Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Credit: UN Photo/Loey Felipe September 2025

By Annalena Baerbock
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 4 2025 (IPS)

For seventy-eight years, the question of Palestine has been on the agenda of this General Assembly, almost as long as the institution itself.

Resolution 181 (II) was adopted by the General Assembly on November 29 1947 – laying the foundation for the Two State Solution and calling for the establishment of both an Arab State and a Jewish State in Palestine.

But while the Jewish State, the State of Israel, is a recognized Member State of the United Nations, the Arab State, the State of Palestine, is not.

Seventy-eight years later, Palestine has still not been admitted to the UN as a full Member.

For 78 years the Palestinian people have been denied their inalienable rights – in particular, their right to self-determination. Now, it is high time that we take decisive action to end this decades-long stalemate.

The atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7th set off one of the darkest chapters in this conflict. Two years of war in Gaza have left tens of thousands of civilians killed, including many women and children. Countless more have been injured, maimed, and traumatized for life.

Communities are starving; civilian infrastructure is in ruins; almost the entire population is displaced. Children, mothers, fathers, families like us.

The hostages who have been finally released and reunited with their loved ones are slowly recovering from captivity under extremely dire conditions, while other families are mourning over the returned bodies. Again, children, fathers, mothers, families like us.

And while the horrors of Gaza have dominated the news for two years, settlement expansion, demolitions and increased settler violence in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem continue to undermine the prospects for a sovereign, independent, contiguous and viable Palestinian state.

Palestinian communities are bifurcated by the rapid expansion of settlements. Movement, communication and access to essential services and livelihoods are severely restricted for Palestinians by checkpoints, confiscations and demolitions.

While in my previous capacity, I visited a small village in the West Bank to actually meet with Palestinian farmers and teachers who wanted to show me what settlement expansion and settler violence meant for their daily lives.

As we stood on a hillside overlooking their farmland, a drone from an Israeli settlement began hovering above us, circling in the air, monitoring what we were doing and probably saying.

We know what happens when foreign people and cameras are no longer there. It’s not just a drone watching; it’s outright violence, including farmers being attacked as they try to go to work, as they try to harvest.

Beyond the violence itself are the daily indignities confronting the residents of the West Bank, including children getting to school or thousands of pregnant women rushing to hospital to receive care or give birth, only to be stopped at checkpoints or by road closures.

All that has happened in the last two years has all underlined what we have known since decades. The Israeli–Palestinian conflict cannot be resolved through illegal occupation, de jure or de facto annexation, forced displacement, recurrent terror or permanent war.

This only adds to grievances and fuels the flames of conflict.

Israelis and Palestinians will only live in lasting peace, security, and dignity when they live side by side in two sovereign and independent states, with mutually recognized borders and full regional integration –

As outlined in the New York Declaration, which is indeed a ray of hope, and the adoption of Resolution 2803 in which the Security Council endorsed the “Comprehensive Plan to End the Conflict in Gaza”.

We see unfortunately again on a daily basis that these are only words on paper if we do not deliver. We need to ensure that the ceasefire is consolidated and becomes a permanent end to hostilities. Since this ceasefire at least 67 children have been killed; and again, we see children being left without parents, or left in the rubble.

This has to end.

And as we brace for the increasing cold in New York ourselves, imagine what winter means for the people of Gaza: tents collapsing under rain, families shivering without shelter, children facing the night with nothing but thin fabric between them and the wind, and countless people still going to sleep hungry.

If we want to live up to our commitments, we need humanitarian agencies, on the ground without hindrance and without excuse.

And we need to ensure that humanitarian aid is delivered throughout all Gaza in a full, safe, unconditional and unhindered manner, in full accordance with international humanitarian law and humanitarian principles. And this includes delivery through UNRWA.

And as outlined in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of Israel in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, allowing UNRWA to fulfil its mandate and continue operations there is not merely a gesture of goodwill, it is a legal obligation.

Both the General Assembly and the Security Council have been consistent on the parameters that must guide any peaceful resolution of the conflict. So, we know what we have to do.

These parameters are again reiterated in the draft resolution before this Assembly today, relating to the New York Declaration, which was endorsed by a vast majority of Member States, and identified a comprehensive and actionable framework including tangible, timebound and irreversible steps for the implementation of the Two-State-Solution, in particular that resolution underlined that Gaza must be unified with the West Bank. There must be no occupation, siege, territorial reduction, or forced displacement.

It underlines that Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.

It makes clear that the Palestinian Authority must continue implementing its credible reform agenda focusing on good governance, transparency, fiscal sustainability, fight against incitement and hate speeches, service provision, business climate and development.

And it calls on the Israeli leadership to immediately end violence and incitement against Palestinians, and immediately halt all settlement, land grabs and annexation activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. It makes clear that it has to end the violence of the settlers.

As diplomats we all know this is hard diplomatic work. And therefore , I want to be frank and clear.

The quest for peace, stability and justice in the Middle East needs our United Nations. It needs this Assembly to play a meaningful role.

It requires every Member State to walk the talk: to engage in this process, to uphold the United Nations Charter, to adhere to international law, and the promise this institution made to all the people of the world eighty years ago.

Let us recall once more: self-determination, and the right to live in one’s own state in peace, security, and dignity, free from war, occupation and violence, is not a privilege to be earned, but a right to be upheld.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Excerpt:

Annalena Baerbock In her address as President of the UN General Assembly

Drone view from Combu Island, with the city of Belém, where COP30 took place, in the background. Credit: Alex Ferro/COP30

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR, Dec 4 2025 (IPS)

“I see more philanthropic support aligning with systems thinking, linking climate stability, biodiversity protection, Indigenous leadership, and community resilience,” says Michael Northrop, Program Director at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

In an interview with Inter Press Service (IPS), he says funding is increasingly moving beyond isolated interventions and siloed approaches. The intersection between climate, nature, and Indigenous rights can be considered together. He sees philanthropy moving in that direction, and the momentum is growing.

Northrop is particularly excited about the recent COP30 Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) announcement. Over the past two years, the Fund has backed the facility while in its development stages. TFFF targets the protection of 1.2 billion hectares of tropical rainforests across more than 70 low- and middle-income countries.

The TFFF was launched during COP 30 with USD 5.5 billion in commitments from sponsor countries, strong endorsements from 53 countries, and plans for delivery. It has a long-term goal of raising about USD 125 billion.

All-in-one Solution

He calls it a nature solution, a climate solution, an Indigenous peoples and local communities solution, and an economic development solution, all in one.

“The Brazilian government raised almost USD 7 billion in early contributions. They aim to secure another USD 15 billion from governments over the next 12 to 18 months, then attract USD 100 billion in private investment. This structure focuses on investment instead of grants or loans. Countries will get paid per hectare of standing forest they conserve,” Northrop told IPS.

Northrop sees this initiative as a major departure from traditional models. It rewards protection instead of exploitation and avoids burdening countries with increased debt.

He appreciates Brazil’s leadership in promoting this initiative, stating that the RBF has been working with Brazilians and other nations for nearly two years. “The current challenge is moving from concept to a mature investment mechanism that can finance forest protection at scale.”

Indigenous peoples and local communities already protect nature more effectively than any other model, he says.

“Half of the world’s remaining intact forests are within Indigenous territories. Almost 45 percent of global biodiversity exists within those lands, although formal recognition of land rights often lags. In regions such as the Amazon, the Congo Basin, and Southeast Asia, granting tenure to indigenous communities has helped protect forests, marine resources, and ways of life.”

Michael Northrop, Program Director at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, in a remote Ecuadorian Amazon rainforest. Photo: Supplied

He emphasizes that when giving sovereignty and governance responsibilities to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs), they do not require extensive external resources.

“They need safety, legal recognition, and the freedom to live on and defend their lands. This is a powerful message that is now understood more widely.”

Single Lens Needed to Tackle Multiple Issues

One of the greatest obstacles, according to Northrop, lies in the way global systems compartmentalize climate, nature, and indigenous issues. Climate change, he says, is treated through one lens, biodiversity through another, and Indigenous rights through yet another.

These areas are interdependent but managed separately. Negotiators at UN climate summits differ from those at biodiversity forums. They often belong to different ministries, speak different scientific languages, and focus on different priorities. As a result, policy responses malfunction.”

Northrop believes the disconnect reflects human cognitive limits.

“Most people cannot think deeply about these big systems all at once. Yet he notes progress in recognizing connections, supported through the powerful visual mapping of these connections that Earth Insight did before COP30. He believes accessible visuals help experts see the interdependencies more effectively.

The fund uses field visits to identify partners. Northrop says the institution does not have a big staff, so it relies on travel and direct engagement. The Fund looks for people who think on a large scale and design strategies to solve complex problems. Reviewing paper proposals alone is insufficient. He says real understanding comes from meeting people, seeing their environments, and learning what drives them.

There are enormous numbers of positive examples of effective philanthropy, but even with these, the overall volume of the work is insufficient. He notes a generational shift in the sector that contributes to current impact.

“Earlier, philanthropic institutions often hired academics without social change and policy change experience. Today, staff are increasingly drawn from social movements, campaign organizations, and policy implementation roles.”

He finds this shift encouraging.

Michael Northrop, Program Director at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF), inspects oil pipelines in the Ecuadorian Amazon. RBF stresses that Indigenous peoples and local communities already protect nature more effectively than any other model. Photo: Supplied

Still, philanthropy cannot substitute for strong governance and policy. He points to worrying trends in the United States, where decisions that protected social and environmental systems are being reversed. He insists progress depends on government action alongside philanthropic support. Both are needed.

At COP30, Northrop notes a split in approaches among countries. “A large number wanted to phase out fossil fuels and halt deforestation. Others, including major oil-producing nations, continue to push for extraction. The world has already crossed the threshold for burning new fossil fuel reserves if it hopes to protect the planet.”

Unfortunately there is also continued pressure to industrialize forest landscapes through oil, mining, logging, and agriculture.

Fossil Fuel Phase-Out Efforts

Northrop expects philanthropy will support the 80 countries that have committed to a fossil fuel phase-out. This approach may need adoption outside the formal COP mechanisms, given the split in Belém. He also expects strong philanthropic engagement to support efforts to end deforestation.

He would like to see immediate action on phasing out fossil fuels and ending deforestation. He says the world cannot wait.

The link between forest protection and fossil fuel restraint is direct. Extraction becomes more difficult if forest areas are left intact. Keeping reserves in the ground helps safeguard forests. Northrop believes strategies must be aligned.

He sees growing collaboration among philanthropic groups focused on nature and climate—a new and expanding trend—which must continue because neither philanthropy nor policy can solve these issues alone. Both must work together with civil society and indigenous communities.

Northrop is clear about the biggest challenge for climate philanthropy—achieving scale. Philanthropy alone cannot deliver transformation at the necessary magnitude. Only policy can. Philanthropy must help develop and support strong policy and governance to scale systemic change.

His personal motivation, which developed early in life, continues to drive him. He says he’s fortunate to have met so many mission-driven people throughout his four decades of work on nature, climate, and development. He has deep respect for how social change agents’ minds work. What keeps him going, he says, is listening. He tries to understand what people are doing and what inspires them. He credits individuals who have driven major changes in the environmental, health, and education systems for inspiring his work.

Northrop believes there is more philanthropy today and that more players think globally. He welcomes new actors with practical experience in change-making. He warns that philanthropic support must be backed by stable national and international policy.

“The coming months will test whether the Tropical Forest Forever Facility advances beyond the pilot stage. If it succeeds, it could become one of the most significant efforts yet devised to reward protection instead of destruction.”

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');  

Excerpt:

Michael Northrop, Program Director at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, says the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, announced at COP30, is an all-in-one nature, climate, Indigenous peoples, local communities and economic development solution.

The United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) is the world’s highest-level decision-making body for matters related to the environment. Credit: UNEP
 
The 7th session of the UNEA will take place from December 8-12 in Nairobi, Kenya.

By Inger Andersen
NAIROBI, Kenya, Dec 3 2025 (IPS)

As geopolitical challenges and tensions escalate globally, one thing is clear: fragmented politics will not fix a fractured planet. This is why the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) – the world’s highest decision-making body on the environment – is so critical to address our shared and emerging environmental threats.

The seventh session of the Assembly, taking place at the headquarters of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) in Nairobi, Kenya, next month, will bring together ministers, intergovernmental organizations, multilateral environmental agreements, the broader UN system, civil society groups, scientists, activists and the private sector to shape global environmental policy.

Inger Andersen
Credit: UNEP/Natasha Sweeney

Recent UNEP data show emissions continue to rise as the impacts of global environment and climate challenges are accelerating and growing ever more extreme. We see it in record heatwaves, disappearing ecosystems, and toxins in our air, water and soil. These are global threats that demand global solutions.

Even in turbulent times, environmental multilateralism continues to deliver. Since countries met at UNEA last year, this multilateralism has delivered important progress.

Governments agreed to establish the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution – finally completing the “trifecta” of science bodies alongside the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The BBNJ Agreement on the sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction came into force, a major win for the governance of our oceans.

Importantly, during such a challenging political climate, the Paris Agreement is showing that it is working. However, it is clear we need to move much faster with greater determination. But change is afoot: The global shift to low-emission and climate resilient development is irreversible. Renewable energy is outcompeting fossil fuels pricewise. Climate smart investments are driving tomorrow’s vibrant economies and societies.

While we must recognize that many were hoping COP30 would include explicit reference to phasing out fossil fuels in the decision text, this was not to be. However, the COP President committed to creating two roadmaps during his one-year tenure, one to halt and reverse deforestation and another to transition away from fossil fuels – a move that was backed by more than 80 countries during the talks.

These are not small steps – nor are they enough to address the threats we face in full. But they do reinforce that multilateralism can still bring science and policy together to address our global challenges.

Of course, progress is not always straight forward. Since UNEA’s historic resolution in 2022 on a legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution, including in the marine environment, negotiations have continued to advance. While we do not yet have a full treaty text agreed, the latest talks in Geneva earlier this year made hard fought progress and countries remain at the table, sustaining momentum toward an agreement that ends plastic pollution once and for all.

This year, under the theme “Advancing sustainable solutions for a resilient planet,” UNEA will build on these wins to set the stage for even greater progress.

The seventh edition of UNEP’s flagship report, the Global Environmental Outlook, will be key to informing how we deliver this future. Released during UNEA, the report will help move us beyond diagnoses of our common challenges to identifying real solutions across five interconnected areas: economics and finance; circularity and waste; environment; energy; and food systems. Drawing on contributions from hundreds of experts worldwide, the Outlook will help countries prioritize the most effective solutions to deliver our global goals.

To deliver at the speed and scale required, the United Nations system must act together – with the full family of Multilateral Environmental Agreements coming together to support countries. UNEP is proud to host 17 conventions and panels that span the environmental spectrum, from toxic chemicals to protection of the ozone layer. Bringing this family of agreements closer together offers opportunities to better align priorities.

This is why UNEA will put a central focus on how these agreements can better work together for accelerated, more targeted support to countries as they implement commitments. Because action on climate is action on biodiversity and land; because action on land is action on climate; because action on chemicals, pollution and waste is action on nature and on climate.

Inaction now carries a clearer cost than ever. At UNEA-7 in Nairobi – the environmental capital of the world – the “Nairobi Spirit” can convert shared challenges into shared action and, ultimately, shared prosperity on a safe, resilient planet that benefits all.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Excerpt:

Inger Andersen is Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme

The first USSR nuclear test Joe 1 at Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan, 29 August 1949. Credit: CTBTO

By John Burroughs
SAN FRANCISCO, USA, Dec 2 2025 (IPS)

In a Truth Social post that reverberated around the world, on October 29 President Donald Trump wrote: “Because of other countries’ testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”

A month later, it remains unclear what “testing programs” Trump had in mind. Other than North Korea, which last tested in 2017, no country has carried out nuclear-explosive testing since 1998.

Some commentators speculated that Trump was referring to tests of nuclear weapons delivery systems, since Russia had just carried out tests of innovative systems, a long-range torpedo and a nuclear-powered cruise missile.

Perhaps to underline that the United States too tests delivery systems, in an unusual November 13 press release Sandia National Laboratories announced an August test in which an F-35 aircraft dropped inert nuclear bombs.

It appears, though, that the testing in question concerns nuclear warheads. In what was clearly an effort to contain the implications of Trump’s announcement, on November 2, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said regarding US plans that “I think the tests we’re talking about right now” involve “noncritical” rather than “nuclear” explosions. The Energy Department is responsible for development and maintenance of the nuclear arsenal.

In contrast, Trump’s remarks in an interview taped on October 31 point toward alleged underground nuclear-explosive testing by Russia, China, and other countries as the basis for parallel US testing. His remarks perhaps were sparked by years-old US intelligence assessments that Russia and China may have conducted extremely low-yield experiments that cannot be detected remotely.

The prudent approach is to assume that Trump is talking about a US return to nuclear-explosive testing. That assumption is reinforced by the fact that a few days after Trump’s social media post, the United States was the sole country to vote against a UN General Assembly resolution supporting the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).

The Russian government is taking this approach. On November 5, President Vladimir Putin ordered relevant agencies to study the possible start of preparations for explosive testing of nuclear warheads.

US resumption of nuclear-explosive testing would be a disastrous policy. It would elevate the role of nuclear arms in international affairs, making nuclear conflict more likely. Indeed, nuclear tests can function as a kind of threat.

It likely would also stimulate and facilitate nuclear arms racing already underway among the United States, Russia, and China. Over the longer term nuclear-explosive testing would encourage additional countries to acquire nuclear weapons, as they come to terms with deeper reliance on nuclear arms by the major powers.

Resumption of nuclear test explosions would also be contrary to US international obligations. The United States and China have signed but not ratified the CTBT. Russia is in the same position, having withdrawn its ratification in 2023 to maintain parity with the United States. Due to the lack of necessary ratifications, the CTBT has not entered into force. Since the CTBT was negotiated in 1996, the three countries have observed a moratorium on nuclear-explosive testing.

That posture is consistent with the international law obligation, set forth in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, of a signatory state to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty.

The object and purpose of the CTBT is perfectly clear: to prevent and prohibit the carrying out of a nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.

The CTBT is a major multilateral agreement with an active implementing organization that operates a multi-faceted world-wide system to verify the testing prohibition. It stands as a precedent for a future global agreement or agreements that would control fissile materials used to make nuclear weapons, control missiles and other delivery systems, and reduce and eliminate nuclear arsenals.

The sidelining or evisceration of the CTBT due to an outbreak of nuclear-explosive testing would reverse decades of progress towards establishing a nuclear-weapons-free world.

A return to nuclear-explosive testing would similarly be incompatible with compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Its Article VI requires the negotiation of “cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date.”

Nuclear-explosive testing has long been understood as a driver of nuclear arms racing. The preamble to the NPT recalls the determination expressed in the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty, which prohibits above-ground nuclear tests, “to seek to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons for all time and to continue negotiations to this end.”

In 1995, as part of a package enabling the NPT’s indefinite extension, a review conference committed to completion of negotiations on the CTBT by 1996, which was accomplished. In 2000 and 2010, review conferences called for bringing the CTBT into force.

To resume nuclear-explosive testing though a comprehensive ban has been negotiated, and to support design and development of nuclear weapons through such testing, would be a thoroughgoing repudiation of a key aim of the NPT, the cessation of the nuclear arms race.

That would erode the legitimacy of the NPT, which since 1970 has served as an important barrier to the spread of nuclear arms. The next review conference will be held in the spring of 2026. Resumption of nuclear-explosive testing, or intensified preparations to do so, would severely undermine any prospect of an agreed outcome.

It is imperative that the United States not resume explosive testing of nuclear weapons. It would be a very hard blow to the web of agreements and norms that limit nuclear arms and lay the groundwork for their elimination, and it could even lead toward the truly catastrophic consequences of a nuclear conflict.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Excerpt:

Dr John Burroughs is Senior Analyst, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy

By Simone Galimberti
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Dec 2 2025 (IPS)

This coming International Volunteer Day (IVD), celebrated every year on 5 December, is special because the United Nations will launch the International Volunteer Year 2026 or IVY 2026.

This is going to be a great opportunity to re-set the global agenda of volunteerism, one of the most important tools to promote civic engagement, the bedrock of our societies.

Civic engagement, expressed through volunteerism, can make local communities more inclusive and people centered.

Because volunteerism in essence is by the people, for the people and with the people, is not just a tool but it is a catalyst for meaningful human-to-human experiences.

If it can be designed, planned and managed properly including investing in the people that are engaged in it and driving it, volunteerism provides unique opportunities to grow and become better human beings.

In an era in which artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly evolving and challenging some of the most foundational aspects of our lives, volunteerism could offer a new meaning, new ground to forge connections by helping others.

“In an era of political division and social isolation, volunteering offers a powerful way to forge connections and foster our shared humanity” shares UN Secretary-General António Guterres in his official message for this year’s IVD.

Yet, almost inexplicably, volunteerism struggles to be recognized for its vital role and for the functions it plays in our lives. Volunteerism should be something that can really rally people together, a glue that can help with re-establishing connections with others.

In short, volunteerism is a precious, universal unifying element in our lives. Unfortunately, we are still unable to, not only upholding its values on a daily basis but we are also far we far from practicing it, truly making it an inextricable part of our being. After all, there is a common understanding that policy makers around the world have more serious things to deal with.

Instead of considering volunteering as something transformational, it is just seen as something nice while instead it should be at the core of any serious policy promoting social cohesiveness, something that should be a priority for any government.

But will IVY mark a turnaround? Will this special initiative really make a difference? Will IVY then be embraced by leaders in a tokenistic way as normally happens or will be there a serious effort to center volunteering as a key enabler of local wellbeing and prosperity?

These might sound as rhetorical questions that can be easily shrugged off and dismissed because there are more important issues to be worried about.

UNV, the United Nations program that is formally part of UNDP, has a unique role in boosting volunteerism around the world.

I have personally a great admiration for this organization but unfortunately, it falls short of the urgent priority to turbo-charge volunteerism, spreading it, mainstreaming it. At the end I do believe that UNV is failing in what it is its central mission.

Recently I came across a post on LinkedIn about how the government of Uzbekistan is stepping up its support for UNV. This should be great news because for too long, the agency was seen as too westernized, too much modeled to reflect only a certain and partial version of promoting and practicing volunteerism.

I do recognize and praise UNV’s efforts to change and embrace a more diverse strategic outlook and engage with emerging economies, new nations like Uzbekistan.

But as I was going through the post, I immediately felt that this new type of engagement was as much as promoting volunteerism but also about strategically building a pipeline of future UN staff from the Central Asian nation.

Because UNV has always been an entry door to join the ranks of the United Nations system and this is something that always bothered me. I never understood why this agency should promote what are in practice full time jobs that have, basically, nothing to do with volunteerism and are more similar to professional internship or fellowships that, in essence, offer cheaper manpower comparatively to the UN’s pay standards.

To me, this approach does not make sense. Then why do not we entrust UNOPS, the operational arm of the UN with the tasks of running schemes that can offer tangible opportunities to those youths who dream of joining the UN?

I am aware that the UN is undergoing a drastic overhaul. I am concerned about it but I also see this process, driven by immense aid cuts by the American and other administrations, as a chance to redeem the UN as a more effective development force.

I do not know what will happen to UNV. I do appreciate and value the part of the agency that tries to elevate volunteerism in the policy making processes around the world.

This coming IVY could offer a great platform to better promote, pitch volunteerism around the world.

A new edition of The State of the World’s Volunteerism Report, a massive global undertaking, will also be unveiled. With the new global report, a new Framework for the Global Volunteer Index will also be launched, an undertaking led by the University of Pretoria.

Having more data, more parameters and indicators to measure, assess the numbers of volunteers around the world and importantly, their impact, is essential.

In this type of tasks, UNV has developed a unique degree of expertise and it can really exercise the best of the convening powers that the United Nations have been famed for.

In the eventuality of any restructuring, this component of UNV must be not only protected and safeguarded but it must also be boosted. Perhaps UNV needs to shed itself of the outsourcing and onboarding functions it ended up assuming.

They were not supposed to become so central in the agency’s identity but they became the most important, budget wise, component of the agency. Either another agency takes up these responsibilities or UNV can fully separate such functions from its core business agenda.

An autonomous, semi-independent function could operate as it is already working now but it should be sealed off from other dimensions.

This would constitute a semi spin-off of the operation of placing full time United Nations Volunteers (UNV Volunteers) in UN Agencies, a task that is deemed strategically important for many nations as the case of Uzbekistan I ran into tells us.

In envisioning such restructuring, each government willing to sponsor its UNV volunteers, should be charged an additional budget item that could be directed to support the core functions of UNV.

I still imagine UNV running volunteering schemes around the world but these should be part time and only in partnership with civil society. The current model of UNV Volunteers should be re-branded and decontextualized from any association with volunteerism.

The reason for this is simple: these promising young professionals, all well-meaning and well-motivated, are not volunteers nor they are not engaged in any volunteerism centered activity.

If UNV wants to still facilitate and deploy full time volunteers, then, the model being championed by VSO, centered on partnership with local organizations and offering small living stipends to its volunteers, should be considered.

This year’s theme of IVD is “Every Contribution Matters”.

A new and different UNV, more grounded, more agile and closer to local communities and civil society organizations, can be imagined, ensuring that every contribution would “really” matter.

Simone Galimberti writes about the SDGs, youth-centered policy-making and a stronger and better United Nations.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

People walk through a destroyed neighbourhood in Gaza City. Credit: UN News

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 2 2025 (IPS)

The revenues from arms sales and military services by the 100 largest arms-producing companies rose by 5.9 per cent in 2024, reaching a record $679 billion, according to new data released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

www.sipri.org

Global arms revenues rose sharply in 2024, as demand was boosted by the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, global and regional geopolitical tensions, and ever-higher military expenditure.

For the first time since 2018, all of the five largest arms companies increased their arms revenues, according to SIPRI, one of the authoritative sources for arms sales and global military spending.

Currently, a rash of armed conflicts and civil wars are taking place in Ukraine, Gaza, Myanmar, Sudan, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Yemen, Haiti, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Somalia and Western Sahara, among others, triggering a rising demand for arms from governments and rebel forces.

Although the bulk of the global rise was due to companies based in Europe and the United States, there were year-on-year increases in all of the world regions featured in the Top 100. The only exception was Asia and Oceania, where issues within the Chinese arms industry drove down the regional total, according to SIPRI

The surge in revenues and new orders prompted many arms companies to expand production lines, enlarge facilities, establish new subsidiaries or conduct acquisitions.

‘Last year global arms revenues reached the highest level ever recorded by SIPRI as producers capitalized on high demand,’ said Lorenzo Scarazzato, Researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme.

‘Although companies have been building their production capacity, they still face a range of challenges that could affect costs and delivery schedules.’

Of the 26 arms companies in the Top 100 based in Europe (excluding Russia), 23 recorded increasing arms revenues. Their aggregate arms revenues grew by 13 per cent to $151 billion. This increase was tied to demand stemming from the war in Ukraine and the perceived threat from Russia.

But the rise in arms revenues and military spending also had a devastating impact on civilians, with a rise in death tolls.

As of mid-to-late November 2025, the Gaza Health Ministry reported that over 70,000 Palestinians, mostly civilians, have been killed in the war since October 7, 2023.

But estimates of the death toll in the Russia-Ukraine war vary widely and are difficult to verify, as both sides consider military casualty figures to be state secrets.

Still, the number of Russian military casualties (dead and wounded) is estimated by sources like the UK Ministry of Defense and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) to be over 1 million, a “stunning and grisly milestone”.

Ukrainian military casualties (killed and wounded) are estimated at approximately 400,000.

Norman Solomon, executive director, Institute for Public Accuracy and author of “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine,” told IPS the business of war is the business of lucrative death, and never more so than in 2025.

“The buyers and sellers of high-tech weaponry are in a macabre embrace, and the results can be found on the battlefield, in civilian suffering, and in the less-obvious carnage of depleted resources as children starve while profiteers feast.”

The United States stands out as the world’s biggest arms merchant. No other country comes close. And in recent years, when it comes to putting armaments to aggressively lethal use, Russia has become a standout with its war in Ukraine and Israel has become a standout with its war in Gaza, said Solomon, who is also national director, RootsAction.

“It should be clearly understood that U.S. weapons makers have been deriving tremendous profits from the Ukraine war and from Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. Those profits will continue as long as the mutual destruction of Ukrainian and Russian lives continues, and as long as Israel maintains its policies of destroying the lives of Palestinian civilians’.

“In a world where several countries are major arms exporters, all of whom should be condemned for their activities, the United States is far and away the leader in murderous commerce,” he pointed out.

The fact that the U.S. excels at such commerce is a marker for a moral corruption built into the country’s political economy and power structure of governance. Opposition movements, nonviolent and determined, will be essential to forcing an end to what Martin Luther King Jr. called “the madness of militarism,” he declared.

Dr Simon Adams, international human rights expert and President and CEO of the Center for Victims of Torture, told IPS in this new age of impunity, increased conflict and creeping authoritarianism in so many parts of the world, there has been a sickening increase in global arms sales.

The guns, drones, missiles and other weapons are coming from the major arms manufacturing countries and companies, but it is civilians in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan and elsewhere who pay with their lives, he said.

“There is a direct correlation between the increase in the global arms trade, and the fact that 123 million people are currently displaced in the world – the highest number since the Second World War.”

“We need governments to invest more in humanitarian solutions to global problems, not spend billions of dollars more every year on the manufacture and marketing of shiny new killing machines.”

“I long for the day when the arms trader will be seen like the slave trader, sex trafficker or drug dealer – as an international outlaw and pariah. As someone involved in an immoral criminal enterprise that is antithetical to human progress,” he declared.

Asked for a response, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters December 1 about the
“obscene amount of money that is going to weapon sales compared to the struggle that we face every single day trying to fund our humanitarian operations”.

“We understand that Member States need to defend themselves and need for military. But I think, if you do a compare and contrast the amount of money that is flowing into that sector as opposed to the amount of money that is being sucked out of the humanitarian and development sectors, it should give us all food for thought,” he declared.

Meanwhile, in 2024 the combined arms revenues of US arms companies in the Top 100 grew by 3.8 per cent to reach $334 billion, with 30 out of the 39 US companies in the ranking increasing their arms revenues, according to SIPRI.

These included major arms producers such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics.

However, widespread delays and budget overruns continue to plague development and production in key US-led programmes such as the F-35 combat aircraft, the Columbia-class submarine and the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

Several of the largest arms producers in the US are affected by overruns, raising uncertainty about when major new weapon systems and upgrades to existing ones can be delivered and deployed.

‘The delays and rising costs will inevitably impact US military planning and military spending,’ said Xiao Liang, Researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme.

‘This could have knock-on effects on the US government’s efforts to cut excessive military spending and improve budget efficiency.’

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');  

In the quiet hills of Chamhanya Gondwe village in Malawi’s Mzimba district, a young boy once watched his community struggle with limited access to healthcare. Today, Ranken Chisambi, a 22-year-old final-year biomedical engineering student at the Malawi University of Business and Applied Sciences (MUBAS), is determined to transform healthcare in Malawi and beyond. “I’ve always […]

A Yemeni mother and her child receiving nutritional assistance at a clinic in the Abyan governorate. Credit: UNICEF/Saleh Hayyan

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

For the past decade, Yemen has been at the center of a severe and multifaceted humanitarian crisis, marked by widespread violence between various Middle Eastern actors, widespread civilian displacement, economic decline, and the collapse of essential services that serve as lifelines for displaced communities.

As the crisis has intensified in recent months, humanitarian agencies face increasing challenges in providing lifesaving care to civilians, who are experiencing record levels of hunger in a country that has become more reliant on remittances as self-sufficiency continues to slip further out of reach.

On November 25, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP) released a joint report detailing the food security situations in areas of highest concern that require urgent humanitarian intervention. According to the report, Yemen’s food crisis is primarily driven by economic deterioration, escalating armed conflict, climate shocks, displacement, disrupted supply chains, limited humanitarian access, and the collapse of safety nets.

The report highlights that food production in Yemen was severely impacted by the main Kharif season in August 2025, which was marked by early-season dryness followed by extended rainfall. Between August and the end of September, widespread flooding damaged water infrastructure across the country, particularly in the Lahij, Ta’iz, and Ma’rib governorates, which not only reduced economic output but also increased the risk of waterborne illnesses, such as cholera. Together, these factors contributed to a below-average 2025 cereal harvest, which serves as a critical food source for millions of Yemeni civilians.

Ongoing conflict remains a key driver of widespread food insecurity in Yemen, with attacks in areas controlled by the Sana’a-based authorities and along the Red Sea contributing to continued economic decline and triggering new waves of displacement. These attacks have damaged critical infrastructure, resulting in a decrease in fuel imports and a rise in food prices. Humanitarian access constraints, funding cuts, and economic sanctions also hinder the effectiveness of responses.

The report notes that over half of Yemen’s population is projected to experience high levels of acute food insecurity between September 2025 and February 2026, with approximately 63 percent of surveyed households reporting a lack of adequate food and 35 percent reporting severe food deprivation. Food security conditions are especially severe in four districts across the Amran, Al Hodeidah, and Hajjah governorates, where populations are experiencing catastrophic levels of hunger—defined by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) as the highest possible level.

Approximately 18.1 million people are projected to face ‘Crisis’ or worse levels of acute food insecurity (IPC Phase 3 or above), including 5.5 million in ‘Emergency’ (IPC Phase 4) across the country. In 2025, 24 districts are expected to experience very high levels of acute malnutrition, particularly in the Ta’iz and Al Jawf governorates. Of the districts classified in Emergency (IPC/CH Phase 4), 72 percent also have a Nutrition Severity Level of 4 or higher.

It is estimated that the average Yemeni household spends more than 70 percent of its income on food, leaving very little for other critical necessities. These households predominantly rely on unhealthy foods for survival, such as cereals, sugar, and fats, while essential items for a balanced diet like meat, fruit, and dairy, are almost entirely absent.

These challenges are even more pronounced among displaced communities, with approximately 24 percent of internally displaced civilians reporting that at least one family member goes an entire day and night without food—nearly double the rate seen in resident communities.

To effectively address the food security crisis in Yemen, it is crucial to confront the underlying economic challenges, which are threatening millions of livelihoods and restricting access to essential needs. According to the report, Yemen’s gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to contract by 0.5 percent in 2025, with inflation likely to remain elevated.

Public finances are under severe strain due to fuel shortages and the Houthi blockade on oil exports in areas controlled by the Internationally Recognized Government (IRG). Meanwhile, regions governed by the Sana’a-Based Authorities are grappling with severe liquidity shortages, and external shocks, such as ongoing conflict, reduced aid, and economic sanctions, are expected to exacerbate the already fragile economic situation.

“Economic stabilization in Yemen depends on strengthening the systems that keep services running and livelihoods protected,” said Dina Abu-Ghaida, World Bank Group Country Manager for Yemen.

“Restoring confidence requires effective institutions, predictable financing, and progress toward peace to allow economic activity to resume and recovery to take hold.”

Yemen’s economy is currently unable to adapt to external shocks due stringent economic sanctions, flailing external funding, and its historic over-reliance on remittances for survival. According to a joint analysis from Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development (ACTED), the Cash Consortium of Yemen (CCY), the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), and more, remittances in 2024 made up over 38 percent of Yemen’s GDP, making it the third-most remittance-dependent nation in the world.

The report also highlights that a significant decline in remittances would lead to currency destabilization, a collapse in import financing, and the widespread use of negative coping strategies, such as asset liquidation and severe dietary restrictions.

According to WFP, funding for the 2025 Yemen Humanitarian Needs and Response Plan urgently requires USD $1.1 billion for investments in food security measures and livelihood interventions and roughly $237.9 million for nutritional assistance. However, lifesaving humanitarian programs have been forced to suspend or halt certain operations as funding is at its lowest level since the beginning of the crisis in 2015, with contributions at only 24 percent. Beginning in January 2026, WFP will reduce the number of people receiving food assistance in IRG areas from 3.4 million to 1.6 million due to funding shortfalls. In Sana’a Based Authorities, all WFP operations will remain paused.

The United Nations (UN) and its partners continue to call for increased donor contributions as the evolving economic situation reshapes the food security landscape, which remains subject to change.

Through its operations, WFP will provide targeted emergency and nutrition assistance, such as distributing agricultural inputs like seeds, tools, and fertilizers, as well as fishing and livestock production packages, such as fishing gear, small ruminants, and poultry.

Cash assistance will also be paired with these efforts to protect the livelihoods of households dependent on livestock. The organization will also strengthen its operational readiness for potential conflict escalation, ensuring rapid and second-line food security responses.

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');  

By CIVICUS
Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses US civil society action under the second Trump administration with Bridget Moix, General Secretary of the Friends Committee on National Legislation, the oldest faith-based lobbying organisation in the USA, advocating for peace, justice and environmental stewardship. Bridget has participated in the No Kings movement, a nationwide grassroots response to democratic backsliding and attacks on rights.

Bridget Moix

Since Trump’s second inauguration in January, the USA has witnessed what may be its largest ever democracy protests. Millions have taken to the streets in response to authoritarian overreach and mass deportations. The No Kings movement draws its name from the country’s founding rejection of monarchical rule, applying the principle to contemporary concerns about growing authoritarianism and the concentration of executive power in the hands of the president.

What drives the No Kings movement?

We are experiencing a rapid and devastating rise of authoritarianism. Since coming into office for his second term, Trump has embarked on a relentless campaign to undo generations of democratic institution building and international law while pursuing his own interests and the interests of billionaires. He has launched a militarised mass deportation campaign against immigrants that is ripping families apart and disappearing people from our streets. At the same time, he is dismantling core government agencies and firing hundreds of thousands of federal employees, punishing political opponents and rewarding those who are willing to serve him and his so-called ‘America First’ agenda.

Many people across the political spectrum are deeply troubled by what he’s doing and see it as a major attack on core principles of democracy, which have been at the heart of the struggle for freedom and equality since the country’s founding. The USA was founded on the rejection of rule by monarchy, a declaration against kings doing what they want at the expense of the public. The No Kings movement recalls that history and speaks out against Trump’s authoritarian actions today.

What have the protests been like, and what role is civil society playing beyond the streets?

The first protests brought about five million people in 1,500 cities and towns across the USA onto the streets to stand up for democracy. More recent protests in October brought seven million people out in 2,600 towns and cities.

What’s impressive about these protests is they bring a wide diversity of people together, across traditional social and political boundaries, who all believe our democracy is at real risk and we need to resist Trump’s authoritarianism. Even in very small towns, large groups gather, including people who have never protested before but feel they must do something now. That gives me hope.

Beyond the protests, US civil society has been very active and is learning and taking inspiration from movements elsewhere, as well as from our history of democratic struggle. Civil society groups have been quick to take legal action to sue the Trump administration for its overreach and continue to do so. They provide training every week on non-violent resistance and monitor immigration enforcement activity. Faith leaders have been speaking out and holding vigils and taking part in civil disobedience. Many groups are advocating with Congress to uphold its constitutional powers and provide a check on the Trump administration. Mutual aid groups are providing support for migrants and others at risk across the country. People are also working to build long-term resilience individually and in solidarity with others because we know this could be a long struggle.

How are immigration policies affecting communities?

Immigration raids and detentions are happening across the USA. I live in Washington DC, where Trump has deployed the national guard to further militarise our communities. The White House has given Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) free rein to terrorise people, detaining them from their homes, schools and workplaces as well as off the street, in front of their families. ICE officers drive unmarked vehicles, wear masks and do not follow due process as they should under US law.

Here in DC we’ve had at least 1,200 people detained in two months, probably many more. They are often taken without any warning and transported hundreds of miles to detention centres. Their families struggle to find out what happened to them and get legal help. Many people who are here legally have been swept up in these detentions, including US citizens. Many families are too afraid to send their children to school or leave their house. All of us know families who have been affected. The economy is also being affected.

However, the good news is that communities are standing up and working around the clock to support and protect one another, document and interrupt abuses and urge our leaders to push back against this mass cruelty campaign. Neighbourhood groups in Chicago, DC, Los Angeles and elsewhere are organising rapid response teams and sharing learning with each other to build resistance and solidarity.

How has the government responded to the protests?

The Trump administration doesn’t care about protests and just tries to ignore them or spread lies about them. We are used to that. What is important though is that we’re beginning to see more movement among members of Congress, whose constituents are protesting and advocating with them, and the protests are building the awareness and broader engagement of the public we need to push back.

Research shows that it takes 3.5 per cent of the population engaged in civil resistance to overcome authoritarian regimes. We have 330 million people in this country, and with each major protest we’re getting closer to that threshold.

What needs to happen to protect democracy?

We need to continue building an engaged and active movement of people who speak up, push back and advocate to rein in the Trump administration’s authoritarian takeover. We need to draw on the lessons from our history of struggles for freedom such as the Civil Rights movement, as well as lessons from grassroots movements around the world, as we grow non-violent civil resistance. We need more people protesting and protecting their neighbours, and we also need to turn that protest into policy action.

We need more people lobbying their members of Congress to stand up as an independent branch of government that responds to people and to do the right thing. Also critical is Congress standing up to protect its constitutional power of the purse and its authority over war. These are critical guardrails we need exercised against the militarised campaigns of the Trump administration at home and abroad.

We need to continue the legal pushback through the courts to uphold the rule of law and prevent the White House from further militarising our streets and corrupting government and elections. Solidarity across impacted communities in the USA and with civil society movements around the world will be very important to help us maintain and grow momentum here. We need to remember that our struggles for peace, justice and freedom are connected to people’s struggles all around the world.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
TikTok
YouTube
Bridget Moix/LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Outsourcing cruelty: the offshoring of migration management CIVICUS Lens 15.Sep.2025
Trump and Musk take the chainsaw to global civil society CIVICUS Lens 07.Mar.2025
Trump 2.0: What to expect CIVICUS Lens 18.Jan.2025

 

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 Rabab Fatima
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

As we gather in Doha for the High-Level Meeting on “Forging Ambitious Global Partnerships for Sustainable and Resilient Graduation of Least Developed Countries,” the stakes could not be higher. A record number of fourteen countries-equally divided between Asia and Africa are now on graduation track. Graduation from the Least Developed Country (LDC) category is a landmark national achievement—a recognition of hard-won gains in income, human development, and resilience. Yet, for too many countries, this milestone comes with new vulnerabilities that risk undermining the very gains that enabled graduation.

Since the establishment of the LDC category in 1971, only eight countries have graduated. Today, 44 countries remain in the group, representing 14% of the world’s population, but contributing less than 1.3% to global GDP. The Doha Programme of Action (DPoA) charts an ambitious yet achievable target: enabling at least 15 additional countries to graduate by 2031. But as the DPoA underscores graduation must be sustainable, resilient and irreversible. It must serve as a springboard for transformation— not a moment of exposure to new risks.

USG Rabab Fatima

Graduation with momentum:
Graduation often coincides with a significant shift in the international support landscape. As preferential trade arrangements, concessional financing, and dedicated technical assistance begin to phase down, countries may face heightened fiscal pressures, reduced competitiveness, and increased exposure to external shocks. Without well-sequenced and forward-looking transition planning, these shifts can slow progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and strain national systems.

Yet within these challenges also lie opportunities. With the right policies, partnerships, and incentives, graduation can catalyse deeper structural transformation, expand access to new financing windows, strengthen institutions, and unlock pathways to diversified, resilient, and inclusive growth. The task before us is to manage risks while harnessing these opportunities—ensuring that no country graduates without momentum.

Smooth Transition Strategies: A National Imperative
The DPoA calls for every graduating country to develop inclusive, nationally owned Smooth Transition Strategies (STS) well-ahead of the graduation date. These strategies must be fully integrated into national development plans and SDG frameworks, ensuring coherence and resilience. They should prioritize diversification, human capital investment, and adaptive governance, while placing women, youth, and local actors at the center of design and oversight. STS must be living documents—flexible, participatory, and backed by robust monitoring and financing.

Reinvigorated Global Partnerships: The essential Pillar
No country can navigate this transition alone. The Doha Programme of Action calls for an incentive-based international support structure that extends beyond graduation. For LDCs with high utilization of trade preferences – the withdrawal of preferential market access must be carefully sequenced to avoid abrupt disruptions. For climate-vulnerable SIDS and LLDCs, enhanced access to climate finance, debt solutions, and resilience support are key elements in their efforts to tackle post-graduation challenges.

Deepened South-South and triangular cooperation, innovative financing instruments, blended finance, and strengthened private-sector engagement will be essential to building productive capacities and unlocking opportunities in digital transformation, green and blue economies, and regional market integration.

iGRAD: A Transformative Tool
The operationalization of the Sustainable Graduation Support Facility—iGRAD—is a concrete step forward. By providing tailored advisory services, capacity-building, and peer learning, iGRAD can serve as a critical tool to help countries anticipate risks, manage transitions, and sustain development momentum. Its success, however, hinges on strong political support and adequate, predictable resourcing from development partners.

Graduation as a Catalyst for Transformation
Graduation should not be the end of the story—it should be the beginning of a new chapter of resilience and opportunity. With integrated national strategies and reinvigorated global partnerships, we can turn graduation into a catalyst for inclusive, sustainable development. Let us seize this moment in Doha to reaffirm our collective commitment: no country should graduate into vulnerability. Together, we can ensure that graduation delivers on its promise—for communities, for economies, and for future generations.

Rabab Fatima is UN Under Secretary General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

“Like countless other women I am tied to domestic work.” Credit: Learning Together.

By External Source
Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

I am an educated Afghan woman and a former government employee. I have long been active in women’s rights struggles, education, and community development. For me, living in Afghanistan is fraught with dangers and difficulties. In a context where women are denied the right to study, work, or participate in public life, my previous roles in government institutions and international organizations, and my afvocacy for women’s rights, place me at particular risk.

With the fall of the previous government and the Taliban takeover, all my work in women’s rights and civil society issues has effectively turned into a target on my back; I am now being pursued by Taliban operatives and others equally opposed to women’s freedom. I have been repeatedly threatened, both directly and indirectly, by the Taliban and individuals associated with the group.

These threats are not only directed at me as a women’s rights activist, but my husband is also facing similar threats for having worked for the previous government. Thus, our entire family is facing an array of hostile forces; it makes it difficult to continue living in Afghanistan.

Under these circumstances, perhaps it is useful to describe what an average day looks like for me.

My day begins at five in the morning. There is no electricity because our solar panels are old and no longer capture and store enough energy, so the house is dark. I find my way to the kitchen using my phone’s flashlight to prepare breakfast. I ration our flour carefully. Prices are high and wasting food is unthinkable.

 

The writer is from Bamiyan province in central Afghanistan. Credit: Learning Together.

 

I also use gas sparingly, only to prepare rice because it is expensive. I heat water using a small makeshift stove that runs on wood and store it away in thermos flasks for tea and other daily needs.

My youngest daughter wakes up and cries. I breastfeed her, and she falls back asleep. Then I take my son to school. Sometimes he is reluctant to go because he is afraid. The road is unsafe, and he does not have pocket money and is increasingly under peer pressure. Despite this, we manage to persuade him.

He often returns from school hungry. Breakfast is usually tea with dry bread or tea with sugar, so he is often undernourished and weak.

After my son has left for school, the rest of the family would then sit down and have our breakfast.

My husband usually goes away to the mountains to meet friends and former work colleagues, so I am often left alone at home with my daughter. By 8 a.m., I have had most of the house chores done before the children’s snack time at 10 a.m.

After finishing with the chores, I feed my daughter and put her down for a nap. It is time to do the laundry, which I do by hand every other day because children’s clothes need frequent washing due to their playing habits in the dirt.

After all the running around, when I can still find a little time, I try to revisit my books. I try to go over my old books or review notes on psychology and education that I studied years ago. It saddens me, because I know that in today’s Afghanistan I cannot continue my education or return to work.

Some days I feel so exhausted and unwell that I lack the energy to do housework or even tend properly to my daughter. But because this innocent child had no choice in being born into this world, I force myself to look after her. On many days, life feels unbearable.

Before noon I return to the kitchen to prepare lunch before my son returns from school at 12.00 p.m. Lunch is usually boiled potatoes and bread, which has become too repetitive for my children’s liking but we have no alternatives. They often cry, but eventually they eat their meal. By 1:30 p.m., the children are done with lunch. After that, I put them down for a nap, wash the dishes and then perform my prayers.

 

Doing the laundry is part of her daily routine. Credit: Learning Together.

 

In the afternoons, I teach English and basic literacy to women in the neighbourhood. These lessons help me to stay in contact with the people around us and maintain awareness of their general situation. It also brings some peace to all of us. Most of our conversations revolve around daily struggles – rising prices, lack of money, and worries about our children’s future. None of us has much hope, but sharing our burdens lightens up the gloom engulfing our lives and lifts our spirits.

Our home is outside the city center, in a village where we are not well known. This distance from the provincial center means the Taliban rarely come prowling, which makes the prohibited teaching easier. The women also come in small groups and bring no books or pens that might raise suspicion and likely filter back to the Taliban. I work with them at home, and the literate women take photos of the lessons on their phones, while the others learn on the spot, since they have no further opportunity to study in their own homes.

The learning also involves practicing household skills such as sewing clothes, attaching headscarves, and other practical crafts to maintain their skills.

My husband returns home in the evening, usually tired, disillusioned and very depressed. I try to comfort him, even though I am deeply worried myself. My son struggles with his schoolwork, often showing frustration. I have to sit with him and go over his lessons.

For dinner, I usually cook whatever is immediately available, most often, local rice because it is more affordable.

After dinner, which is usually around 8 p.m., and all the dishes are washed and stacked away, I try to revisit my online psychology studies at the university. Psychology is the subject needed in today’s circumstances, and I am passionate about it. I am truly grateful to those who have supported me in this endeavor, and I thank them for their help. Many of my difficulties are eased, and it brings me happiness.

When everyone goes to sleep, I am left alone lost in thought. I worry about my daughter’s future, knowing she cannot go to school in Afghanistan. I think back to the days when I studied at university and had big dreams. Now, all I can do is pray that someday women will again have the opportunity to study, work, and live freely.

Most nights, these thoughts keep me awake. I lie in bed until morning, exhausted and hopeless. By dawn, I feel as though I have already worked so hard that I cannot even lift myself from the bed. I wake up dizzy, weak, and depressed, yet the day begins again.

It’s important to share that I live this same daily routine every single day. I am no longer a government employee, and like countless other women, I am confined to my home, with no time for rest, leisure, or even a moment of freedom. In the past, days off meant visiting friends or relatives, exploring the city, or enjoying simple outings. Transportation and the possibility of movement made it all possible.

Now, the Taliban have banned women from walking the streets, entering public spaces, or even leaving home for the simplest errands. Every step outside is forbidden, every opportunity to live fully taken away.

I am deeply grateful to those who read these words of mine. Through you, I hope my silenced voice can be heard. I hope it can reach the outside world, not just for me, but for hundreds of women whose lives are trapped under the same restrictions. Together, perhaps, a path can be found to reclaim life, dignity, and hope. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Excerpt:

The author is an Afghanistan-based female journalist, trained with Finnish support before the Taliban take-over. Her identity is withheld for security reasons

A coastal community in the Eastern Caribbean. Small island states say their extreme climate vulnerability is still not reflected in global finance decisions made at COP30. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

By Alison Kentish
CASTRIES, St Lucia, Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

Caribbean small island states say this year’s UN climate conference has once again failed to deliver the urgency and ambition needed to tackle escalating climate devastation across the region. From slow-moving climate finance to frustrating political gridlock, leaders say COP30 did not reflect the realities that small islands are living through every day.

Jamaica is recovering from Hurricane Melissa, which left over 30 percent of the country’s GDP in losses and billions of dollars in damage. While the country has been able to respond rapidly thanks to a suite of innovative developmental finance tools, including a USD 150 million catastrophe bond, parametric insurance and a disaster savings fund, its Minister for Water, Environment and Climate Change, Matthew Samuda, warns that the vast majority of Caribbean islands do not have similar mechanisms.

Speaking at a press conference organized by Island Innovation and themed “Islands, the Climate Finance Gap, and COP30 Reflections,” Samuda said this is precisely why global negotiations must center the lived experiences of SIDS.

“I think I perhaps may be a little more disappointed than I am usually at the end of a COP because seeing what Jamaica is going through, seeing what Vietnam is going through, seeing extreme weather events pop up all around the world over the last 10 days, you would think that the urgency and the facts staring us in the face would have brought about greater ambition,” he said, adding that “unfortunately, the global geopolitical landscape didn’t allow for us to go much further.”

A Struggle Just to be Heard?

For many small islands and territories, simply participating meaningfully at COP30 was an uphill battle. The British Virgin Islands, like other Caribbean territories, had to rely on partners, including the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre for accreditation and access to the negotiations.

“We try to split up and cover as much as we can,” said Dr. Ronald Berkeley, Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources and Climate Change. “Our reliance on partners shows how limited our reach still is.”

Berkeley said that despite the Caribbean’s visible and worsening climate impacts, it remains difficult to get major emitters to understand the region’s urgency.

“For small islands, this is real. I’m not sure a lot of the big players believe us,” he said. “Until you live through being almost blown to smithereens by a Category Five hurricane, you will never understand.”

The BVI recently established its own climate trust fund, currently funded with about US$5.5 million, to address some financing shortfalls, but Berkeley emphasized that this cannot make up for reliable, large-scale climate funding.

Barriers to Pledges

Caribbean officials are echoing the same concern—that climate finance exists on paper but rarely reaches small, vulnerable nations at the speed or scale required.

“At COP there were positive commitments, about US$1.3 trillion annually by 2035 for climate action, the tripling of adaptation finance and operationalizing the Loss and Damage Fund,” said Dr. Mohammad Rafik Nagdee, Executive Director of the Caribbean Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (CCREEE).

“But the elephant in the room is the global finance gap,” he said. “Even where access exists, it’s not accessible at the speed the climate crisis demands. Processes are lengthy, requirements heavy and small governments simply don’t have the technical capacity.”

Nagdee said the region needs “greater predictability, simpler pathways and finance that is actually ready to disburse.”

Living Through it—Not Debating it

For Jamaica, which is emerging from one of the most devastating storms in its history, the mismatch between climate impacts and climate action is glaring.

“In the past four years, Jamaica has had its hottest day on record, its wettest day on record, its worst droughts, two tropical storms, a Category 4 hurricane and now what could be classified as a Category 6,” Samuda said. “That’s climate change in reality. That’s not an academic debate for us.”

Caribbean leaders widely described COP30 as a ‘mixed bag,’ with negotiations with incremental progress overshadowed by inadequate urgency.

“We cannot talk about building back better if the resources arrive slowly,” Nagdee said.

For small island states living on the frontlines of warming seas, rising temperatures and record-breaking storms, the message from COP30 is clear and becoming all-too familiar—that  climate change is accelerating and the price of delay is already being paid.

This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.

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');  

Excerpt:

Regional leaders say the outcome of the ‘mixed bag’ climate talks once again overlooks the real and mounting threats faced by Caribbean countries.

UNAIDS campaigns have dominated the global effort to end HIV/Aids as a public threat since 1999. Credit: UNAIDS

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

“It’s like adding fuel to an already burning fire,” says Aditia Taslim.

“We have not recovered from the impact of the US funding cuts earlier this year, and closing down UNAIDS prematurely will only make things worse, especially for key populations and other criminalized groups, including people who use drugs,” Taslim, who is Advocacy Lead at the International Network of People Who Use Drugs (INPUD), tells IPS.

Her view is shared widely by HIV activists around the world who were stunned by a proposal from UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres in September, included in a report on progress on UN reforms, to shut down the UN’s main agency to fight HIV/AIDS next year.

UNAIDS, the civil society groups that sit on its board, experts, and national governments across the globe had already been working on a transformation plan for the agency, which would see it end in its present form around 2030 when current HIV targets expire.

And many still do not understand exactly why closure next year is now being planned.

“There is a lot of confusion around this right now. We’re not sure why 2026 was chosen. Perhaps it was because we were in fact already in a process of transformation,” Angeli Achrekar, Deputy Executive Director of the Programme Branch at UNAIDS, told IPS.

But the proposal has been met with vociferous pushback—a call from the UNAIDS Programme Coordinating Board (PCB) NGO Delegation to the Secretary General urging him to reconsider was endorsed by more than 1 000 NGOs.

World Aids Day has been commemorated since 1988 and is a significant platform for people to unite against the disease. Credit: UNAIDS

Many of those same groups have warned that if the early closure does go ahead, gains in fighting the disease will be at risk, and, some are certain, lives will be lost unnecessarily.

“If this happens, the world will be much less effective in preventing and treating HIV, which means more people dying from a disease that is completely preventable and treatable. There’s no doubt in my mind that closing UNAIDS will lead to more HIV infections and deaths,” Julia Lukomnik, Strategic Advisor at Dutch organization Aidsfonds, told IPS.

UNAIDS, which started operations in 1996, is unique among UN structures in that its governing board actually includes civil society groups. This, experts say, has meant that in all its work, those on the ground working directly with the communities affected by the disease – not just people living with HIV (PLHIV), but also key populations most at risk, including drug users, sex workers, members of the LGBT+ community, and others—have had a crucial say in developing its policy and implementing its work.

Indeed, while the agency’s activities include treatment projects, in many countries it is seen as a vital bridge, directly and through partnerships with local NGOs, between communities and local, regional, and national authorities.

“If UNAIDS were to close in 2026, the impact would be significant, particularly in countries like Vietnam where community-led organizations depend on UNAIDS for data, technical guidance, coordination, and engagement space. UNAIDS has played a critical bridging role, connecting governments, donors, and civil society in Vietnam,” Doan Thanh Tung, Executive Director at Lighthouse Vietnam, one of the largest LGBTQ+ organizations in Vietnam, told IPS.

This is of particular concern at a time when marginalization and criminalization of key populations and PLHIV in many countries is worsening.

UNAIDS has played a crucial role in advocating for the rights of key populations and PLHIV, including helping bring in landmark legislation enshrining some rights and access to services.

UNAIDS workers provide support to communities in need of their services. The organization and its workers have been badly affected by the impact of a sudden acceleration of cuts to international HIV financing. Credit: UNAIDS

Campaigners fear that without UNAIDS presence, some communities would very quickly face increased marginalization or criminalization, without anyone to speak up for them.

“We’re in a context of increasing criminalization of key populations for the HIV epidemic. We know—in part because of UNAIDS— that violating the rights of key populations leads to increased HIV cases. When you criminalize gay and trans people, you increase HIV cases. When you criminalize sex workers, you increase HIV cases. When you criminalize safe injection sites, you increase HIV cases,” said Lukomnik.

“Closing the UN body that most strongly advocates for the human rights of these groups at the very time when these rights are increasingly threatened will almost certainly increase both rights violations and HIV cases,” she added.

Within UNAIDS, officials are aware this could be a problem.

“The question is where can advocacy for key populations be maintained [without UNAIDS] in countries. UNAIDS can raise issues to do with key populations with governments. Will other organizations be able to do that?” Eammon Murphy, UNAIDS Director, Regional Support Teams for the Asia Pacific and Eastern Europe and Central Asia regions, told IPS.

“One of the critical functions we perform is being the voice of communities. The voice of the community must be safeguarded at the local, regional and global levels,” Achrekar said.

As well as allowing it to advocate for communities, the trust that communities have with the agency means it can have a better view of an epidemic in a given country than state authorities might have, say experts.

They highlight UNAIDS’ vital role in collecting and evaluating data on the disease in specific communities and using data to develop effective interventions and national policies and set HIV targets. If that monitoring and evaluation capacity is lost suddenly with no time to replace it properly, the impact on authorities’ efforts to fight an HIV epidemic could be devastating, they argue.

“UNAIDS set the targets for the global AIDS response that has given countries the ability to shape their strategic plans to respond to HIV and AIDS. Those targets and strategic plans ensured high-impact interventions that led to a reduction of new HIV infections, addressing inequalities, gender-based violence and stigma and discrimination against people with HIV or AIDS,” Tendayi Westerhof, National Director, Pan African Positive Women’s Coalition-Zimbabwe, told IPS.

“It was responsible for the Global AIDS  Programme report that monitored progress of the AIDS response by countries. If UNAIDS is closed, this will have a huge impact on the monitoring of progress by countries in fighting AIDS,” she added.

The proposed closure of the agency also comes at a time when HIV groups are still reeling from recent upheavals in global aid funding.

The withdrawal of US aid at the start of this year, which had previously accounted for 73 percent of international HIV/AIDS financing, has already had a devastating effect on the fight against the disease, forcing many organizations on the frontline of the HIV response to close.

UNAIDS modeling forecasts the funding cuts could lead to an additional 6.6 million new HIV infections and 4.2 million AIDS-related deaths by 2029.

Closing UNAIDS against this backdrop could further imperil the sustainability of the HIV response in some places, especially in those where services for key populations are already underfunded.

“We have seen the impact of the abrupt funding cuts from the US, which have crippled a lot of harm reduction services and forced many drug user-led networks and organizations to close their operations. Harm reduction has also been severely underfunded. Closing down UNAIDS will only create reasons for governments to close down services and programmes, as well as funding for people who use drugs,” said Taslim.

“In most low- and middle-income countries, services and programmes for people who use drugs… are still heavily dependent on international donors. Closing UNAIDS prematurely means that services and programmes for our community will be the first to be removed from national priorities. There is no sustainability strategy in place for services and programmes for people who use drugs and other key populations, as well as other criminalized and marginalized communities,” he added.

Tung warned that dismantling UNAIDS at a time when global funding for HIV is shrinking “would likely erode global-to-local solidarity, reduce community engagement in the HIV response, and weaken independent data systems, which could further exacerbate the epidemic and undo decades of progress in HIV prevention and control that would be extremely difficult to recover.”

But while activists warn of the potential for a 2026 closure of UNAIDS to profoundly impact the world’s HIV response, they also point out that so far it is only a proposal and that there is some hope it may not come to pass.

“The proposal to end UNAIDS in 2026 was made by the UN Secretary General, but it’s really up to the UNAIDS PCB to make this call,” said Lukomnik.

UNAIDS officials point out that the agency had already begun a process of transforming itself.

Earlier this year, the PCB set out its plan to restructure between 2025 – 2027, and then review its structure and mandate again in 2027. It had been expected that after that, a transition period would see key UNAIDS functions shifted to other parts of the UN system or other actors involved in the HIV response by 2030.

The first phase of this restructuring involved the agency this year beginning a huge reduction in the number of its staff and offices around the world—both are to be cut by more than 50 percent.

Achrekar said the transformation was in part a response to global funding changes but also to reflect moves towards greater sustainability in the global HIV response.

“Our transformation is partly because of the current funding volatility, but it was already underway before that. We are focused on ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030 and even before the General Secretary’s proposal, we at UNAIDS knew that we had to transform for where the HIV response was shifting to in the future—that as countries start to approach 2030 HIV targets, the HIV response would need to be sustainable after 2030. Our transformation means we can be fit for when the HIV response needs to become sustainably supported by countries,” said Achrekar.

“We are not certain if this SG proposal can be turned back. But we believe there could be a way to bring some coherence to what the SG has proposed and the transition we had already planned. UNAIDS is not afraid of transforming,” she added.

However, if the proposal does come to pass and UNAIDS closes next year, the organization is hoping others involved in the global HIV response will be able to step up, to some extent, to help maintain the response.

“We are just one player in the HIV response and all the others have critical roles too. The global solidarity in the HIV response must be maintained in future and we have to be able to safeguard what is critical in the HIV response and the people affected by HIV,” Achrekar said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Open-pit mine Archives. Credit: Africa Renewal, United Nations

By Zipporah Musau
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 1 2025 (IPS)

Although Africa holds more than 30 per cent of the world’s critical green minerals—including cobalt, lithium, manganese, and rare earth elements vital for building batteries, wind turbines and solar panels— this has not translated into prosperity for the continent.

At the Africa Climate Summit 2025 held in Addis Ababa in September 2025, leaders and experts explored ways Africa can benefit more from its resources.

Under the theme “Accelerating renewable energy, nature-based solutions, e-mobility, and scaling up climate finance,” the Summit sought ways to build a resilient and prosperous future for Africa. The important question, however, was whether Africa would continue exporting its raw materials for others to reap the profit or seize this moment and drive the agenda of its transformation.

Speaking at the Summit, the Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), Claver Gatete, called for a united African front in order to leverage these resources strategically.

“We cannot afford to repeat the exploitative patterns of the past,” he said. “Africa must industrialise using its own resources, creating jobs and sustainable growth of our people.”

The current net-zero clean energy race has triggered surging global demand for minerals used in batteries, solar panels and wind turbines, of which Africa is a key supplier.

Mr. Gatete emphasised the need for African governments to invest in local processing, value addition, and stronger regional cooperation, and avoid exporting raw minerals.

Risks and opportunities

The Summit highlighted both opportunities and risks. On one hand, critical minerals could generate billions in revenue, accelerate clean industrialisation and help Africa achieve the SDGs.

On the other hand, unchecked extraction will not benefit Africans and would worsen inequality and environmental degradation.

Mr. Gatete called for building continental capacity to process, refine, and manufacture components like batteries within Africa. He cited the ECA—Afreximbank Battery and Electric Vehicle (BEV) value chain initiative, launched in the DRC and Zambia, to build special economic zones (SEZ) for producing electric vehicle battery precursor and components as a concrete example of this shift “from resource extraction to technological innovation and prioritisation of local value addition.”

To expand this further, participants emphasised the importance of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) to develop integrated regional value chains, reduce external dependence, and unlock economies of scale. In the same breath, they called for continental unity to avoid fragmented national policies that could weaken Africa’s bargaining power.

To address this, ECA proposed the formation of African Critical Minerals Alliance—to harmonise regulations, negotiate better trade deals and promote intra-African collaborations.

“Unity is our strength,” Mr. Gatete reminded participants. “By working together, African countries can ensure that green minerals become a foundation for prosperity, not another lost opportunity.”

Africa’s financing gap for climate action was also discussed at the Summit, with leaders renewing their calls for increased international climate finance, debt relief and technology transfer. They also underscore the importance of the private sector investment aimed at strengthening regional value chains, building local processing capacity and expanding critical infrastructure.

The Africa Climate Summit 2025 ended with the adoption of the Addis Ababa Declaration, a renewed commitment to place sustainability, equity, and local development at the heart of mineral exploitation. The message was clear—Africa holds the key to the global green transition. The challenge now is how to turn that potential into lasting, inclusive prosperity for its people.

Source: Africa Renewal, United Nations

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

When the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution to designate 25 May as World Football Day. Credit: UN Photo/Loey Felipe

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Nov 28 2025 (IPS)

The 193-member General Assembly, the UN’s highest policy-making body, routinely designates ”International Days” and “World Days’” on a wide range of subjects and events – from the sublime to the ridiculous: described as “a sudden shift from something grand and awe-inspiring to something silly and unimportant”.

The commemorations range from the International Women’s Day and the International Day to Combat Islamophobia to the International Moon Day and World Bicycle Day (not forgetting World Tuna Day, World Bee Day, International Day of Potato, World Horse Day, World Pulses Day and International Day of the Arabian Leopard).

According to the UN, the world body observes 218 international days annually (and counting).

One of the first designations came from the UN General Assembly’s declaration in 1947 that 24 October should be celebrated as United Nations Day, the anniversary of the adoption of the UN Charter that founded the Organization.

Since then, UN Member States have proposed more than 200 designations, presenting draft resolutions to the General Assembly so the entire membership, representing 193 nations, can vote.

But a new resolution aimed at revitalizing the work of the General Assembly “notes with concern the significant increase in the number of proposals to proclaim international days, weeks, months, years or decades”.

The resolution decides, on a trial basis, to put on hold consideration of new proposals for international days, weeks, months, years and decades during the eighty-first and eighty-second sessions.

The resolution also requests the President of the General Assembly, effective from the eighty-first session in 2026, to group all proclamation requests for international commemoration into a single resolution per agenda item, where each proposed commemoration contains its own operative paragraph focused on its establishment.

The upcoming International Days in March 2026 include:
1 March – World Seagrass Day
1 March – United Nations Zero Discrimination Day
3 March – International Day for Ear and Hearing Loss
3 March – World Wildlife Day
5 March – International Day for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Awareness
8 March – International Women’s Day
10 March – International Day of Women Judges
15 March – International Day to combat Islamophobia
20 March – International Day of Happiness
20 March – French Language Day
21 March – International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
21 March – World Poetry Day
21 March – International Nowruz Day
21 March – World Down Syndrome Day
21 March – International Day of Forests
21 March – World Day of Glaciers
22 March – World Water Day
23 March – World Meteorological Day
24 March – World Tuberculosis Day
24 March – International Day for the Right to the Truth concerning Gross Human Rights
25 March – International Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery
25 March – International Day of Solidarity with Detained and Missing Staff Members
30 March – International Day of Zero Waste

The list for December includes:
01 Dec – World AIDS Day
02 Dec – International Day for the Abolition of Slavery (A/RES/317(IV)
03 Dec – International Day of Persons with Disabilities (A/RES/47/3)
04 Dec – International Day of Banks (A/RES/74/245)
04 Dec – International Day Against Unilateral Coercive Measures (A/RES/79/293)
05 Dec – International Volunteer Day for Economic and Social Development (A/RES/40/212)
05 Dec – World Soil Day (A/RES/68/232)
07 Dec – International Civil Aviation Day (A/RES/51/33)
09 Dec – International Day of Commemoration and Dignity of the Victims of the Crime of Genocide and of the Prevention of this Crime (A/RES/69/323)
09 Dec – International Anti-Corruption Day (A/RES/58/4)
10 Dec – Human Rights Day (A/RES/423 (V)
11 Dec – International Mountain Day (A/RES/57/245)
12 Dec – International Day of Neutrality (A/RES/71/275)
12 Dec – International Universal Health Coverage Day (A/RES/72/138)
18 Dec – International Migrants Day (A/RES/55/93)
18 Dec – Arabic Language Day
20 Dec – International Human Solidarity Day (A/RES/60/209)
21 Dec – World Meditation Day (A/RES/79/137)
21 Dec – World Basketball Day (A/RES/77/324)
27 Dec – International Day of Epidemic Preparedness (A/RES/75/27)

Newspaper headlines reflect the abductions of girls and others in Nigeria’s northern states. Credit: Hussain Wahab/IPS

By Hussain Wahab
ABUJA, Nov 28 2025 (IPS)

On the morning of 17 November 2025, darkness cloaked Maga town in the Danko/Wasagu Local Government Area, Kebbi State, until gunfire shattered the silence. It was around 4 am when armed attackers stormed the Government Girls Comprehensive Secondary School, firing into the air to terrify residents before heading to the staff quarters. There, they killed two, including Hassan Yakubu, the school’s Chief Security Officer and then abducted 26 female students.

Two later escaped, said Halima Bande, the state’s commissioner for Basic and Secondary Education. This brazen raid came less than 72 hours after the killing of Brigadier-General Musa Uba in an ambush by the insurgents.

A rescue mission by Nigerian soldiers to intervene in Kebbi’s abduction was itself ambushed and injured by the insurgents, heightening fears that such violence is spiraling beyond the reach of conventional security responses.

Since then, 24 girls have been released, Nigerian President Bola Tinubu announced.

Abubakar Fakai, whose nine nieces are among the 26 abducted schoolgirls, told IPS that his family and the entire community have been plunged into unbearable grief.

A father of four of the kidnapped girls, Ilyasu Fakai, is still in shock. Almost every household in the close-knit village has been affected. For more than a week they received no credible information about the girls’ condition or whereabouts, Abubakar said.

“Every night we try to sleep, but we can’t, because we keep thinking of the girls lying somewhere on bare ground, scared and cold. These are teenage girls, and we fear for their dignity and their lives. We just want the government to rescue them quickly and reunite them with us. This pain is too much for our community to bear,” he told IPS.

The Kebbi raid was one of several mass abductions that occurred within days of each other.

At least 402 people, mainly schoolchildren, have been kidnapped in four states in the north-central region—Niger, Kebbi, Kwara and Borno—since 17 November, the UN human rights office, OHCHR, said on Tuesday.

Call to Authorities

“We are shocked at the recent surge in mass abductions in north-central Nigeria,” OHCHR Spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan said in Geneva.

“We urge the Nigerian authorities—at all levels—to take all lawful measures to ensure such vile attacks are halted and to hold those responsible to account.”

A day after the Kebbi incident, a church was attacked in Eruku, Kwara; two were killed and about 38 abducted during a live church session. State Gov. AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq, in a statement, said President Bola Tinubu deployed an additional 900 troops to the community.

In Niger State, a St. Mary’s School in Papiri was also attacked on Friday, November 21, and 303 boys and girls, plus 12 teachers, were abducted; only 50 are said to have escaped as of Sunday, November 23. This number surpasses the number of girls kidnapped in Chibok, prompting an international “Bring Back Our Girls” campaign.

The same day, militants launched another deadly attack in Borno State. The list is not exhaustive, underscoring how Nigeria’s overlapping insurgency and banditry crises are converging in devastating ways.

Insurgency a Threat to Food Security

The rise in insurgent attacks is threatening regional stability and causing a spike in hunger, according to the the World Food Programme (WFP)

The latest analysis finds nearly 35 million people are projected to face severe food insecurity during the 2026 lean season from June to August—the highest number ever recorded in the country.

Insurgent attacks have intensified this year, the UN agency said.

Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), an al-Qaeda affiliate, reportedly carried out its first attack in Nigeria last month, while the insurgent group Islamic State in West Africa Province (ISWAP) is apparently seeking to expand across the Sahel region.

“Communities are under severe pressure from repeated attacks and economic stress,” said David Stevenson, WFP Country Director and Representative in Nigeria.

“If we can’t keep families fed and food insecurity at bay, growing desperation could fuel increased instability with insurgent groups exploiting hunger to expand their influence, creating a security threat that extends across West Africa and beyond.”

Human-rights activist Omoyele Sowore drew national attention to the lawlessness in a viral post.

A Long Shadow Over Schools

Human-rights activist Omoyele Sowore drew national attention to the lawlessness in a viral post.

These recent incidents are not isolated—they are part of a deepening national crisis that has targeted schools for more than a decade. According to Save the Children, 1,683, schoolchildren have been kidnapped in Nigeria from April 2014 through December 2022. UNICEF similarly reports that over 1,680 schoolchildren have been abducted within that period and according to a SBM report, 4,722 people were abducted and N2.57 billion (about USD 1.7 million) was paid to kidnappers as ransom between July 2024 and June 2025.

These statistics reflect both past challenges and an enduring failure—despite Nigeria’s endorsement of the Safe Schools Declaration, the protections promised on paper have not reached many of its most vulnerable schools.

Experts and analysts say these incidents reflect a broader model: criminal gangs and insurgents are increasingly seeing schoolchildren as high-value targets. This surge underscores a chilling truth: educational institutions, especially in rural and poorly guarded areas, are no longer safe havens. They are strategic targets.

“This has now become a national and international discussion, giving Nigeria a very bad name,” said Colonel Abdullahi Gwandu, a conflict expert, in an interview with IPS, criticizing the government’s failure to anticipate such attacks and the slack competency of security forces, putting not only education but every sphere of the nation in mayhem.

Trauma, Trust, and Retreat

In the wake of the Kebbi abduction, fear rippled across communities. Uncertain of their children’s safety, parents in Maga and nearby areas rushed to withdraw their daughters from schools. Community leaders responded with grief and prayer. Maga’s traditional ruler announced a special prayer gathering, calling on God to bring the girls home safely.

Habibat Muhammad, a youth advocate, said it concerned her that these trends put the education of girls at risk.

“When you train a girl child, you train a nation but how do you train a nation when girls who should be sitting in class are dragged out of their hostels by people who have learned to exploit government negligence?”

She said many rural girls’ schools lack basic security infrastructure: trained guards, perimeter fencing, early-warning systems and proper lighting. She argued that this absence of protection contrasts sharply with the layered security given to public officials or financial institutions. “Education must be treated as a national priority, not a soft target,” she told IPS.

Why the State Can’t Seem to Stop Attacks

Security experts and community voices agree that the Kebbi attack exposed major systemic flaws. Gwandu described the incident as a stark reminder of how fragile rural school security has become. He noted that the deliberate killing of a school security officer signals a shift in tactics: attackers are now targeting authority figures in addition to students. He stressed the need for a more intelligence-driven strategy and urged the military to take firmer action. “

The Northwest Division, headquartered in Sokoto, should be given full authority and resources to respond quickly and aggressively by combining human intelligence with AI to track bandits and their informants while addressing poverty and poor education to reduce criminal recruitment, Gwandu said.

Beyond immediate security, he argues, the government must tackle root causes: poverty, lack of education, and widespread youth unemployment make banditry and kidnapping more appealing for disenfranchised young people.

The Cost Beyond the Kidnapping

Dr. Shadi Sabeh, an educationist and the vice-chairman of the Iconic University, argues that closing these wounds must be central to Nigeria’s recovery strategy.

“We have to be there for our children. Guidance and counselling are almost absent in our education system.” he calls for trauma-informed curricula, peer support groups, bravery training, and sustained mental health services within schools to help students cope, heal, and reclaim their futures. This highlights the need to keep youth productive.

“A hungry man is an angry man and an idle hand is a devil’s workshop.

Jeariogbe Islamiyyah Adedoyin, Vice President of the School of Physical Sciences, added a more personal plea.

“No child should ever have to go through something like that just to get an education. Our girls deserve to learn without fear. She said when schools are no longer safe, the future of the nation is at risk.”

What the Government Is Doing—And Why It’s Not Enough

In response to the crisis, authorities have initiated both immediate and longer-term measures. Short-term responses include deployment of troops to high-risk regions like Kebbi and Niger, search-and-rescue operations involving military, police, and local vigilantes, closure of some schools deemed vulnerable and public condemnation from religious and political leaders.

However, high levels of poverty, unemployment, and illiteracy, and lack of parental care make marginalized youth vulnerable to recruitment by armed groups and defeat these efforts.

A legal expert, Waliu Olaitan Wahab, told IPS that the roots of insecurity in northern Nigeria run far deeper than the activities of Boko Haram, herdsmen, or bandit gangs. He described the crisis as multifaceted, arguing that decades of neglect by northern elites have created a system where millions of children grow up without support, opportunity, or protection—making them easy targets for recruitment.

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');  

Credit: Sergey Bobylev/RIA Novosti/Anadolu via Getty Images

By Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Nov 27 2025 (IPS)

Three years ago, Captain Ibrahim Traoré seized power in Burkina Faso with two promises that have proved hollow: to address the country’s deepening security crisis and restore civilian rule. Now he has postponed elections until 2029, dissolved the independent electoral commission and pulled the country out of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Burkina Faso has become a military dictatorship.

The journey began in January 2022, when protests over the civilian government’s failure to address jihadist violence opened the door for Lieutenant-Colonel Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba to seize power. Transitional authorities promised a return to democracy within two years, agreeing to a timeline with ECOWAS. But eight months later, Traoré led a second coup, accusing Damiba of failing to defeat insurgents.

When Traoré’s promised deadline of June 2024 approached, the military government convened a national dialogue that most political parties boycotted. The resulting charter extended Traoré’s presidency until 2029 and granted him permission to stand in the next election, transforming what was meant to be a transitional arrangement into consolidated personal power. The dismissal of Prime Minister Apollinaire Joachim Kyelem de Tambela and the dissolution of his government in December 2024 removed the pretence of civilian participation in governance.

As the military has entrenched its rule, civic freedoms have evaporated. The CIVICUS Monitor downgraded Burkina Faso’s civic space rating to ‘repressed’ in December 2024, reflecting the systematic silencing of dissent through arbitrary detention and a particularly sinister tactic: forced military conscription of critics. Four journalists abducted in June and July 2024 disappeared into the military, with authorities announcing they had been enlisted. In March 2025, three prominent journalists who spoke out against press freedom restrictions were forcibly disappeared for 10 days before reappearing in military uniforms, their professional independence erased at gunpoint.

Civil society activists have suffered similar fates. Five members of the Sens political movement were abducted after publishing a press release denouncing the killing of civilians. The organisation’s coordinator, human rights lawyer Guy Hervé Kam, has been repeatedly detained for criticising military authorities. In August 2024, seven judges and prosecutors investigating junta supporters were conscripted; six reported to a military base and have not been heard from since. This weaponisation of conscription transforms civic engagement into grounds for forced military service, effectively criminalising dissent while claiming to mobilise national defence.

Meanwhile the security situation that supposedly justified these coups has dramatically worsened. Deaths from militant Islamist violence have tripled under Traoré’s watch, with eight of the 10 deadliest attacks against the military occurring under his rule. Military forces now operate freely in as little as 30 per cent of the country. The military has committed mass atrocities: in the first half of 2024, military forces and allied militias killed at least 1,000 civilians. In one incident in February 2024, soldiers summarily executed at least 223 civilians, including 56 children, in apparent retaliation for an Islamist attack.

Conflict has displaced millions, with independent estimates placing the numbers of internally displaced people at between three and five million, far exceeding the government’s last official count of just over two million in March 2023. Some are fleeing across the border. Around 51,000 refugees arrived in Mali’s Koro Cercle district between April and September 2025, overwhelming host communities already struggling with fragile public services. Multiple concurrent epidemics, including hepatitis E, measles, polio and yellow fever, compound the humanitarian crisis in Burkina Faso.

To avoid accountability for these failures, the junta is withdrawing from international oversight. In January, following their joint exit from ECOWAS, which they characterised as being under foreign influence and failing to support their fight against terrorism, military-run Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger formed the Alliance of Sahel States. In September, the three juntas announced withdrawal from the ICC, mischaracterising the body that holds human rights abusers to account as a tool of neocolonial repression. These moves leave victims of extrajudicial killings, torture and war crimes with no realistic prospect of accountability.

The regime’s online propaganda machine has proved remarkably effective in justifying its intensifying repression. Traoré has cultivated an image as a young pan-African hero fighting western imperialism. To some young people across Africa and the diaspora, he represents the charismatic leadership needed to break with discredited politics and colonial relationships. This reputation is built on extensive disinformation that overstates progress, downplays human rights violations and portrays withdrawal from international institutions as bold resistance rather than an evasion of accountability.

The junta’s anti-imperialist rhetoric obscures a simple reality: it has replaced one troubling relationship with another. Having expelled French forces, Burkina Faso has turned to Russia for military support. Russian mercenaries now operate extensively alongside national forces, bringing no pressure to respect human rights while offering Vladimir Putin a shield from accountability for his war in Ukraine. The junta has recently granted a company linked to the Russian state a licence to mine gold.

Yet the democratic ideal survives. Civil society leaders continue to speak out, journalists continue to report and opposition figures continue to organise, despite the enormous personal risks. Their courage demands more than statements of concern.

In the face of the Trump administration’s sudden termination of USAID programmes, other international donors must step up and establish emergency funding mechanisms to support civil society organisations and independent media operating under severe restrictions in Burkina Faso or in exile. Regional institutions must impose targeted sanctions on officials responsible for human rights violations and maintain pressure for democratic restoration. Without sustained international solidarity with Burkina Faso’s democratic forces, the country risks becoming another cautionary tale of how military rule, once consolidated, proves extraordinarily difficult to reverse.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Head of Research and Analysis, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report. She is also a Professor of Comparative Politics at Universidad ORT Uruguay.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

 

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');  

International Criminal Court. Credit: UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Nov 27 2025 (IPS)

The US sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) have intensified the rigid isolation of judges and officials of the Court based in The Hague, Netherlands.

According to an interview with the French judge Nicolas Guillou, published in Le Monde, ICC judges are also being refused access to American websites and credit cards.

“The sanctions, imposed by the United States after the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli officials accused of war crimes in Gaza, have severely impacted the daily lives and professional operations of the sanctioned individuals”.

Judge Guillou has described his situation as being “economically banned across most of the planet,” forcing him into a lifestyle reminiscent of the pre-internet era.

Asked for a response, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters: “Sadly, he’s not the only person linked to the ICC who’s been placed under unilateral sanctions.”

As you know, the ICC is separate from the UN Secretariat. “That being said, we believe that the International Criminal Court is a very important element of the international justice system. It was set up by Member States. We don’t believe that its members should be targeted by unilateral sanctions, which as I think, as the article says and as we know, have a deep impact on people and their families.”

ICC Deputy Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan, who addressed the Security Council on the Situation in Libya on November 25, also focused on life under US sanctions.

The progress towards justice in Libya, she pointed out, has been delivered despite what are also “unprecedented headwinds faced by the Court”.

“I must be clear that coercive measures and acts of intimidation against the ICC, civil society and other partners of justice do not serve anyone other than those who wish to benefit from impunity in Libya and in all situations that we address.”

It is the victims of murder, sexual violence, torture and the other most serious crimes addressed by our Court that stand to lose the most from these coercive actions.

“I firmly believe that is not a position that is welcomed by any member of this (Security) Council, and it is my sincere hope that we can rebuild a common ground between us for collective, effective action against atrocity crimes,” declared Khan.

Meanwhile, the International Bar Association (IBA) has condemned the imposition of additional sanctions against ICC judges and officials by the US administration as an attack against the global rule of law and the independence of judges, and calls on all ICC States Parties to take actions to protect the Court.

IBA President Jaime Carey is quoted as saying: ‘Judges and prosecutors must be able to carry out their work without fear of retribution. The IBA continues to stand for the independence of judges and lawyers, a fundamental principle of the rule of law.’

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS the US imposed sanctions on two ICC trial judges, Nicolas Guillou and Kimberly Prost, and against two Deputy Prosecutors, Nazhat Shameem Khan and Mame Mandiaye Niang.

They were accused of supporting “illegitimate ICC actions against Israel, including upholding the ICC’s arrest warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant, since they assumed leadership for the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor.” The sanctions ban the four from entering the US and block their US assets.

While the IBA has condemned the sanctions against ICC judges and officials as an attack on the global rule of law and judges’ independence and called on all ICC States Parties to take actions to protect the Court, several other measures can be taken to inhibit, if not stop, Trump from continuously using the power of his office to serve his ego and his misguided political agenda, he said.

First, other countries and international bodies can put collective diplomatic pressure on the US to reverse or reconsider these sanctions. This may involve negotiations or leveraging alliances to show that this kind of punitive action isn’t widely supported.

Second, the International Criminal Court itself, or other international legal bodies, might issue statements condemning the sanctions or seek support from other member states. Although the ICC doesn’t have direct enforcement power over US policies, it can still rally international opinion and try to create global pushback.

Third, on the US side, Congress could raise domestic legal and political challenges if there’s significant opposition within the US; those sanctions could be challenged or eventually reversed. With the court of public opinion on their side, sometimes, just the threat of political backlash can make the Trump administration reconsider.

Fourth, the IBA should urge other international legal organizations or human rights groups to create a broader coalition of support. By doing so, they can amplify pressure on the US government and show that the legal community worldwide stands firmly against such sanctions.

Fifth, the IBA can engage in direct advocacy with other governments to raise this issue at diplomatic forums such as the United Nations or other international gatherings. Essentially, it can continue to use its platform to advocate for broader coalitions of support, keep the issue in the spotlight, and secure direct support to overturn US policy and help generate international momentum.

In short, it’s usually a mix of international diplomatic pressure and domestic US political or legal checks that could be used to push back against this kind of measure. Obviously, none of these measures is easy to implement; nevertheless, they are the main avenues to consider.

“For the US to use the club of restrictive sanctions on a group of judges who are simply trying to honor humanity’s legal protections is a kind of vindictiveness akin to madness. This irrational action weakens global humanity’s legal protections. Everybody on earth has less safety and security if international law is flouted in such a way. The court is a vital component fostering international justice and peace”, said Jennings.

James E. Jennings, President, Conscience International, told IPS the Trump Administration in Washington is good at two things: chest thumping and distracting attention from the main issue at hand. The White House has now vindictively added fresh sanctions on judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC). And why? To defend Israeli impunity from charges of war crimes and worse in Gaza.

Federica D’Alessandra, Co-Chair of the International Bar Association’s Rule of Law Forum, said that “The measure has brought the tribunal’s day-to-day operations to a near standstill, raising existential concerns about its future.”

Trump, for years a practitioner of the use of fear for making his enemies back down, is trying to intimidate the judges by Mafia-like behavior. Although it won’t work in the long run because Trump will not be around forever, the strategy is working presently to delay, delay, delay justice.

Justice delayed, according to a well-known slogan, might very well be in this case justice denied. By slapping sanctions on the four ICC judges, Trump and his minions have thrown sand in the wheels of international accountability.

Even though the technique is contra bonos mores (opposed to decent morality) as long ago enacted in Roman Law, It might work in this case because it threatens to gum up the works of international order, he pointed out.

“International law is the only mechanism that can truly regulate the bloody tooth and claw of the natural order. Watch a few videos of apex predators at work in the jungle and you’ll understand what damage an unregulated dictatorship like Russia’s can do to civilian life and infrastructure in both Ukraine and Russia. Israel’s “mad dog” Likud military regime is even worse—because Russia at least has not attacked six nations,” declared Jennings.

Meanwhile, specific impacts, according to an AI Overview, include:

• Financial Services: All accounts with major US credit card companies like Visa, Mastercard, and American Express have been deactivated. Some non-American banks have also closed their accounts due to the global reach of US sanctions.
• Online Services: Access to accounts with American tech and e-commerce companies has been terminated. This includes services such as Amazon, Google, Apple, Airbnb, and PayPal.
• Travel and Booking: Online reservations for hotels and travel services have been canceled. For example, a hotel booking made on Expedia for a location within France was canceled hours later due to the sanctions.
• General Commerce: Online commerce has become nearly impossible because one cannot know if a product or its packaging involves an American entity.

These measures effectively prohibit any American person, company, or their foreign subsidiaries from providing services to the sanctioned individuals without authorization from the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).

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');  

Local farmer ploughing a field in Indonesia. Credit: Unsplash

By Ana Carolina Avzaradel Szklo
RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, Nov 26 2025 (IPS)

The UN climate talks at COP30 once again brought the critical issue of climate finance to the forefront of global discussions.

However, while much of the debate revolved around traditional forms of aid directed at developing countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, a faster, more transformative approach lies in expanding access to carbon markets.

When emerging and developing economies (EMDEs) are equipped with the tools and knowledge needed to engage in these markets on their own terms, carbon finance can be generated and harnessed in ways that reflect their unique natural assets, governance, social contexts, and national priorities.

Achieving global climate and sustainable development goals depends on ensuring that those worst affected by climate change can fully participate in and benefit from this growing flow of finance.

EMDEs are on the frontlines of climate change — from rising sea levels threatening Pacific island nations to intensifying droughts and fires in the Amazon and Horn of Africa, and increasingly intense and frequent hurricanes in the Caribbean. These crises often hit hardest in regions that have contributed least to global emissions and in the most difficult position to react to them.

Yet, these same nations face a climate finance shortfall of $1.3 trillion per year. Carbon markets present an opportunity for these countries to bridge this gap by turning their natural advantages into climate finance assets.

Despite successful initiatives aimed at bolstering both high-integrity supply and demand for carbon credits, significant barriers to access persist, particularly for EMDEs. From fragmented policy landscapes to weak governance structures, limited institutional capacity, and low investor confidence, various obstacles prevent the vast potential of EMDEs to engage fully.

The Access Strategies Program — led by the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative — is a direct response to these challenges. It helps governments design and implement their own pathways into high-integrity carbon markets, enabling them to build the policies, institutional capacity, and investor confidence needed to meet their climate finance needs and transform their potential into progress.

Each country’s natural capital — from Brazil’s vast rainforest and agricultural landscapes, to the Caribbean’s blue carbon ecosystems, or Kenya’s grasslands and renewable energy potential — represents a unique competitive advantage, ready to be realised.

Simultaneously, no two countries share the same development goals or governance contexts. In some, carbon markets can drive forest conservation and biodiversity protection; while in others, they deliver the most impact by strengthening rural livelihoods or financing clean energy transitions.

The Access Strategies model recognises this uniqueness, tailoring its support to help countries use carbon finance in ways that align with their own specific economic and environmental strategies and goals.

For example, the Partnership for Agricultural Carbon (PAC) — developed with the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) — is building capacity across Latin American and Caribbean agriculture ministries to participate in high-integrity carbon markets. It provides training, policy guidance, and decision-making tools that help governments and farmers identify viable carbon projects aligning with national agricultural and sustainability goals.

The collaboration has given small and medium producers a clearer route to investment, while positioning agriculture as a central player in regional climate strategies. Another example of the Access Strategies work is the recently launched Amazon Best Practices Guide, which will help Amazon state governments design and implement carbon market frameworks made specifically for their unique ecological and governance realities.

Moreover, in countries such as Kenya, Peru, and Benin, the Program has provided tailored support to develop policy and regulatory frameworks, strengthen institutional capacity, and attract responsible investment for high-priority climate mitigation projects — all in line with country-led goals.

These examples show what’s possible when governments have the tools and expertise to engage in high-integrity carbon markets on their own terms. More countries should seize this opportunity to tap into the growing flow of finance from carbon markets.

While carbon markets are not a silver bullet, they are one of the few scalable and self-sustaining tools available when grounded in integrity and tailored to each country’s needs.

Programs like Access Strategies do more than transfer technical knowledge — they build the enabling conditions for locally led action, drawing on countries’ unique ecological, social, and institutional insights to shape solutions that work in practice.

The focus of global climate action should not only be on new funding pledges, but on ensuring funding that is already available is effectively redirected for EMDEs countries to harness their own natural capital and promote social inclusion, while meeting their climate goals and reshaping their development pathway.

Building this kind of capacity is how we turn global ambition into lasting, locally owned progress, and moreover how carbon finance can become a true instrument of sustainable development.

Ana Carolina Avzaradel Szklo, Technical Director, Markets and Standards, Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI)

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

UN Secretary-General António Guterres addresses the media at the G20 Summit in South Africa. Credit: UN Photo/Ropafadzo Chiradza

By Danny Bradlow
PRETORIA, South Africa, Nov 26 2025 (IPS)

US president Donald Trump’s efforts to derail a successful wrap-up of the G20 summit in Johannesburg failed. Trump boycotted the meeting and the US told other countries through diplomatic channels not to sign a communiqué. Nevertheless, the 19 remaining countries and regional organisations signed a 30-page declaration.

This called for, among other things, increased funding for renewable energy projects, more equitable critical mineral supply chains and debt relief for poorer countries. Senior research fellow Danny Bradlow explains what was, and wasn’t, achieved.

In what ways was South Africa’s G20 presidency a success?

The G20 has been a great diplomatic success for South Africa in at least three ways.

First, it succeeded in leading all the other G20 countries and organisations to adopt by consensus a leaders’ declaration despite a boycott and bullying tactics by Washington.

The 120 paragraph Leaders’ Declaration covered all the issues embodied in the “Solidarity, Equality and Sustainability” theme that South Africa chose for the G20. They included:

• • debt and access to affordable, sustainable finance

 

• • financing for a just energy transition

 

• • critical minerals

 

• • inequality

 

• • a second phase for the

Compact with Africa

• The first phase was launched in

2017 during Germany’s G20 presidency

• and provided a framework for Africa’s engagement with its development partners.

 

• • illicit financial flows

 

• inclusive growth.

Second, South Africa succeeded in launching a number of initiatives over the course of the year.

Firstly, the G20 acknowledged South Africa’s five years of support for the establishment of an African Engagement Framework within the G20’s finance track. It is intended to support enhanced cooperation between Africa and the G20.

Secondly, leaders expressed support, in various ways, for the G20 working group initiatives on illicit financial flows, infrastructure, air quality, artificial intelligence, sustainable development and public health. The ministerial declaration on debt was also supported. This includes reforms around initiatives supporting low and middle income countries facing debt challenges.

Thirdly, the Ubuntu Legacy Initiative was launched. This is designed to fund cross-border infrastructure in Africa. It was also agreed that an Ubuntu Commission will be set up to encourage research and dialogue on dealing cooperatively with global challenges. Ubuntu can be explained with reference to the isiZulu saying ‘umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu’ which means ‘a person is a person through other people.’ It entails an ethics of care, compassion and cooperation.

Lastly, South Africa succeeded in delivering an effective, efficient and constructive G20 year. This is no small feat. It required the country to organise more than 130 meetings of G20 working groups, task forces and ministerial meetings, in addition to the leaders’ summit.

Is this only a good news story?

It is inevitable that any complex, multifaceted and voluntary process involving participants with strong and contrasting views will not be an unqualified success.

This, without doubt, is the case with South Africa’s G20 year. The environment was complicated by a number of factors:

• • the wars in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan

 

• • the actions of the US and some of its allies to undermine the international community’s efforts to address the intertwined challenges of climate, biodiversity, energy, poverty, inequality, food insecurity, debt, technology and development, and

 

• trade wars initiated by Trump imposing tariffs on trading partners.

These factors meant that getting the diverse membership of the G20 to reach agreement on a broad range of complex issues would be extremely difficult. In fact, it would only be possible to do so at a high level of abstraction.

Unfortunately, this proved to be the case. The result is that the G20 Leaders’ Declaration largely boils down to a set of general statements that are almost totally devoid of commitments for which states can be held accountable. Such general statements are not uncommon in the diplomatic statements issued at the end of high-level multilateral meetings. However, this is an extreme example.

The leaders expressed their support for a number of voluntary principles on issues such as disaster relief, artificial intelligence, critical minerals and debt. They also expressed support for the work of organisations like the multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund, and for some specific South African led initiatives like the review of the G20 itself.

However, there are no time frames or deliverables attached to these expressions of support.

What needs to be done to make the declaration effective?

The G20 is a voluntary association with no binding authority. The declaration’s efficacy therefore ultimately depends on all the G20’s stakeholders both taking – and advocating – for action on the issues raised in it.

These stakeholders include states and non-state actors like international organisations, businesses and civil society organisations.

The value of the declaration is how both the state and non-state actors use it to advocate for action. That can be in future G20 meetings as well as other regional and international forums.

How can the declaration be used to lead to action?

One of the biggest challenges facing African countries is debt. Over 20 are either in debt distress or at high risk of debt distress. Many African countries are being forced to choose between servicing their debts and investing in the development and climate resilience of their own populations.

The challenge that this creates for African states is exacerbated by their limited access to affordable, predictable and sustainable sources of development finance.

This means that African countries are unlikely to gain a sustainable path to reaching their development and climate goals without substantial action on debt and development finance. The Leaders’ Declaration, in paragraphs 14-22, clearly recognises the challenge. Key elements include:

• • the endorsement of

the statement

• their finance minister and central bank governors made on debt sustainability

 

• • a reiteration of the support for the

Common Framework

• for dealing with low-income countries in debt distress. The framework establishes a process for dealing with the official and commercial debt. But the process has proven to be too slow and cumbersome.

 

• • a commitment to working with the

Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable

to explore better ways to meet the needs of debtor countries in distress and their creditors. This roundtable establishes an informal mechanism that brings together creditors and debtors and other stakeholders in sovereign debt to discuss ways to improve restructuring processes.

But these will be just empty words unless the endorsements are turned into action.

There are three actions that stakeholders can take.

First, African leaders can form a regional borrowers’ forum to discuss the debt issue and share information on their experiences dealing with creditors and on developing common African positions on development finance and debt. This would build on the work done by:

• • the African Expert Panel appointed by South African president Cyril Ramaphosa, and

 

• the African finance ministers under the auspices of the African Union and the UN Economic Commission on Africa.

They can also use this forum to engage in open discussions with African non-state actors.

Second, African non-state actors can develop strategies for holding the leaders accountable if they fail to follow up on the declaration. And they can hold creditors accountable for their actions in their negotiations with African debtors in distress.

Third, African non-state actors should initiate a review of how the IMF needs to reform its operational policies and practices. Africa has eloquently advocated for greater African voice and vote in IMF governance. The next step should be to explore how the substantial changes that have taken place in the scope of IMF operations can be translated into operational practices. These include the macroeconomic impacts of climate, gender and inequality.

Daniel D. Bradlow is Professor/Senior Research Fellow, Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship, University of Pretoria

IPS UN Bureau

 

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