day’s debate.

 

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');  

Secretary-General António Guterres briefing journalists in a pre-pandemic era. At left is his Spokesman Stéphane Dujarric. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elias

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 12 2021 (IPS)

When a Southeast Asian ambassador hosted a lunch for journalists, including reporters from the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, he told us there was an ulterior motive for the sumptuous lunch at his residence.

“We will soon begin our two-year term as a non-permanent member of the Security Council – and we need your cooperation (read: news coverage)”.

And then added: “Hey guys, remember, as the Americans say, there is no such thing as a free lunch”. A wise-cracking British journalist shot back: “Ambassador, there is also no such thing as a free press”.

Perhaps he was reflecting a famous quote attributed to an American journalist who once said the freedom of the press is only to those who own one.

Still, for scores of journalists covering the UN for their newspapers– thousands of miles away from home– one of the most coveted datelines is “Reporting from the United Nations.”

Some of these correspondents, both full-time and part-time, come from developing nations, including India, Indonesia, Egypt, Brazil, Cuba, Malaysia, Bosnia, Singapore, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, while others come from the Western world, including Italy, France, Germany, Canada, Australia, UK and the US, plus Russia and China.

They occupy two floors of the 39-storeyed UN Secretariat building— with free office space in one of New York’s most expensive real estate markets.

Besides reporting on military conflicts, civil wars, genocide and war crimes high on the Security Council agenda, most UN correspondents were also gifted raconteurs who could spin a tale or two, particularly from their home countries.

The late Dharam Shourie, UN Bureau Chief for the Indian news agency, Press Trust of India (PTI), pointed out that journalists back home, particularly in the 1950s and 1960s, could rarely afford the luxury of a tape recorder. So, most interviews, mostly with politicians and government bureaucrats, were either one-on-one or over the phone.

But if the interview got a strong blowback, politicians and government officials were quick to deny the entire story– or falsely accuse the reporter of either misquoting or concocting the quotes. Unfortunately, journalists had no proof to nail the lying politicians.

According to Shourie, there was a rare instance in the 1960s when a reporter, armed with a bulky tape recorder, went to interview an Indian politician. The politician asked the reporter: “What is it that you are carrying”.

Told it was a tape recorder, he said: “No tape recorders here. Leave it outside my office.” And added the punchline: “You are trying to deny me, my right to deny, what I am going to tell you.”

Shourie also told me about inviting a visiting journalist, a rigid vegetarian and a Brahmin Hindu, for lunch at the UN cafeteria. When he saw him serving himself beef stroganoff, Shourie was surprised and asked him: “I thought you were a strict vegetarian and did not eat beef.”

“Oh” said the visiting journalist: “I don’t eat Indian cows but I can eat American cows”.

Meanwhile, journalists, rarely if ever, were able to get any on-the-record comments or reactions from ambassadors, diplomats and senior UN officials because most of them followed the advice given to Brits during war time censorship in the UK: “Be like Dad, Keep Mum”.

But as a general rule, most ambassadors avoided comments on all politically-sensitive issues with the standard non-excuse: ”Sorry, we have to get clearance from our capital”.

But that “clearance” never came. Still, it was hard to beat a response from a tight-lipped Asian diplomat who told me: “No comment” – And Don’t Quote Me on That”.

A group of IPS interns from Germany, the US, France, Sweden and the Netherlands. Credit: IPS

On the other hand, most senior UN officials never had the basic courtesy or etiquette to even acknowledge phone or email messages. The lines of communications were mostly dead.

When I complained to the media-savvy Shashi Tharoor, a former Under-Secretary-General for Public Information and a one-time journalist and prolific author, he was explicit in his response when he said that every UN official – “from an Under-Secretary-General to a window-washer”—has the right to express an opinion in his or her area of expertise.

But that rarely or ever happened.

However, there were exceptions: When Inter Press Service (IPS) launched its daily UN conference newspapers, beginning with the 1982 Earth Summit in Rio, we were desperately chasing diplomats to get a sense of what was going on.

The meetings were mostly behind closed-doors, with the 134-member Group of 77, the largest single coalition of developing nations, expressing disappointment at the absence of any concrete pledges for funding a global environmental plan.

As I was doing a wrap-up of the two-week long conference, I approached Dr Gamani Corea, a former Secretary-General of the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and a member of the Sri Lanka delegation, for a final comment.

“We negotiated”, he said with a tinge of sarcasm, “the size of the zero”, as he held out his fingers to indicate the zero.

When he ran a summer internship programme at IPS, I also advised our interns of how crucial the lead para was in any news story—with would-be journalists spending weeks or months in journalism schools trying to crank out the perfect lead (or as the Americans call it the “lede”).

I quoted the demanding editor (Walter Matthau) in the 1974 Billy Wilder classic “The Front Page” (there were three remakes of it) who berates his reporter (Jack Lemmon) for missing the fact that his fictional newspaper “The Examiner” had landed a scoop in tracking down a killer.

Matthau complains he doesn’t see this in the lead while Lemmon responds that it was in the second para. An indignant Matthau shouts back: “Who the hell reads the second para (in a news story)?”

When I discussed some of the great newspaper headlines, I told my interns about one such legendary headline in the London Times in 1986 when a British Labor party politician Michael Foot was appointed to chair a committee to look into nuclear disarmament in Europe. The classic headline read: FOOT HEADS ARMS BODY. And a legend was born.

Meanwhile, there was a longstanding myth that journalists can do no wrong – and newspaper editors back home usually have the last word responding to any denials of a published news item: “We stand by our story” or “This correspondence is now closed”.

Still, I remember reading an anecdote about a newspaper in a small town in mid-West USA which erroneously ran an obituary of an ailing town official in the “Deaths” columns.

The indignant official called the newspaper editor from his hospital bed to confirm he was still alive and kicking—and demanding a retraction. “I am sorry”, said the editor,” We usually do not carry any corrections, but we can list your name under our “Births” column tomorrow”.

And then, there was at least one senior UN official with an off-beat sense of humor who recounted an incident — but insisted it should be “strictly off the record” lest he be accused of male chauvinism”.

He said he was speaking at a press briefing in Europe to launch a UN report, when following the briefing, several journalists rushed to the podium, as they most often do, with more questions or seeking exclusive quotes.

“There was this young buxom European woman reporter,” he said, “who approached me with a label pinned to her chest which read: PRESS”. And I did not know what to do”.

Thalif Deen, a former UN Bureau Chief for Inter Press Service (IPS) news agency, is the author of a newly-released book on the United Nations titled “No Comment – and Don’t Quote Me on That” from which this article is adapted. Published by Amazon, the book is mostly a satire peppered with scores of anecdotes-– both serious and hilarious. The link to Amazon via the author’s website follows: https://www.rodericgrigson.com/no-comment-by-thalif-deen/

 

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');  

Police say criminals are taking advantage of the unrest following the former president's jailing.

South Africa captain Siya Kolisi tests positive for coronavirus as his side build up to the series against the British and Irish Lions.

Kenya's president and his deputy had what seemed like a perfect political marriage, until a third partner showed up.