Africa

A video of a woman driver being assaulted by motorbike taxi riders sparks renewed calls for action.

Ros Atkins looks at why global food price rises appear inevitable as a consequence of Russia invading Ukraine.

A Mar. 3 plenary session of the constitutional convention of Chile, where in long working days its members are drafting a new constitution, which must be completed by Jul. 4 at the latest. On Feb. 17, they approved by a large majority the new definition of Chile as a regional, plurinational and pluricultural State. CREDIT: Orlando Milesi/IPS

By Orlando Milesi
SANTIAGO, Mar 9 2022 (IPS)

Chile could change the course of its history and become a diverse and multicolored country this year with a “plurinational and intercultural state” that recognizes and promotes the development of the native peoples that inhabited this territory before the Spanish conquest.

By 112 votes in favor and 32 against, the constitutional convention approved this proposal which now forms part of the draft constitution that Chilean voters will approve or reject in an August or September referendum."The current Chilean constitution and the previous ones make no mention of the words Indian, native…indigenous peoples, or original peoples. Nothing. They are erased from the constitution because they were made invisible socially, culturally, economically, politically and militarily." -- Domingo Namuncura

The constitutional convention is debating and drafting a new constitution which is the result of the work of 155 constituents – half men and half women, with 17 indigenous members – elected by popular vote in October 2020 who began the task on Jul. 4, 2021. They have until Jul. 4 to finish their work.

In the country’s last census, in 2017, 2.18 million Chileans self-identified as indigenous people.

In other words, 12.8 percent of the 17.07 million inhabitants of Chile at that time (today the population stands at 19.4 million) were recognized as belonging to one of the indigenous peoples distributed throughout this long narrow South American country: the Mapuche (the largest native group), followed by the Aymara, Rapa Nui, Diaguita, Atacameño, Quechua, Colla, Kawesqar and Yagan.

Domingo Namuncura, a Mapuche social worker and professor at the Catholic University of Valparaíso, told IPS that “we are facing a very important historic event. The declaration of a plurinational State has always been a dream of the indigenous peoples of Chile.”

The creation of the constitutional convention was the response to months of protests and social unrest in 2019, the repression of which tainted the second term of right-wing President Sebastián Piñera, a businessman who had already governed the country between 2010 and 2014, and who will be succeeded as of Mar. 11 by the leftist Gabriel Boric, winner of the December elections.

Chile has been governed since 1980 by the constitution imposed by the dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet (1973-1990), who used legislation to put in place a neoliberal and authoritarian economic and political regime, which democratic governments have only been able to partially dismantle since 1990.

The result is a country with a dynamic economy based on exports of mining and agricultural products, but with one of the most unequal societies in the world, which was at the basis of the 2019 demonstrations, as was the failure to fulfill promises of change, such as a new constitution, the reform of the educational system or improvements in social rights.

Mapuche Indians living in the metropolitan region. Data from 2021 indicate that the Mapuche, Chile’s largest indigenous people, number 1.8 million, followed by the Aymara (156,000) and the Diaguita (88,000). CREDIT: Orlando Milesi/IPS

Arguments of the constituents

No previous Chilean constitution has mentioned indigenous people and their rights, by contrast with other Latin American constitutions that have emerged since 1980. And the only precedent of declaring a “plurinational state” is that of neighboring Bolivia, which did so in its 2009 constitution.

“The current Chilean constitution and the previous ones make no mention of the words Indian, native…indigenous peoples, or original peoples. Nothing. They are erased from the constitution because they were made invisible socially, culturally, economically, politically and militarily,” said Namuncura.

Adolfo Millabur, Chile’s first Mapuche mayor, elected in 1996 in the southern town of Tirúa, resigned from his post to become a member of the constitutional convention, to occupy one of the seats reserved for Mapuche representatives. He maintained that “if Chile is transformed and defines itself as a plurinational state, what changes is its democratic vocation.”

“By acknowledging the peoples that lived here prior to the creation of the Chilean State, a collective actor is given value. Different forms of relations should begin to be established, especially in the area of political definition and participation,” he told IPS.

Lawyer Tiare Aguilera, a member of the constitutional convention from the Rapa Nui people, believes that “the most important thing is to reach the referendum with a citizenry that is informed about plurinationality and its implications.”

In her view, “through plurinationality, our country will finally be able to advance towards reparations for the native peoples of Chile.

“There is a great deal of ignorance among the public. If we correctly inform and educate the public about their meanings and implications, we believe that the changes in the definition of the State will be understood,” she told IPS.

The facade of the old National Congress, where since July 2021 the members of the constitutional convention have been debating the new form of State that will govern Chile starting this year, if the draft constition is approved in a referendum. CREDIT: Orlando Milesi/IPS

Jaime Bassa, a member of the constitutional convention who was its vice-president until January, said “the normative proposals approved in commissions and in the plenary on plurinationality speak to us of a sense of reality, of accepting ourselves in legitimate diversity and coexistence, of recognizing our historical roots, of valuing ourselves based on our cultural identity.

“In comparative experiences, plurinationalism and multilingualism have brought about interesting cultural changes that have led to innovative and sustainable development alternatives,” he told IPS.

In his opinion, “the growth and development model we are moving towards within the framework of the constituent process that is underway should promote ethics and inter-territorial solidarity, care for the environment and sustainability, as foundations for political equality, and to ensure collaborative, resilient contexts of respect for rights that allow us to broaden and deepen our democracy.”

Bassa said the constitutional convention “is working on a proposal for a plurinational and decentralized legislative power in which there is equality, which would give rise to representation for the different territories, that would participate in the process of law-making, effectively representing the peoples and nations that coexist within the State.”

The regulation approved on Feb. 17 states that “Chile is a regional, plurinational and intercultural State made up of autonomous territorial entities, within a framework of equity and solidarity among all of them, preserving the unity and integrity of the State.”

According to Namuncura, who was the first Mapuche to serve as a Chilean ambassador, to Guatemala, “Chile has always been plurinational because it is constituted on the basis of different native populations that were already in this territory and that joined as native peoples or nations, by force or otherwise, in the construction of the national State.

“From the Aztec, Mayan, Inca and Mapuche cultures, before the arrival of the Spaniards, America was already a plurinational continent populated by more than 1,200 indigenous nationalities that were formed many centuries ago,” he pointed out.

The convention is also discussing other norms for indigenous peoples, such as their own courts of justice in coordination with the national justice system, a parliament with indigenous representation and a regime governing natural resources located in their territories.

Representatives of the Mapuche, Lonko and Machi peoples take part in the raising of the flag in the Plaza de Armas in Vilcún, 700 km south of Santiago, in one of the many events held in Chile every Jun. 24, declared a national holiday for We Tripantu (new sunrise), the Mapuche New Year. CREDIT: Mirna Concha/IPS

Business leaders unhappy

This process is of great concern to the business leaders grouped in the Confederation of Production and Commerce (CPC), whose board, headed by Juan Sutil, met several times with Mapuche representative Elisa Loncón, who was president of the convention until January, and her successor, María Elisa Quinteros.

The CPC was behind numerous Popular Standards Initiatives seeking to include its positions in the debate. It invited everyone to support these initiatives “that defend the values of freedom of thought and free enterprise,” among others, in order to achieve “a robust democracy” with public-private collaboration.

The CPC gathered 507,852 signatures and was able to submit 16 initiatives with its views on the constituent process. Three of them have already been rejected: “Free enterprise”, “Economic model, freedom of entrepreneurship and promotion of small and medium-sized enterprises”, and “Water for all”. One more is still being processed: “Towards sustainable mining for Chile”.

Business leaders have raised the tone of their opposition to the convention, which they accuse of distancing itself from the real Chile and from the work for a constitution for all.

“I am concerned that the constitution that is being drafted is not generating the proper balances and will not be a constitution that takes into account the sensibilities of all Chileans,” said Sutil.

Those sensitivities, he said, are especially from “a minority sector, which could be the center right, the right and even people from the center within the convention itself who are not being taken into consideration at all,” he told a local radio station.

“Chile is much more than what the constitutional convention reflects. The correlation of forces is very different in the real Chile than what is happening in the convention,” he argued.

According to Sutil, criticism of the convention is widespread and “this is bad not only because it jeopardizes the process, but also because it jeopardizes the future of the country from an institutional point of view, and from the point of view of its development and growth.”

Forestry companies own approximately 1.9 million hectares in an enormous area in the south, across three of the country’s regions. A significant part of these hectares are the ancestral lands of indigenous peoples.

Catalina Marileo and Luis Aillapán, a Mapuche couple, stand in front of their home in Puerto Saavedra in the central Chilean region of La Araucanía. They have been among the many members of native peoples tried under an anti-terrorism law inherited from the dictatorship for acts such as, in their case, opposing the military for building a road on their land. Now Chile could be declared a plurinational State. CREDIT: Marianela Jarroud/IPS

Precedents of a truth commission

The Historical Truth and New Deal with Indigenous Peoples Commission, created by then president Ricardo Lagos in 2001 and composed of 24 members with cross-cutting representation, found that 500,000 hectares were awarded to indigenous peoples between 1884 and 1929. This was verified after reviewing 413 titles issued in that time span.

The purpose of the Commission was to “correct the historical invisibility of native peoples, recognize their identity, repair the damage done to them and contribute to the preservation of their culture.”

In its final report, in 2003, the Commission proposed a hundred measures. In the area of land, it called for protecting lands belonging to indigenous peoples, demarcating and titling ancestral lands of native communities, and establishing a land reclamation mechanism.

Regarding natural resources, it proposed recognizing the indigenous peoples’ right of ownership, use, administration and benefit, the preferential right in State concessions, and the right of use, management and conservation.

So far, the greatest gesture by the State for the mistreatment of indigenous peoples was made by the current United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, who as president of Chile (2006-2010 and 2014-2018) apologized in June 2017 to the Mapuche in a solemn official act for “the errors and horrors” committed against them.

Namuncura believes that a pending task is “to reach a political agreement with the large forestry companies so that a part of these lands, which today are their property, are returned to the indigenous peoples through a long-term political and financial commitment, with the possibility of considering the value of this restitution.”

The wording already approved for the first draft will now be analyzed by the Harmonization Commission, which will ensure “the concordance and coherence of the constitutional norms approved by the plenary.”

The version that emerges from that process will be voted by the plenary which, by two thirds, will define the text to be voted on by all Chileans in the referendum.

Justice Christopher, who played for Nigeria against England at the 2002 World Cup, has died suddenly at the age of 40.

Refugees at a border point between Republic of Moldova and Ukraine on March 1, 2022. Among the 2 million refugees who have fled Ukraine were Roma refugees who say they were discriminated against as they tried to escape. Credit: UN Women

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Mar 9 2022 (IPS)

Roma refugees fleeing war-torn Ukraine are facing discrimination on both sides of the country’s borders at the end of often harrowing journeys across the country, rights groups have claimed.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24 has sparked what the UN has described as the fastest-growing refugee crisis in Europe since WWII, and as of March 9, an estimated 2 million people had left the country.

These include Roma who, like other refugees, abandoned their homes and communities as fighting broke out across the country.

But having reached borders of neighbouring states, they have found themselves subject to what some groups helping them have described as “brutal” discrimination.

“Groups working on the ground at borders in Slovakia, Romania, and Hungary have confirmed discrimination to us, and also media reports have backed this up. Roma are facing discrimination both by border guards, and then local people once they get out of Ukraine. It’s very sad and disappointing, but not surprising,” Zeljko Jovanovic, Director of the Roma Initiatives Office at the Open Society Foundation (OSF) told IPS.

Roma refugees faced ‘brutal’ discrimination at both sides of the border of Ukraine as they joined 2 million others to flee the bombing in war-torn Ukraine. These headlines reflect their ordeal. Graphic: IPS

Roma living in Europe are among the most discriminated and disadvantaged groups on the continent. In many countries, including Ukraine where it is thought there are as many as 400,000 Roma, significant numbers live in segregated settlements where living conditions are often poor and extreme poverty widespread.

Health in many such places is also bad with research[1] showing very high burdens of both infectious and non-communicable diseases and significantly shorter lifespans than the general population.

Incidents of discrimination of Roma have been reported at the borders of all countries that are taking in refugees, according to the OSF and the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC).

These have included being made to wait much longer in lines, sometimes tens of kilometres long, in freezing weather, than ethnic Ukrainian refugees, before they are processed.

“They are always the last people to be let out of the country,” said Jovanovic.

Media reports have quoted refugees describing discrimination and, in some cases, physical attacks.

One Roma woman who had made her way to Moldova said she and her family had spent four days waiting at the border with no food and water, and having found shelter were then chased out of it by Ukrainian guards.

Groups working with the refugees said Roma who crossed into their countries told them similar stories.

Viktor Teru of the Roma Education Fund in Slovakia said: “Roma refugees tell us that on the Ukrainian side there is ‘brutal’ discrimination.”

But once they finally make it over the border, their problems often do not end there.

Bela Racz, of the 1Hungary organisation, which is helping Roma refugees in Hungary, said he had witnessed discrimination during three days his organisation spent in the eastern Hungarian border town of Zahony at the beginning of March.

“Roma arrived in separate coaches – the Ukrainian border guards organized it this way – and when they did arrive, Roma mothers were checked by Hungarian police many times, but non-Roma mothers were not.

“Local mayors and Hungarians are not providing direct help, such as accommodation, and information, [for Roma] in their towns – that only comes if we ask for it and organise it. Roma did not get proper help, information, or support,” he told IPS.

There have been numerous media reports of similar discrimination at border crossings in other countries, including incidents of Roma being refused transport by volunteers, and being refused accommodation.

Jaroslav Miko, founder of the Cesi Pomahaji (Czechs Help) NGO, who has transported more than 100 Roma refugees from the Slovak-Ukrainian border to the Czech Republic, told IPS he had seen “discrimination of Roma among the volunteers who were picking people up at the border”. He said volunteers were picking up some refugees in vehicles and taking them to other places, but that Roma families were being turned away if they asked for help.

In another incident, the head of a firefighting station in Humenne, in eastern Slovakia, where many Roma refugees have been sent to a holding camp, told a reporter that the refugees had “abused the situation”. “They are not people who are directly threatened by the war. They are people from near the border, they have abused the opportunity for us to cook them hot food here and to receive humanitarian aid,” the firefighter allegedly said, adding that Ukrainian Roma should not be allowed across the border.

Slovakia’s Interior Minister Roman Mikulec and national fire brigade officials have refused to comment on the claims.

But despite these incidents of discrimination, Roma refugees are getting local help – from other Roma.

“Many Hungarian Roma living in nearby villages are providing accommodation for Roma. Due to the presence of groups like ours, and state representatives, the situation with discrimination is getting better,” said Racz.

“There is a good network of Roma activist groups coordinating work to help refugees and also there are Roma mayors in many towns near the borders in Romania and Slovakia who are prepared to take Roma refugees and arrange shelter for them,” added Jovanovic.

However, all those who spoke to IPS said the discrimination against Roma refugees was a reminder of the systemic prejudice the minority faces.

Meanwhile, Jovanovic said he hoped that the problems Roma refugees were facing now would not be forgotten, as they had been in the past.

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');  

Namibian Gracia Kibangu says she came out as queer during a beauty contest to live her truth.

Ukraine’s Ambassador to the UN Sergiy Kyslytsya. Credit: United Nations

By Alon Ben-Meir
NEW YORK, Mar 9 2022 (IPS)

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was certainly not a surprise and has unambiguously exposed the West’s weakness. The question is what lesson the United States and its allies should learn from it and what measures they must now undertake to prevent Putin or any future ruthless Russian autocrat from ever daring to invade another country.

Righting the Wrong

As we observe the horrifying unfolding events in Ukraine, the escalating death toll, and the destruction that is raining down on cities and innocent Ukrainians, we must be true to ourselves and admit that we—the US and our European allies made it possible for Putin to wage such an unprovoked and unjustified war.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, we have basically taken for granted the new world order, believing that the Soviet Union is a thing of the past and that Putin’s ambition to resurrect the Russian Empire is nothing more than posturing. We have dealt with his military campaigns in Georgia and his annexation of Crimea by imposing sanctions, which have hardly been crippling.

Meanwhile, we have steadily been exposing our vulnerabilities, which Putin has been carefully and diligently studying, preparing himself for what we are now witnessing with great alarm but great moral failing.

To understand the magnitude of Putin’s danger to the world order, it suffices to quote US Ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who stated that “Putin asserted that Russia today has a rightful claim to all territories – all territories – from the Russian Empire; the same Russian Empire from before the Soviet Union, from over 100 years ago, ” including Ukraine, Finland, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and parts of Poland and Turkey”.

The State Department later declared “These countries are sovereign. They are independent. They are not part of Russia. You [Putin] have no claim to them,” which suggests how dangerous and out of control Putin is. In response to this unparalleled state of affairs, the West under American leadership must regroup and commit to spare no effort to stop Putin in his tracks and be prepared to take whatever measures are necessary to that end.

There are five areas that we have sorely neglected and allowed to fester, which we must now tackle with utmost urgency if we want to prevent another catastrophe and restore stability and peace in the European theater.

US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield. Credit: United Nations

Provide military aid to non-NATO member states

Although the Biden administration knew for several months, based on solid intelligence, that Putin was planning to invade Ukraine and shared that information with our allies, they did not provide the Ukrainian army with defensive and offensive weapons ahead of time.

What is worse is that weeks before the invasion, Biden publicly stated that the US had no intention of interfering militarily on behalf of Ukraine, which sent exactly the wrong message to Putin—that he should not fear NATO intervention.

Moreover, NATO member states waited for the invasion to happen before they decided to rush such equipment, which would have otherwise sent a clear message to Putin that the West stands firmly behind Ukraine.

Contrary to NATO member states who enjoy collective security, many non-NATO democracies, including Finland, Sweden, Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Ukraine itself, do not have the same security protection and hence NATO could not interfere militarily to stop the invading Russian forces.

Moreover, these states do not have the ‘security guarantees’ that the US provides to countries such as Israel, South Korea, Japan, albeit the US has some form of defense pact with 69 countries, mostly through NATO and the Organization of American States (OAS).

The time is now for the US and its allies to provide significant military aid to these countries and not wait for the next Russian invasion. In addition, NATO should fast track the applications of the states that wish to join NATO. Strengthening their militaries and preparedness will force Putin or any other Russian despot to think twice before they dare to invade any of these countries.

Doubling NATO members’ military appropriations

As European NATO members bicker about their military expenditure, which is required to be two percent of each member’s GDP, they continue to rely heavily on the US to carry much of the financial burden for their security. Meanwhile, Putin was busy building one of the most formidable military machines in modern times, which he put on full display as he invaded Ukraine.

It is time wake up. NATO members must, at a minimum, double their military contribution from two to four percent to ensure that along with the US, NATO’s conventional military defenses and offensive capabilities are overwhelming to a degree that no Russian leader can ever presume to challenge with impunity.

Moreover, it is in NATO’s best geostrategic interests to include other European countries, especially, Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo, who have long wanted to join NATO.

Mending relations with China

As the US argued contentiously with China about its trade practices, Taiwan, and its human right abuses, Putin was investing much time and energy in developing close ties with China’s leader Chairman Xi, while expanding trade and military cooperation between their two countries.

Both leaders want to limit America’s sphere of influence in Europe and Asia, and although they declared, when they met during the Winter Olympics, that there are “no limits” to the growth of their bilateral relations, the US can and should create daylight between them.

The Biden administration must now carefully recalibrate its China policy. Notwithstanding their deep conflicting issues, it is time to mend relations with China. This is necessary not only because it serves America’s interest, but also will let the Chinese realize that there is a limit to Chinese-Russian bilateral relations and that the US remains an indispensable trading partner.

China’s trade interest with the US is critical to its economy, in addition to the fact that more than $1 trillion of China’s reserve funds are held in US Treasury securities, not Russian banks.

Moreover, both the US and China concur when it comes to respecting the sovereignty and independence of other countries (albeit the Chinese are much stricter in their philosophy of non-interference), and although China did not condemn publicly Russia’s invasion, it certainly expressed its displeasure with Moscow.

The Biden administration should initiate new and comprehensive discussions with the Chinese government about all their differences and follow Kissinger’s negotiating approach to China by delinking the disputes over their conflicting issues.

Regardless of how egregious China’s human rights violations are, the US should raise critical issues in private as long as it achieves the same objective. China resists any country that interferes in its domestic affairs and does not want to air its dirty laundry in public once they agree to engage in such discussions. However, if private pressure does not work, especially in ending China’s egregious violations, including genocide, public pressure can be resumed.

Push for reforming the UNSC

Although the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) was established to maintain global peace and security, it has long since lost its relevance. The veto powers accorded to the five permanent members—the US, UK, China, France, and Russia—have been frequently used by one or the other to serve their interest, regardless of how inconsistent that might have been to the goal of maintaining peace and security.

During the UNSC emergency session as Russia was invading Ukraine, the Russian ambassador had the audacity to make a totally baseless and false statement declaring that Russia was merely sending peacekeeping troops to the eastern part of the country to prevent a “genocide” by the Ukrainian military against the people of Donetsk and Luhansk.

During the session, we heard extraordinarily powerful and moving speeches, especially by the Ambassador of Ireland, but that was just about the extent to which the UNSC could go, which sadly and tragically has become nothing more than a debating forum. In fact, there is no more glaring example of how irrelevant the UNSC has become, than that debate on February 24.

There is a dire need now to reform the UNSC to reflect the changing geostrategic and demographic reality and its impact on the global order. These reforms are critical to ensure that the UNSC lives up to its founding premise to maintain global peace and security.

They must include enforceable political and sanctioning mechanisms to prevent a brazen and unprovoked invasion by Russia or any other power on a sovereign nation in the future. How absurd can it get when Russia, which invaded the sovereign democratic nation of Ukraine and committed war crimes, can still exercise its veto power against any resolution that condemns it, and do so without any repercussions?

Although comprehensive reforms of the UN will be extraordinary difficult and may take years, the effort must nevertheless begin immediately and the focus should be on reforming the UNSC first to prevent a single country, and for that matter, one ruthless despot, from changing the world order.

Despite overwhelming opposition from both the Security Council member states and the General Assembly, Putin went ahead with his planned invasion of Ukraine, knowing full well that he can grossly violate the UN Charter and do so with impunity.

Strengthening American democracy

While we were becoming accustomed to Putin’s outrageous behavior, America’s democracy was put on the chopping block thanks to Trump and his blind Republican followers. Trump spared no effort to polarize the country to the core while serving as Putin’s agent in the White House to trample on American democratic institutions. Our democracy became vulnerable and is retreating, which is precisely what Putin was hoping for and was ready to exploit—and he did.

There is no better time than now for the Biden administration to strengthen our democratic institutions at home while making every effort to reach out to any Republican with an ounce of integrity to begin the healing process. Tragically, there are too many so-called Republicans who follow Trump and are ready to sacrifice America’s democracy on the altar of his twisted ego.

Trump followers, to be sure, are sycophantic, a poison for our Republic, and the kiss of death to our democratic institutions. Every single one of them must look at themself in the mirror and ask: What do I stand for? Do I stand for unity and for our 240-year-old democracy and for what is right and moral, or do I stand for autocracy led by a moron like Trump who considers a vicious and dishonest thug like Putin, who is committing war crimes in broad daylight, a “genius”?

America’s strength lies where it always has—in freedom, equality, human rights, and above all, in genuine patriotism and unity, as the nation must always come first before any political party or individual’s interests. Putin has challenged the West and we all came together.

We must now build on this momentum and send the most unambiguous message to Putin—you have made a horrific mistake by invading Ukraine and you will pay for it. And we will ensure that your war crimes against the Ukrainian people will be the beginning of the end of your era and your reign of terror.

I salute the courage of the Ukrainian people, I salute President Zelensky for his exemplary leadership, fortitude, and high moral standing, and I mourn for the Ukrainians who fought and died with valor and bravery for their country and for their freedom.

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies for over 20 years.

 

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');  

With large numbers of nurses emigrating, patient care is suffering as there are not enough staff.

By Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury
SINGAPORE, Mar 8 2022 (IPS-Partners)

Change is a uniquely predictable phenomenon in nature. Also, by logical extension, in politics. Ions ago the observation of Heraclitus of Ephesus that the world is in constant flux, and one never steps into the same river twice is an incontrovertible axiom. Hence the idea that any existing global order, or a political system on the international matrix with a certain hierarchical power arrangement can sustain perennially, would be an erroneous one. When I was a student of Cold War and Global strategy in the mid-seventies the concept of ‘paradigm shift’ propounded by the American physicist and philosopher Thomas Kuhn in his tome “The structure of Scientific Revolutions” enormously interested me. Simply put, Kuhn argued that the shift occurs when any dominant paradigm under which science operates (his main concern was physics though this also applies to the social sciences) confronts new phenomena that renders it incompatible. To me the thesis remains relevant. A case in point is the place of the United States of America in the global scheme of things. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s , the existing bipolarity in the world order of US-Soviet dominance ended. The US emerged as the only ‘hyperpower ‘an expression used by the French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine in 1999,’and held absolute unchallenged sway in a unipolar world.

Dr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury

Many could argue today with ample justification that America’s unipolar moment was an opportunity lost. This was the time when the US could have shored up the global institutions it had helped so much to create in the post War world of late 1940s and the decades that followed. It could firmly establish universal global norms setting the guidelines for the conduct of politics and economics to further its own espoused and cherished liberal governance, unimpeded by any serious opposition. Instead, the chance to do all this was frittered away, the success in the Cold War resulted in a state of hubris, and the US set out to do what one of its founding fathers John Quincy Adams had counselled it against, that is going abroad in search of monsters to destroy”!

But why? Like in explanation of most phenomenon, no single cause can generally be attributed. However, one main reason certainly was the reaction in American thinking and ruling circles to the New Left and counterculture that gripped the society in the post-Vietnam era. It led to the rise of ‘neo-conservative’ (‘neo- con’)’ideas, first in the academia, and then spreading to the administration of George Bush in the persons of individuals like Paul Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams and Richard Perle who in turn heavily influenced very senior policymakers like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. The intellectual guru of the ‘neo-cons’ was Professor Leo Strauss of Chicago University, an escapee from German Nazism, who was a votary of the Greek Philosopher Plato. Now Plato, however admired, fell short of following in liberal political circles, and whom Karl Popper, another distinguished academic, had unabashedly called an “enemy of open society”.

Be that as it may, the ‘neo-cons’ and their camp-followers led the US into a spate of interventionism in international affairs, often inexplicable, and indefensible, in moral, ethical or merely pragmatic terms. The list included Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. These led to untold sufferings all round, clearly leading, however, to great profits for what Dwight D, Eisenhower had earlier described as the American “military industrial complex”. Also, importantly, the actions were establishing precedence that other great powers of the future were likely to follow. At that point in time there were none just beyond the rim of the saucer, though China was rising, and Russia was showing signs of becoming more assertive. The last two powers acquired leaders that were authoritarian and nationalist, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping, to both of whom what was sauce for the goose (i.e., the US) was also now sauce for the gander (themselves). For the West to criticize them, therefore, could be akin to throwing stones while living in a glasshouse.

This brings us to Ukraine and its current pains. In Europe, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact security treaty was not accompanied by the folding of its western counterpart, NATO. Instead, the western allies began to use NATO as a tool of its military interventions elsewhere, while at the same time enlarging its membership by embracing the States of Eastern Europe with difficult ties with Russia, the main successor of the Soviet Union. Initially Russia had gone along when it was too weak to resist. But by the 2010s, Russia under Putin saw itself as sufficiently strong enough to stand up to the expansion. And it did, particularly when it came to Ukraine, with its complex and complicated politics of intramural rivalries and Russia’s extremely deep interest in that country for its own security.

John Mearsheimer, an extremely articulate American political scientist who belongs to the ‘realist’ school of thought, analyzes that the causes for the Ukraine crisis, broadly, are three-fold: First, NATO’s eastward extension; second, the European Union’s expansion, and third, Russian fears of “colour revolutions” cheer-led by the west to effect regime changes. He argues that while Ukraine should of peripheral interest to the West, Russia sees it of critical to its security and hence it was well known that it would go to any length to ensure the denial of inimical influence in Ukraine. Despite that knowledge the western allies had encouraged Ukraine to embrace the west’s security and economic institutions, thus leading that country up the garden path,

The resolve of Russia to stop western plans in their track had been steeled by the communique that was issued in 2008 at the end of the NATO Summit in Bucharest. It had declared that “Georgia and Ukraine” would be NATO countries, and hence entitled to its “Article 5 Protection clause (any war waged against any NATO member is war against all). The aspiration became a possibility when in 2014 the “Maidan Coup” in Kiev supplanted a pro-Russian government with a pro-western one. Thereafter, on grounds that Kiev was oppressing Russian populations and sympathizers in territories where they were preponderant, Russia annexed Crimea in Ukraine (which had a pro-Russian population and hosted a Russian base in its port, Sevastopol). Moscow also supported secessionists in the eastern Donbas region of Ukraine, eventually recognizing this February its two tiny ‘republics’, Donetz and Luhansk. As NATO responded by announcing enhanced forward presence” in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Poland, Putin invaded Ukraine. The Ukrainians have been putting up a brave but sadly impossible defence, with the west now unwilling to be goaded into a war with Russia directly. Ukraine’s disillusioned but plucky President, Volodymyr Zelensky, when offered evacuation by the US, reportedly retorted: “I want ammunition, not a ride!”

Prior to the invasion, during the Beijing winter Olympics, Putin and Xi signed a historic 5000 -word joint policy document that heralded the start of a “New Era of International Affairs”, cementing their “friendship without limits. It read like a demarche delivered by two great powers to a till now yet more powerful third, signaling the beginning of what earlier in this essay I had called a “paradigm shift”. For the first time, China was endorsing some key Russian demands. The two, China and Russia, opposed “the further expansion of NATO”. Russian concession to China for this support was significant. Russia joined China in expressing “serious concern “about trilateral security partnership between Australia, Britain, and the US. The signing of this document was decidedly one of the most important watershed points in contemporary global politics.

Important in terms of contemporary political theory, China and Russia rejected the western definition of democracy and proffered their own based on historic heritage and long-standing traditions, relying on “thousand years of experience of development, popular support and consideration of the needs and interests of citizens”. So, if China and Russia have their way, the “new era “would be shaped by values other than those the world had known to be universal, emanating from the west. This was most certainly nothing short of throwing down the gauntlet to America and the west.

One should stop short of concluding China and Russia have combined inextricably with no daylight between them. For instance, China has constantly, while giving support to Russia in the conflict vis-à-vis the US, has behaved with studied circumspection. It has urged restraint upon Russia and Ukraine and has also China had also called for talks to end the belligerency, which are now taking place, though without much success at writing. China and Russia feel that they have emerged as great powers in their own right, but as two separate poles, rather than together as one. In fact, the three existing civilizations, western, eastern, and central Eurasia are represented in the three protagonists, the US, China, and Russia. In the foreseeable future, none of the three would wield, or be allowed to wield, absolute power. US disinclination to directly confront Russia, as in denying President Zelensky’s fervent appeal for “no fly zone over Ukraine” could be symptomatic of a limitation in the future to behave in a freewheeling unilateral manner as in the unipolar times, particularly in regions the two rising powers, China and Russia, have deep interest. Russia’s ability to operate unfettered in Ukraine without America’ military confronting it, is also a sign of acceptance of the notion of ‘spheres of influence’.

So what may be likely emerging for the future is a global “tripolar” order comprising the US, China, and Russia. This, despite the existing US technological and innovative superiority, which may be eroded by the burgeoning geo-strategic influence of the other two. Their relations may be based on an interplay of the classical “balance of power” theory and behaviour-pattern in the contemporary political scene. Each will lead a group of nations, and switch sides in issues based on perceptions of self-interest, unencumbered by ideals or ideology. In a Kissingerian sense, the behavior-pattern of the three poles would be as follows: One, each pole would act in accordance with the principle of “raison d étre” shunning any notion of universal morality; and two, no pole would be dominant but would advance its capability by aligning itself with one or the other according to its calculations of power imperatives. At this time, Russia and China are together, but this situation could also change in the future, depending on the circumstances. The subordinate players in each pole could also choose sides, though with utmost care, given the fate that Ukraine unfortunately found itself in. For now, Europe has chosen to play a secondary role vis-à-vis the US, despite occasional outbursts of autonomous predilections. That too could change. For instance, in dealing with Iran. So active diplomacy between and within the circles of the three poles will continue.

What would be the role of lesser players in such milieu of a tripolar globe. Clearly, multilateralism and international institutions, some things I had myself placed great store by in the past, cannot offer the same amount of security. These will remain important but not as predominant sources of protection. Power will tend to emanate from the three poles, each of which will provide all possible support to those under its umbrella. Unfortunately, unrestrained ‘realpolitik’ will be the name of the game. Any global order that emerges would perhaps need to be underwritten by the three.

For weaker or smaller or powers the situation will not be ideal. What will be necessary for each of them is the building of a web of linkages with powerful global actors, including pole-leaders, and having them develop stakes in each. This would call for nimbler diplomacy because there are no set rules or protocol for such maneuverings. Neutrality is not necessarily the easy way out, as we are beginning to see in this conflict. As a Singaporean scholar, William Choong has said observing the current scenario, neutrality is a narrow plank, getting increasingly narrower. While this may look like a global chaos, eventually an order out of it will emerge, a new global “Social Contract”, driven by the primordial instincts of the humankind to survive. It is difficult to delineate it at this time, but it will surely reflect more realism than idealism.

Dr Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury is the Honorary Fellow at the Institute of South Asia Studies, NUS. He is a former Foreign Advisor (Foreign Minister) of Bangladesh and President and Distinguished Fellow of Cosmos Foundation. The views addressed in the article are his own. He can be reached at: isasiac @nus.edu.sg

This story was originally published by Dhaka Courier.

Credit: UNICEF
 
The International Women’s Day is not a celebration – it is a reminder that we have yet to empower young girls in crisis to access their inherent right to a quality education.

By Yasmine Sherif
NEW YORK, Mar 8 2022 (IPS)

For decades now, world leaders have talked about ending hunger and poverty and building a new world order based on human rights and gender-equality.

Still, we have an estimated 64 million girls and adolescent girls suffering in brutal conflicts, forced displacement and climate-induced disasters who are held back by illiteracy and left without hope for their future. Amongst them, analysis indicates that as many as 20 million girls may never return to school as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

It is not enough to have goals and a vision unless we turn that vision into action. Every girl has an inalienable right to a minimum of 12 years of quality education. Girls and teenage girls in conflicts and forced displacement suffer multiple risks already, such as trafficking, gender-based violence and early-childhood marriage, and thus are those left furthest behind in turning our goals and visions into reality. Their education must now come first.

Investing in girls’ education is not just about delivering on our promise of inclusive and equitable education, or Sustainable Development Goal 4, it is the very foundation for reaching all other goals in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Without an education, these girls will never be able to lift themselves out of abject poverty and we can no longer aspire to achieving gender-equality.

We need a laser focus on girls’ education in emergencies and protracted crisis to achieve multiple Sustainable Development Goals. Their experiences of inhumanity, loss and destitution can be turned around into their potential to become empowered women able to contribute to their war-torn countries and communities. Without them – 50% of the population – no crisis-country can build back better. It is logistically impossible.

All the evidence indicates that investing in girls’ education provides one of the best returns-on-investment for overseas development assistance – and the enabling environment and strong women leaders and professionals we need to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, Paris Agreement targets and other international accords.

According to Plan International, every dollar spent on girls’ education has the potential to generate a general return of $2.80. This could boost GDP in developing countries by 10% over the next 10 years, resulting in less poverty, hunger and violence, and more resilience and greater capacity to respond to new fast-acting crises.

With just eight short years left to deliver on this global promise, we need to build on the progress made, including the Education Cannot Wait target of 60% girls and adolescent girls in crisis-affected countries.

It starts with financing. Education Cannot Wait, the United Nations global, billion-dollar fund for education in emergencies and protracted crises, has reached approximately 2.3 million girls since its inception five years ago. With $1 billion in additional resources, the Fund could reach an additional 9 million girls by 2026.

It takes partnerships and the United Nations New Way of Working whereby humanitarian and development actors work together towards collective learning outcomes, hence peacebuilding, or what we call the humanitarian-development-peace nexus.

As we are in a race against time and we need real learning outcomes, it also requires humanitarian speed and developmental depth. This is precisely what Education Cannot and its partners in host-governments and communities, the UN system and civil society as well as private sector are doing. We are doing it together, we do it with speed and we are on a quest for results.

Working closely with our in-country partners, we understand the realities these girls and young women face, and tailor our responses to meet their holistic needs. This entails a protective learning environment, gender-sensitive curriculum, mental health and psycho-social services, teacher training, social-emotional skills as well as academic skills, in countries like Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda or Lebanon.

To ensure continuity for crisis-affected girls and adolescent girls – of whom only 1 out of 4 is able to complete lower secondary education – we need to make sure that all girls make the transition to high school and beyond, and are able to participate in science, technology, engineering and math studies.

It means creating safe learning environments so girls can walk safely to school without fear of abduction or assault.

It means empowering female teachers and providing incentives to teach science, provide education of menstrual health and hygiene, and ensure dignity in the home and in the classroom.

It means understanding the direct link between climate action and forced displacement and building an education system that that is resilient to climate-change induced disasters. And it means partnering with local women and girls’ groups and organizations, and delivering across a wide range of partnerships that bring together government, UN agencies, donors, philanthropic foundations, civil society and local communities.

There is no simple solution to the interconnected global crises that have left so many girls behind. We do know however through the work of the UN’s Global Fund for Education in Emergencies and Protracted Crisis that by working together through joint planning and one joint programme towards collective outcomes, we can reach the girls and adolescent girls left furthest behind in conflict zones, refugee camps and war-affected communities. We also know that lack of financing is the biggest challenge in achieving our vision of providing a quality and continued education to 64 million girls. So, on International Women’s Day, let us remind ourselves that their right to an education, their human rights, are actually priceless.

The author is the Director of Education Cannot Wait, the United Nations global fund for education in emergencies and protracted crises.

 

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 opinion piece is part of series to mark International Women’s Day, March 8.

Software developer Angela Mugo changed her line of work after repeatedly being denied a job as an electrical engineer.

Nigeria coach Augustine Eguavoen wants to persuade former Chelsea winger Victor Moses to return to international football.

A Nigerian student stuck in the Ukrainian city of Sumy describes life amid the conflict.

Moroccan Younes Zerdouk steps up to coach Comoros, Kaba Diawara is retained by Guinea and Javier Clemente leaves Libya again.

Teresa Lokichu (left) and Joyce Nairesia share their experiences of breaking gender barriers in Kenya. Gender activists say deep-rooted patriarchy has no place in a world which faces climate change, diseases, pandemics and food insecurity. Credit: Facebook and Twitter

By Joyce Chimbi
Nairobi, Kenya, Mar 8 2022 (IPS)

Teresa Lokichu recalls the day she attended a meeting convened by high-ranking government officials, community leaders and elders to discuss various pressing issues such as security in her pastoral community of West Pokot in Kenya’s Rift Valley region.

Despite being a well-known peace champion in the community, women’s leader, and crusader against Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), she had no place, let alone voice, in what was meant to be a consultative meeting.

“I did what a woman in our pastoral community is required to do, stand up and quietly wait until the men in charge saw it fit to give me an opportunity to speak. Everyone in the room was seated, but I remained standing. I needed to speak on behalf of women and children who are most affected by insecurity and conflict,” Lokichu, director of Pokot Girl Child Network, tells IPS.

“The meeting went on as if nothing was amiss even as I remained standing. A female cabinet Minister was in attendance and interrupted the meeting to ask why I remained standing. She was very surprised to hear that this is the only way for a woman to ask for permission to speak in such a meeting.”

Lokichu was immediately granted an opportunity to address the gathering and would later become a nominated Member of the County Assembly, West Pokot, in Kenya’s devolved system of governance.

Her experience is not far from that of Joyce Nairesia, the first Samburu woman to join the Council of Elders and chair such a Council.

She tells IPS that male elders lift a traditional rungu (club) during Council meetings while addressing the Council as a show of power. Being a woman in a pastoralist community, she cannot do the same.

“To address the Council, I first stand up, lift a piece of grass, and wait to be permitted to speak. This is a show of respect and humility in their presence,” she says.

“People say, but how is this possible? I say it is better to influence change from within than from outside looking in.”

As the world marks yet another International Women’s Day on March 8 under the theme ‘Break the Bias’, communities across this East African nation are far from a gender-equal world.

A world free from bias, stereotypes, and discrimination and one where gender equity and inclusivity is freely and widely embraced.

Gender experts such as Grace Gakii, based in Nairobi, say that the world faces a myriad of challenges from climate change, diseases, pandemics, food insecurity and fragile peace. Calls for gender equality and equity in all facets of life are crucial to improving social and economic outcomes.

“We have to uproot deep-rooted patriarchy and misogyny as well as the systematic discrimination of women in political leadership and in business,” Gakii, a researcher in gender equality and equity, tells IPS.

UN data on women in politics shows that Rwanda has the highest percentage of women in parliament globally. South Africa, Senegal, Namibia and Mozambique also made it to the top 20 list.

“Rwanda is also one of 14 countries in the world to have 50 percent or more women in their cabinet. But what is becoming increasingly clear is that representation is not enough. Women need the influence to change how the society perceives men and women, and the roles they assign to them,” Gakii explains.

UN figures indicate that 50 percent of African female cabinet members hold social welfare portfolios. Gakii says these positions align with society’s perception of women as nurturers – not wielders of power who participate at high stake political and leadership decision-making levels.

Only 3 percent of African female cabinet members are in charge of critical and highly powerful dockets in finance, defence, infrastructure, and foreign affairs.

Lokichu says women’s voices are lacking in higher levels of decision making and governance, further perpetuating gender stereotypes, bias, and discrimination against women.

Even in business and the corporate world, where Africa’s firms have the highest percentage of female representation on company boards at 25 percent compared to the global average of 17 percent, according to McKinsey Global Institute, Gakii says it is not enough.

“Women are increasingly represented, but their influence is limited. There is no real impact and progress towards gender parity if participation and influence do not go hand in hand,” she says.

“The global average of women in executive committee is 21 percent. Africa is ahead at 22 percent, with South Africa having the highest percentage of gender parity. It is not enough that women are seen in positions of power. Power must be felt for there to be a paradigm shift in the collective societal conscience.”

In recognition of these facts, in February 2021, the African Union (AU) Ministers in charge of Gender and Women’s Affairs adopted the Common African Position (CAP) to advance women’s full and effective participation and decision making in public life.

The AU says that due to existing gender gaps in leadership roles across financial, investment and entrepreneurial markets, the African continent loses over 20 percent of its GDP every year.

Gakii says women must rise to power and influence in politics, business, religion, and institutions of higher learning for them to push gender boundaries in a consistent, systematic and impactful manner.

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

• International Women’s Day, 2022 Gender Equality Today for a Sustainable Tomorrow
• International Women’s Day, 2022 How Bangladesh Became a Test Case for Women’s Empowerment
• Can 70% of the World’s Poor Celebrate International Women’s Day?

Excerpt:

The following feature is part of series to mark International Women’s Day, March 8.

On Feb 26, Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that would have demanded Moscow immediately stop its attack on Ukraine and withdraw all troops, a move several Council members said was deplorable, but inevitable. While 11 of the Council’s 15 members voted in favour of the text, China India, and the United Arab Emirates abstained. Credit: United Nations

By Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury
NEW YORK, Mar 8 2022 (IPS)

The ongoing war in Ukraine has raised the question of expulsion or suspension of the Russian Federation from the United Nations. As is known, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, its UN seat was transferred to the Russian Federation.

With the collapse of the USSR in late 1991,the Commonwealth of Independent States signed a declaration agreeing that “Member states of the Commonwealth support Russia in taking over the USSR membership in the UN, including permanent membership in the Security Council.”

USSR Ambassador to UN transmitted to the UN Secretary-General a letter from President of the Russian Federation stating that:

“… the membership of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in the United Nations, including the Security Council and all other organs and organizations of the United Nations system, is being continued by the Russian Federation with the support of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. In this connection, I request that the name ‘Russian Federation’ should be used in the United Nations in place of the name ‘the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’. The Russian Federation maintains full responsibility for all the rights and obligations of the USSR under the Charter of the United Nations, including the financial obligations. I request that you consider this letter as confirmation of the credentials to represent the Russian Federation in United Nations organs….”

The Secretary-General circulated the request among the UN membership. There being no objection, the Russian Federation took the USSR’s place, with President Boris Yeltsin personally taking the Russian Federation’s seat at the Security Council meeting on 31 January 1992.

Without presenting new credentials. USSR Ambassador to UN continued serving as the first Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations.

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury

UN’s working arrangements

Since its inception, the United Nations has resorted to all kinds of measures, practices, and procedures to circumvent the complexities of an intergovernmental decision-making and legal implications, heavily influenced by the position or opposition of the five permanent members of the Security Council.

As a result, acquiescence in its various manifestations has become all pervasive in the business of the United Nations. A clear manifestation of that is practiced these days through what is known as “silent procedure” whereby the reluctant acceptance of Member States of all kinds of anomalies achieve an agreement or consensus otherwise not possible.

The Russian veto on the Ukraine resolution in the Security Council prevented unanimous global resolve to address the situation there. The continuation of veto is an aberration of the multilateral system as practiced in the UN Security Council, thereby jeopardizing all the positive UN efforts to maintain international peace and security.

Change in multilateral system

The war in Ukraine has reaffirmed more clearly than ever that the “global ideological struggle” that had for so long dominated the international scene does not exist anymore. And the new realities must be translated into a different set of global institutions unless the existing one undertake major and all-pervasive reforms of their decision-making and operational practices and procedures.

The expulsion or suspension of one of the five veto-wielding permanent members would not necessarily result in effective maintenance of the global peace and security. There would still be four others with the ability to deny any time a consensus decision with which any one of them does not agree.

Veto, the chief culprit

The chief culprit in the failure of unified global action by the UN is the continuation of the irrational practice of veto. As a matter, I have said on record that, if only one reform action could be taken, it should be the abolition of veto. Believe me, the veto power influences not only the decisions of the Security Council but also all work of the UN, including importantly the choice of the Secretary-General.

I believe the abolition of veto requires a greater priority attention in the reforms process than the enlargement of the Security Council membership with additional permanent ones. Such permanency is simply undemocratic. I believe that the veto power is not “the cornerstone of the United Nations” but in reality, its tombstone.

Case of China

Unlike the question of the replacement of USSR membership by the Russian Federation in 1991, the case of the recognition of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) by the UN is straightforward.

It was decided by the apex body of the UN system, the General Assembly in its groundbreaking resolution 2758 titled “Restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations” which was adopted by two-thirds majority on 25 October 1971 in accordance with the UN Charter.

The resolution recognized the People’s Republic of China as “the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations” and expelled “forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek” from the United Nations.

Following adoption of Resolution 2758, the Beijing government began representing China at the UN from 15 November 1971 and its delegates were seated at the UN Security Council meeting held on 23 November 1971, the first such meeting where representatives of the Beijing government represented China with its veto power as a permanent member of the Council.

UN’s clear position on Taiwan

Over the years, Taiwan’s efforts to revive the application for UN membership separately for itself has received no support of the UN membership in general.

Reflecting the long-standing UN policy is mirrored in the “Final Clauses of “Final Clauses of Multilateral Treaties, Handbook”, 2003 published by the UN, stating that:

“…regarding the Taiwan Province of China, the Secretary-General follows the General Assembly’s guidance incorporated in resolution 2758 (XXVI) of the General Assembly of 25 October 1971 on the restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations. The General Assembly decided to recognize the representatives of the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations. Hence, instruments received from the Taiwan Province of China will not be accepted by the Secretary-General in his capacity as depositary.”

It is relevant to recall that in 2007, Secretary-General of the UN Ban Ki-moon rejected Taiwan’s membership bid to “join the UN under the name of Taiwan”, citing Resolution 2758 as acknowledging that Taiwan is part of China, although it is important to note, not the People’s Republic of China.

Why not amend the Charter

I have confronted on many occasions the question why Russia and PRC have not called for an amendment of the UN Charter to streamline their membership issue. For that, my opinion is that all Permanent Members are fully cognizant that that would open up a Pandora’s box, including the issue of abolition of veto and other reform issues which are not at all to their liking as part of the P-5 coterie.

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, is Former Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the UN; President of the UN Security Council (2000 and 2001); Senior Special Adviser to UN General Assembly President (2011-2012) and Former Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of the UN.

 

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, Mar 8 2022 (IPS)

All too many developing countries have been persuaded or required to prioritize inflation targeting (IT) in their monetary policy. By doing so, they have tied their own hands instead of adopting bolder economic policies for growth, jobs and sustainable development.

Anis Chowdhury

Why inflation targeting?
IT refers to monetary policy efforts to keep the inflation rate within a certain low range. Many countries – developed and developing – have adopted this policy priority following New Zealand’s 1989 lead, arbitrarily aiming to keep inflation under 2%.

Initially, developing economies adopted IT after crises to get financial support from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), e.g., after the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis. From the mid-1970s, many had borrowed heavily to accelerate growth. After the US Fed raised interest rates sharply from 1980, many succumbed to debt crises.

The IMF insisted on severe short-term stabilization policies to keep inflation and debt low. The World Bank complemented it with medium-term structural adjustment policies demanding market liberalization and other reforms.

Price stabilization policies to keep inflation low have been an IMF priority since. But instead of accelerating growth, as promised, IT has actually slowed it. Yet, developing countries have jumped on the IT bandwagon – 25 had formally adopted IT by 2020, while most others strive to keep inflation very low.

How bad is inflation?
Most believe that inflation is the greatest threat to the economy and growth. Many presume inflation creates uncertainty, causing resource misallocation. All this is said to retard growth – meaning fewer jobs, less tax revenue and lasting poverty.

Higher prices hurt by reducing purchasing power, especially harming wage-earners. On the contrary, price stability – implying low and steady inflation – is believed to be more conducive to ensuring growth and prosperity.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Another core IT belief is that money only temporarily affects growth, but permanently affects prices. IT advocates believe central bankers should mainly strive for price stability – not employment or growth. They usually presume independent central banks are better at doing so.

Many central bankers and economists dogmatically believe – without evidence – that tightly reining in inflation actually spurs growth. Acknowledging developing countries are more prone to external and supply shocks, the IMF recommended targets of up to 5% – higher than developed countries’ 2%.

Most developing countries aspiring to become emerging market economies have formally adopted IT – e.g., South Africa’s 3–6% or India’s 2–6%. By setting successively lower short-term inflation targets, they believe financial markets are impressed.

But by doing so, they prevent themselves from realizing their full economic potential. Striving to emulate the developed countries’ 2% target constrains both growth and structural transformation. After all, it was quite arbitrarily set for no economic reason, except the NZ finance minister liking the ‘0 to 2 by ’92’ slogan!

Arbitrary targets
While there is little disagreement about likely problems associated with ‘hyper-’ or very high inflation, the threshold beyond which inflation becomes harmful is a moot issue on which there is no consensus.

Inflation targets are arbitrarily set, as acknowledged in an IMF paper. Hence, “any choice of a medium-term inflation target for these [developing] countries is bound to be arbitrary”. Harry Johnson had found early IMF empirical studies of the inflation-growth relationship to be inconclusive.

Later studies did not settle the matter. For example, Michael Bruno and William Easterly at the World Bank concluded that inflation under 40% did not tend to accelerate or worsen, and “countries can manage to live with moderate – around 15–30 percent – inflation for long periods”.

MIT’s Rudiger Dornbusch and Stanley Fischer, later IMF Deputy Managing Director, came to similar conclusions. They found moderate inflation of 15–30% did not harm growth, noting “such inflations can be reduced only at a substantial short-term cost to growth”.

A 2000 IMF paper suggested 11% inflation was optimal for developing countries; 7% inflation would have “an insignificant negative effect” on growth, while 18% inflation remained positive for growth. Yet, it recommended an IT target of 7–11% and “bringing inflation down to single digits and keeping it there”.

The IMF Independent Evaluation Office’s 2007 report on Sub-Saharan Africa found “mission chiefs are evenly divided on whether (or not) the Fund should tolerate higher [than 5%] inflation rates…IMF policy staff acknowledge that the empirical literature on the inflation-growth relationship is inconclusive”.

Hence, very low inflation targets are quite arbitrary without any sound theoretical and empirical bases. But the IMF and its chorus of economists have not hesitated to insist on keeping inflation very low by promoting IT for all, especially to susceptible developing country policymakers.

Constraining development
Very low inflation targets particularly constrain low-income countries (LICs). LIC governments face modest revenue bases and limited domestic savings. Hence, they should borrow more from central banks to finance their development spending.

But such borrowings are prohibited by law in many developing countries – especially those which have formally embraced IT – to prove their anti-inflationary commitment. Thus, a potentially major means for central banks to be more developmental is denied by statute.

By raising interest rates to keep inflation very low, central banks reduce not only consumer spending, but also business investments. Such policies also increase both public and private debt burdens, in turn constraining spending.

Thus, overall aggregate demand remains depressed, limiting growth unless compensated by greater export demand. But higher interest rates attract capital inflows, causing exchange rates to appreciate, undermining export competitiveness.

Means deny ends
IT policy is problematic for two major reasons. First, it demands debilitatingly low targets. Second, it denies central banks’ potential developmental role by insisting on price stability – read ‘containing inflation’ – as its principal goal.

IMF researchers have acknowledged, “identifying the growth effects of moving from, say, 20 percent inflation to 5 percent has been challenging”.

They concluded, “pushing inflation too low – say, below 5 percent – may entail a loss of output …, suggesting a need for caution in setting very low inflation targets in low-income countries… In particular, inflation targets should be set so as to help avoid risks of an unintended contractionary policy stance.”

Also, San Francisco US Federal Reserve Bank research has concluded, “developing economies that adopted an inflation target did not show any substantial gains in growth in the medium term compared with those that did not adopt a target”.

Thus, developing countries prioritizing IT have, often unwittingly, curtailed their own economic prospects. Falsely promoted as means to enhance growth, jobs and development, IT, in fact, constrains them – the ultimate con!

Rejecting the IT fetish does not mean doing nothing about inflation. Instead, developing countries need to better know the economic challenges they face and the efficacy of their policy tools. National economic priorities should be comprehensively addressed without subordinating all policy goals to the god of IT.

 

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

• Inflation Targeting Voodoo
• Resist Inflation Phobia Coup
• Inflation Paranoia Threatens Recovery
• Inflation Bogey Blocking Recovery
• Central Banks Must Address Pandemic Challenges

Every time Angella Okutoyi, whose mother died in childbirth, steps on court she thinks of how tennis will change her family's life.

Some want evangelists to make less noise when trying to convert people in Uganda's capital, Kampala.

The Ukraine war could push millions closer to starvation, the boss of the World Food Programme says.