Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Chiring Tamang holds the family’s new baby while his wife Priya looks on. She delivered the girl at home in their village in Nepal’s Sindhupalchowk district in February 2021. Credit: Marty Logan / IPS

By Marty Logan
Kathmandu, Nepal, Jul 21 2021 (IPS)

One year after Nepal’s Ministry of Health (MoH) appealed to international organisations in the country to urgently supply a drug used to stop excessive bleeding after childbirth, a UN agency has delivered $1 million worth of contraceptives to prevent another shortage.

The 1.6 million cycles of oral contraceptive pills and 776,000 units of injectable contraceptives and syringes will prevent roughly 75 000 unintended pregnancies, 22 000 unsafe abortions and 80 maternal deaths, according to the UN Population Fund (UNFPA).

As it was last year at this time, Nepal is at the tail end of a lockdown designed to break a runaway number of Covid-19 cases. Between April and May 2021, daily cases went from 150 to more than 8,000—fuelled by outbreaks in neighbouring India. Intensive care unit beds were unavailable in most hospitals in the capital Kathmandu and some cities on the southern border with India, and patients attached to oxygen tanks were forced into hospital parking lots. Crematoriums had to be expanded to accommodate the dead.

More than 9 500 people have died, and 667 000 had been infected as of 18 July, according to official figures, which are widely considered to underestimate the true impact.

“This support is very timely as Nepal was on the verge of facing a shortage of the injectable contraceptives and oral pills,” said Dr Tara Nath Pokhrel, Director of the Family Welfare Division (FWD) of the MoH. “These supplies will greatly help the federal, provincial and local governments to address the increasing family planning needs during the COVID-19 pandemic,” he added in a UNFPA press release.

Last year’s urgent need was misoprostol, a drug used for medical abortion and to stop excessive bleeding of new mothers, also known as postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). The condition is the leading cause of death among women who give birth at home, a number that skyrocketed after the first case of Covid-19 was detected in January 2020. Deliveries in health facilities fell by more than 50% during the 2020 lockdown, according to The Lancet journal.

The shortage affected only the three-pill package of misoprostol used to prevent PPH, not medical abortion kits. It was December before UNFPA could deliver nearly 500 000 doses to the government, a one-year supply.

Maintaining a steady supply of misoprostol has been a challenge for the Government of Nepal since it took over the programme from a project sponsored by the US government in 2010. Initially, it was able to turn to international partners to source the drug outside of the country, but it soon absorbed the purchasing into its procurement system.

However, in 2014 the government’s corruption agency charged eight ministry of health employees with importing poor quality misoprostol into the country at inflated prices.

Eventually, they were acquitted, along with private-sector suppliers, but the high-profile case put a ‘chill’ on further buying by government officials, a former employee of the project told IPS. “If the person needed to justify (misoprostol procurement) maybe they were thinking, ‘this created lots of tension in the past, so let’s not go for procurement’.

Shortages resulted. Then in 2015, earthquakes rocked Nepal, killing nearly 9,000 people. That disaster was followed by a months-long blockade of road routes from India after Nepal’s politicians approved a controversial new Constitution. Supply chains became twisted and unreliable.

In 2017, following Nepal’s first elections under a federal governance system, some health responsibilities were transferred from central authorities to provincial or local officials, including the purchase and distribution of misoprostol. But local governments appeared unprepared.

“In general, local governments did not have sufficient time and resources to strengthen their procurement capacity on lifesaving maternal and neonatal health commodities,” a spokesperson for UNFPA noted in a statement. “It also depended on how much priority each local government had given to the health sector in general.”

Before Covid-19 hit, the misoprostol programme was in place in 56 of Nepal’s 77 districts, but in January 2020, a survey of 12 of the 56 districts found that none had the drug, says Surya Bhatta, executive director of One Heart Worldwide, an international NGO working in Nepal.

“I think misoprostol is one of the most discussed matters in our office,” he adds. “We talk about this a lot with local leaders, pregnant mothers, female community health volunteers during their monthly meetings, and with service providers in the health facilities. Even for the managers, in larger government forums, there is a lot of discussion happening, but the implementation side has a lot of holes to fill.”

During the 2020 lockdown, misoprostol shortages and PPH deaths of women who gave birth at home generated many headlines. This year there have been no reports of misoprostol shortages, Dr Punya Poudel of the FWD told IPS. However, maternal deaths remained above average for the second year running. From mid-March 2020 to mid-June 2021, there were 258 maternal deaths, compared to 51 in the same period pre-Covid, according to preliminary statistics.

Nepal’s maternal mortality rate of 239 per 100,000 births is equivalent to roughly 1,200 deaths annually.

In the agency’s press release, UNFPA Representative to Nepal Lubna Baqi urged the government and partners to make reproductive health a priority.

“Nepal has continued to struggle with shortages in supplies due to competing priorities and demands, but it is time for the government and development partners to turn their attention to preventing unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortions by investing in family planning and comprehensive sexuality education.”

 

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');  

A global system in which poor countries are unable to develop and produce their own vaccines to match their demand is not sustainable; particularly when faced by potential future pandemics. Credit: PAHO/Karen González.

By Jonatan Konafino and Shubha Nagesh
Jul 20 2021 (IPS)

“Vaccine equity is the challenge of our time,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), told the gathering in opening remarks.  “And we are failing”at a special ministerial meeting of the Economic and Social Council.

Earlier, G7 leaders wrote a letter of support declaring that wealthier countries should pay the cost to vaccinate low and middle income countries.

Globally, indiscriminate inequity exists in the procurement and distribution of vaccines, which has hit the countries in Asia and Africa the most. According to the World Health Organization, among the 832 million vaccine doses that have been administered, 82% have gone to high- or upper-middle-income countries, while only 0.2% have been shipped to low-income countries

The United States announced that it would donate 500 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine to COVAX to supply COVID vaccine doses to countries in need. In addition, several countries pledged support to a waiver to intellectual property restrictions, which could allow countries to produce the vaccine generically to amplify production and supply.

While these are essential steps in the right direction, a global system in which poor countries are unable to develop and produce their own vaccines to match their demand is not sustainable; particularly when faced by potential future pandemics.

Stringent measures, with global solidarity and commitment to build global vaccine equity and ensure the last person gets the vaccine in rich and poor countries alike before the next global health crisis hits is the need of the hour. This is a time when internationalism wins over nationalism, and globalism works better than local.

Globally, indiscriminate inequity exists in the procurement and distribution of vaccines, which has hit the countries in Asia and Africa the most. According to the World Health Organization, among the 832 million vaccine doses that have been administered, 82% have gone to high- or upper-middle-income countries, while only 0.2% have been shipped to low-income countries.

According to a United Nations report, in high-income countries alone, 1 in 4 people have been vaccinated, a ratio that drops precipitously to 1 in 500 in low-income countries.

This inequitable vaccine access is rooted in the power, influence and the control of few rich countries who have determined vaccine allocation. Early on, despite COVAX’s commitment to vaccinate the world’s population, Western countries developed vaccines separately, in bulk, more than what was necessary, hoarded and vaccinated all, including their young people, who are considered less at risk.

Citizens of low income countries faced shortage, even those who were at risk for COVID-19. As a result, many countries have been left behind.

In the Global South, countries have welcomed and celebrated the ‘noble’ decision of rich countries to donate overstocked vaccines. However, we must take a step back to understand why countries need donations in the first place.

Our struggle to access vaccines is not a consequence of our present shortcomings but of our long histories––many of which are burdened with the legacy of violent colonialism. If poor countries need to rely on donated vaccines, it’s a sign that the global health system is not working. Global Health has failed in this Pandemic.

It’s not just about purchasing doses. A painful history of unequal power relations has shifted resources out of low- and middle-income countries to their high-income counterparts.

We are working against a persistent lack of support for the infrastructure that allows countries in the Global South to independently drive scientific development. Moreover, our material resources and human capital have supported northern economies for decades.

This is exacerbated by the problem of brain drain, in which talent is pulled from low- and middle-income countries to their high-income counterparts, perpetuating dependence and inequities. For example, it is estimated that researchers working internationally from low-income countries produce 10 times more patents than their compatriots at home.

Scientific and health sovereignty are strategic drivers of equitable access to health.
Rich countries are often lauded for aid and donations- progress can be made when we move from charity to rights-based models.

To sustain development efforts, international cooperation and collaboration that allows what countries need is international cooperation that enhances local capacity and expertise, enables country infrastructure and retains the talent to generate innovation at home is crucial. It’s about Human Rights, Social Justice and Equity.

In the short term, developing countries need to be able to produce vaccines and access them equitably. This includes relaxing the World Trade Organization’s Trade Related Access to International Property Rights to enable countries to produce vaccines on site.

In the long term, international collaboration across nations is urgent. For example, the Sputnik-V vaccine program in Argentina involves cooperation between the Gamaleya Institute, the Russian Investment Fund and a national pharmaceutical, Richmond Lab, to develop and produce vaccines for Argentina and the southern cone. This type of cooperation is strategic to expand vaccine production and enhance technology investment in developing countries.

Regional cooperation will strengthen the health and technology sectors in developing countries. During the last few months, AstraZeneca vaccines have been produced between Argentina, which produces the active substance of the product and Mexico, which subsequently completes and bottles doses.

COVID is a global threat today. There will be more, severe threats in future. As we move forward, let the lesson from the crisis not go in vain. Together, in solidarity, we can each do our bit to advance our shared vision of an equitable world. It has taken extraordinary drive to develop the vaccine. Reimagining Global Health should be  about the deliberate intention to get this vaccine to the last person.

Jonatan Konafino MD, MSc, PhD is a Senior Atlantic Fellow for Health Equity and Professor of Public Health at Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche and George Washington University. Secretary of Health in the Municipality of Quilmes, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 

Shubha Nagesh is a medical doctor by training and a Global Health Consultant. She presently works for The Latika Roy Foundation, Dehradun, India. She is a Senior Atlantic Fellow in Global Health Equity.

Spanish officers inspecting the remains of a garrison on Monte Arruit, July 1921. Annual, Morocco. Credit: Public Domain.

By Joaquín Roy
MIAMI, Jul 20 2021 (IPS)

It would seem that those responsible for the recent immigration crisis in Ceuta and Melilla have coordinated their strategy to commemorate the centenary of one of the most serious defeats that Spain has suffered in its foreign relations. One hundred years ago, the Spanish armies suffered one of the most painful losses in its history.

From July 21 to August 9, 1921, the military detachments that had tried to consolidate the colonial presence in the territory of the Riff, north of the northern area of ​​the so-called Protectorate located on the Mediterranean slope of the present Kingdom of Morocco, were bloody massacred in the so-called Annual Disaster.

This episode has been imprinted in the memory of not only of the military, but also in the national conscience.

In succinct terms, what happened in North Africa in the second decade of the 20th century was a consequence of a more spectacular disaster suffered by the Spanish empire at the end of the previous century.

Joaquín Roy

As a resounding burial of the Spanish empire, which had lost almost all American territories in the 19th century, in 1898 the United States ended the Spanish presence in Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines, by imposing the surrender and cession of those territories after the incident of the sinking of the battleship Maine in the bay of Havana.

Embarrassed by the defeat, the Spanish military passed the blame for the awesome disaster onto the politicians. The final traumatic event originated various consequences in Spain, among which are a period of introspection and meditation on the national essence, presided over by the “Generation of ’98”, and the emergence of a regenerationism led by various sectors of public influence.

While the monarchy in the regency period could hardly stand out in remedying the state of national prostration, the military was preparing to seek the construction of a substitute empire.

In continuation of the previous incursions in North Africa, the coalition of conservative forces with military sectors, in search of alternative companies to the loss of the imperial territories, believed to find a replacement empire in North Africa.

The recruitment of military contingents based on forced replacement troops produced the serious incidents of protest at the ports of embarkation. The opposition that originated the so-called Tragic Week of Barcelona in 1909 stood out then, with the result of a fierce repression. The government survived. Spain was destined to invent another empire.

The distribution of the immense African territories among the European powers resulted in the award to Spain of the northern part that comprised the Riff, with a rugged geography populated by a human contingent that has hardly been identified with the precarious unity of Morocco.

The administration of the so-called Protectorate would be a difficult mission to fulfill until its disappearance. The withdrawal order had its holocaust in the place called Annual, where the Spanish detachment of eleven thousand five hundred soldiers was massacred and the survivors were put to the knife. These bloody events were novelistically relived by important writers such as Ramón J. Sender.

In this scenario, the Spanish Legion was founded, following the model of the French. Led by Millán Astray, one of its most prominent leaders was Commander Francisco Franco, who rose through the ranks on merits of war and later became the youngest general in the European armies.

The positions of the Spanish military in North Africa were desired both by the commanders and by the troops themselves who were involved in corruption.

Almost miraculously saved the city of Melilla, the Spanish presence received a considerable effort with the joint operation of the Spanish and French forces in the so-called landing of Al Hoceima (exaggeratedly considered as a precedent of the Normandy operation), a coastal area that still presents the survival of the Spanish “presidios”.

As a result of that remarkable joint operation, the Riff’s leader Abd el-Krim surrendered and was subsequently released. He survived his many adversaries and died in Cairo in 1963. He is considered one of the “inventors” of guerrilla strategy.

The monarchy of Alfonso XIII survived when he handed over power to General Primo de Rivera, but after his fall from grace, the institution soon disappeared when in the municipal elections of 1931 the conservative parties lost electoral favor in the big cities.

The King abdicated and the Second Republic was declared. In 1936 Franco rebelled. The troops led by the coup general left from Morocco at the beginning of the Civil War.

Ceuta and Melilla are remains of that neocolonial stage, recently converted into “autonomous cities” within the Spanish territorial administration. Despite the abandonment of the territory of the Sahara, as a result of the Green March of 1975 when the Franco regime died, Spain insists on the evaluation of the UN opinion subject to a referendum that Morocco has refused to carry out, claiming sovereignty over its inhabitants, a thesis that clashes with that of Algeria, where the Sahrawis take refuge.

Although Morocco’s tactic seems focused on the occupation of Ceuta and Melilla, in reality the priority is the control of the entire Sahara and domination of the southern slope of the Strait of Gibraltar. This strategic detail is a priority for the United States, which has generally supported Moroccan interests, as has France, a power that in turn supports Algeria’s theses.

 

Joaquín Roy is Jean Monnet Professor and Director of the European Union Center at the University of Miami

People in Yangon queue for oxygen cylinders to treat COVID patients as a third wave of the pandemic sweeps through Myanmar. Credit: Sai T

By Sara Perria
ROME, Jul 20 2021 (IPS)

The third wave of Covid-19 is sweeping through Myanmar, from the high narrow buildings of the commercial capital Yangon to bamboo houses in rural areas.

Ma Ni, not her real name, caught the virus in Yangon, infected by her husband and son. But no members of the family show up in the official numbers because they preferred to buy a home test instead of going to a hospital or a quarantine centre.

“It’s been seven days with COVID now,” 34-year-old Ma Ni says. “My husband needs oxygen, but we cannot get it … I hope God will save us.”

Ma Ni’s family is not alone. According to the military’s Ministry of Health, Myanmar recorded 3,461 new cases of COVID-19 and 82 deaths on July 11 alone.

In total, since the pandemic first struck, Myanmar has reported almost 4,000 deaths. Videos circulating on social networks show a dramatic increase in the number of bodies taken to Yangon’s crematorium.

The numbers, although certainly under-reported, are far lower than they were in Europe, the US or India, but they are growing. Moreover, the impact of COVID-19 has been compounded by the aftermath of the military coup on February 1 that ousted elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi and triggered nationwide protests, resulting in more than 900 deaths and thousands of prisoners, according to the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners, an NGO based in Thailand.

As a result, hundreds of panicking citizens are shying away from testing and quarantine facilities perceived as mismanaged by the unpopular military.

“I’d rather die than go to a military hospital,” Ko Moe, again not a real name, tells IPS. “I don’t trust them, and given my work as a volunteer ambulance driver, they might arrest me for helping the protestors.”

The military is trying to stop private initiatives, even shooting to disperse a crowd queuing to refill oxygen tanks. It is also forbidding producers to distribute oxygen to ineligible citizens, saying people are hoarding it unnecessarily.

Myanmar people think otherwise. Deep inside the country, in the city of Taunggyi, Shan State, a doctor interviewed by IPS says people are organising themselves autonomously to cope with the emergency because the health system has collapsed.

“As for now, things look still normal here but … many donors and well-wishers have set up a committee to install oxygen plants by themselves to help the people in the city and the small villages around Taunggyi,” she tells IPS.

Grievances are expressed all over social networks and emotional appeals for help from the international community or obituaries of loved ones who succumbed to the virus.

But it’s also the flu season, which many, feeling abandoned by the State or unable to afford private facilities, mistake for COVID.

“The situation is pretty chaotic. There have been many outbreaks of COVID but also of seasonal flu, in major cities and rural regions,” another doctor working for a private hospital in Yangon tells IPS on condition of anonymity. “People are frustrated for not getting efficient medical care from the authorities, while general hospitals cannot operate on a full scale since the majority of civil service doctors have joined the disobedience movement and there are only a few doctors and nurses left,” he says.

Indeed, only a small percentage of citizens have been vaccinated against the virus. The ongoing protests that started in February have crammed prisons with political prisoners, turning the repression into an epicentre of the outbreak.

Following a recent trip to Russia, junta leader General Min Aung Hlaing announced the purchase of 5 million doses of the Sputnik vaccine. However, it may be too little, too late to avoid an unprecedented health crisis in a country of over 54 million people only partly controlled by the military.

The international community is also accused of not helping, having been already stigmatised for failing to do anything to support Burmese citizens during the coup, beyond statements of condemnation.

The UN special rapporteur for Myanmar Tom Andrews told the Human Rights Commission on July 13 that the junta lacks the “capabilities and the legitimacy to bring this crisis under control”. And the lack of trust in the military makes this crisis “particularly lethal”, he said.

Activists from the opposition ‘Milk Tea Alliance Burma’ expressed the sentiment of the public in a Tweet: “Last year, the pandemic was contained successfully in Myanmar because of collective efforts of everyone. DASSK (Aung San Suu Kyi) was influencing the public well, holding campaigns to make cloth masks, the public followed the instructions well, they masked up and stayed at home without complaining.”

With the population mistrustful of the military and pro-democracy protests continuing, albeit on a much smaller scale, rules are often overlooked.

A Google app tracing people’s movements shows that the situation is back to the pre-coup situation in terms of traffic and crowds in the streets. Many shops may appear to be closed from the outside but are working at normal capacity behind. Masks are usually left at home.

The military has a history of resistance to international aid despite being unequipped to deal with an emergency, as happened in the disastrous aftermath of cyclone Nargis in 2008. The junta is unlikely to change its isolationist stance now, and international help may well be limited, according to a diplomat in Yangon, interviewed by IPS.

“COVID is not going to change anything for the junta, it’s taking people’s minds off the revolution, so it’s not such a bad thing for the military,” he says, asking not to be named for security reasons.

 

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

The writer is a Research Analyst at Stimson Center

By Cristina Petcu
WASHINGTON DC, Jul 20 2021 (IPS)

The forthcoming UN Secretary-General’s “Our Common Agenda” report, to be released before this year’s UN General Assembly High-Level Week, is expected to offer ambitious recommendations to accelerate the realization of the UN75 Declaration as the world comes to grips with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Promote Peace & Prevent Conflicts. Credit: United Nations

While the report’s ideas are still undisclosed, three notions are likely to represent conceptual building blocks: a “new social contract,” a “new global deal,” and “networked and inclusive multilateralism” have each permeated current high-level discussions at the United Nations, especially in speeches of UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

While these three concepts are not mentioned explicitly in the UN75 Declaration, they are implicit in the framing of the declaration’s twelve commitments. Building on perspectives from past and present scholars, world leaders, policymakers, and practitioners, these powerful notions are each unpacked in Stimson Center’s recent report, “Beyond UN75: A Roadmap for Inclusive, Networked, and Effective Global Governance.”

Critics, including the United Nations, argue that the present state of the social contract is outdated and incapable of meeting the needs and challenges of the twenty-first century. The UN Secretary-General himself emphasized that a new social contract is “an opportunity to build back a more equal and sustainable world” from COVID-19.

A new, modernized social contract could, indeed, help advance a more just post-COVID-19 recovery and economic policies that consider the realization of human rights as an end in itself—rather than as one more channel to achieve high economic growth levels under outdated metrics.

It could include a global political commitment to securing social protection floors and universal access to educational systems, among other initiatives that seek to respond to the major economic, technological, and societal shifts now underway.

Similarly, an equitable, resilient, and sustainable social contract should rebuild people’s trust in governance institutions. Trust is a prerequisite that offers legitimacy to those governing, and it permits the existence of a contract in the first place.

With the “new social contract” being the vision and long-term goal for weaving a new normative fiber binding states and peoples together, the world also needs a more operational “new global deal.”

The UN Secretary-General suggested that a new global deal would entail a redistribution of power, wealth, and opportunities, and global political and economic systems that deliver critical global public goods: public health, climate action, sustainable development, and peace.

This echoes long-standing discussions about representativeness in the current system of global governance, considering, for example, the distribution of special drawing rights at the International Monetary Fund, which gives the United States a blocking minority share, or the setup of the Security Council with its five permanent, veto-wielding powers and ten non-permanent members.

Resource redistribution and redirection also need to be seen in light of calls for a “green recovery” from the COVID-19 pandemic and of the need to recalibrate the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.

Advancing a new social contract and new global deal further require a more networked and inclusive multilateralism. This would entail a paradigm shift from the state-centric international world order to one where myriad actors, beyond nation-states (especially traditional major powers), can collaboratively share and implement solutions to complex problems.

Delivering the future we want will not come from “polarized member states or politicized UN secretariats.” It will result from collaborations between international civil servants, Member States, and progressive networks of non-state actors—including scholars, academics, media, businesses, philanthropies, and other stakeholders.

In this spirit, the United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations must update their rules of engagement with non-state actors, to facilitate networked and inclusive multilateralism. There is no dearth of institutional innovation ideas that can help build inclusive multilateralism.

For instance, the Call for Inclusive Global Governance, released in April 2021 and endorsed by over 150 civil society organizations worldwide, provides three recommendations for promoting greater inclusion and participation of civil society at the UN: first, the creation of a formal instrument—a World Citizens’ Initiative—to enable individual citizens to influence the UN’s work; second, a UN Parliamentary Assembly to allow for the inclusion of elected representatives in agenda-setting and decision-making at the UN; and third, the appointment of a UN Civil Society Envoy to support greater civil society engagement at the UN.

Networked and inclusive multilateralism, going beyond classic intergovernmentalism, provides a platform and framework to carry out a new global deal (operational plan) in the service of establishing a new social contract (vision).

What is needed now is enlightened leadership, combined with a well-designed strategy for reform for channeling these ideas in support of a more interlinked and participatory global governance system.

Guided by these three powerful concepts, the Secretary-General’s “Our Common Agenda” can generate political momentum for a potential 2023 World Summit on Inclusive Global Governance for truly innovating the United Nations system to keep pace with present and future challenges and opportunities.

The 75th anniversary of the United Nations was believed to be a moment for laying the foundations for a new kind of multilateralism. Although adoption of the UN75 Declaration represents an important milestone, its vision is yet to be matched by a commensurate global plan for action.

Bouncing back now from the COVID-19 presents an opportunity to also rebuild a global system that can help all nations and peoples effectively overcome current global inequalities, injustices, and insecurity. It is incumbent on all of us to make 2021 a turning point for multilateralism.

 

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

Excerpt:

The writer is a Research Analyst at Stimson Center

By Anis Chowdhury and Jomo Kwame Sundaram
SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, Jul 20 2021 (IPS)

Despite facing the world’s worst pandemic of the last century, rich countries in the World Trade Organization (WTO) have blocked efforts to enable more affordable access to the means to fight the pandemic.

Everyone knows access for all to the means for testing, treatment and prevention – including diagnostic tests, therapeutic medicines, personal protective equipment and vaccines – is crucial.

Anis Chowdhury

European deceit
In October 2020, South Africa and India requested the WTO to temporarily suspend relevant provisions of its Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). By May 2021, the proposal had 62 co-sponsors and support from more than two-thirds of WTO member States.

Despite overwhelming support from low- and middle-income countries, Western governments, Big Pharma and other industry officials dismiss this waiver request as not only unnecessary, but also undermining future technological innovation.

Although most European Parliament members support the waiver proposal, it is actively opposed by European governments and the European Commission (EC), the European Union (EU) executive.

It is also resisted by Brazil and other rich countries, such as the UK, Norway, Switzerland, Australia, Canada and Japan. However, the Biden administration now supports a temporary waiver for vaccines, but is silent on the other items urgently needed.

Misleadingly, European leaders insist that the temporary waiver request is unnecessary, but IP rights (IPRs) are essential for innovation. “IPR regimes have, at best, second-order effects upon the rates of innovation”. In fact, “when patent rights have been too broad or strong, they have actually discouraged innovation”.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

They misleadingly claim access can be achieved by existing provisions for voluntary licensing (VL), technology transfer, COVAX bulk purchasing and existing TRIPS flexibilities, especially compulsory licensing (CL). But these purported solutions are known to be grossly inadequate.

COVAX is struggling due to poor funding, supply shortages and inadequate donations. Hence, many poor countries have not even applied. With IPRs strengthened internationally since 1995, TNCs find technology transfer agreements less profitable.

Big Pharma law
Strict international enforcement of patent protection is recent. Pfizer’s then chairman, Edmund Pratt successfully pushed IP onto the agenda of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which created the WTO and TRIPS in 1995.

Fearing stronger IP rights would enhance corporate power and reduce affordable access to life-saving medicines, many developing countries resisted TRIPS. But rich countries pushed TRIPS through, using carrots and sticks to divide developing countries.

TRIPS includes CL, first introduced in the 1883 Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. A government can thus allow a third party to make or use a patented product or process without the patent owner’s consent. But this can only be for domestic use, subject to other conditions, e.g., paying “the right holder … adequate remuneration”.

Despite great efforts, rich country governments failed to increase members’ TRIPS obligations at the 1997 Singapore WTO ministerial. Nevertheless, US President Clinton tried again at the 1999 Seattle ministerial, triggering an African walkout.

After 9/11, some concessions were made before the 2001 Doha ministerial, including a new ‘Development Round’ of WTO talks. Two decades later, no conclusion is in sight as rich countries see little chance of getting what they want.

With the HIV/AIDS crisis, campaigning against TRIPS was boosted by President Mandela’s leadership. The Doha Ministerial Declaration included ‘public health exceptions’ to TRIPS. Now, there is no need to first negotiate VLs during health emergencies. Also, countries without manufacturing capacity can use CLs to import cheaper versions.

European deceptions
By insisting that existing TRIPS flexibilities are sufficient, European leaders deny all actual problems in practice. Ignoring decades of experience, they used to insist VL provisions are enough to expand output and share expertise.

In reality, VLs are often shrouded in secrecy, with patent holders choosing beneficiaries and even distributors. Thus, the AstraZeneca VL to the Serum Institute of India limits what it can produce, and prevents it from meeting Indian and other needs.

They concede when “voluntary cooperation fails, compulsory licences… are a legitimate tool in the context of a pandemic”. But CLs are only relevant for patents, not new vaccines which have not been patented, and deny other IP barriers.

EC arguments protect Big Pharma, but effectively reject the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP) initiative. C-TAP seeks to enable equitable access to technologies for approved COVID-19 vaccines and therapies. But industry and government officials dismiss technology sharing as unnecessary, and worse, dangerous for future innovation.

Inflexible ‘flexibilities’
For a long time, Big Pharma and their governments, including the EC, pressured developing countries not to use the very CLs they now tout as the solution. The US Trade Representative routinely threatened sanctions against countries using CLs for medicines, only recognising others’ right to use them this year.

CLs are very difficult to actually use, especially by countries with limited negotiating capacities or relevant manufacturing capabilities. Existing provisions require complicated country-by-country, company-by-company and patent-by-patent negotiations, also raising massive coordination problems.

The CL provision may be enough for some, but certainly not all needed equipment, tests and medicines. Many products need several CLs, implying “a harrowing number of CL must be coordinated and granted in multiple countries”.

Also, CL does not require sharing industrial secrets, confidential information, industrial design and other relevant knowledge necessary for viable production. These can be critical, e.g., for mRNA vaccines using new technologies.

Those countries unable to produce themselves have to find others willing to issue CLs to produce cheap generics for export. Yet more hurdles are contained in the fine print of TRIPS and the 2001 ‘flexibilities’.

Bogus claims
In fact, sharing such confidential information not only spurs competition, but also enhances innovation. Thus, Shantha Biotechnics in India developed a low-cost hepatitis B vaccine, the basis for UNICEF’s lauded global vaccination drive.

Contrary to industry and political leaders’ claims that circumscribing patents would kill pharmaceutical innovation, “a host of new drugs and improved HIV treatments” followed “the agreement on Public Health exception to TRIPS”. These new and improved treatments effectively ended that deadly pandemic.

After inventing the polio vaccine, Jonas Salk was asked, “Who owns this patent?”. He famously replied, “Well, the people I would say. There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?”

 

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

• Rich Country Hypocrisy Exposed by Vaccine Inequities
• End Vaccine Apartheid Before Millions More Die
• IP, Vaccine Imperialism Cause Death and Suffering, Delay Recovery
• Intellectual Property Cause of Death, Genocide
• Intellectual Property Monopolies Block Vaccine Access
• Politics, Profits Undermine Public Interest in Covid-19 Vaccine Race
• West First Policies Expose Myths

By Rosi Orozco
MEXICO CITY, Jul 19 2021 (IPS)

In June, the Department of Homeland Security made a critical announcement. For the first time in U.S. history, more than 15 national and local agencies and civilian organizations conducted a simultaneous major binational operation to find missing children inside and outside the United States.

Rosi Orozco

They called it “Operation Lost Souls”. Its objective was to find girls and boys who were missing and possibly deceived or kidnapped by sexual exploitation gangs.

The secret operation lasted a week. And the result announced by Special Agent Erik Breitzke surprised even the organizers: 24 minors were recovered and, among them, three were located in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.

The report of the operation does not explain the condition in which the minors were found. Still, it is not difficult to infer why they were in Ciudad Juarez: the United Nations, the International Police, and the Mexican Congress have warned that this border city is a well-known destination for sex tourism.

In 1993, that Mexican city became infamous worldwide due to a phenomenon known as “Las muertas de Juarez,” where hundreds of femicides were discovered under the suspicion that the victims had been recruited for sexual slavery.

More than 28 years later, Ciudad Juarez is still a city known for its tolerance of prostitution, its glittering brothels with hidden girls, and its streets run by pimps and mafias that are tied to the porn industry. It is a pedophile’s paradise.

There is an explanation for that: in Ciudad Juárez, as in many others cities worldwide, the fight against human trafficking has the wrong approach — the police often harass those who are prostituted, not the clients. But there is a growing global movement calling for doing the opposite.

That movement is also trending in Mexico and is inspired by the French law enacted on April 13, 2016, which prohibits any sexual act that has been agreed upon in exchange for money.

It’s a simple but substantial change: to protect human rights, the law should not go against people trapped in prostitution but against clients. In other words, the authorities must attack the most powerful link in the chain, not the most vulnerable.

To this end, it is necessary to stop the criminalization of those trapped in prostitution and, instead, create incentives for their exit from the sex trade.

For example, designing self-employment programs, granting tax benefits for those who wish to leave prostitution, including them in a protected witness program with benefits, issuing temporary residence permits for foreigners who could not get a job because of their immigration status, among other measures.

To reach the goal of lowering sexual trafficking and exploitation, the law needs to strongly target the demand that perpetuates these crimes. The penalties for “client exploiters” need to be strengthened.

To prosecute them more effectively, mexican activists are asking their government to imitate what the French police does by removing the burden of proof of the solicitation from the victim’s shoulders.

The French law has been a successful model, according to the Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution (CAP International): it has curbed the investment of traffickers, discouraged clients, provided dignified outlets for the most vulnerable, and swept away the dangers of the tolerated clandestinely.

This model has also proved that pimps are less likely to “invest” in a country with such hard measures against them. Because they see themselves as genuine businessmen, these progressive laws such as the Swedish and French laws that have strong penalties for sex buyers are simply not good for business.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), in the General recommendation No. 38 (2020) on human trafficking, encourages this new movement and calls on countries around the world to enforce it, especially in a pandemic context.

“The need to address the demand that fosters sexual exploitation is significant in the context of digital technology, which exposes potential victims to an increased risk of being trafficked,” alerts the General recommendation.

This global movement walks hand in hand with others that have shaken the world, such as #MeToo or the worldwide protests against inequality.

It’s the voice of millions around the world, Mexicans included: never again a city where sex buyers are seen as mere clients and traffickers are treated as businessmen.

To raise awareness among Mexican lawmakers, we will implement from July 26 to August 6 the worldwide campaign #10Days and #VsTrafficking hand in hand with several international organizations that will encourage new activists to stand against exploitative clients and put an end to the suffering of every lost soul in the world.

We are millions convinced of a revolutionary idea: abolishing prostitution does not limit sexual freedom, instead it motivates the sexual freedom that is needed in the world. The one that does not depend on money.

The author is a human rights activist who opened the first shelter for girls and teenagers rescued from sexual commercial exploitation in Mexico. She has published five books on preventing human trafficking; she is the elected Representative of GSN Global Sustainability Network in Latin America.

 

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');  

North Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Credit: UNICEF/Olivia Acland

By Tanvi Bhatkal and Lyla Mehta
BRIGHTON, UK, Jul 19 2021 (IPS)

The UK government’s decision to reduce its Official Development Assistance (ODA) budget from 0.7% of gross national income (GNI) to 0.5% — a cut of around £4 billion this year — was confirmed last week by a majority of 35 votes in a House of Commons vote.

The cuts that came into effect from April this year have been especially devastating for Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), a sector where the UK has been very prominent globally. Between 2015 and 2020, the UK helped 62.5 million people gain access to safe water and sanitation between 2015 and 2020.

A leaked memo of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) highlighted that cuts this year alone to bilateral aid for WASH could be as high as 80% – from £150 million in 2019 to £30 million in 2021. This sudden reduction will both undermine past progress, plunge millions into water insecurity and lead to unnecessary death, especially of children.

Providing clean drinking water is considered one of the most cost-effective ways of improving health and productivity across the global South. Inadequate access to WASH is responsible for 10% of the global disease burden, contributing to 1.6 million preventable deaths annually.

Having piped water frees up time for households, increasing opportunities for income generation, education, childcare and building social capital – especially for girls and women.

According to WaterAid, achieving universal basic water services would free up 77 million working days for women annually. Safe sanitation could prevent 6 billion cases of diarrhoea and 12 billion cases of helminths between 2021-2040, improving child health and nutrition.

For decades, OECD countries including the UK have been committed to improving access to drinking water and sanitation and, in 2010, the UN General Assembly officially recognized the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation.

Despite this, 2 billion people globally lack access to safe water, and 3.6 billion – nearly half of humanity – lack access to safe sanitation. In fact, the WHO and UNICEF’s Joint Monitoring Programme recently announced that achieving the Sustainable Development Goal of universal coverage by 2030 will require quadrupling current rates of progress.

Water, along with pollutants and contaminating agents, flows into a canal in Maputo, Mozambique. Credit: John Hogg / World Bank

It is never a good time to renege on global commitments and cut support for water and sanitation services – but the timing couldn’t be worse than during a global pandemic.

The leaked FCDO memo recognises WASH as a priority area of UK Aid for the British public, especially in the time of Covid-19 and with the UK hosting the UN Climate Change Conference (COP-26). Yet, this is when the UK government decided to turn off the tap.

One example of a UK ODA-funded research project is Towards Brown Gold, which studies the sanitation challenge in off-grid small towns across Ethiopia, Ghana, India and Nepal – and examines how shit can be reimagined as a resource or “brown gold”.

This year the project is receiving one third of its original budget, with uncertainty of future budget restoration. This cut has been devastating to our partners, who have unstintingly worked to formulate collaborative plans and employ staff during the severe wave of Covid-19 in South Asia and civil war in Ethiopia.

These cuts have upset ongoing work and developing partnerships with local governments and communities to contribute to improved sanitation services for the most marginalised groups. Similar cuts have occurred across hundreds of projects on water, sanitation, public health, and even critical Covid-19 research.

The government argues that the cut of £4 billion in ODA is needed as the UK’s public finances have struggled during the pandemic. Yet, while curtailing ODA , the government spent £37 billion on Test and Trace – which was considerably more expensive than similar programmes in other countries and yet failed to deliver on its basic promise.

The government has also increased defense spending by £16 billion, a quarter of which could have protected its ODA commitments. This makes it clear that the cuts are not financial, but rather ideological. While the pandemic has highlighted the need for mutual solidarity, they undermine the idea of working together to enhance global public goods.

The significant cut to UK aid is undoubtedly having devastating effects, with prolonged uncertainty for lifesaving programmes, humanitarian efforts and crucial development progress.

With concerns that the strict economic criteria needed for a return to 0.7% risks making the ODA cuts permanent, it remains imperative for the development community and for citizens to continue to urge the government to prioritise funding for essential WASH services across the global South.

The cut to UK aid is a political choice, not an economic necessity: in the midst of a pandemic the cuts to the UK’s ODA budget negatively affect the world’s poorest, the UK’s reputation, and the effectiveness of research institutions in the UK and partners across the world.

No one is safe until we are all safe. How can the UK afford to renege on its global responsibility at such a time?

Tanvi Bhatkal is a Postdoctoral Researcher and Lyla Mehta, Professorial Fellow, both at the Institute of Development Studies, UK

 

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');  

UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta H. Fore meets with students at the Roberto Suazo Córdoba School, in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Credit: UNICEF/Bindra

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 19 2021 (IPS)

With Henrietta Fore’s decision last week to step down as UNICEF Executive Director, her successor is most likely to be another American since that post has been held– uninterruptedly — by US nationals for almost 74 years, an unprecedented all-time record for a high-ranking job in the UN system.

The seven U.S. nationals who have headed the UN children’s agency since its inception in 1947 include Maurice Pate, Henry Labouisse, James Grant, Carol Bellamy, Ann Veneman, Anthony Lake and Henrietta Fore. Pate held the job for 18 years, from 1947 to 1965, and Labouisse for 14 years, from 1965 to 1979.

No other agency has had a national stranglehold on such a senior position in the 76-year history of the United Nations.

As for individuals monopolizing office, Dr Arpad Bogsch, another US national, held the post of director general of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva for 24 long years (1973-1997).

But more recently, however, the professional life span of senior officials in the UN secretariat is mostly five years, with a possible extension for an additional five years.

Since money talks, the US has continued to stake its claims for the UNICEF job, primarily as its largest single financial contributor.

But that claim also applies to several UN agencies, which depend on voluntary contributions, and where some of the high-ranking positions are largely held by donors or big powers, mostly from Western Europe, or China and Russia.

James Paul, former Executive Director at the New York-based Global Policy Forum (1993-2012) and a prominent figure in the NGO advocacy community at the United Nations, told IPS much is at stake in the appointment of the head of a major agency in the UN system.

Powerful governments battle over prestige and the shaping of policy, he said, pointing out, that “interest is intense now, as the appointment of a new head of UNICEF comes up”.

“Observers inevitably wonder: what country gets the post, what is the region of the appointee, what ethnic or national group does this person represent, what is the person’s gender identify, and finally, last but not least, what is the policy inclination and administrative record of the person selected?” said Paul, author of “Of Foxes and Chickens”—Oligarchy and Global Power in the UN Security Council (2017).

He said some candidates may be serious people with years of experience while others may be personal friends of a powerful head of government.

How will the selection process work and how much pressure will be put on those with a say over the appointment process: the UN Secretary General and Executive Boards or committees? he asked.

In the early years of the UN, he said, there was a tendency to appoint male candidates who were US nationals. The US government often acted very bluntly about getting its way and it threatened many times to withhold funding or punish UN officials if its candidate was not selected.

Two well-known cases of US hegemony are UNICEF, the UN Children’s Fund, and UNDP, the UN Development Programme.

UNICEF is notorious because its Executive Director has been a US national continuously since the organization’s founding 74 years ago, said Paul. Now that the current head is stepping down, the question inevitably arises – will Washington once again be able to get its way?

Admittedly, it did make one concession over the years. Under pressure in 1995 to accept a very accomplished Scandinavian woman, the US agreed to drop its male candidate. Washington then proposed a woman and turned up the heat.

Carol Bellamy, the US candidate, was eventually appointed. The present head, Henrietta Fore, is also a woman but she too carries a US passport, said Paul.

Former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1992-1996), who had a love-hate relationship with the US, tried to break the US monopoly back in 1995. But he failed.

In his book “UN-Vanquished–a US-UN saga,” (1999), Boutros-Ghali says he was thwarted by then US President Bill Clinton and US ambassador Madeline Albright.

Clinton wanted William Foege, a former head of the US Centres for Disease Control, to be appointed UNICEF chief to succeed James Grant, also an American.

Since Belgium and Finland had already put forward “outstanding” women candidates — and since the US had refused to pay its UN dues and was also making ”disparaging” remarks about the world body — “there was no longer automatic acceptance by other nations that the director of UNICEF must inevitably be an American man or woman,” said Boutros-Ghali.

“The US should select a woman candidate,” Boutros-Ghali told Albright, “and then I will see what I can do,” since the appointment involved consultation with the then 36-member UNICEF Executive Board. ”

Albright rolled her eyes and made a face, repeating what had become her standard expression of frustration with me,” he writes.

When the US kept pressing Foege’s candidature, Boutros-Ghali says that “many countries on the UNICEF Board were angry and (told) me to tell the United States to go to hell.”

The US eventually submitted an alternate woman candidate: Carol Bellamy, a former director of Peace Corps.

Although Elizabeth Rehn of Finland received 15 votes to Bellamy’s 12 in a straw poll, Boutros-Ghali said he asked the Board president to convince the members to achieve consensus on Bellamy so that the US could continue a monopoly it held since UNICEF was created in 1947.

And thereby hangs a tale.

According to the latest published figures, total contributions to UNICEF in 2020 were over US$7 billion. The public sector contributed the largest share: US$5.45 billion from government, inter-governmental and inter-organizational partners, as well as Global Programme Partnerships.

The top three resource partners in 2020 (by contributions received) were the Governments of the United States of America (US$801 million), Germany (US$744 million) and the European Union (US$514 million).

As UNICEF’s largest donor, the US was considered “an indispensable partner”.

“Our partnership with the US Government is broad and diverse, spanning humanitarian and development programmes across key areas of UNICEF’s work, including health; education; early child development; water, sanitation and hygiene; nutrition; child protection; gender equality; HIV and AIDS; immunization; and research programmes,” according to UNICEF.

Samir Sanbar, a former UN assistant secretary-General and head of the Department of Public Information, told IPS the argument over the post of UNICEF Executive Director was the first clash between Boutros-Ghali and Ambassador Albright who otherwise was very friendly, as both were “former professors”.

As Boutros-Ghali once quipped: “I may be America’s yes man (as he was described in the Arab press when he was elected secretary-general) but certainly not, yes sir “.

Initially, American UNICEF Executive Directors like Henry Labouisse and James Grant proved their value not merely by bringing U.S. funds but by their proven accomplishments, said Sanbar.

Guterres, an experienced politician, will most likely explore options: perhaps await proposals from the Biden Administration while keeping open possible interest by members of the Security Council like Norway–and others, which could offer a substantive contribution, as long as its candidate is a woman, said Sanbar who had served under five different secretaries-general during his longstanding UN career.

Paul pointed out that UNDP provides an interesting basis for comparison. It had a US head (the title is Administrator) for thirty-two years consecutively, from its founding in 1967.

In 1999, when the moment for a new appointment arose, the UN membership stepped up pressure for a more diverse pool of candidates.

At last, the magic spell of US dominance broke, as Mark Malloch Brown of the UK got the nod. And since 1999, there hasn’t been a single US national in that post of UNDP Administrator.

That was a sign that Washington’s grip on the UN was slipping and that its global influence was waning – slowly perhaps but unmistakably.

A capable woman from New Zealand, Helen Clark, was one of the new breed, along with a Turk, Kemal Dervis, and a German, Achim Steiner, who currently holds the post.

But not all US nominees have turned out badly, said Paul.

James Grant, was a widely-respected head of UNICEF, and Gus Speth won plaudits as head of UNDP. But symbolism is important in a multi-lateral organization with a world-wide membership and a very diverse constituency.

“No matter how competent the US candidate might be, and no matter how independent-minded, color-coded and engendered, it is time for UNICEF to get a non-US Executive Director. The world of 1947 has long gone. US hegemony is not what it was.”

“A bit of fresh air at UNICEF is long overdue,” declared Paul.

Thalif Deen is the author of a newly-released book on the United Nations titled “No Comment -– and Don’t Quote Me on That.” Peppered with scores of anecdotes-– from the serious to the hilarious-– the book is available on Amazon worldwide. The link to Amazon via the author’s website follows: https://www.rodericgrigson.com/no-comment-by-thalif-deen/

 

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

That a country like El Salvador, poor and with many social needs, would embark on an effort to attract so-called bitcoin mining, which demands a huge amount of energy and does not generate large numbers of jobs, is an extravagance that many find hard to digest. “In El Salvador financial resources are not abundant, they […]

Sania Ahmed found her photograph uploaded on ‘Suli Deal’ auctioning app. Credit: Handout

By Sania Farooqui
NEW DELHI, Jul 16 2021 (IPS)

Ongoing online sexual harassment of Muslim women through ‘Sulli Deals’, an auctioning app hosted by GitHub, has been reported to the authorities – but not before it called untold trauma to the targeted women.

Cyber Cell registered the case in Delhi, India, despite GitHub having shut the open-source app Sulli Deals down. Sulli is a derogatory term that often used by abusive right-wing trolls for Muslim women in India.

Previously similar profiles and handles were found on Twitter and YouTube. These platforms were used to harass Muslim women using a similar ‘Sulli Deals’ modus operandi to auction pictures of the women.

Sania Ahmed, a media professional, realised her pictures were being auctioned and morphed online through ‘Sulli Deals’ on Twitter almost a year ago. Sania says she complained to Twitter about these handles, even tried to reach out to the police, but her complaints were ignored.

“When I first found it online, a handle on Twitter was bidding Pakistani Muslim women. When I called it out, that handle blocked me, but that incident was followed by horrible trolling, very graphic abuse, and posts. I knew about this ecosystem of trolls, and I had been complaining to Twitter, but it had not taken any action,” Ahmed told IPS in an exclusive interview.

“It was recently when a right-wing handle tagged me on Twitter that I realised that they had gone ahead and created an entire app, and they were bidding on Muslim women through it.

“I have received rape threats, acid attack threats and death threats. This was different because it wasn’t just about me anymore; there were so many other women involved. The fact that these men had downloaded all our pictures, imagine the kind of effort they were putting in,” Ahmed said.

Farah Mizra (name changed due to safety concerns), is another woman who found her pictures on the ‘Sulli Deal’ app, said in an interview with IPS. She was “in an absolute state of shock” for days when her friend told her the pictures were being used as ‘Sulli Deal of the Day’.

“I also found my friends’ pictures on that app, and my first reaction was to immediately report it to GitHub. There were twitter handles sharing screenshots from this app and tagging us, and I just spent that night incessantly reporting all those handles that were auctioning us.”

Online harassment creates anxiety about general safety.

“Online sexual harassment doesn’t take much time to reach women offline. They have my pictures. They have my name. They can easily get more information and details about me. I feel safe, neither online nor offline.

“These attacks are not random. The women are carefully chosen. We are all Muslim women. We have a voice and have been vocal towards many policies of the BJP government,” Mizra said.

According to this report by Plan International, “Free to be Online”, 58 percent of young women face online harassment and abuse on different social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, WhatsApp and TikTok.

Anne-Birgitte Albrectsen, CEO of Plan International, in this piece, said: “In high and low-income countries alike, the report found that girls are routinely subjected to explicit messages, pornographic photos, cyberstalking and other distressing forms of harassment and abuse. Attacks are most common on Facebook, where 39 percent have suffered harassment, followed by Instagram (23 percent), WhatsApp (14 percent) and Twitter (9 percent).”

Geeta Seshu, a journalist specialising in freedom of expression, working conditions of journalists, gender and civil liberties, in an interview with IPS, said women face a range of online harassment which range from abuse to stalking to doxing and hosting platforms need to take responsibility.

“The ‘Sulli Deal’ auction is the latest manifestation of the extreme misogyny and fear of who speaks out. It is revolting and Islamophobic, and an attempt to intimidate and insult the dignity of women,” Seshu says.

“Organised groups use the internet to incite hatred and abuse. The delay in spotting and taking down objectionable content is inexcusable. If this app was hosted on GitHub, it needs to state clearly what its hosting guidelines are. I feel that the tech companies are aware of the problematic content. They do allow its circulation while they pretend ignorance or helplessness. For them, the more the clicks and eyeballs, the more the possibility of monetisation.”

Following these attacks on Muslim women, a group of more than 800 women’s rights organisations and concerned individuals issued a statement condemning the harassment and abuse.

“This is a conspiracy to target women by creating a database of those Muslim women journalists, professionals and students who were actively raising a voice on social media against right-wing Hindutva majoritarianism. The intention is to silence their political participation.

“This attempt to de-humanise and sexualise Muslim women is a systemic act of intimidation and harm. This is not the first time this has happened,” the statement says.

The National Commission of Women (NCW) took suo motu cognisance of the case and has written to the Delhi commissioner of police seeking a detailed action-taken report on the matter.

Hana Mohsin Khan, a commercial pilot, says she was targeted because of her religion.

Commercial pilot Hana Mohsin Khan was also targeted for taking issue with the ‘Suli Deal’ app. Credit: Handout

“I’m a Muslim woman. Even though I am not political, I am active on Twitter. All I did was support and Tweet against those ‘Sulli Deal’ Twitter handles earlier, and I guess they decided to go after me as well,” Khan said.

“I am not scared, this is not going to stop me from doing what I am doing, but the fact is they took my photo from Twitter, my username, and this app was running for almost over 20 days without our knowledge and that just makes me angry.”

Khan was among the women who went ahead and filed an FIR with the police, she tweeted, sharing a copy of her FIR and said, “I am resolute and firm in getting these cowards to pay for what they have done. These repeated offences will not be taken sitting down. Do you worse, I will do mine. I am a non-political account targeted because of my religion and gender.”

In a statement, Human Rights Watch flagged its concern towards the Indian government’s policies and actions towards its minorities.

“Since Modi’s BJP came to power in 2014, it has taken various legislative and other actions that have legitimised discrimination against religious minorities and enabled violent Hindu nationalism. The BJP government’s actions have stoked communal hatred, created deep fissures in society, and led to much fear and mistrust of authorities among minority communities.

“Prejudices embedded in the government of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have infiltrated independent institutions, such as the police and the courts, empowering nationalist groups to threaten, harass, and attack religious minorities with impunity,” the statement says.

The internet has always held out the promise of democratic communication, says Seshu. For Muslim women and women who are marginalised and face discrimination in society, the internet can be empowering.

“The internet is regulated and censored by the state and by private internet companies. Organised groups use the internet to incite hatred and abuse. When no action is taken against these vigilante groups by either the state or by private companies, they jeopardise and end up destroying all democratic space.”

 

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 UNDP

By Borbala Csete and Andrea Eras Almeida
VIENNA, Jul 16 2021 (IPS)

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Eastern Caribbean island nation, famed for its beautiful landscapes, pristine white-sand beaches and temperate climate, attracted around a million tourists each year.

But with travel restrictions across the globe, tourism all but dried up, and the country’s economy has seen a dramatic downturn. It is estimated that, by the end of 2020, GDP had contracted by 18%, primarily due to a 71% decline in long-stay arrivals over the year.

In these times of instability, the Barbadian government is accelerating its efforts to diversify the economy and rebuild a more sustainable and resilient one. Apart from renewed activity in traditional sectors, the country aims to tap into the new value chains of the emerging global green and blue economy.

Barbados not only has ambitious plans to become the first carbon-free small island developing state by 2030, but also intends to become an export leader of cleantech products and services to the Caribbean and beyond.

Cleantech for more resilience

In this context, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in Vienna, with funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF), is supporting the Government of Barbados with the establishment of BLOOM, the Caribbean’s first cleantech cluster.

Created as public-private partnership, the cluster provides shared resources and services, as well as a makerspace for companies and academia to work on joint projects, solutions and marketing. The cluster is hosted by the Barbados Investment and Development Corporation (BIDC), under the supervision of the Ministry of International Business and Industry.

Mark Hill, CEO of BIDC, said, “Cleantech is part of our “Design It, Make It, Ship It” export and business development strategy, which aims to foster the design of feasible, viable and desirable Barbadian products and services that are well-produced, sustainable and globally competitive, and can be physically shipped or virtually exported across the globe. With the BLOOM cluster we have an important tool to promote local cleantech entrepreneurship and innovation.”

“We can build on the success of the Barbadian solar-thermal industry, which has its origins in the 1970s. Solar thermal water heating reaches over 55,000 consumers today, saving thousands of barrels of oil and CO2 emissions each year”.

“Under the common BLOOM label, we will upgrade existing industry and create new ones, tapping into new technologies and business models, including electric mobility, battery storage, green hydrogen, ocean energy, efficient appliances, waste recycling, bioenergy and the circular economy,” he added.

“The cluster’s sustainable, responsible and impactful investment design-led approach to export development, embraces the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a bedrock for developing Barbadian businesses.

“The days of business-as-usual are over. We’re doing business unusual,” concludes Hill.

Matching businesses, science and beyond

Jari Aaltonen, manager of BLOOM, explains, “The BLOOM cleantech cluster is still a relatively new player in Barbados’ innovation ecosystem as it was launched in 2020 in the midst of a deep economic crisis. As of now, the cluster has 20 members including start-ups, government agencies, chambers and universities.”

“Working with young start-ups and new business development projects has great economic and job creation potential,” says Aaltonen. At the moment, the cleantech incubator is established with 10 incubatees, whose business models and business plans are under development in cooperation with the cleantech cluster members.

The cluster has engaged young cleantech entrepreneurs from the University of West Indies for the incubation programme, offering them high-quality training, individual coaching and mentoring provided by local experts and partly by international training institutions like Coursera and the International Labour Organization. “This combination is the key for accelerated learning,” Aaltonen says.

“The cluster is working at all levels: local, national, regional and global. The country’s first cleantech incubator was established with four experts, which has nearly doubled to seven since, in line with growing demand”.

The team is working very closely with their start-ups in their first two years, to help them validate their business idea and business model, secure financing, start product development and get their first few clients. Building new skills and capacities is key for the success of any start-up, and, therefore, there is a sharp focus and a lot of attention on organizing online training courses that are compact, innovative, and pragmatic at the same time.

Since 2019, a close cooperation has been established with the Barbados Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Caribbean Climate Innovation Centre and the International Association of Science Parks to boost strategic partnerships between local and international businesses.

Standing out from the crowd: women and youth cleantech entrepreneur

One such organization is CEMBI (Caribbean Environmental Management Bureau), a non-governmental organization which has launched the BitEgreen Market web platform and app to increase the use of recycled materials.

CEO Simera Crawford explains that the BitEgreen app is “a solution that offers value to the community at large through the preservation of the environment for present and future generations.

“I live by a purpose which is to preserve the well-being of nature for present and future generations. I have the training and abilities to do something about it,” she adds.

Crawford also acknowledges that “building a team to foster high performance implementation of a very extensive business idea and finding assistance in marketing and communications is a challenge.” UNIDO’s programme is designed to help alleviate these concerns until the growth of the business diminishes them.

Empowering women and youth

As of now, there are ten start-ups in the incubation programme, and 60% of the entrepreneurs are women. Close to two-thirds of the clients have managed to raise financing through grants and/or loans.

Kerri-Ann Bovell is part of the cleantech cluster with her business EcoMycö, which seeks to replace traditional fossil fuel-based packaging, such as Styrofoam and high-density and low-density polyethylene, with a bio-based and biodegradable alternative. She incorporates local plant matter as the raw materials for the bioplastic films she has created so far.

“I feel like I am at the starting point of a successful journey. Thanks to the support from the incubator, I have already learned to think more critically and have gained a much better understanding of what it takes to start and grow a successful business.”
For Bovell, pushing a bio-material business ahead implies “contributing to both our Barbadian and Caribbean economies, possibly even the international community, in a manner that results in little-to-no negative environmental impacts.”

And for those who are interested in working in this field, Bovell advises “be prepared to not only work hard but work smart as well. Also, utilize the resources provided for you as much as possible.”

Pilot for global replication

The GEF-funded project in Barbados is a pilot for the Global BLOOM programme promoted by UNIDO, within the Global Network of Regional Sustainable Energy Centres (GN-SEC), which assists developing countries in the establishment of cleantech clusters as part of their energy, environment and industrialization policies.

According to Martin Lugmayr, UNIDO Global BLOOM Coordinator, “Clustering is an important tool to incentivise the private sector to strategically engage in the expanding value chains of global cleantech manufacturing and servicing. A sustainable and inclusive climate transition requires the strengthening of local entrepreneurship and innovation, also in lower and lower-middle income countries. Ultimately, it is about local jobs and environmental sustainability.”

“In the past, cleantech clustering has been predominantly a domain of industrialized and emerging countries. However, there is also a critical mass of young entrepreneurs and scientists in developing countries who are keen to work together in a collaborative platform, benefitting from joint resources, intelligence and support for incubation and industrial upgrading,” he adds.

Borbala Csete and Andrea Eras Almeida work in the Energy Systems and Infrastructure Division of the Directorate of Environment and Energy at the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in Vienna, Austria.

 

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

With its political and economic clout, the G20 should lead in delivering sustainable food systems as the world grapples with rising hunger, malnutrition and inequality. That was the consensus of leading food and development leaders at a virtual conference on Fixing Food 2021: An opportunity for G20 countries to lead the way, hosted this week […]

Credit: GRI

By Margarita Lysenkova
AMSTERDAM, the Netherlands, Jul 15 2021 (IPS)

As the global community gears up for the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit in September, it is significant that preparations are also underway by Global Reporting Initiative to deliver a new sector reporting standard for agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing.

The Summit aims to leverage the power of food systems to deliver progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet, unlocking the contribution of companies in the food production sectors will be impossible without clarity on their sustainable development impacts.

Part of GRI’s Sector Program, which aims to deliver 40 Sector Standards over the coming years, the exposure draft version of the Sector Standard for Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fishing is currently out for public comment. The Sector Program has a remit to provide the global best practice for transparency within sectors, helping organizations meet stakeholder expectations for comprehensive and comparable sustainability reporting.

We are prioritizing agriculture, aquaculture and fishing because these sectors provide for basic and essential societal needs: food, most obviously, but also raw materials, such as fibers and fuels. They also have shared and overlapping materiality, which steered our rationale for bringing them under one umbrella.

The Standard will add to the reporting landscape for the sectors, bridging the gap on sector topics where stakeholder expectations are evolving and scrutiny is increasing. It will deliver disclosures that consider biodiversity and natural resources, measures to mitigate climate change, as well as how to adapt farming and fishing practices in ways that minimizes their negative impacts.

This focus closely dovetails with the objectives of the Food Systems Summit, for which the pre-summit activity starts in July. The UN articulates the aims as ensuring access to safe and nutritious food for all; shifting to sustainable consumption patterns; boosting nature-positive production; advancing equitable livelihoods; and building resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks, and stress.

Margarita Lysenkova. Credit: GRI

Research and rationale

The draft Standard’s content is the culmination of more than 12 months of rigorous research by our Sector Team, drawing on authoritative sources and a multi-stakeholder process. A 19-member expert working group was instrumental in developing the exposure draft.

Reflecting diverse backgrounds, it includes representatives from five continents and constituencies, with a unique combination of sectoral skills and organizational experience, including crop and animal production, aquaculture, and fishing.

The proposed Sector Standard will help companies increase recognition and understanding on their shared sustainability challenges. It includes relevant reporting topics that are covered by GRI’s (sector-agnostic) topic-Specific Standards – for example, climate adaptation, biodiversity, waste, food safety, and occupational health – as well as introducing seven new topics.

By including topics not covered by existing GRI Standards, we have expanded the breadth of reporting guidance for agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations to identify their most significant impacts – thereby supporting decision-useful data that can be a catalyst for the adoption of more sustainable practices.

The seven new topics

The newly introduced topics in the draft Standard are:

1. Food security recognizes the sectors’ central role in food production, guiding organizations to describe commitments to ensure their operations contribute to stability of food supply and access to food, including how they work with other organizations.
2. Land and resource rights calls on companies to report how they respect individuals’ and communities’ land rights (including those of indigenous people). It also asks about their operations and suppliers whose access or rights to natural resources cannot be assured.
3. Living income addresses whether companies provide enough for workers and producers supplying to them to afford a decent standard of living. The topic also deals with reporting on the proportion of employees paid above living wage.
4. Natural ecosystem conversion covers policies, commitments and monitoring tools to reduce or eliminate activities that change natural ecosystems to another use or profoundly change an ecosystem’s structure or function.
5. Soil health guides reporting on soil management plans and fertilizer application.
6. Pesticides use focuses on how organizations manage and use chemical or biological substances for controlling pests or regulating plant growth.
7. Animal health and welfare addresses the approach to animal health planning and use of welfare certification schemes or audits, as well as disclosing the use of any medicinal or hormone treatments.

Grounded in the SDGs

With positive and negative impacts that link to the SDGs, all of the topics covered in this Sector Standard, and the way it is structured, will make it easier for businesses to understand their contribution to the achievement of the SDGs – and how they can contribute towards solutions.

Perhaps more than any other sector, agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations have wide-ranging impacts that touch on all of the 17 SDGs. In particular, this new Standard makes multiple linkages between topics and goals on ending poverty (Goal 1); ending hunger (Goal 2); ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation (Goal 6); promoting decent work for all (Goal 8); reducing inequalities (Goal 10); ensuring sustainable consumption and production (Goal 12); taking climate action (Goal 13); protecting life below water (Goal 14) and life on land (Goal 15); ensuring peace and justice (Goal 16); and building partnerships (Goal 17).

We need your input

The global public comment period to gather feedback on the exposure draft for Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fishing Sector Standard closes on 30 July. We encourage you to channel your considerations on this draft’s feasibility, completeness, and relevancy by completing an online questionnaire. The more input from all interested groups and stakeholders, the more we can do to ensure the delivery of a Standard that is fit-for-purpose.

Our hope for the final Standard, which we intend to launch in 2022, is to empower organizations to achieve meaningful and consistent sustainability reporting that supports sustainable food systems and encourages responsible fishing and farming practices.

We all know that companies within these sectors are essential for providing the food and resources that human wellbeing depends on. Let’s ensure that they can do so in a way that contributes to lasting and sustainable solutions.

Margarita Lysenkova joined GRI Standards Division in 2019 and has been instrumental in the development of the new Sector Program, contributing to the GRI Oil and Gas Sector Standard and leading the pilot project for the Sector Standard for Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fishing.

With a professional background in corporate, UN and non-for-profit sectors across four countries, Margarita’s expertise spans international labour standards and sustainability. Previous roles include working for the International Labour Organization in Geneva, and in financial reporting with a Belgian multinational. Margarita holds degrees in economics (Saint Petersburg University of Economics & Finance) and business management (ESC Rennes School of Business).

ABOUT GRI
Global Reporting Initiative is the independent, international organization that helps businesses and other organizations take responsibility for their impacts, by providing the global common language to report those impacts – the GRI Standards

 

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

Excerpt:

The writer is Manager – Sector Program, Global Reporting Initiative

Two women processing peppers in a small plant in Turkey. Credit: FAO

By Mario Lubetkin
ROME, Jul 15 2021 (IPS)

Europe, the United States and other countries have made important progress in reducing the dramatic impact of COVID-19 in key sectors of the economy and population. However, in some parts of Africa, Latin America, Asia and the Middle East, the devastating effects of the pandemic continue to severely affect these sectors. One sector in particular, the food and agriculture sector, has been deeply impacted.

This was one of the issues discussed at the meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation held on 29 June in Matera, Italy, within the framework of the Group of 20 (G20), under the Italian Presidency. The topic of food sustainability was addressed at the meeting in view of the ongoing impacts of COVID-19.

One of the approved initiatives was the creation of a coalition in favour of food that allows countries, whether multilaterally or bilaterally, to find common paths based on successful practices that different countries have carried out throughout this period beginning in early 2020.

The idea of the Food Coalition sends a clear signal – each country, on its own, will not be able to cope with the difficulties that the pandemic has caused or worsened.

According to FAO data, over 100 million more people could fall into hunger because of COVID-19, further increasing the current figure of 690 million hungry people

This initiative is part of a broader internal debate within the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) to identify ways to address the potential worsening of poverty and hunger due to the effects of the pandemic.

In 2015, more than 150 heads of state and government made a commitment, to achieve 17 Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. Two of these goals set out to eliminate poverty and hunger. If action is not taken to recover from the effects of the pandemic, we risk not being able to reach our goal by that time. According to FAO data, over 100 million more people could fall into hunger because of COVID-19, further increasing the current figure of 690 million hungry people (according to figures announced in July 2020).

On the contrary, if they continue this path, in 2030, more than 840 million people around the world could starve despite the efforts that have been made to date.

The initiative is about building a coalition with a common vision that takes into account the aspects of food sustainability, health, the environment and the economy.

The participation of different public and private actors was precisely one of the topics that was discussed during the aforementioned G20 meeting in Matera. This resulted in the launch of a call for joint global or regional initiatives that can be summarized at the meeting of the Ministers of Agriculture of the G20, to be held in mid-September in Florence, Italy.

This process of joining and coordinating common plans and actions, leaving behind certain areas of isolation generated by COVID-19 between countries and regions, should allow, for example, small producers in less developed countries to act directly with markets in developed countries. This is a consideration that is being applied by countries and producer groups in Europe, the United States, and some African countries.

In addition, incorporating into new peace agreements, for example between Israel and Morocco, the component of sustainable agriculture and food and even reviewing existing projects in different countries which were substantially affected by COVID-19 are viable solutions to move forward.

Reorientating agricultural and food strategies in the mid and long term by adopting a “one health” approach should also share a similar and complementary vision. One that focusses on the analysis of health, nutrition, the sustainable future of the planet and animals, to work towards getting out of the current risky and fragmented reality.

We must protect biodiversity, promote initiatives of young people and women in rural areas, avoid food loss that continues to exceed 14 percent of what is being produced, and generate new food sustainability scenarios, among many other aspects.

This joint effort of coalitions should help reverse the scandalous trend towards starvation and obesity (more than 1 billion people are obese, in addition to hundreds of millions of people starving), which renders the quality of nutrition as one of the challenges of the post-pandemic.

This will be one of the topics for discussion at the Pre-Summit of the Food Systems Summit, to be held in Rome between 26 – 28 July, convened by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Thousands of participants, either physically or virtually, from presidents to ministers, academics, representatives of the private sector and civil society, are expected to be present.

The conclusions of the debates of the Pre-Summit in Rome will later be sent to New York in September, where heads of state and government will meet to reach possible common agreements.

Today more than ever, it is time to join forces, analyze the complexity of the situation, all while looking for experiences that have had tangible and positive results throughout this period.

As Pope Francis recently pointed out, it is necessary to “redesign an economy suitable for men, which is not limited to profit but connected” to the common good, an ethics-friendly economy, respectful of the environment.

Excerpt:

Mario Lubetkin is Assistant Director General at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

By Jewel Fraser
PORT-AU-PRINCE, Jul 14 2021 (IPS)

A regular visitor to the islands of the Caribbean has become a dreaded nuisance over the past ten years. The sargassum seaweed that typically washes ashore now arrives each year in overwhelming, extraordinary amounts for reasons that are not entirely clear.

When it comes, it threatens marine wildlife, disrupts local fisheries and then dies on Caribbean beaches, leaving stinking toxic debris that drives away tourists.

The Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism is looking for ways to deal with the problem and has launched a 3-year project with the New Zealand government to turn this environmental hazard into an economic opportunity. In this Voices from the Global South podcast, IPS Correspondent Jewel Fraser hears more about the project.

 

Sargassum covers a Caribbean beach for as far as the eye can see, in 2018.
Music: Big Boi Pants by Shane Ivers – https://www.silvermansound.com

 

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: UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

By P. Soma Palan
COLOMBO, Sri Lanka, Jul 14 2021 (IPS)

The only Planet in the Universe with living beings, including animal and plant life is the Planet Earth. Can we transform it to a Utopia, more or less, a Paradise. Yes, we can. Why not? If all Nations of the Planet have a genuine desire to have eternal peace and harmony, without recourse to a course that will lead to the destruction of the Planet to smithereens.

The end of the World War2 gave birth to the United Nations Organization in 1945. Leaders of all Nations, collectively, framed the UN Charter and adopted it as the Gospel of all Nations of the world. The primary and the fundamental objective of the UNO, inter alia, was the prevention of a recurrence of another World War and its calamitous consequences to the Planet Earth.

That is, to banish wars of any magnitude, limited or world- wide, from the face of the Earth. The World has been saved from the scourge of a multi-dimensional war for the last 76 years. But the absence of such a war does not mean the World has secured eternal peace and harmony. Limited wars, persists, including terrorism, around the world, in localized regions.

Can Peace Co-exist with Armies in place?

How could one banish wars from the Planet Earth, while nations retain armies? Isn’t the clarion call for World peace, in the midst of military, naval and the air forces, ironical, antithetical and self-defeating? It is like giving a gun to an individual and asking him to practice peace. What is true of the individual is greatly true of nations with armies.

The primary purpose, and the only purpose of an army, is to wage war and fight. That is what armies are for. The mere existence of armies is an act of violence. Armies are not meant for to practice “Ahimsa” and Non-violence. Having armies means the intention to wage war. It cannot have any other intention.

The only deciding factor is the point of time. If private people are allowed to carry guns, what will happen? There will be chaos and mayhem in such countries. Naturally, all citizens will carry weapons to defend themselves from being attacked by other fellow citizens.

What if we spent more on peace and less on arms? The United Nations General Assembly declared 2021 the “International Year of Peace and Trust”. It is also the first year of the Decade of Action to usher in ambitious steps to deliver on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Against this backdrop, the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) launched the “What if — Spesterra” Youth Video Challenge to stimulate young people’s interest and knowledge about the vital way disarmament contributes to a safer, more secure and sustainable world for all. Credit: UNODA

This applies even more to countries in a macro scale. There can never be peace and harmony. Apparent peace is only an interlude; A lull between war and peace. But never will it be an everlasting peace on the planet.

It would be argued that countries must have an army. It is a necessity to defend itself from external threats of aggression, invasion and conquest. That is because it is the norm for all countries to have standing armies. Therefore, the need for defense against threats, arise.

If countries don’t have armies, where is the threat? If the possibility for offence is eliminated altogether, the need for defense is superfluous. This leads to competition among the countries. Each country wants to outdo the other in their capacity to defend.

Thus, the fire power of the country is increased in its lethality and intensity for destruction. This is only limited to big and militarily powerful countries. It is of no significance to small countries. Small countries become pawns only in the geo-political games of large and powerful countries.
Armies and Human Civilization are incompatibles

Human civilization has reached its peak in progress and advancement. Isn’t having armies armed to the teeth with weapons to cause death and destruction, an insult to the intelligence of civilized human beings? Is it compatible with the so called higher human civilization?

Comparatively, there had not been a major international war for the last 76 years. Practically, national armies have been hibernating. To have armies without a war is a waste of human and material resources of countries. It does not contribute to the Gross National Product (GNP) of a country.

Moreover, armies existing within a country side by side with other higher and noble Institutions like Universities, Churches, Temples, Mosques, dedicated to religion and spirituality is a contradiction; an unholy existence between the Demon and the Divine.

Armies and wars are a manifestation of primitive tribalism. Paradoxically, primitive tribes, fought wars, in a more civilized and less cruel manner than the modern technologically advanced armies. Primitive tribes fought hand to hand, directly with the enemy, with simple weapons like bows and arrows, spears. Truly, they were more heroic than the modern soldiers.

Modern armies fight with technically advanced weapons by just pressing the trigger that kill, maim enemies in thousands per second. There is nothing courageous or heroic than the compulsive survival instinct to kill the enemy before he kills you.

Those who win wars with such ease with machines are decorated with medals and titles, which they egregiously display on their uniform lapels, for killing human beings. Isn’t this barbaric and uncivilized; A refined form of tribalism.

Armies generate Production of Armaments

The existence of armies inevitably leads to production of armaments in factories. Today, production of military hardware is a lucrative trade of bigger and powerful nations. What you produce needs to be sold. So, nations create a demand for weapons and military hardware by fomenting belligerence in vulnerable countries and even promote insurgencies and terrorism.

World terrorism is a by-product of nations having armies. How can preaching of world peace and harmony can be achieved in the prevailing context on Planet Earth?

Thus, other vulnerable countries are de-stabilized, and covertly instigated, and promote conflicts and belligerence, insurgencies, and terrorism in other countries for profitable business. One cannot talk of universal peace and harmony and a planet free of wars, unless and until the instruments of wars, such as standing armies, armament production facilities, deadly sophisticated weaponry, nuclear arsenals, inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBM) and the next logical extension of biological weapons in the form of disease as an agent to kill, which is the next goal of powerful nations, are disbanded, dismantled and completely wiped out of the Planet Earth.

This is not impossible if leading nations have a firm and committed will and sincerity of purpose to achieve eternal peace and harmony on the Planet Earth.

Total disarmament is the only panacea for Peace and Harmony on Planet Earth Thus, if armies exist as a norm for the need for nations’ defense and security against possible external aggression and invasion, stockpiling of weapons and military hardware and other infrastructures, becomes a necessity and cessation of wars between nations, terrorists’ insurgencies, are an impossible goal to attain on Planet Earth.

After all the UNO is the world’s apex forum with a membership of 193 nations, big and small. All nations should voluntarily accede to adopt a Universal Convention or Agreement to do away with armies and dismantle all military hardware, infrastructures and production of weapons.

Once this ideal is achieved, permanent and irreversible peace and harmony would rein on Planet Earth. Planet Earth could be truly transformed into a Utopia.

Analogy between the Planet Earth and Countries

Planet Earth is a gigantic territory. Its population is contained in pockets of countries, which have defined boundaries. On a macro scale each country is a human settlement. The oceans, seas and the space above commonly belong to all countries.

Likewise, countries population is contained in pockets of territorial units of human settlements as homes, residencies and institutions. Rivers, lakes, forests within a country are common and belong to the country, the State. This similarity or analogy between the Planet Earth and each country, will logically demonstrate that what happens within a country could possibly happen in the Planet Earth, also.

Countries of the Planet are thus analogous to territorial units of human settlements within each country. The territorial units of a country are not allowed to have arsenals of armaments, miniature armies. Therefore, there is no threat of any territorial unit of human settlement attacking another, and annexing and expanding its territorial unit.

Thus, peace and harmony prevail in countries between human settlements. There may happen riots and mob violence at times, which are quelled by the State’s Law and Order arm, the Police Force not by guns, but by such devices as batons, tear gas, water cannons.

The fact that no one has arms and armories is the only and prime reason for the prevalence of peace and harmony in the territorial settlements. If this is possible within countries, why cannot there be peace and harmony between countries of the Planet Earth when armies and armaments are abolished?

Why should this be brushed aside as an ideal and theoretical proposition? It can be made a practical reality. What is needed is the will, dedication and commitment of all countries to voluntarily accede solemnly under Oath to an International Convention or Agreement to abolish all standing armies and dismantle all military hardware and infrastructures, including nuclear reactors.

The sole responsibility and onus lie with the United Nations Organization. This is not an ideal dream but a realizable goal. Once this is achieved, there is no need to labor for World Peace and Harmony. It will come automatically and naturally.

The Ideal, Theoretical and the Practical

My thesis for a Utopian Planet Earth would be received with expected contempt, and derisively dismissed as an idealistic dream, theoretical and impractical by the realist pundits. The world is full of practical minded realists. These practical men are an obstacle for human progress. Idealists are branded as fools and day dreamers.

Pragmatists call themselves realists. They little realize that all action, practice and reality were born out of an idea. Idea precedes practice and not the reverse. Realists are pessimists who accept the faulty and the imperfect as immutable reality. They accept the state of things as they are, as sacred and inviolable whereas, the idealists want to make the imperfect, perfect. The realists want to live with it.

That is the difference between the idealists and the realists. The latter consider themselves skillful and diplomatic with the ability to navigate through the existing reality and function within its parameters. Skillful diplomacy is another word for deceit and cunning. But the Idealists need only sincerity and honesty and will to overcome practical difficulties to realize their visionary goal.

Consequential benefits of total and complete disarmament

Firstly, the immediate and direct consequence of total and complete disarmament is undoubtedly, the Planet Earth will be free of wars between nations and within nations. Peace and harmony will reign supreme. All disputes between nations and within nations would be settled by dialogue, discussion and negotiation directly between nations, if necessary under the auspices of the UNO; Failing which, adjudication by the International Court of Justice, should be made mandatory and its decision will be final and conclusive.

Secondly, the need to defend one’s country and its territorial integrity against any foreign threat will disappear. Countries’ allocation of large portion of their National Income for defense in their budgets too will disappear. This resulting savings from human and material resources will be available for allocation to other vital segments of economic development, such as education, health, and investment on economic development, Infra-structures, poverty alleviation and raising the general standard of living of its citizens. It will increase countries’ national wealth and prosperity.

Thirdly, human resource of the defense forces can be channeled and absorbed into civilian productive sectors, if necessary, by re-training. The military hardware and infrastructures, such as aircraft, battleships, aircraft carriers can be remodeled and modified for civilian purposes such as, passenger and cargo transport. Battle tanks also could be modified for use for civilian purposes of land use.

Fourthly, abolition of armaments production facilities of countries will result in non-production of weapons. This will mean the complete closure of supply chain of weaponry around the world for terrorist outfits, and terrorism will die a natural death.

Fifthly, the Planet Earth would be turned into a Utopia, where peace and harmony, will be the norm. It is the only option opened to mankind to save the Planet Earth from total destruction from nuclear and biological wars with disease as a weapon, to which we are heading , if not in the near but certainly in the remote future.

The writer, who describes himself as a world citizen, is a peace activist with an abiding interest in the preservation of Planet Earth. He has been influenced by spiritual celebrities like Swami Vivekananda, Sadh Guru, Jiddu Krishnamurti and others.

He can be reached at: sahapalan@gmail.com

 

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

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

Could the next wars be triggered by climate change?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Systems not sectors

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Inclusivity not exclusivity

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

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

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

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

Global public goods not sovereign-owned commodities

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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