Africa

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM / ROME, Mar 3 2020 (IPS)

The great American impeachment show has ended not with a bang, but with a whimper. The dirt was washed away from President Trump, the perfect Teflon Guy. Maybe his invulnerability comes from the fact that he appears to be more of a brand than a real person, adapted to a frame of mind that increasingly dominates social media – cheap entertainment, shallowness, vulgarity, invectives, and catchy phrases without support in well-founded facts. Trump is all and nothing, a shape shifting trickster pretending to be the role model for voiceless masses.

We are subjects to a constant flow of information. Social media makes it easy to select issues that interest us. Influenced by this selective behaviour people tend to adapt their views to those of their idols, accepting them with lock, stock, and barrel, defending them as if they were part of them. Just as they tend to excuse their own improprieties, they accept the flaws of their role models.

An era characterized by strong mainstream parties with loyal followers and generally stable politics is now coming to an end, the latter being replaced by general opinions floating around on social media. However, this does not hinder that some of these opinions are supported by fanatical believers.

In 1848, Marx and Engels proclaimed: ”A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of communism”.2 We may now replace this spectre with National Populism, haunting not only Europe, but many other regions of the world as well. This ideology has been claimed to emanate from the so-called Four Ds´ – distrust, destruction, deprivation, and de-alignment.3

Distrust of politicians and institutions fuelled by a general feeling that they are governed by elites distanced from ordinary citizens. It is also assumed that a ”voiceless” majority is ignored while historically marginalized groups, like women and ethnic minorities, gain voice and presence in the legislature.

Destruction of national groups´ historic identity and established way of life. North America and most of Europe are assumed to be ruled by culturally liberal politicians, transnational organizations and global finance, eroding nations and moral values by encouraging mass-migration. At the same time it is believed that ”politically correct” agendas seek to silence any opposition.

A sense of deprivation is growing, particularly among workers and small business owners who are experiencing decreasing wealth and vanishing benefits. Millions are convinced they are losing out relative to others. Feelings inflamed by a conviction that even if they do not belong to an underclass of strangers and welfare-takers they are nevertheless excluded from decision making. Accordingly, many suffer from de-alignment, feeling lost in a world perceived as more chaotic and less predictable than it was in the past.

Such notions are by demagogues successfully applied to seductive tactics. They present themelves and their party as spokespersons for the people, an imaginary unified group, with the same identity, interests, characteristics, and needs. What the people have in common are their nationality and culture. Gender, class, ideology, income, education or individuality do not matter. Political schemers indicate the existence of an elite that is not on the people’s side. A self-sufficient class of highly educated and wealthy politicians and bureaucrats who control media and have lost all contact with the common man, while lining their own pockets on the bases of their influence. For a political rabble-rouser it is also opportune to identify a group as scapegoats, who are not part of the people and accordingly lack any common interests with them. These scapegoats are depicted as being in league with the elite, which ensures that resources of the people are directed towards these alien parasites. Should the people get rid of the scapegoats as well as the elite everything would be just as fine as before.

Through such deceptive simplifications a politician like Donald Trump, in spite of the fact that he is a billionaire and part of a wealthy, privileged elite, attracts a fan base cosidering him to be the incarnate hope for benign change. Donald Trump, who was a pop-culture icon before he became a politician, has been adopted by what has been called toxic fandom.

Fan is short for fanatic originating from the Latin fanaticus, meaning “of or belonging to the temple, a temple servant, a devotee.” Fandom is a subculture composed of people characterized by a shared feeling of empathy and camaraderie emerging from a common interest. It is supported by a parallel ”make-believe” universe created by social media and a growing industry catering to the wishful thinking of gratified consumers. Several supporters of nationalist leaders seem to consider them as incarnations of their own beliefs. If such an idol is accused of misconduct his/her fans are ready to rush to his/her defense, since attacking an idol would be like attacking them.

Michael Schulman, staff writer at The New Yorker, recently stated that ”a glance around the pop-culture landscape gives the impression that fans have gone mad”.4 ”Couch potatoes” that earlier idled their time away in front of TV-sets and computers are now rising up and are through social media becoming active, opinionated participants in what is happening around them.

For example, when the TV-series Game of Thrones in May 2019 did not end in accordance with several fans´expectations more than 1.7 million of them signed a petition to HBO to ”remake Game of Thrones Season 8 with competent writers.” However, such incidents are nothing compared to what happens to an individual who dares to question the behaviour of an admired idol. Social media provides numerous examples of how idol detractors are targeted by outrageous threats directed towards them and their families.

The stout support Donald Trump receives from Republican politicians and his immovable base appears to be a mixture of fandom and concerns about personal power and well-being. Extremely few Republicans want, or dare to, state that ”the emperor is naked”, that Trump actually is an ignorant bully and a narcissist guilty of a great number of misdeeds and abuse of power. Doing that may result in being hounded by Trump fans who brazenly stood by his side during the impeachment proceedings.

Contrary to Trump, who seems to be a self-consciously constructed media product, US Senator Mitt Romney appears to be a morally motivated politician adhering to steadfast principles. Trump proclaims his guiding principle to be America First, while Mitt Romney in 2010 realeased a book he called No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.5 However, Romney´s Americanism is contrary to Trump´s populism founded on strict morals. The American Exceptionalism he brings forward in his book is based on three related ideas. The first is that US history is different from the one of other nations. Through the American Revolution (1765-1783) the USA became the first new nation and thus developed a unique ideology – Americanism, based on liberty, equality before the law, individual responsibility, republicanism, representative democracy, and laissez-faire economics. Second is the idea that the US has a unique mission to transform the world, that Americans have a duty to ensure that ”government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” The third is a conviction that the United States’ history and mission give it superiority over other nations.

Mitt Romney served as Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007 and was the Republican Party’s nominee for President of the United States in the 2012 election. Furthermore, he is a fifth-generation member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) and has throughout his adult life served as this religion´s bishop. He is a faithful follower of the Mormons´ moral code based on a scripture called the Word of Wisdom. Accordingly, he abstains from the consumption of alcohol, coffee, tea, and tobacco and follows his Church´s Law of Chastity, which prohibits adultery and sexual relations outside of marriage. When Romney critizises Trump he does so from a moral standpoint.

One might be skeptical to both Mormonism and American Exceptionalism, though it is difficult not to admire the personal courage Romney displayed on February 5, when he on the Senate floor decried President Trump’s intents to ”corrupt” a general election to keep himself in office as “perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of an oath of office that I can imagine.” Romney was the only Republican politician who publically supported the impeachment of Trump. In his speech Romney condemned the lies and moral laxity of the US president, answering the question ”whether the President committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of high crime and misdemeanor” by ”Yes, he did.”

Romney counted with attacks and accusations of disloyalty from his fellow Republicans. And he certainly became a target of the uncontrollable wrath of Trump´s fandom and of course of their idol as well. Trump labeled Romney as a ”failed presidential candidate” adding that ”I don´t like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong.” Nevertheless, it was the other way around – Romney used his faith to justify what he believed to be right. In opposition to the complicity of his party colleagues, he stood his ground by declaring ”I am a profoundly religious person. My faith is at the heart of who I am. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential.” 6

Mitt Romney proved that personal moral conviction and decency can survive within a party that has been hijacked by National Populism and spineless sycophants. We may hope that more people like Mitt Romney are prepared to listen to their conscience and be brave enough to reveal the manipulations and lies of narcissistic manipulators like Donald Trump. We also have to find effective means to address the deceit, hate and ignorance that have invaded social media.

1 Nicoletti, Gianluca (2015) “Umberto Eco:´Con i social parola a legioni di imbecelli´,” La Stampa, June 11.
2 Hobsbawm, Eric (2012) How to Change the World: Reflections on Marx and Marxism. New Haven.Yale University Press.
3 Eatwell, Roger and Matthew Goodwin (2018) National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democarcy. London: Penguin Books.
4 Schulman, Michael (2019) ”Fans are more powerful than ever. Does their passion have a dark side?” The New Yorker, September 9.
5 Romney, Mitt (2010) No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. New York: St. Martins Press.
6 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/us/politics/mitt-romney-impeachment-speech-transcript.html

Jan Lundius holds a PhD. on History of Religion from Lund University and has served as a development expert, researcher and advisor at SIDA, UNESCO, FAO and other international organisations.

The post Personal Conviction Versus Fandom: The Case of Mitt Romney appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

“Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community. They were immediately silenced, but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots.” 1

                                                                                                                                                           Umberto Eco

The post Personal Conviction Versus Fandom: The Case of Mitt Romney appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The US is running talks between Ethiopia and Egypt over the controversial mega dam project.

Nneamaka Anyanwu started an initiative to help underprivileged girls in Nigeria through basketball.

Kenyan pupils are increasingly being asked to be at school by 6:30am despite classes not starting until 8am.

Iffat, humanitarian public health promoter for Oxfam, talks to Rohingya refugees Asia Bibi*, son Anwar* and daughter Nur* in the camps in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. Iffat was part of the Oxfam emergency response team working to provide vital aid including clean water, food vouchers and toilets. Credit: Abbie Trayler-Smith/ Oxfam

By Anna Tonelli
NEW YORK, Mar 3 2020 (IPS)

This International Women’s Day, 25 years after we first heard it declared that “women’s rights are human rights” at the historic Beijing 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women, we need to take the space and time to reflect on just how far we’ve come – and just how much more work there is to do.

This year, achievements in the quest for recognizing women’s rights, leadership, and voice must be celebrated; but more than anything we need to double down and hold governments and other powerbrokers to account – to be part of the movement to ensure women’s rights are actually respected as human rights once and for all.

Every March, women arrive in New York from around the world to do just that – to advocate for the implementation of the myriad commitments that international decision-makers have made to the realization of women’s rights.

Tucked away in a small corner of Manhattan, the yearly Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) at the UN brings thousands of women and allies together to connect and learn from each other, and to hold their governments accountable.

This year would have been historic as more than 12,000 people had registered to join this conference, a testament to the importance of Beijing’s anniversary and the commitments it produced.

Sadly, this series of events has been postponed due to the Coronavirus – a grim but important reminder of how interconnected our world has become, and how much we must rely on each other to protect ourselves and make progress.

Anna Tonelli

Oxfam, just one small piece of this moment was set to bring 22 partners to participate – activists and leaders from places like Russia, India, Palestine, Zambia and Bolivia.

Oxfam and our partners were to host events and conversations on issues ranging from gender-based violence, women land rights, fundamentalism in Latin America and Russia, women and climate, natural and resource governance and unpaid care work. These issues and conversations may not be happening in person next week, but they must still go on.

Right now is a critical moment for Latin America, and Oxfam staff and our partners are speaking out against the chronic violation of women’s rights and feminicides that have become the norm in the last years.

It is where the rise of fundamentalism, toxic masculinity, and extreme authoritarianism have created a wave of impunity and normalization of human rights violations.

As we have watched forests burn, air quality suffer and temperatures rise, women from Zambia, India, Colombia and more are pushing for transformative feminist leadership and climate-just governance for natural resources like coal, oil and other extractive industries – and for the intrinsic connection between women’s rights and the climate crisis to be more widely recognized.

As inequality spirals out of control, Oxfam is calling for an end to our sexist economies that have put us in the position where the richest 22 men in the world have more wealth than all the women in Africa.

It’s no accident that while most billionaires are men, women do more than three-quarters of all unpaid care work, and when they do work, dominate the least secure and lowest-paid jobs. These are just more barriers women face when trying to make a difference and lead in their communities.

Dorothy, 27, stands inside the house she is rebuilding with her brother, in the village of Malambwe, southern Malawi, following the flooding brought on by Cyclone Idai. Dorothy’s house collapsed and the floodwaters carrying away many of her belongings, as well as some of her livestock. She took her four year old child, and went to higher ground to escape the floodwaters. Credit: Philip Hatcher-Moore/Oxfam

Even as thousands had plans to travel and convene at CSW, this space was never open for all. Travel restrictions and statelessness had stopped plans to have a Rohingya leader join from Bangladesh to help launch an Oxfam report highlighting Rohingya women’s challenges, priorities and leadership.

It calls for an immediate focus on addressing the root causes of the crisis, better supporting women to meet their basic needs with dignity and further enabling their leadership in decision-making at all levels.

Many women caught in some of the world’s worst humanitarian crises and conflicts – like Yemen, Syria and South Sudan – also do not have access to these opportunities due to instability at home, threats to their safety, and the discriminatory Muslim Ban enacted by the Trump administration.

The postponement of CSW is a reminder of the women’s voices we must always be amplifying around the world during these moments and in between. Whether we’re together in New York or spread around the globe, acts of solidarity through elevating women’s stories and demands on social media, signing petitions for national decision-makers, and joining campaigns make all the difference.

We also need to see more women and men in power who support women and who will put forward a feminist foreign policy. On International Women’s Day and every day, we have a duty to shine a light on these women and the efforts they are making to realize their rights. In a time of increasing anxiety about health, politics, climate and more – we should appreciate the advocates and leaders who paved the way for anniversaries like Beijing, and celebrate the communities of smart, driven, tireless women who continue to push for a more inclusive and just world.

The post Sexist Economies Where World’s 22 Richest Men Have More Wealth than All the Women in Africa appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of special IPS coverage of International Women’s Day on March 8 2020

 

Anna Tonelli is Oxfam’s Inclusive Peace and Security Senior Policy Advisor

The post Sexist Economies Where World’s 22 Richest Men Have More Wealth than All the Women in Africa appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By GGGI
Mar 3 2020 (IPS-Partners)

The Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) has partnered with the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) and the Peruvian Society for Environmental Law (SPDA) to support Peru’s efforts to reduce deforestation through an innovative approach that promotes sustainable agroforestry practices and secures land tenure of small farmers in the Amazon.

Representatives from the Government of Norway, GGGI, ICRAF and the SPDA, gathered in Lima to mark the start of a 3-year project whose objective is to provide technical, legal, financial and institutional support to help the Government of Peru implement the Agroforestry Concessions system.

Among those present were Thorstein Wangen, Advisor for Climate and Forestry of the Royal Embassy of Norway concurrently accredited in Peru, Elise Christensen, the Senior Advisor for the Norway International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI), Einer Telnes, NORAD Senior Advisor of the Department for Climate, Energy and Environment, as well as Aaron Drayer, the GGGI Peru Country Representative, along with the GGGI teams and project leadership from ICRAF and SPDA.

Agroforestry Concessions are an innovative legal mechanism that seeks to incorporate family farmers in the forest economy by offering those that occupy land in the public forest domain a forty-year usufruct contract over land and tree resources. Their possession is conditioned upon halting deforestation and implementing sustainable land use, including agroforestry.

The project’s expected impacts are to reduce deforestation and carbon emissions in the Peruvian Amazon, promote restoration through agroforestry of previously deforested land, and improve livelihoods of vulnerable small-scale farmers at the forest frontier. It is estimated that Agroforestry Concessions could benefit more than 120,000 families that are currently farming over 1.5 million hectares of forest land.

Successful implementation of Agroforestry Concessions will require the coordination of multiple sectors and governance levels to support the transition of family farmers at deforestation frontiers to engage in sustainable land-use practices that are also financially sound. For this reason, the consortium team will work hand in hand with the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, the Peru Forestry and Wildlife Service and the Ministry of Environment, as well as Amazonian regional governments.

In the meeting, consortium members and the representatives of the Government of Norway discussed the importance of a multi-stakeholder process to ensure that the Agroforestry Concessions system is successful. Mr. Aaron Drayer indicated how the consortium represents a sum of complementary expertise and approaches to respond to that complexity.

The representatives of the Government of Norway highlighted the importance of this new mechanism to help Peru comply with its climate change commitments under the Paris Agreement. Mr. Thorstein Wangen highlighted the importance of engagement with government actors at all levels and connecting the project to public policies. And. Mr. Einer Telnes stressed the importance of this new system to support the Government of Peru towards its zero-deforestation goal. He also emphasized the opportunity for other countries to learn from the Peruvian experience promoting agroforestry, securing land rights and improving farmers’ livelihoods.

Finally, Elise Christensen pointed out that the project’s approach is built upon an in-depth understanding of the complexities of land use at the agricultural frontier and that it focuses on a model that relies more on recognizing land tenure rights for farmers and providing financial incentives than on command and control models.

GGGI and the consortium partners will work closely with the National Forest and Wildlife Service (SERFOR), the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (MINAGRI), the Ministry of the Environment (MINAM) and key regional governments to help build the enabling financial, legal, institutional and technical conditions for the successful implementation of the new Agroforestry Concessions system for family farmers in the Peruvian Amazon.

The post GGGI Supports Peru’s New Agroforestry Concessions System for Family Farmers to Reduce Deforestation in the Amazon appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Former African Footballer of the Year Samuel Eto'o believes that football has the power to unite people around the continent.

Sahle-Work Zewde, President of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

By Sahle-Work Zewde and Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 3 2020 (IPS)

Twenty-five years ago, thousands of representatives adopted the Beijing Declaration, one of the most progressive universal agreement to advance women’s rights.

The Beijing Declaration built on the human rights inscribed in the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979, whose articles 7 and 8 clearly states the need for removing all discriminations preventing women from leadership.

On September 1995, the Beijing Platform of Action took full ownership of the human rights agenda initially contained in CEDAW, advanced women’s rights and strongly reaffirmed the universal commitment to women’s power and leadership. Women took ownership of the human rights agenda and redefined it to ensure that gender equality and women’s empowerment would be at its core.

At the time, world leaders committed to the extraordinary Platform for Action with tangible and ambitious commitments in strategic areas, from peace to development, and designed roadmaps to get us there.

Since 1995, the world continued the march to make the world more gender equal and to enhance women’s leadership and participation in peace, security and development processes.

In 2000, following decades of advocacy led by women civil society organizations and women human rights activists, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 1325, the global commitment to ensure that women are systematically and sustainably integrated into peace and security processes.

The international community furthered the women, peace and security agenda in 2009 by recognizing the harmful impact of sexual violence in conflict on women and communities, making this scourge punishable under International Human Rights Law and International Criminal Law.

In the last twenty-five years, African women have made substantive progress in political, economic and social arenas but also have faced numerous constraints.

Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka

The positive picture reflects enhanced political and legislative leadership to ensure that women do have a seat at the table of key decision-making processes.

Today, Rwanda has the highest percentage of women members of parliament in the world: 61%. Namibia, Senegal and South Africa follow closely with at least over 40% of women holding seats in Parliament.

Ethiopia not only made great strides by electing its first female President in October 2018, but Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed also raised the bar high for national governments by ensuring a gender equal cabinet with 50% of its members being women.

Across Africa, women have taken the seat at the top table, including President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, President Joyce Banda of Malawi, President Catherine Samba-Panza of the Central African Republic and President Ameenah Gurib-Fakim of Mauritius.

More women are being elected in public office or appointed to ministerial positions. These changes have not happened by coincidence but as the result of deliberate policy decisions and grassroots action.

In many cases, this transformation was realized through hard-fought constitutional amendments and parity legislation aimed at reserving the necessary space for women and youth.

At continental level, the African Union has developed an extensive and progressive body of legal instruments as well as innovative solutions and platforms in its various thematic areas of work. The years 2010-2020 marked the African Women’s Decade.

The AU Strategy for Gender Equality & Women’s Empowerment (2018 – 2028) is informed by global standards that include instruments like the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs – whose Goal 5 is on “Gender Equality”).

Other human rights instruments of the African Union such as the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights consider women’s rights as an integral component of the key rights. The AU has appointed Heads of State as champions and leaders to push for implementation of commitments under various thematic areas of the work of the Union.

Despite these great achievements, we must admit that the world – and we as leaders – did not keep our promise to ensure that every woman and girl, wherever she may live, could be assured to enjoy her full human rights reach her full potential.

The reality is that we have failed women and girls. Some of the best minds remain excluded because we failed to provide access to education to all women and girls. Many of the potential pillars of our societies remain marginalized because we failed to properly address and eradicate gender inequality and violence against women.

Our continent is lagging behind in creating the peaceful and developed societies we seek to realize, in part, because we failed to offer women and girls the necessary opportunities and tools, which would allow them to thrive and be full contributors.

And despite the elections of some women to high and highest offices, and existing legislative and legal frameworks, by and large, across Africa women are still struggling to gain a seat at the decision-making table or in peace and security processes.

Despite the existing evidence revealing that gender perspective drives the sustainability of peace and security processes, there is still a blunt implementation gap in terms of ensuring women’s participation in peace processes.

The evidence is staggering, with women constituting about 4% of signatories of peace agreements, 2.4% of chief mediators, 3.7% of witnesses or observers to peace negotiations, and 9% of negotiation team members. . Today, Africa currently counts one female Head of State (Ethiopia), four Vice-Presidents (The Gambia, Liberia, Tanzania, Zambia) one Prime Minister (Namibia).

This stark reality is a daily reminder that we cannot slow down our efforts. We must accelerate our efforts against the pushbacks. Women’s meaningful participation and leadership are crucial in the effective functioning and sustainability of our communities and our world.

To achieve this, a top-down approach is not sustainable to build the necessary transformative change. If the promise made is to be delivered, women and youth must be front and center and the drivers of the positive change we all aspire.

In this spirit, on 2 June 2017 African women leaders – I among them – came together as a movement to launch the African Women Leaders Network (AWLN) and its Call to Action, backed by the African Union and the United Nations through UN Women.

Our Network aims to advance, train and support female leaders across sectors and generations in Africa. The AWLN is pushing for policies and programmes that empower and enable women on the continent across the political, economic and humanitarian fields to reach their full potential.

Since June 2017, the African Women Leaders Network has achieved key milestones, from bolstering the voices of African women leaders across generations on the ground to enhancing their participation and leadership in key decision-making processes.

The Network committed to push and deliver on the commitments made in UN Security Council resolution 1325 by October 2020, its 20th anniversary and to be in solidarity with the women and communities in conflict and post-conflict situations throughout Africa.

Since 2017, the AWLN conducted joint UN-AU solidarity missions to revitalize women’s participation and leadership in peace, security and development in Cameroon, Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Niger Nigeria, Somalia and South Sudan. The missions brought much needed political attention to the situation on the ground, while promoting women’s meaningful participation as mediators in all efforts of conflict-resolution, sustainable development, peacebuilding and humanitarian interventions.

The AWLN redefines the faces and structures around power and leadership – considering each and every woman or girl a leader, standing up for her human rights, may she be a Head of State or a grassroots activist working for peace and development, an entrepreneur or a schoolgirl with a dream.

We support the advancement of African women through six (6) flagship projects in peace and security, governance, finance, agriculture, young women’s leadership and social mobilization. The Network further provides peer learning, experience sharing and cross-generational dialogues in order to bolster women’s contributions to building and sustaining peace, sustainable economies and social transformation.

Women are making a crucial difference in the lives of the people they serve at local level. In this spirit, the AWLN national chapters are the cornerstones of movement building for the Network and support its localization at grassroots level and represent a major milestone benefiting all African women and ensuring that their voices are better heard, and their issues better addressed, in order to increase women’s ownership in the transformation of the continent and the 2063 Agenda “The Africa We Want.”

Since 2017, the AWLN has established 11 national chapters in (chronologically) the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, the Central African Republic, Sierra Leone, the Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Seychelles, Ethiopia, Liberia, Morocco and Cameroon.

The Network, with the support of UN Women and the AU, plans to have a total of 25 national chapters established by March 2020, in line with UN Women’s Generation Gender Equality Campaign, and to ensure that a critical mass of women is leading the movement throughout the continent.

We are working closely with women’s groups, the UN System, the African Union and development partners to ensure that, beyond women’s participation, all efforts are undertaken to create a conducive environment for women empowerment and the protection of their rights and freedoms.

We encourage all African Member States to speed up the process and to offer the necessary support to women and young people coming together for Africa’s transformation. The time for action is now to build irreversible positive changes for gender equality in Africa.

In 2020, 25 years after the Beijing Declaration and 20 years after Security Council resolution 1325, it is clear that we must accelerate our efforts, move faster on the roadmap towards the targets we want to reach, and deliver tangible actions for the people we serve.

As I write these words, we are still very far away from achieving gender parity and full women’s empowerment in Africa. We must build on the positive strides that we have made so far to achieve this urgent ambition.

As African women, we call on all African men – leaders in politics and business, elders and young, neighbors in our cities and villages, fathers, brothers and sons – to join women in a great partnership for human rights, peace and development.

We call on them to lead and invest in change at a national level with the African Women Leaders Network National Chapters and women’s movements for peace to address the gender equality gaps that we know persist.

Africa has already adopted strong protocols, including the Maputo Protocol, and instruments that bind us, and through which Heads of State and Government have already agreed on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment. Women must be meaningfully included in peace, security and developments negotiations and in the politics of their country.

We are asking all our allies to use their power and influence to support African women in taking their rightful place in the next chapter of the continent and building a future where women and girls can live out their lives freely, in purpose and happiness.

The movement of African women across the continent is a rally for action. A movement to ensure that leaders keep on their commitments and promises.

It is time for action.

Together, we can unite for Africa’s transformation.

The post It is Time for Action! Uniting for Africa’s Transformation appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of special IPS coverage of International Women’s Day on March 8 2020

 

Sahle-Work Zewde, is President of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, and Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, is Executive Director of UN Women

The post It is Time for Action! Uniting for Africa’s Transformation appeared first on Inter Press Service.

He was pilloried after a false story circulated that he had thrown a tantrum at the US consulate.

Doping in South African schoolboy rugby is casting a shadow over the whole sport. Salmon van Huyssteen's story is just one chapter.

"Gross failures" led to Prince Fosu's death from malnutrition, dehydration and hypothermia, an inquest finds.

Ghassan Salame says he cannot take any more stress trying to broker peace in the country.

By External Source
Mar 2 2020 (IPS-Partners)

The Pacific Community (SPC) is calling for contestants to join the Pacific Healthy Recipe Contest and showcase their cooking skills and creativity to promote healthy eating and prevention of non-communicable diseases (NCDs).

Up to 75 per cent of deaths in Pacific countries are related to NCDs, such as diabetes and heart diseases, with unhealthy diets and lifestyles seen as important factors in their development.

From observation, the Pacific diet has changed over time and consumption of local foods has transitioned into consumption of more imported processed foods that are high in sugar, fat and salt. Approaches to improve eating habits includes trainings on healthy eating, development of resources to improve knowledge and health promoting campaigns to increase awareness.

Who can apply?
The contest will be open to all Pacific Island Countries and Territories.

How to apply
The contest will be launched through SPC social media.

Contestants will be invited to:
– Complete the registration online or fil this word document until 29 February 2020
– Follow the directions given to submit details of their recipe that they have created together with a photo of the prepared dish.

Prize
The winner and their entire family (up to 10 people) will enjoy a gourmet meal prepared in the comfort of their own home by a well-known chef!
All participants will get a copy of the ‘Pasifka Plates’ cook book.

How to assess the winner?
Assessment of the winner will be based on:
• Use of local ingredients
• Recipe with less sugar, salt and fat
• Creative and aesthetic presentation
• Showcasing of Pacific cooking traditions.

The recipes will be made available on the SPC website as well as shared through other means of communication.

Useful links:
Competition Terms and Conditions
Participation Form

For more information, it is possible to contact the organizers at the following address: health-enquiries@spc.int.

Media contacts:
Solène Bertrand-Protat, Non-Communicable Diseases Advisor, Public Health Division (PHD), Pacific Community (SPC) | soleneb@spc.int

General Inquiries:
Evlyn Mani, Communications Officer, Public Health Division (PHD), Pacific Community (SPC) | evlynm@spc.int
Alexandre Brecher, Senior Communications Officer, Corporate Communication Office, Pacific Community (SPC) | alexandreb@spc.int

About SPC:
The Pacific Community has been supporting sustainable development in the Pacific, through science, knowledge and innovation since 1947. It is the principal intergovernmental organization in the region, owned and governed by its 26 member countries and territories.

Division
Corporate
Public Health Division (PHD)

The post The Pacific Community launches the Pacific Healthy Recipe Contest appeared first on Inter Press Service.

US President Donald Trump looks on as India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi waves during a rally in India in February 2020. PHOTO: MANDEL NGAN/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

By James M. Dorsey
Mar 2 2020 (IPS-Partners)

Television news summarises daily what a new world order shaped by civilisationalists entails. Writer William Gibson’s assertion that “the future is already here—it’s just not evenly distributed” is graphically illustrated in pictures of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of desperate Syrians fleeing indiscriminate bombing in Idlib, Syria’s last rebel stronghold, with nowhere to go.

It’s also evident in video clips from the streets of Indian cities where police stand aside as Hindu nationalists target Muslims and Prime Minister Narendra Modi turns Muslims into second-class citizens; refugee camps in Bangladesh where hundreds of thousands of Rohingya who fled ethnic cleansing in Myanmar linger with no prospect of a better life; a devastating civil war in Libya fuelled by foreign powers propagating a worldview that has much in common with civilisationalism; a take-it-or-leave it US plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that belittles and disregards Palestinian aspirations; the Trump administration’s adoption of rules that favour immigrants from Europe rather than Africa, Asia and Latin America; and China’s brutal efforts to erase the identity and culture of its Turkic Muslim minority.

The constant TV diet of the horrors of civilisationalist-inspired violence, war, human suffering, discrimination and prejudice, coupled with fears of existential threats posed by the other, migration and globalisation, no longer sparks outrage.

“The horrors in Idlib are one face of the emerging ‘new world disorder,'” said Wall Street Journal columnist Walter Russell Mead. Underlying civilisationalist discrimination and repression that risks dislocating minority segments of populations, political violence and mass migration on unmanageable scales is the mainstreaming of racism, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia and the demonisation of liberal values that propagate basic, human and minority rights and ideologies that seek to synthesise democratic and conservative values steeped in tradition and religion, particularly Islam.

Civilisationalists and right-wing populists, including Messrs. Trump and Modi, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Chinese President Xi Jinping, feed from similar philosophical troughs.

Political scientist Shawn W Rosenberg argues that the political structures of states that are governed by populists and/or defined by a civilisation rather than the Westphalian concept of a nation are built on the notion that people are characterised not by their ties to one another, but by being part of a nation.

Civilisationalists and populists ignore individual differences and emphasise an individual’s relationship to the nation. In their world, individuals are at the bottom of the heap in a civilisationalist state that is anchored in concepts of loyalty to the nation, and obedience to the state and its leaders who embody the will of the people.

Rosenberg warns that civilisationalists see an independent judiciary, Western concepts of rule of law, and a free press as institutions that not only obstruct accomplishment of their mission but also undermine their definition of the role and place of the individual.

To protect a nation’s integrity, civilisationalists and populists seek to shield “the people” from foreign influences, migration and the nation’s competitors—other nations. They see their nation’s power as derived from being stronger than others and doing better than others at the other’s expense.

Foreign policy is geared towards that goal rather than towards a global community that upholds principles of equality, equity and cooperation, Rosenberg asserts. Civilisationalists and populists seek economic and/or military diminution, if not domination of others, which by implication requires a rejection or hollowing out of international institutions.

The civilisationalist approach is making itself felt not only in lands governed by civilisationalists. Mainstream political leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron, widely viewed as a centrist who is attempting to counter civilisationalism and populism, are not immune to aspects of civilisationalism.

Nor is the Dutch parliamentary commission that earlier last month held controversial hearings about “unwanted influencing by unfree countries” that focused on Gulf support for Dutch Muslim communities and an unnuanced view of political Islam. The commission contemplated following in the footsteps of Austria, which has banned foreign funding for Muslim organisations. France is considering a similar ban.

Speaking in the city of Mulhouse earlier last month, Macron laid out his strategy to combat political Islam represented by the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists, who in his words insist that Islamic law supersedes the laws of the French Republic and emphasise “Islamist separatism” and “Islamist supremacy.”

Kuwait and Qatar are funding the construction of an Islamic religious and cultural centre in Mulhouse. Qatar has backed the Brotherhood in the past and is home to Yusuf al-Qaradawi, widely viewed as one of the foremost influencers of the Brotherhood, a catch-all for a multitude of aligned Islamist groups that bicker among themselves.

“In the Republic, we cannot accept that we refuse to shake hands with a woman because she is a woman. In the Republic, we cannot accept that someone refuses to be treated or educated by someone because she is a woman. In the Republic, one cannot accept school dropouts for religious or belief reasons. In the Republic, one cannot require certificates of virginity to marry,” Macron said.

Macron’s sweeping opposition to political Islam persuaded him to support Libyan rebel leader Khalifa Haftar, who stands accused of human rights violations and has aligned himself with a Saudi-backed strand of Salafism that preaches absolute obedience to the ruler.

Haftar, who also enjoys the support of the United Arab Emirates and Egypt, two countries opposed to democracy and any expression of Islam that rejects submission to an autocrat, is seeking to wrench control of the Libyan capital of Tripoli from the United Nations-recognised Government of National Accord (GNA). The GNA is backed by Turkey and includes elements associated with the Brotherhood.

To be sure, France has had its share of jihadist violence in recent years, with deadly attacks on a French satirical newspaper, restaurants, music halls and soccer stadiums and the ramming of a truck into a crowd on the streets of Nice.

Creeping civilisationalism does not, however, by definition characterise the efforts by Europeans like Macron and others to ensure that minority communities, including Muslims, are full-fledged participants in a society that should afford them equal opportunity and rights and requires them to accommodate dominant mores.

Civilisationalist approaches, nonetheless, contribute to the failure to be agnostic in countering all forms of supremacism and racial, ethnic or religious prejudice and the lumping together of ideologies that reject democratic values with ones that seek accommodation.

It is a failure that creates the environment in which someone like white supremacist Tobias Rathjen was emboldened, earlier last month, to kill nine people with immigrant backgrounds in the German city of Hanau. German politicians accused the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party of contributing to that environment. They demanded that the party be placed under surveillance.

Countering civilisationalism is one side of the coin. Avoiding unhelpful generalisations and oversimplifications is another.

In an examination of the concept of popular sovereignty in Islamic thought, political scientist Andrew F March argues that this decade’s popular Arab revolts marked an “intellectual revolution” and “a comprehensive reformulation of Islamic political philosophy”, involving not only “reducing rulers to their proper status as agents of the people but also implicitly raising the people to the ultimate arbiters of God’s law.”

No doubt, it is a revolution that is rejected by ultra-conservative Muslims, elements of the Brotherhood and various strands of Salafism. Nonetheless, it was a revolution articulated in February 2011, days after the fall of Hosni Mubarak, by none other than Al-Qaradawi, one of the most prominent Islamist thinkers.

Quoting Martin Luther King Jr’s prediction that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice,” Mead, the columnist, concluded that this “is hard to see from Idlib.”

He could have just as well been speaking about the dislocation and suffering in a civilisationalist-dominated world that plays out on television screens across the globe in which rights, equitable rule of law and international law are relegated to the dust bin.

Dr James M Dorsey is a senior fellow at Nanyang Technological University’s S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, an adjunct senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute and co-director of the

University of Wuerzburg’s Institute of Fan Culture.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

The post Not a pretty picture appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Orange the World march in Ecuador. November 2019. Credit: UN Women/Johis Alarcón

By External Source
QUITO, Ecuador, Mar 2 2020 (IPS)

Inclusion of women in political processes is one of the key ingredients of sustainable peace.

Although the number of women in political office has increased worldwide over the past 25 years, progress has been slow.

As of 1 January 2020, only four countries had 50 per cent or more women parliamentarians (Rwanda, Cuba, Bolivia and United Arab Emirates).

In the Americas region, an average of 30.6 per cent of parliamentarians were women as of October 2019. In December 2019, the National Assembly of Ecuador approved a package of reforms to advance gender parity and address obstacles in the way of women candidates to elected office.

Data, analysis and recommendations by the United Nations contributed to what is considered a milestone in the country.

The United Nations and other international organizations will devote substantial time and attention in 2020 to assessing progress (or the lack of it) in increasing the participation of women in political and peace processes.

Twenty years since the adoption of Security Council resolution 1325, the consensus, backed by evidence, is that women’s participation in peacemaking and peacebuilding contributes to the quality and durability of peace after conflict.

There is also growing evidence that women’s leadership in political decision-making processes improves such processes. Adding to that body of evidence is a recent study (in Spanish) by UN Women, carried out in cooperation with the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA), on the situation in Ecuador.

The South American country ranks sixth in Latin America, out of 33 countries, in terms of the number of women legislators in the National Assembly. The number of women elected officials at the local level, however, is very low.

The UN study set out to determine, among other things, why this was so and what could be done about it. The research identifies discrimination, but also political violence against women, as reasons for the scant number of women officials in the country.

The study includes information from 154 people, including 41 women candidates and 12 focus groups in the the March 2019 elections. It focuses on the situations of discrimination and violence that women experience when choosing a political party and movement; registering their candidacies; taking office as authorities; performing their duties, and during the campaign and election process.

The findings show that violence against women candidates takes place within their families, communities and political parties. The violence is largely psychological, but it is also physical and sexual. This violence is a central barrier to women’s access and participation in politics.

Sixty-six per cent of the women interviewed said that psychological violence was the most frequent manifestation of political violence, including reputation bashing and rumor campaigns against them; making them invisible, hardly publicizing their candidacy or their governance, and isolating them, excluding them or marginalizing them; and party members or local government officials concealing information or providing false information.

One third of the women responding mentioned that they had been subjected to bullying, ridicule and public mocking, prevented from talking or expressing what they think.

The perpetrators of political gender-based violence against women were political stakeholders (leaders of political parties, electoral candidates, political party activists and electoral campaign personnel); societal stakeholders (voters, family members, community members or groups, religious or traditional leaders, media and social networks, employers and workmates); and governmental stakeholders (police, military and other governmental staff from all branches of the State, including electoral officials and personnel).

In June 2019, DPPA adopted a new Women, Peace and Security Policy calling for specific efforts to advance gender equality and the inclusion and empowerment of women, including action needed to promote women´s political participation through legislation.

An Electoral Needs Assessment Mission deployed to Ecuador in May 2019 explicitly recommended supporting the National Electoral Council to prevent and mitigate violence against women in political life.

In partnership with UN Women Ecuador, DPPA backed efforts to address political violence against women, promoting the linkages between SDG 16 on peace, justice and strong institutions and SDG 5 on gender equality.

The UN study recommended specific structural reforms to the legal and institutional framework, as well as promoting cultural change through the women’s movement and media. The study in particular urged changes to prevent, identify, denounce and punish violence against women candidates.

In August 2019, the National Electoral Council’s Democracy Institute held two public discussions in Quito and Guayaquil on the findings of the study.

The information and analysis in the study, the feedback from female politicians, and the joint work among the National Electoral Council, the Democracy Institute and UN Women, with support from DPPA, served as the basis for a draft proposal to amend the Code of Democracy.

The National Electoral Council submitted the proposal to the National Assembly in the fall of 2019. On 3 December 2019, the National Assembly approved the package of reforms, with key provisions to advance gender parity and to address violence against women candidates.

Diana Atamaint, the President of the National Electoral Council, welcomed the reforms and thanked the United Nations for its contributions through data, analysis and recommendations, to this important milestone.

The reforms include parity headings in the lists of candidates in a progressive manner: 15 per cent of women by 2021, 30 per cent in 2023, until reaching 50 per cent in 2025.

The presidential binomials must be composed of male-female or female-male candidates by 2025. In addition, provisions on political violence included specific sanctions against gender-based political violence.

*The article was first published in the online magazine of the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA)

The post Helping Advance Women’s Political Rights in Ecuador appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

International Women’s Day, March 8 2020

 

UN’s Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA)*

The post Helping Advance Women’s Political Rights in Ecuador appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Lebanese women in politics. Credit: Eliane Eid

By Eliane Eid
KESERWAN, Lebanon, Mar 2 2020 (IPS)

Women were at the forefront of Lebanon’s 2019 ‘October Revolution’. Beyond the iconic images of their participation, it seems that by women linking equity in politics to the broader issues of mismanagement of corruption paid off – although activists say there is a long road ahead.

In May 2018 saw the election of six Lebanese women to parliament from 86 female candidates. Following the October 2019 uprising, that started to change the equation within the political system and under the continued pressure of the civil society, a new cabinet was formed. It included six female ministers out of 20.

From a general perspective, this seems like a win for achieving gender equality, considering that 30% of the actual cabinet is female. Lebanon, a democratic republic in the Middle East, is deemed to have acknowledged the role of women and started to include them in the political field.

However, from a Lebanese perspective, questions arise whether this achievement is a veneer to please the streets and Western donors in a crumbling country?

Rouba El Helou-Sensenig, coordinator of the gender, communications and global mobility studies at the Faculty of Law and Political Science at Notre Dame University in Lebanon, is not convinced this change is enough.

“Even though the Lebanese government signed international agreements related to advancing women’s rights and their participation in political life, I believe that the Lebanese government is not serious about reaching gender equality,” she says.

“What has been achieved so far is the result of a combination of pressure from civil society and international bodies,” she added, citing a list of reasons why women’s rights within the country are flawed.
“Today, the Lebanese people, whether they are with or against gender equality, are aware that Lebanese women do not have the right to give their citizenship to their children; that the religious courts do not rule in favour of a mother most of the time.”

She says the Kafala system promotes more injustices in Lebanese society and “family friendly-policies should be drafted and implemented” as a matter of urgency.

El Helou-Sensenig explained to IPS that Lebanon still has a labour code with a long list of articles which prohibit women from working in certain fields. Gender-based violence and sexual harassment are still not appropriately criminalised.

Two young women rest in the morning of a new day during the October 2019 Revolution, Lebanon. Credit: Blanche Eid

Historically, Lebanese women waited until 1953 to vote and run for elections – and their fundamental rights undermined until Lebanon signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 1997.

Most of the women in parliament have been elected based on their political affiliations or even traditional ones. Lebanese society has rarely seen any organic approach to promote female candidates in any election.

This year the World Economic Forum (WEF), in its 2020 report Mind the 100 Year Gap, noted that gender parity would not be attained for 99.5 years – meaning that none of the current generations will witness it. WEF’s even more sobering analysis puts the gap in the Middle East, and North Africa is 140 years. This is a challenge to NGOs and institutions fighting gender discrimination.

Once such a global advocate for gender equality and health and rights of girls and women, Women Deliver is working with five civil society organisations (CSOs) to breach the gender inequity gap in Lebanon. Its Humanitarian Advocates Program, along with the CSOs, is working toward meeting the needs of the women and children who make up 80% of the country’s more than 1 million registered refugees.

In the broader society equality will take time, but many countries still lack fundamental human rights, including Lebanon.

In February Notre Dame University held a seminar on women pursuing peace and justice and being politically active. During the seminar, Cedar Mansour, dean of the faculty of law and political science, explained that for Lebanon to make changes, women need to be more involved in policymaking and participation.

“In order to make a real difference, the change should start in the institutions. Equality should be paramount, inherited discrimination that is infesting our laws should be revolted against,” Mansour said.

By making laws and creating opportunities for women to become more involved, only then, Lebanon will have a chance to stay in the race.

Many factors stand in the way of achieving these goals, the seminar heard.

Lea Baroudi, the founding member and director of March, Lebanon, told IPS has personal experience of many of these challenges and what it takes to be successful.

“What made me continue is what I saw I was capable of doing. I had this belief that I can change. There are two struggles that affect us as women: the patriarchal attitude and the older generation mentality. The attitude of ‘you cannot do it’,” she said.

“But, to succeed, you have to fail many times, and that’s what kept me going”.

Baroudi explained that no matter what a woman will do, she will always be questioned and evaluated every step of the way. She always has to be number one in every field; otherwise, she is considered weak and powerless.

“As long as we cannot change the laws, we have a problem” she adds. Lebanon needs a shift in the understanding of gender equality and its implementation. Many factors play an essential role in shaping this culture, especially patriarchal power rooted in the Lebanese mindset.

In 2016, Lebanon created the first ministry of women’s affairs; this initiative was supposed to be a step forward to achieve political empowerment and gender equality. In the case of Lebanon, the minister of women’s affairs was a man. The idea of creating this ministry was to promote political empowerment, but a female figure in Lebanese politics is known to be more of a mediator than an action taker.

Four months have passed since the revolution started – women have taken a critical role in keeping this uprising safe and its agenda in the spotlight.

One of the current demands is to have an early election with more women involved.

Lebanon might witness a new era of female leaders, but the key issue is whether create a safe environment for Lebanese women by changing policies or they would fall in the trap of being the winning ticket for political parties.

The post What’s Needed for Real Changes for Women in Lebanese Politics? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

International Women's Day, March 8 2020
 

The year 2020 began with a shock report, Mind the 100 Year Gap, from the World Economic Forum which projected that gender equity would take at least 100 years to realise. Women and girls play a crucial role in society. However, they bear the brunt of patriarchy, their needs often unmet by traditional humanitarian responses and their health and education needs not prioritised. In the run-up to International Women’s Day with its theme, “I am Generation Equality: Realising Women’s Rights” IPS is publishing a series of features, opinion and editorials from experts and affiliated journalists around the world on women.

The post What’s Needed for Real Changes for Women in Lebanese Politics? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Olivier Assoua migrated to Europe at 16 - years later he returned to Cameroon to make a film about migration.

By Emina Osmandzikovic
Mar 2 2020 (IPS-Partners)

A succession of meetings over the last two months in Berlin, Geneva and Munich has signified a renewed multilateral effort to resolve the Libyan civil conflict. With 13 nations led by the UN, seeking to enforce a brittle arms embargo and comprehensive cease-fire, the concerned parties have been seeking to resolve the rivalry between the UN-recognized administration based in the capital of Tripoli and the country’s western regions with the backing of Turkey, Qatar and Italy, and the rival eastern-based government led by General Khalifa Haftar, with the support of Egypt, France, Russia and other states.

Emina Osmandzikovic

While recent diplomatic efforts have produced a 55-point road map to resolve the conflict, a potential conflict resolution is still very much dependent on the complex interplay between internal and external actors and the willingness of all parties to observe the tentative internationally-led peace effort. With the humanitarian situation in Libya deteriorating due to the country’s contracting economy, a robust peaceful solution is urgently needed.

Libya as a proxy in foreign powers’ interplay

Nine years after the initial outbreak of violence against the regime of Muammar Al-Qaddafi, Libya is still at war, marred with the refugee and migrant crises, internal strife between opposing militias, haunted by Islamist groups, and unable to govern its own territory. In addition to an over-inflated narrative of Al-Qaddafi’s prominent role in inciting violence in 2011, the aftermath of the NATO intervention in Libya[i] left a jarring environment of tribal, ethnic, religious and ideological violence that had a negative spill-over effect on the neighboring countries, the most prominent example being the case of Mali in 2013.

The 2012 parliamentary elections were initially seen as a promising development. With the turn-up rate higher than 60 percent, the elections brought to office a moderate, secular coalition government despite persistent instances of violence across the country. However, since mid-2014, the country has seen the rise and progression of two parallel governing systems, one based in Tobruk, controlling the Libyan National Army (LNA), the other based in Tripoli with the international endorsement and support of the UN and external allies, further complicating the already byzantine political landscape of post-uprising Libya.

As one of the key markers of the conflict, tribal violence has gone unaddressed under Al-Qaddafi and further exacerbated in the post-uprising Libya. While this item took a backseat on the agenda of the recent internationally-brokered peace talks, this issue remains crucial to tackling the country’s peaceful power-sharing. The inability of the dual government to impose a monopoly on violence has been further perpetuated by the 2013 Political Isolation Law, which came as an attempt to prevent members of the Qaddafi regime from holding public office during the country’s transition to peace and stable power-sharing. Moreover, most of the militias across the country have been paid by one of the two rival governments despite failed attempts to incorporate them in the budding, but still weak, national security forces. This is in addition to a massive number of weapons still in possession of private individuals.

Marginalized in the peace talks, one impeding factor that cannot be ignored is the rising influence of radical Islamists, including various branches of ISIS), aided by larger regional movements. Such groups have actively worked to undermine any progress toward peace, as stabilization is not in their interest. One particularly (unclear) has been garnering support from the local population by undertaking charity work, especially for martyrs’ families. They have positioned themselves as worthy challengers by providing socio-economic assistance where the government had previously failed. As a consequence, the Islamist agenda is becoming more attractive for Libyans, begging the question of potential legitimacy of either of the two competing governments in any post-conflict scenario.

Post-2011, the deep-seated tribal divisions that had been utilized by the Qaddafi regime have been left untouched, which has opened a Pandora’s box of difficulties for consolidating any power-sharing mechanisms and establishing peace. The tribe-state relations in Libya have been historically fluid, pragmatic and opportunistic, and the marginalization has reinforced the co-optation of some tribes, but contended to threaten the exclusion of others. The downside of tribal involvement in security provision is that protection is offered in selective manner, reproducing politics of co-optation and exclusion at local level.

The 2011 uprising led to a Libyan polity that was able to remove Qaddafi from power, yet remained short of addressing the tribe-government nexus, which was later swallowed by a vortex of militias, extremist groups and external players. This conundrum was furthered by the NATO intervention in Libya and the intense involvement of external forces in the country’s civil war, a factor that marks the conflict even today and continues to be one of the greatest impediments to any serious peace negotiation. As an antithesis to any on-ground progression toward peace, the role of external forces further complicates the situation in the country by internationalizing its conflict without tackling its domestic drivers.

The UN has been involved in the country since the beginning of the Libyan revolt in 2011. Following the NATO intervention in Libya, the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL), established in September of the same year, became the primary international body seeking reconciliation between various revolutionary groups. Egypt and Russia have steadily supported the House of Representatives in Tobruk in efforts to drive other groups out of Benghazi and Eastern Libya, according to some reports, while Turkey, Qatar and Sudan have supported the Tripoli-based government.

Ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict

Despite several meetings that have taken place and those that are scheduled in the old continent, the short- and medium-term future of Libya continues to hang on a thread. As the first meeting between Libya’s warring sides since early 2018, the Berlin conference failed to produce fruitful and credible results. The sequel, seen in the Munich Security Conference held in early February, merely addressed the failures of its predecessor. The most recent Geneva talks failed to even include the warring sides. These failures, especially the inability to stop the supply of weapons to various factions in Libya, indicate a lack of credible commitment by both local and international actors toward any sustainable peace efforts.

Following the latest peace effort in Geneva, the next meeting is scheduled for early March in Rome, though it remains uncertain which of the parties will attend. While the unprecedented frequency of high-level meetings indicates renewed global interest in resolving the conflicts in Libya, these platforms have also been used as an extension of proxy confrontations among various sides. For instance, the European Union has, thus far, used the UN arms embargo on Libya to cease its Operation Sophia and launch Operation EU Active Surveillance. In parallel, Turkey has used the very same political vacuum to send fighters from Syria to Libya.

These high-level discussions have largely contributed to the marginalization of previously-mentioned local processes within Libya, thereby undermining the efforts of local actors to maintain their step-by-step approach to forging the country’s peaceful future. Ensuring that no external party further complicates the on-ground conundrum has proven to be virtually impossible. In the short-term, the international community needs to work on establishing credibility and trust in order for all sides to step away from armed conflict. And in the long-term, all parties involved have to diligently and collectively work on securing a permanent cessation of hostilities as both a necessary and a sufficient condition for the resumption of Libya’s dormant political process.

The urgent need for a negotiated solution is compounded by Libya’s rapidly deteriorating economic situation, with a contributory factor in the UN’s prediction that more than 900,000 people in the country will be in need of some form of humanitarian assistance in 2020. Perhaps the right solution lies beyond regularly meeting and talking peace with the warring sides, in their presence or otherwise.

Competing external and internal factions

In an interplay between domestic forces and international actors, eastern Libya ports, controlled by the Libyan National Army (LNA) under the command of Khalifa Haftar, have shut down oil exports, resulting in national crude output being cut by more than half ahead of the Berlin summit. In addition, of the build-up to the Munich follow-up conference held on February 16-17, a period of calm was overshadowed by high-level discussions on the future of the UN arms embargo on Libya and the complicating factor of Turkish troops being deployed in the war-torn country.

As the first meeting between the warring sides since 2018, the Berlin summit left a bitter aftertaste for both the LNA Chief, Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, and the Prime Minister of the GNA, Fayez al-Sarraj. In January 2020, as many as 11 world leaders and both warring sides of the Libyan conflict walked away with a diluted pledge to cease the flow of weapons into Libya and a promise to form a five-by-five military council to negotiate a ceasefire in the near future. In the event, the Munich follow-up meetings produced similar results to the most recent Geneva talks.

In the post-Berlin period, the international community has maintained its focus on the conflict-torn Libya despite the tensions and conflicting interests that undermined the negotiations in Geneva.

The renewed efforts to seek a solution have been galvanized by Turkey’s direct military intervention in the conflict. Even as Berlin prepared for the meeting, the UN called for an end to foreign intervention in Libya. Yet Turkey announced in January that it is sending troops to Libya in support of the GNA. The decision was backed by the deployment of hundreds of Syrian fighters to bolster the GNA forces’ efforts, envisioned to work in tandem with the Turkish forces. Around the time of the Munich conference, however, additional reports surfaced that Turkey sent fighters to fight in Libya, a move that underscored the extent to which the government led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan was prepared to disregard the UN-led principle of non-involvement. Although Erdogan stated that Turkish forces were involved in Libya for training purposes only, the intervention suggests that Turkey wishes to further assert its power in the Eastern Mediterranean in order to overcome its relative diplomatic isolation following recent agreements between Greece, Cyprus, Egypt and Israel on exploring local hydrocarbons reserves.

The announcement served as a prelude to ceasefire negotiations and a mini-summit between the GNA, supported by Turkey, Qatar and Italy, and the LNA, supported by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, France and Russia, that took place on January 13 in Moscow, reflecting the fact that Russia increasingly sees Libya as one of the focal points of its interest in the region. President Vladimir Putin’s interest in the conflict stems from his ambition to assert Russia’s interests in the Mediterranean as part of a strategic push-and-pull with the Western powers and a conviction that Russia’s status necessitates a say in the outcome of the Libyan civil war. However, the January talks in Moscow prematurely ended when Haftar requested more time for consideration, subsequently leaving Russia without a concrete agreement and signaling to Moscow and other capitals that Haftar’s objectives might greatly differ from their agendas.

With no concrete steps on the horizon, the reiteration of the urgency of obtaining peace in Libya was at the heart of the Munich debate. Despite the fact that the Berlin summit hosted all the key players of the Libyan conflict, including the Arab League and the African Union in an attempt to prevent the marginalization of Libya’s immediate neighbours, the ultimate conclusion did not progress from previous efforts. Moreover, the voices of both the Arab League and the African Union have gone unheard amid renewed tensions and the latest spill of weapons into Libya, despite prominent statements from the region repeatedly seeking consensus-based political arrangements.

The unofficial ceasefire declared by Turkey and Russia, who support the GNA and Haftar respectively, has reduced active fighting to Libya’s capital since it went into force on January 12; however, no official document detailing the ceasefire has been signed. Under the auspices of the UN special envoy for Libya, Ghassan Salame, Germany was hoping to finalize a political roadmap agreement during the Berlin summit in Europe’s latest and most concrete attempt to stabilize Libya; however, no concrete follow-up has been negotiated as of February 27th.

Viable future avenues

While the UN is seeking a step away from foreign interference in Libya, focusing on transforming the unofficial ceasefire into an official agreement with monitoring and separation of rival groups and repositioning of heavy weapons, the most recent wave of geopolitical focus on Libya paints a different picture. Turkey has sent troops to Libya, followed by a Russian-led ceasefire negotiation that was left open-ended, as a prelude to the Berlin summit and Europe’s increased involvement in Libya’s future. In negotiating the ceasefire and Libya’s post-conflict peace landscape, efforts to build a new Libya should take into account the country’s strong tribal character and should look into integrating tribal forces in a manner that favors the central state project while simultaneously allowing for true representation and inclusion of all local and tribal entities.

In the long-term, an improvement of the current situation in Libya is direly needed, especially in terms of the rule of law, the socio-economic sector; and infrastructure. Politically, such a leap toward peace could be achieved through federalism and a step-by-step approach in addressing the country’s system of dual governance and underlying tribal issues, that could further aid both national and international efforts in containing armed opposition and re-securing entire Libya’s territory.

Ultimately, securing Libya’s peace process will be a tedious and fickle process. The international community and the parties to the conflict have to stick to the step-by-step approach to tackling each issue that is undermining the credibility of actors and viability of a peaceful status quo. In the short-term, all sides will have to jointly and in good faith work on establishing and maintaining the credibility of intention and trust. In concrete terms, abiding by the UN arms embargo on Libya may not necessitate the cessation of other measures, which is what the EU had done with Operation Sophia to launch Operation EU Active Surveillance. This will also demand greater involvement by other parties as well, which have thus far been seen as marginal to the negotiations, including the African Union, with a stronger pledge to adhere to the UN embargo. In the long-run, such efforts will ensure a permanent cessation of hostilities within Libya along with a greater degree of certainty of not reverting to lawlessness.

[i] Kuperman, Alan J. “A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO’s Libya campaign.” International Security 38.1 (2013): 105-136.

Author’s profile: http://trendsresearch.org/expert/emina-osmandzikovic/

This article was first published by TRENDS Research & Advisory.

The post What ails Libya’s peace process? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Guinea-Bissau, which has a history of coups, had two presidents following disputed elections.

Credit: UN News/Li Zhang

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 2 2020 (IPS)

The deadly coronavirus COVID-19, which is spreading across China, Japan, South Korea, Iran, Italy, the Philippines– along with new cases in Asia, Western Europe and the Middle East– has claimed one of its first casualties at the United Nations.

The annual inter-governmental meeting of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), due to take place March 9-20, is being described as dead on arrival (DOA).

But it is still likely to take place as scheduled— minus the participation of over 5,000 to 6,000 delegates from overseas.

The 11-day meeting, the largest single gathering of women delegates from 193 countries, is being significantly downgraded because of the threat of COVID-19.

The United States, meanwhile, has postponed its own summit of world leaders of the 10-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) due to take place in Las Vegas March 14.

“As the international community works together to defeat the novel coronavirus, the United States, in consultation with ASEAN partners, has made the difficult decision to postpone the ASEAN leaders meeting previously scheduled for mid-March,” a senior administration official was quoted as saying.

Ma.Victoria (Mavic) Cabrera Balleza, Chief Executive Officer, Global Network of Women Peacebuilders, told IPS the 64th session of the upcoming CSW session should not be cancelled because of the outbreak of coronavirus disease — but its methodology should be modified.

“It is a very important event that brings a big momentum to our advocacy for women’s rights and gender equality, especially this year as we are commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, the most comprehensive global women’s rights agenda,” she pointed out.

In light of the outbreak of coronavirus disease, the UN Secretary-General’s suggestion to the Chair of the CSW that Member States consider amending the format and conduct of the session is a good idea, she said.

“However, I don’t think it should be limited to New York-based delegations only. The valued-added of CSW sessions lie on the huge participation of women’s rights activists and gender experts from around the world,” said Cabrera Balleza.

Such strong participation allows for discussions on diverse topics that impact on women’s enjoyment of their rights in political, economic, and social arenas, she noted.

UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters February 28 that given the fast evolving situation regarding COVID-19– and the need to balance the UN’s critical work and public health concerns—UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has suggested to the Bureau of the Committee on the Status of Women that they hold a scaled down meeting, limiting participation to New York based representation.

This, in effect, would bar delegates coming from their home countries preventing the spread of the virus through travel.

The limited participation, Dujarric pointed out, would still enable the CSW to adopt decisions and implement its mandate.

The final decision, which is likely to be aligned with the recommendation made by Guterres, will be taken by the 193 member states later this week.

Emergency room nurses wear face masks at Second People’s Hospital of Shenzhen in China. Credit: Man Yi/ UN News

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said his first priority “is to protect our homeland. We have imposed prudent travel restrictions and strong travel advisories to slow the spread of the virus in the United States.”

This could, in effect, prevent women delegates from some the US blacklisted countries from entering the US and participating in the CSW session.

Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the US National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said at a news briefing February 24: “It’s not so much of a question if this will happen anymore but rather more of a question of exactly when this will happen.”

She said that cities and towns should plan for “social distancing measures,” like dividing school classes into smaller groups of students or closing schools altogether. Meetings and conferences may have to be canceled, she said. And businesses should arrange for employees to work from home.

Purnima Mane, a former UN Assistant Secretary-General and Deputy Executive Director of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), told IPS the CSW session, like in the case of other large meetings and conferences, is under serious consideration on the part of the organizers of canceling the meeting due to the growing epidemic of the coronavirus COVID-19.

“As an advocate of women’s issues, I will of course be disappointed if the meeting is not held as planned but as a public health professional as well, I would advocate for caution.”

She said the situation of the virus is evolving rapidly and merits a careful assessment of the risks of any global meeting.

The meeting is next week and countries remain at different stages of preparedness to deal with the epidemic, said Mane, a former President and CEO of Pathfinder International.

She pointed out that the World Health Organization (WHO) has consistently advised against the application of travel restrictions.

However, several countries have imposed restrictions nonetheless, such as quarantine, visa restrictions or denial of entry of passengers.

In others there is far stricter screening of passengers on arrival and discrimination against citizens from certain regions of the world, even though the epidemic has spread to every continent except Antarctica, and cases are growing on a daily basis, she declared.

Cabrera Balleza told IPS: If most CSW participants will not be able to travel to New York, virtual conferences can be organized.

However, UN country teams and governments in developing and conflict-affected countries should open up their offices so grassroots women’s rights activists can go there, use the internet and participate in virtual conferences.

The UN should also provide transportation and interpretation support during virtual conferences, she noted.

As WHO has declared a global emergency over the coronavirus and has been lending support to China and other countries, the UN HQ in NY should ensure that it is taking all necessary precautions and its operations are not in any way contributing to the spread of the disease.

There are a number of logistical challenges in organizing a modified CSW session but they are not insurmountable.

If the UN and Member States are truly committed to women’s rights, gender equality, and women’s empowerment, they will mobilize necessary resources to ensure that the CSW session in 2020, will contribute to making this a pivotal year for the accelerated realization of women’s empowerment and gender equality for all women and girls around the world, said Cabrera Balleza.

The other key concern, she said, is the lack of “care planning” if participants catch the virus.

“What if they get sick when they are already in New York? Are there enough facilities that are equipped to handle coronavirus cases? Let alone the cost of medical care in NY. What if they get sick on the way back to their countries? Not having immediate access to care when traveling is a big problem,” she cautioned.

Mane told IPS that in a situation in which many countries are not in a state of topnotch preparedness for dealing with this epidemic, it is judicious to wait to hold a global meeting.

“And in a situation in which some countries are imposing travel restrictions despite WHO advice, it is obvious that not everybody who wants and should be present at this important meeting will be able to participate in person, anyway, reducing the impact of the CSW meeting.”

She said that each of the intergovernmental meetings is expected to be assessed on a case-by-case basis depending on the evolving situation.

But since the CSW is the first major intergovernmental meeting of 2020, the decision will undeniably impact other intergovernmental meetings to follow.

For the CSW, taking into consideration the pragmatic and public health considerations, it makes sense to give countries more time for building preparedness and to permit the presence of more delegates at the CSW.

It might be optimal either to organize country level meetings to feed into global recommendations for the CSW or an outright postponement of the date, so that when the CSW is held, it is a truly global event. In view of the vital subject of women’s status being dealt at the CSW, it would be prudent and ethical to do so.

UN Spokesperson Dujarric said the advice given by the Secretary-General is based on inputs from the Senior Emergency Policy Team and very close consultations between the U.N. Medical Services and the WHO.

“Forthcoming intergovernmental meetings at Headquarters and elsewhere will be assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specificities of the meetings and evolving circumstances,” he added.

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@aol.com

The post Coronavirus Claims its First UN Casualty appeared first on Inter Press Service.