Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

The United Nations Headquarters in New York. Credit: Unsplash/Nils Huenerfuerst

By Maximilian Malawista
NEW YORK, Jun 24 2025 (IPS)

The world is losing interest in investing in others, especially when it comes to humanitarian aid. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has slowed to critical levels, weakening emerging markets and further slowing growth across developing nations.

As of 2025, FDI has dwindled to its lowest levels yet, largely due to heightened trade tensions among barriers for international investment. Lowered levels of FDI indicate a move to domestic and isolationist efforts, increasing the likelihood of failed budgetary cooperation to international intergovernmental bodies such as the United Nations.

This is already evident in the UN’s budgets for the Secretariat and for humanitarian aid operations. With many of the UN’s largest donors deciding to cut back on their contributions, the organization will now see a 20 percent reduction in its workforce (6,900 jobs), in addition to sizing down humanitarian aid operations globally. On June 20th, Spokesperson for the Secretary General Stéphane Dujarric remarked, “no office in the UN will be exempt from the 20 percent reduction, and that includes the Secretary General’s office.” This would suggest that the cuts have been brought on due to the reduced budget, and not a want for managerial optimization of the UN’s staff. Under U.S. President Donald Trump, nearly USD 1.5 billion in missed payments have contributed to a USD 3.7 billion budget cut to the UN. This financial strain has been further exacerbated by multiple overdue payments from China. Together, China and the U.S. make up a little over 40 percent of the UN’s total budget.

These cuts have also been seen across the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), where “the deepest funding cuts ever to hit the international humanitarian sector” have occurred. This has resulted in resulting in OCHA to presenting their new global “hyper-prioritized” appeal, aimed at supporting 114 million people facing life threatening necessities worldwide. The new plan asks for USD 29 billion in funding, a decrease of USD 15 billion called for in the previous plan.

“We have been forced into a triage of human survival,” said Tom Fletcher, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator .“The math is cruel, and the consequences are heartbreaking. Too many people will not get the support they need, but we will save as many lives as we can with the resources we are given.”

The Global Humanitarian Overview for 2025 originally called for USD 44 billion and aimed to reach about 180 million people out of the nearly three hundred million in need. However as of June, only USD 5.6 billion has been received, less than 13 per cent of the appeal. As a result, aid will be disbursed not purely by human necessity, but by cruel and cold calculations.

With the new calculations, the new plan was designed with three goals. Firstly, by reaching the people facing the most urgent conditions, using a scale ranking humanitarian need for aid, prioritizing cases that reached level 4 (Extreme) and level 5 (Catastrophic) as a starting point for disbursement. Second, the prioritization of life-saving support, according to the planning already concluded in the 2025 Humanitarian Response. Third, ensuring that limited resources are directed based on where they can do the best, accounting for speed of disbursement capabilities.

In his statement on the situation, Fletcher concluded by saying: “Brutal funding cuts leave us with brutal choices. All we ask is 1 percent of what you chose to spend last year on war. But this isn’t just an appeal for money – it’s a call for global responsibility, for human solidarity, for a commitment to end the suffering.”

The Investment-Aid Correlation

Credit: Unsplash/Salah Darwish

The shortfall in humanitarian aid funding has directly coincided with global FDI pull backs, reflecting an investor who is less donor-confident, having a decreased interest in bilateral engagement, and overall lack of security about putting money towards fragile states. For the 2023 financial year, developing economies received USD435 billion in FDI (which was USD 867 billion in 2022), the lowest since 2005. A larger slowdown has also been seen for advanced/high-income economies receiving USD 336 billion in 2023, the lowest since 1996. FDI as a portion of gross domestic product (GDP) accounted for 2.3 percent of developing economies in 2023, which is only half of what it was in 2008 at its peak year.

To combat the shortfalls of decreased FDI, The World Bank identified a three-policy priority plan, specifically for developing economies. The first priority would be to “redouble efforts to attract FDI” by easing restrictions and speeding up investment. According to the World Bank, a 1 percent increase in countries’ labor productivity has been associated with a 0.7 percent increase in FDI inflows.

The second priority would be to “amplify the economic benefits of FDI”, which will involve offering a greater quality of development post investment, and uplifting sectors that create opportunities for underrepresented groups. The third priority would be to “advance global cooperation” by creating initiatives to increase multi-sectoral/international flows, offering geopolitical relief, and creating structures to support developing economies.

By boosting FDI, this plan would also encourage UN member states to expand or maintain their current humanitarian contributions. FDI can be seen as a signal for the depth of global connectedness, with stronger investment flows reinforcing a shared commitment to the delivering of aid. To establish the most efficient system, everyone is needed, and that includes the mobilization of capital and communication. An increase in FDI provides a crucial backbone for countries struggling with crises. While the UN can support and implement as many aid plans as possible, true impact depends on the individual state’s willingness to invest in these developing nations. Without this investment, these economies will remain stagnant, unable to recover and grow, falling behind the world stage indefinitely.

At the same time, official development assistance (ODA) globally is also on a downward trend.

IPS UN Bureau

 

The Secretariat Building at United Nations Headquarters, in New York. Credit: UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

By Nathalie Meynet
GENEVA, Jun 24 2025 (IPS)

“We are writing to you regarding the cuts being undertaken under the UN80 Initiative and, more broadly, across the UN system. While we are mindful of the current funding challenges, we believe that the rushed and chaotic manner in which these changes are being implemented is causing deeper harm to both the effectiveness and reputation of the United Nations.

The “slash and burn” approach adopted under the UN80 plan, led by Mr. Guy Ryder, adviser to the Secretary-General, risks not only damaging our mission and harming our beneficiaries; it is also proving costly at a time when the Organization can least afford it.

Furthermore, many of the changes are likely to be reversed in the future, as the next Secretary-General works to re-establish coherence and relevance within the system.

In terms of the mission of the United Nations, the consequences of the lack of funding are already stark. An evaluation of the impact suggests that 23 million fewer people affected by humanitarian crises will receive assistance. There could be 4.2 million additional AIDS-related deaths. It means millions of children at risk of being pushed out of school— with an estimated 250,000 in Sudan alone.

It also means that support for the energy transition, development financing, and counterterrorism efforts will be weakened. While developing countries will be the first and hardest hit, many of these impacts will be global. As noted by outgoing UNDP Administrator Achim Steiner in the Financial Times, we are witnessing a “structural destruction of capacity.”

The funding cuts are already causing serious harm, with experienced frontline workers— especially national staff in developing countries—being dismissed with little notice, as well as international colleagues who have served in some of the most complex and high-risk environments.

The management of the UN80 process under Mr. Ryder, risks deepening the crisis and raises serious issues about coherence and vision. It begins with a poor understanding of mandates. For example, leaked proposals have suggested merging the United Nations with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, an idea that is not only unfeasible but fundamentally misunderstands the roles of these institutions.

Even for those organizations more integrated within the UN system, no thought has been given to how these ideas could realistically be implemented, or of the appropriate role of Member States. For instance, the suggestion to merge the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration would weaken rights protections under the 1951 Refugee Convention.

These proposals also reflect the arbitrary way task force members were appointed, meaning that some entities and development mandates are voiceless in the process. We see a risk that some senior managers will seize the opportunity to expand their own entities at the expense of others.

In a recent staff townhall, Mr. Ryder admitted that the reform process is being conducted “back to front”, as strategic decisions will only be made after there had been a 20% ‘across the board cut’ of Secretariat posts within the United Nations, adding to the thousands of positions across the wider UN system.

This means that while discussions under UN80 are ongoing, managers are being forced to make difficult and unnecessary choices without a clear rationale. This rushed approach also carries significant financial costs.

We estimate that each staff termination or relocation costs $100,000 once indemnities, relocation, and training are factored in. Across the system, this will amount to a minimum of $930 million in costs to Member States, with no suggestion of how this will be paid for. As seen in previous rushed downsizing efforts, new staff will quickly have to be (re)hired, incurring further expenses.

We have urged Mr. Ryder, once a respected champion of social dialogue, to begin by identifying how the strengths of the UN system can be aligned with the needs of our beneficiaries to maximize impact at both the global and country levels, and make the UN fit for the future.

Reform should be guided by these principles and informed by inclusive consultation, recognizing that colleagues on the ground often have a more accurate understanding of how the UN operates, rather than senior management in New York.

Unfortunately, our appeals have gone unacknowledged. We therefore hope that you, the Member States, will scrutinize the UN80 process thoroughly; to consider the damage it may inflict on the effectiveness of the United Nations, and to support a more strategic and sustainable approach to restructuring and financing the UN system.”

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Nathalie Meynet, President of the 60,000-strong Coordinating Committee for International Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA), in a letter to Philémon Yunji Yang, President of the General Assembly and to Ambassadors and Permanent Representatives accredited to the United Nations in New York.

By CIVICUS
Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses the closure of offices of the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Mexico with members of Integral Human Rights In Action (DHIA), a Mexican civil society organisation (CSO) that promotes and defends human rights in contexts of mobility.

In May, the UNHCR announced it would be closing four of its 12 offices in Mexico due to funding cuts following Donald Trump’s decision to freeze US$700 million in funding to the agency. This will result in around 200 people losing their jobs and a 30 per cent reduction in the UNHCR’s global operational capacity. Mexico received almost 80,000 asylum applications in 2024, and this reduction in institutional capacity comes at a time when demand for protection services is intensifying, placing a disproportionate burden on CSOs with limited resources.

What are the consequences of the closure of UNHCR offices?

The reduction in the UNHCR’s presence has created multiple crises. The closure of several offices has drastically limited refugees’ access to counselling, legal support and basic services such as medical care. However, the impact goes further: the UNHCR funds the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance, and reduced support could seriously weaken the agency’s ability to respond to the increase in asylum applications, particularly given the significant backlogs it was already experiencing.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that the National Migration Institute has also stopped issuing visitor cards for humanitarian reasons. This leaves many refugees without immigration documentation, exposing them to arbitrary detention and hindering their access to formal employment. In many cases, this leads them to abandon the asylum application process altogether. While applications were resolved in three days to six weeks in 2024, there are currently cases where the wait exceeds three months. This is part of an institutional setback that threatens the exercise of fundamental rights.

What risks do refugee women and girls face?

Refugee women and girls often experience a cycle of violence that is not broken by migration. They flee their countries of origin to escape gender-based violence, but this violence continues along migration routes. During transit, they lack access to sexual and reproductive healthcare, including menstrual products, antenatal care and family planning services.

On arrival in Mexico, they encounter further obstacles in their quest for childcare, continued education and decent employment. These difficulties are exacerbated by the absence of local support networks that could facilitate their integration.

How is civil society responding?

In the face of funding cuts, Mexican civil society has taken a leading role in the humanitarian response. Civil society’s strength lies in its in-depth knowledge of the context and refugees’ needs, which enables it to tailor its services to diverse groups.

However, the impact of the funding cuts is undeniable. Many of these organisations were previously supported by the UNHCR and provided legal advice during the asylum application process, significantly increasing chances of success.

In this context, Mexico needs the support of the international community, particularly the states that have adopted the Cartagena Declaration – the regional framework for the protection of refugees in Latin America – to strengthen regional cooperation and ensure the protection, integration and regularisation of displaced people. At the same time, the Mexican state must take responsibility and allocate resources to address human mobility, fulfilling its international commitments with a long-term vision.

What are the local financing alternatives?

Mexico has mechanisms that could be activated. One option would be to reactivate the public calls for proposals of the National Institute for Social Development, a scheme in which CSOs compete for funds to help migrants and refugees. For this to work, these calls must be governed by the principles of transparency, shared responsibility and citizen participation.

There are also more innovative state models. In Chihuahua state, for instance, the Chihuahua Business Foundation and the Trust for Competitiveness and Citizen Security have successfully channelled business funds into state-supervised trusts via taxes. These resources fund services in areas such as education, food and public safety, which are awarded through public calls for proposals. This model could be replicated in other parts of Mexico to create a national network of alternative financing.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
The disappeared: Mexico’s industrial-scale human rights crisis CIVICUS Lens 22.Apr.2025
Mexico’s first female president: an opportunity for change CIVICUS Lens 21.Jun.2024
Migration in the Americas: a dream that can turn deadly CIVICUS Lens 15.Apr.2024

 

Farmer in Colombia. Credit: Both Nomads/Forus

By Sarah Strack and Christelle Kalhoule
SEVILLE, Spain , Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

Can the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) be a turning point? The stakes are high. The international financial system—so important to each and every one of us—feels out of reach and resistant to change, because it is deeply entrenched in unjust power imbalances that keep it in place. We deserve better.

Under its current form, the Compromiso de Sevilla – the outcome document of FFD4 adopted on June 17 ahead of the conference – reads like a mildly improved version of business as usual with weak commitments. To avoid being derailed, decision-makers at FFD4 must act with clarity and courage, and here’s why.

With predatory interest rates, the international financial system is pushing hundreds of millions into misery as several nations continue to be shackled by a deepening debt crisis. While millions struggle without adequate food, healthcare, or education – basic services and rights – their governments must funnel billions to creditors.

Shockingly, 3.3 billion people – almost half of humanity – disproportionately in Global South nations, live in countries where debt interest payments outstrip education, health budgets and urgent climate action. This imbalance is particularly pernicious toward women, who bear the brunt of the failure of the gender-blind global financial architecture. This system fails to acknowledge and redistribute care and social reproduction responsibilities, resulting in women, especially those located in the Global South, lacking access to adequate essential services and decent jobs.

“The current model of international cooperation is not working, and its financing is also not working while we are facing a series of interconnected crises,” says Mafalda Infante, Advocacy and Communications Officer at the Portuguese Platform of Development NGOs, sharing their recently released Civil Society Manifesto for Global Justice calling for change and a restoration of fairness at FFD4 and beyond.

“Gender equality perspectives are absolutely central to how we understand global justice and financial reform, because let’s be clear: the current system isn’t neutral. It produces and reinforces inequalities, including gender-based ones. The debt crisis and climate emergency disproportionately affect women and girls, especially in the global south. We’ve seen it again and again when public services are cut, when healthcare is underfunded or when food systems collapse, it’s women who carry the heaviest burden. But at the same time, feminist economics also offer solutions. They challenge the idea that GDP growth is the ultimate goal. They prioritise care, sustainability and community well-being. They demand that financing should be people-centered and rights-based and accountable as well. So the role of civil society has been to bring these ideas into the FFD4 space to connect macroeconomic reform with everyday realities and to insist that justice – economic, climate, racial, gender justice – is indivisible,” Infante adds.

FFD4 offers an opportunity to reimagine a financial architecture that can be just, inclusive, and rights-based. This is not a technical summit for experts alone. It is the only global forum where governments, international institutions, civil society organisations, community representatives and the private sector sit together to shape the future of global finance, and it’s happening after 10 years since the latest edition in Addis Ababa.

But there are realities that decision-makers just can’t shy away from. While some powerful countries borrow at rock-bottom rates, other nations face interest charges nearly four times higher. We must thus ask ourselves: is this really a pathway to truly sustainable development or a continuation of profound financial injustices through something akin to “financial colonialism” ?

“Many countries like us in the South, are totally concerned that there can be no development with the current debt situation not discussed. The issue of debt vis-a-vis taxes is vitally important. The money that countries are collecting from the domestic mobilization of resources is all channeled to self-debt servicing. And debt handcuffs social policy. Without these resources, these countries cannot deliver on public services like health and education. There can be no way of improving people’s social indicators without addressing the question of debt stress,” says Moses Isooba , Executive Director of the Uganda National NGO Forum (UNNGOF).

“The Seville conference should decide whether to continue sustaining a system that perpetuates injustices or, once and for all, listen to decency and commit to a world without extreme inequalities. Thousands of organisations around the world demand that public money should not finance weapons, but rather schools, hospitals, healthy environments and a culture of peace. The present and the future are at stake; at stake are the rules we have given ourselves to order the world and the very survival of democracy,” says Carlos Botella, from La Coordinadora, the Spanish NGO for Development Platform.

Forus is attending FFD4 as a global civil society network with one clear message: the current model must change.

We call for a radical transformation of global finance that moves away from a system that enables “tax abuse” and outsized influence from a powerful few.

A crucial step for transformation is creating a UN Convention on Sovereign Debt to fairly and transparently restructure and cancel illegitimate debt, as many countries spend more on debt than on essential services.

In today’s context of shrinking development aid, the role of public development banks is ever more important in support of Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement on climate change. Forus therefore calls on public development banks to work in partnership with civil society and community representatives through a formal global coalition and local engagement to ensure development finance is locally-led and reflects the real needs of people, rooted in consent and mutual trust.

Official development assistance (ODA) must be protected and increased, reversing harmful aid cuts that damage civil society as well as urgent and basic services. The UN has warned that aid funding for dozens of crises around the world has dropped by a third, largely due to the decrease in US funding slashed US funding and announced cuts from other nations.

Finally, governments should support a new UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, adopting gender-responsive, environmentally sustainable fiscal policies while disincentivizing polluters and extractive industries.

“Development financing must not perpetuate cycles of debt, austerity, and dependency. Instead, it must be grounded in democratic governance, fair taxation, climate justice, and respect for human rights. It’s also crucial to promote inclusive decision-making by strengthening the role of the United Nations in global economic governance, countering the dominance of informal and exclusive clubs such as the OECD,” says Henrique Frota, Executive Director of the Brazilian Association of NGOs (ABONG) and former C20 Brazil Chair.

FFD4 must ensure that there is a genuine space for civil society engagement, where all voices are heard and can influence financial decision making, to strengthen accountability and transparency, and to promote greater inclusion.

“This ensures the creation of appropriate spaces and mechanisms for meaningful engagement. Only through this inclusive approach can we fundamentally rethink and redesign the architecture of aid to work effectively,” says Elisa Lopez Alvarado, Forus project coordinator for the EU System for an Enabling Environment for Civil Society – EU SEE, a consortium of international and national civil society organisations in 86 countries, that monitors an enabling environment guided by six diverse principles.

“This partnership is essential for building healthy democracies, strengthening the rule of law, and establishing robust national institutions that guarantee rights. It ensures that development truly follows an inclusive path toward social justice and more equitable societies. Importantly, when strong democratic institutions are in place, they create an environment where diverse initiatives from development banks, private sector actors, and other stakeholders can also thrive and contribute effectively to development goals and social justice,” she adds.

Civil society must be included as an equal partner at the table, with full consideration of the enabling environment in which they operate and their specific contextual circumstances – which goes hand in hand with the real needs of communities.

“The voices of the communities most affected should be included, otherwise large-scale development projects are not sustainable. Local communities and local civil society are the point of contact to make implementation more inclusive,” says Pallavi Rekhi, Programmes Lead at Voluntary Action Network India (VANI), reinforcing that FFD4 must shift from vague aspirations to binding, systemic reforms that rebalance power and serve justice.

“Don’t take stock of what has been done. Instead, look at what has not yet been done at this conference and you will see the immense challenges that lie ahead for the future of our planet,” says Marcelline Mensah-Pierucci, President of FONGTO, the national platform of civil society organisations in Togo.

“The continuous cycle of unfairness and social inequality must come to an end. The time to act is now,” adds Zia ur Rehman, Chairperson of Pakistan Development Alliance.

For many, the road to Sevilla has been long and hard and still, the world’s majority are left behind on this journey. The hard work continues after FFD4 on the need for bold leadership, real action and transformative change that can lead to a more effective and responsive global financial architecture.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Sarah Strack, Forus Director and Christelle Kalhoule, Forus Chair

A young Afghan girl studies at home following the Taliban’s banning of women and girls from pursuing secondary education. Credit: UNICEF/Amin Meerzad

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

Nearly four years ago, the Taliban took control of Afghanistan and issued a series of edicts that significantly restricted women’s rights nationwide. This has resulted in a multifaceted humanitarian crisis, one marked by a notable decline in civic freedoms, stunted national development, and a widespread lack of basic services.

On June 17, UN-Women published its 2024 Afghanistan Gender Index, a comprehensive report that details the gender disparities and worsening humanitarian conditions for women and girls across the country. According to the report, the edicts issued by the Taliban have restricted women’s rights to the point that women and girls in the country have fallen far below the global benchmarks for human development.

“Since [2021], we have witnessed a deliberate and unprecedented assault on the rights, dignity and very existence of Afghan women and girls. And yet, despite near-total restrictions on their lives, Afghan women persevere,” said Sofia Calltorp, UN Women’s Chief of Humanitarian Action. “The issue of gender inequality in Afghanistan didn’t start with the Taliban. Their institutionalised discrimination is layered on top of deep-rooted barriers that also hold women back.”

It is estimated that women in Afghanistan have 76 percent fewer rights than men in areas such as health, education, financial independence, and decision-making. In addition, Afghan women are afforded, on average, 17 percent of their rights while women worldwide have 60.7 percent.

This disparity is projected to further widen following the Taliban’s ban on women holding positions in the health sector, removing one of the final strongholds for female autonomy in Afghanistan. Today, roughly 78 percent of Afghan women lack access to any form of formal education, employment, or training, nearly four times the rate for Afghan men. UN Women projects that the rate of secondary school completion for girls will soon fall to zero percent for girls and women.

Furthermore, Afghanistan has one of the widest workforce gaps in the world, with 89 percent of men having roles in the labour force, compared to 24 percent of women. Women are more likely to work in domestic roles and have lower-paying, more insecure jobs. Additionally, there are zero women that hold roles in national or local decision-making bodies, effectively excluding them entirely from having their voices heard on a governmental level.

“Afghanistan’s greatest resource is its women and girls,” said UN Women’s Executive Director Sima Bahous. “Their potential continues to be untapped, yet they persevere. Afghan women are supporting each other, running businesses, delivering humanitarian aid and speaking out against injustice. Their courage and leadership are reshaping their communities, even in the face of immense restrictions.”

The exclusion of all Afghan women from the workforce has had significant impacts on the local economy. According to the United Nations Sustainable Development Group (UNSDG), since 2021 Afghanistan’s economy has seen losses of up to 1 billion USD per year, representing roughly 5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. This has led to an overall increase in poverty levels and food insecurity.

“Overlapping economic, political, and humanitarian crises — all with women’s rights at their core — have pushed many households to the brink. In response – often out of sheer necessity — more women are entering the workforce,” Calltorp said.

Furthermore, women in Afghanistan lack any form of economic independence. UN Women estimates that only 6.8 percent of women have access to basic financial resources such as bank accounts and mobile money services. Edicts that prevent women from accessing financial independence will leave the vast majority of Afghan women unequipped for a self-sustainable future.

Afghanistan has also seen a significant surge in rates of gender-based violence since the Taliban’s rise to power. According to the report, Afghan women are exposed to nearly three times the global average rates of intimate-partner violence. Other practices, such as forced and child marriages and honor killings, exacerbate the national levels of gender inequality. Amnesty International states that non-compliance often results in retaliation from the Taliban, with women and girls facing arrests, rape, and torture.

In November 2023, Afghanistan’s de-facto Ministry of Public Health banned women’s access to psychosocial support services, leaving the vast majority of victims of gender-based violence without the adequate resources to recover while perpetrators receive impunity. Additionally, the elimination of women’s healthcare, including women’s access to reproductive health and education services, has made it difficult for many women to find basic care.

Due to these challenges, UN Women believes that Afghan women are less likely than men to live the majority of their lives in good health. It is estimated that the life expectancy of Afghan women is far lower than the global average and is projected to worsen in the coming years.

According to CIVICUS Global Alliance, current civic space conditions in Afghanistan are listed as “closed”, representing one of the worst environments for civic freedoms in the world. Josef Benedict, the Monitor Asia Researcher of CIVICUS, states that the women’s rights issues in Afghanistan have deteriorated to the point that it resembles a “gender apartheid”.

“There has been severe repression and systemic gender-based discrimination faced by Afghan women and girls under the Taliban. Women and girls are being systematically erased from public life and are being denied fundamental human rights, including access to employment, education, and opportunities for political and social engagement,” said Benedict.

“The international community must do more to provide support for women and girls in and from Afghanistan by calling for dismantling of the institutionalized system of gender oppression, ensure the representative, equal, meaningful and safe participation of Afghan women in all discussions concerning the country’s future and support community-led initiatives promoting gender equality and women’s rights.”

Additionally, activists and dissenters are routinely punished by the Taliban, facing harassment, intimidation, and violence. Journalists are often targeted, underscoring the risks of speaking out against a repressive government in an increasingly volatile environment.

“The rating is also due to the crackdown on press freedom,” said Benedict. “Nearly four years on, governments have failed to ensure a strong, united international response to counter the Taliban’s extreme repression, take steps to hold the Taliban accountable or to effectively support Afghan activists in the country and those in exile.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Children receiving humanitarian aid in Kabul. Credit: Wanman Uthmaniyyah/Unsplash

By Maximilian Malawista
NEW YORK, Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

Afghanistan is burdened with one of the highest rates of child wasting globally, with 3.5 million children under five years suffering from a severe form of malnutrition, leaving them dangerously underweight and unable to grow or thrive.

With only five years left to meet global nutrition targets, progress remains unpromising: with only two goals, exclusive breastfeeding and reducing child obesity on track. This leaves the nation “not on course” to meet all of the nutrition-related SDGs, as outlined by the 2023 Global Nutrition Report.

Approximately 12.6 million Afghans, 27 percent of the population, were facing acute food insecurity between March and April 2025, with 1.95 million in IPC phase 4 (Emergency), and 10.64 million in phase 3 (Crisis). Additionally 1.2 million pregnant and breastfeeding women are affected by this acute malnutrition, which has been driven by “inadequate access to services, sub-optimum practices and inadequate diets due to economic decline, climate shocks, rising food prices, and poor resilience” according to UNICEF.

According to a 2024 UNICEF report on child food poverty and nutrition deprivation, Afghanistan ranked 4th globally among countries with the highest rates of child poverty.

Nine out of ten young children in Afghanistan, or approximately 2.1 million, live in food poverty, which is leading to stunted growth and development. In this same age group, for one out of every two children (1.2 million children), diets were subsisting of no more than two food groups, “typically cereals and, at times, some milk, day in and day out”. Inadequate dietary requirements has caused 47 percent of young children in Afghanistan to suffer from stunting, with only 14.8 percent consuming five or more food groups. As a result, over 5 million children have been affected by stunted growth (IPC AMN).

While malnutrition is still significant, the UN has made progress in “scaling up the prevention and management of child nutrition in Afghanistan”. About 6.5 million children with wasting have received treatment over the last 3 years. Additionally over 10 million children and their caregivers were receiving preventive nutrition services. This has been marked as an achievement, highlighting “the impact of sustained and focused action, supported by adequate funding”.

A System of Rebuilding:

In Afghanistan, a shepherd guides his flock through barren land. Credit: Unsplash/Mustafa

An investment in nutrition has been found to yield a high return investment, benefiting social, health, and economic systems. For every 1 dollar spent on addressing undernutrition and child wasting, a return of 23 dollars is generated. Malnutrition accounts for USD 2.1 trillion in annual productivity losses, a margin of 2 percent of the global GDP.

To address the remainder of global nutrition targets in Afghanistan, UN agencies such as UNICEF, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Food Programme (WFP), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), have called for a “coordinated, multisectoral action to nutrition”. Involving “strengthening food, agriculture, health and nutrition, water and sanitation” and even offering “social protection and education systems” in the fight to prevent, detect, and treat child wasting along with early forms of malnutrition.

In the report Nourishing Afghanistan: A UN Call to Accelerate Nutrition Action, the UN outlined a 10-step strategy to meet the global nutrition targets, in an attempt to combat malnutrition and its side effects. These include:

1. Strengthen strategies to address malnutrition
2. Ensure Access to Essential Preventive Maternal and Child Nutrition Services
3. Integrated Management of Acute Malnutrition
4. Tackle Child Food Poverty and population food insecurity by Improving
Access to Healthy, Nutritious Diets through strengthening Food Systems
5. Integrated Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) and
climate-sensitive, multisectoral resilience building Initiatives
6. Strengthen Social Protection Systems
7. Increase Nutritional Education & Awareness
8. Leverage Data and evidence for Nutrition Action in Afghanistan
9. Investing on Nutrition in Afghanistan
10. Multisectoral Coordination

One such initiative, ‘First Foods Afghanistan‘, offers a direct systems-based response, linking food, water and sanitation health (WASH), education, health and social protection systems in order to deliver nutritious “first foods” for every child in Afghanistan.

The initiative looks to improve young children’s diets. Dr. Tajudeen Oyewale, the UNICEF Representative for Afghanistan said: “Afghanistan should not only be growing food—it must now grow nutrition. We are shifting the focus from calories to nourishment through child sensitive food systems, and from addressing malnutrition solely through services to also prioritizing the actual foods young children consume. This integrated approach is the only sustainable path to breaking the cycle of malnutrition and poverty in Afghanistan.”

Initiatives like First Foods Afghanistan have played a vital role in the strategy to combat the nutrition deficit in some of the country’s most impoverished regions. This accelerated action becomes even more critical as the brunt of the crisis is mostly affecting women and children, creating non-optimal conditions for growth and development.

As John AYLIEFF, WFP Country Director for Afghanistan warned: “Women and children bear the brunt of the hunger crisis in Afghanistan, where four out of five families cannot afford minimally nutritious diets.” He added: “Without sustained food assistance, millions of Afghans will descend into deeper hunger and acute malnutrition.”

IPS UN Bureau

 

UN Secretary-General António Guterres, briefing reporters outside the Security Council chamber on June 21, said: “I am gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today,” reiterating there is no military solution. “This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.” Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider

By Norman Solomon
SAN FRANCISCO, USA, Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

Twenty years ago, one day in June 2005, I talked with an Iranian man who was selling underwear at the Tehran Grand Bazaar. People all over the world want peace, he said, but governments won’t let them have it.

I thought of that conversation on Saturday night after the U.S. government attacked nuclear sites in Iran. For many days before that, polling clearly showed that most Americans did not want the United States to attack Iran.

“Only 16 percent of Americans think the U.S. military should get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran,” YouGov pollsters reported, while “60 percent say it should not and 24 percent are not sure.”

But as a practical matter, democracy has nothing to do with the chokehold that the warfare state has on the body politic. That reality has everything to do with why the United States can’t kick the war habit. And that’s why the profound quests for peace and genuine democracy are so tightly intertwined.

On Saturday evening, President Trump delivered a speech exuding might-makes-right thuggery on a global scale: “There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days.”

More than ever, the United States and Israel are overt partners in what the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946 called “the supreme international crime” – “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression.”

Naturally, the perpetrators of the supreme international crime are eager to festoon themselves in mutual praise. As Trump put it in his speech, “I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before.” And Trump added: “I want to thank the Israeli military for the wonderful job they’ve done.”

A grisly and nefarious truth is that, in effect, the Israeli military functions as part of the overall U.S. military machine. The armed forces of each country have different command structures and sometimes have tactical disagreements.

But in the Middle East, from Gaza and Iran to Lebanon and Syria, “cooperation” does not begin to describe how closely and with common purpose they work together.

More than 20 months into Israel’s U.S.-armed siege of Gaza, the genocide there continues as a joint American-Israeli project. It is a project that would have been literally impossible to sustain without the weapons and bombs that the U.S. government has continued to provide to the Orwellian-named Israel Defense Forces.

The same U.S.-Israel alliance that has been committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza has also enabled the escalation of KKK-like terrorizing and ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people in the West Bank. The ethnocentric arrogance and racism involved in U.S. support for these crimes have been longstanding, and worsening along with the terrible events.

The same alliance is now also terrorizing Iranian society from the air.

As we have seen yet again in recent hours, the political and media culture of the United States is heavily inclined toward glorifying the use of the USA’s second-to-none destructive air power. As if above it all. The conceit of American exceptionalism assumes that “we” have the sanctified moral ground to proceed in the world with a basic de facto message powered by military might: Do as we say, not as we do.

While all this is going on, the word “surreal” is apt to be heard. But a much more fitting word is “real.”

“People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction,” James Baldwin wrote, “and anyone who insists on remaining in a state of innocence long after that innocence is dead turns himself into a monster.”

Now, people in the United States have real-time historic opportunities – to do everything we can to take nonviolent action demanding that the U.S. government end its monstrous role in the Middle East.

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. The paperback edition of his latest book, War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine, includes an afterword about the Gaza war.

IPS UN Bureau

 

In September 2024 heavy rainfall caused flooding and landslides in Nepal, villages like Roshi in Kavre district affected. Credit: Barsha Shah

By Tanka Dhakal
BLOOMINGTON, USA, Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

Asia is heading towards more extreme weather events with a possibility of heavy toll on the region’s economies, ecosystems, and societies, says the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

The WMO’s State of the Climate in Asia 2024 report released today says Asia is currently warming nearly twice as fast as the global average, fueling more disaster-prone weather events.

In 2024, Asia’s average temperature was about 1.04°C above the 1991–2020 average, ranking as the warmest or second warmest year on record, depending on the dataset. The warming trend between 1991 and 2024 was almost double that during the 1961 to 1990 period.

Report highlights the changes in key climate indicators, including surface temperature, glacier mass, and sea level, which will have major impacts in the region. “Extreme weather is already exacting an unacceptably high toll,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo.

In 2024, heatwaves gripped a record area of the ocean. Sea surface temperatures were the highest on record, with Asia’s sea surface 10 years period warming rate nearly double the global average.

Report says that sea level rise on the Pacific and Indian Ocean sides of the continent exceeded the global average, increasing risks for low-lying coastal areas.

“The work of National Meteorological and Hydrological Services and their partners is more important than ever to save lives and livelihoods,” Saulo said.

Asia land temperatures. Source: World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

Water Resources Are in Danger and Causing Destruction

State of the glaciers, which are regarded as water storage for most of the region, is facing an existential threat. Reduced winter snowfall and extreme summer heat caused decisive damage to glaciers in the central Himalayas and Tian Shan Mountain range. 23 out of 24 glaciers suffered mass loss, leading to an increase in hazards like glacial lake outburst floods and landslides and long-term risks for water security.

The High-Mountain Asia (HMA) region, centered on the Tibetan Plateau, contains the largest volume of ice outside the polar regions, with glaciers covering an area of approximately 100,000 square km. It is known as the world’s Third Pole. Over the last several decades, most glaciers in this region have been retreating. Which is increasing the risk of glacier lake outburst floods (GLOFs).

Community in Thame village in the Mt. Everest region in Nepal is still recovering from the disaster caused by a small glacial lake outburst flood in August 2024, while living in fear of a similar disaster.

From the high Himalayas to coastal areas in Asia experiencing destructive weather events. Extreme rainfall caused great damage and heavy casualties in many countries in the region, tropical cyclones left a trail of destruction, and drought added heavy economic and agricultural losses.

The report included a case study from Nepal, showing how important early warning systems and anticipatory actions are to prepare for and respond to climate variability and change. In late September 2024, Nepal experienced heavy rainfall that led to severe flooding and landslides across the country.

According to the government data, the disaster claimed at least 246 lives and left 218 people missing. Damages to energy infrastructure are estimated at 4.35 billion Nepali rupees, while the agricultural sector faced a loss equivalent to 6 billion Nepali rupees. Reports note that early warning systems and preparation for anticipatory actions helped limit human casualties. But the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM) in Nepal highlighted the urgent need for a tailored, impact-based flood forecasting system at the national level.

Extreme heat events

In many parts of Asia, extreme heat is becoming a concerning issue as countries like India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan in South Asia are already dealing with heat waves. In 2024, prolonged heat waves affected East Asia from April to November.

According to the report, Asia is the continent with the largest landmass extending to the Arctic and is warming more than twice as fast as the global average because the temperature increase over land is larger than the temperature increase over the ocean.

In 2024, most of the ocean area of Asia was affected by marine heatwaves of strong, severe, or extreme intensity—the largest extent since records began in 1993.  During August and September 2024, nearly 15 million square kilometers of the region’s ocean were impacted—one-tenth of the Earth’s entire ocean surface.

“The purpose of the report is not only to inform. It is to inspire action,” said president of WMO Regional Association Dr. Ayman Ghulam.

He highlighted the need for stronger early warning systems, regional collaboration, and greater investments in adapting transboundary water and climate risk management.

“We must ensure that modern science guides decision-making at every level,” Ghulam said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Glaciers More Sensitive to Global Warming, Now in Extreme Danger—Study
• World Day for Glaciers Glaciers Are in Threat, May Not Survive the 21st Centur
• ‘We Will Not Go Quietly Into the Rising Sea,’ Tuvalu Tells International Court of Justice

Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy. The IAEA applies safeguards to verify states are honoring their international legal obligations to use nuclear material for peaceful purposes only. Credit: IAEA

By David L. Phillips
LONDON, Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

A deal between the US and Iran is possible if Iran’s bottom line — its right to nuclear enrichment — and Israel’s bottom line, guarantees that Iran will never have a nuclear bomb are met. This “win-win” outcome would require Donald Trump’s personal engagement. With weapons turned to plowshares, Trump would be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize.

For sure, it’s hard to imagine a path forward in current circumstances. The region is embroiled in conflict. Iran has been humiliated by Israel’s attack. Its nuclear program has been seriously damaged. Israeli air power has destroyed air defenses, incapacitated Iran’s missiles, and killed its military leaders and scientists.

Israel’s actions in the past year have changed the balance of power, neutralizing Hezbollah, Hamas and eliminating the Pro-Iranian Assad regime in Syria.

Javad Zarif, Iran’s former foreign minister and nuclear negotiator, often spoke to me about “Persian pride.” To move forward, a peace deal would have to address Iran’s battered psyche and Israel’s sense of vulnerability.

I envision a deal that would allow Iran to maintain its enrichment facility deep underground at Fordo. The International Atomic Energy Agency would need unfettered access to Fordo ensuring that enrichment was capped at 7 percent, well below the level needed for a nuclear bomb.

Iran’s nuclear program has been set-back as a result of Israeli strikes. Natanz and other enrichment facilities have been damaged and would be permanently dismantled. The Isfahan nuclear complex, which includes a uranium-conversion facility turning “yellowcake” into uranium hexafluoride, has been disabled by Israel’s air strikes and would be decommissioned.

The Tehran Research Center, which manufactures advanced rotors for enrichment, is destroyed. So is the workshop at Karaj, where other uranium enrichment components were manufactured.

Missile and drone attacks are another concern. The US would give security guarantees guarding against such attacks. It would commit to providing Israel with additional Thermal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery systems, an effective mobile surface to air interceptor that shoots down incoming ballistic missiles at a distance of 1,800 miles. Iran’s missile system has been degraded but it is not destroyed.

For the foreseeable future, the US would deploy an aircraft carrier group in the Arabian Sea. Each carrier has more than 60 war planes that can deter missiles and drones strikes. Fighter jets already deployed in the region would also be available for Israel’s defense.

Netanyahu wants Trump to use the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), a “bunker buster”, to take out the Fordo facility. Ford is buried deep underground in a mountain side. Only the US has bunker busters to disable Fordo’s enrichment process.

A bunker buster is designed to penetrate hardened targets using precision-guided 30,000-pound bombs armed with a 5,300-pound warhead. More than one bomb will be needed to disable Fordo. The mission’s success is uncertain. Fordo adjoins a base of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRGC). Its air force could take down the B2 planes needed to deliver bunker buster ordinance.

Trump is under pressure from Netanyahu to attack Fordo. So far, Trump is keeping his options open. Trump insists on Iran’s “complete surrender”. The Ayatollah says Iran will never “grovel” to Washington. It is unlikely that Iran will waive a white flag. Resistance and martyrdom are at the core of Shiite beliefs.

Iran has signaled it is ready to meet US negotiators and discuss a ceasefire. An agreement would commit the US to never use bunker busters unless Iran weaponized its nuclear program.

Iran’s belligerent posture may change when the Iranian people take stock of the regime’s mismanagement. The Iranian people are fed up with their pariah status. Trump’s decision not to intervene would increase the prospects of Iran’s home-grow democratic transition, the best guarantor of peace.

The deal could reap economic and diplomatic benefits. An agreement could catalyze reform across the region, including progress in Gaza. A ceasefire leading to an independent Palestinian state could result in Saudi Arabia’s decision to join the Abraham Accords and normalization of relations with Israel.

Is this positive vision possible? If we can imagine it, we can make it a reality.

Peacebuilding would start with a deal to fully, finally and verifiably eliminate the possibility that Iran’s nuclear program would be used for anything but peaceful purposes.

Current events in the Middle East are nothing short of disastrous. They can, however, be a catalyst for transformation. Only the US can lead this process, and only Trump has the chutzpah to try it.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

David L. Phillips is an Academic Visitor at St. Antony’s College at Oxford University (September 2025). He was formerly a Senior Adviser at the State Department.

Credit United Nations

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 23 2025 (IPS)

When billionaire Elon Musk, a former short-lived advisor to President Donald Trump, was mandated with the task of decimating the federal bureaucracy and laying off thousands of staffers, he was famously pictured carrying a hacksaw to symbolize his cost-cutting agenda.

Perhaps it is now the turn of the United Nations for slashing—the UN80 Initiative– but no one is armed either with a hacksaw or a mini chain saw.

A UN Task Force is currently exploring staff layoffs, merging of several departments and relocating UN agencies from high-cost duty stations, including New York and Geneva, to lower-costs cities.

Meanwhile the Geneva-based UN refugee agency announced its own restructuring last week: “In light of difficult financial realities, UNHCR is compelled to reduce the overall scale of its operations”.

“We will focus our efforts on activities that have the greatest impact for refugees, supported by streamlined headquarters and regional bureau structures,” said Filippo Grandi, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

As part of the agency’s broader cost-cutting measures, UNHCR has had to close or downsize offices worldwide and implement a nearly 50 percent reduction in senior positions at its Geneva headquarters and regional bureau.

In total, approximately 3,500 staff positions will be discontinued. Additionally, hundreds of colleagues supporting UNHCR on a temporary basis have had to leave the organization due to the funding shortfall.

Overall, UNHCR estimates a global reduction in staffing costs of around 30 percent.

Throughout the review exercise, decisions were driven by the overarching priority to maintain operations in regions with the most urgent refugee needs, the refugee agency pointed out.

Regarding staff cutbacks in the Secretariat, UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters last week that no UN department will be exempted from layoffs.

Asked whether the 20 percent cuts were inevitable, he said: “This process is ongoing. It is across the board in the Secretariat, and including in the Secretary-General’s own office”.

“I think his own office is not exempt from it. I spoke to (Under-Secretary-General for Policy) Guy Ryder yesterday, and we hope to have him, and other senior colleagues come and brief you in- person”.

Asked if the Spokesperson’s office is included in the cutbacks, he said: “The need to reduce is across the board– and no office is exempt”.

But the ultimate decision on restructuring will depend, as it does on key policy issues, on approval by the UN’s Administrative and Budgetary Committee (Fifth Committee), with final ratification by the 193-member General Assembly, the UN’s highest policy making body.

In a memo to staffers last week, the UN Staff Union (UNSU) in New York reminded “all colleagues that no decisions regarding the proposed changes have been approved by the General Assembly (GA) at this time.”

“The information shared is preliminary and non-binding, intended solely to prepare you for potential outcomes should the General Assembly endorse the proposals later this year.”

“We urge all colleagues to interpret such communications with caution and to remain aware that final authority rests with the General Assembly, whose decisions are still pending.”

A lingering question remains: will the GA rubber-stamp the decisions of the Secretary-General and his Task Force — or also heed to complaints from staffers and staff unions?

In the memo to staffers, Narda Cupidore, President, 48th Staff Council, UNSU, New York, outlined “the basic premise of potential proposals being made in line with the Secretary General’s instructions to achieve a reduction of 15% – 20% of the UN’s regular Budget for 2026”.

The memo reads:

• “Relocation of Functions: Some functions may be moved from New York to lower-cost duty stations where the UN already has operational infrastructure.
• Consolidation of Functions: Certain administrative services, may be consolidated for efficiency. Functions might be affected by the proposal to consolidate
• Discontinuation of Functions: Some functions may need to be discontinued, requiring a review of both vacant and encumbered posts to determine options.

What this Means for STAFF:

• Direct Impact: Some staff may be asked to relocate, work in different time zones, or see their roles evolve. A few may face the possibility of separation.
• Transparency and Support: Staff will be fully informed of decisions affecting them, given adequate notice, and supported through reassignment, relocation, separation entitlements, or other mitigation measures.
• Emotional Toll: Even those not directly affected may experience stress and uncertainty.
• Engagement and Communication: The organization commits to transparency, open communication, and treating staff with dignity and respect. Measures will include town halls, team meetings, individual consultations, and collaboration with staff representatives.

Management proposes that staff will be supported as follows:

• Transparency and Communication: Staff will be kept informed about decisions, options, and timelines. Managers are tasked with maintaining open lines of communication.
• Engagement Activities: Regular town halls, smaller team meetings, and individual consultations will be held to address concerns and provide guidance.
• Support Measures: Staff will receive assistance through reassignment, relocation, separation entitlements, or other mitigation measures. The organization will work closely with staff representatives to ensure rights and well-being are prioritized.
• Dignity and Respect: The process will be handled with care, treating everyone with humanity and respect.“

Looking Ahead

The UNSU says it appreciates the sharing of this important communication to staff. We continue to advocate for full transparency, consistent and clear communication, and call on all Secretariat entities to uphold this standard without exception. UNSU remains on standby for the proposed collaboration.

“UNSU continues to raise its concern about the realism of the aggressive timeline, the thoroughness of the analysis in such a short time frame; the reason for the specific established quota of cuts; the lack of clarity on the financial cuts and their impacts; as well as the effects on the productivity and quality of our outputs.

UNSU remains fully committed to supporting all colleagues during this period of uncertainty. We strongly encourage you to engage with staff representatives, share your concerns, and report any inconsistencies or challenges you may encounter.

This is very important because in the environment of the Delegation of Authority (DoA) Head of Entities may have differing interpretations of directives, thereby creating the risk of inconsistent implementation.

During this confusing and chaotic time, please do not hesitate to reach out to the Union – as your feedback is essential to ensuring that issues are addressed effectively and equitably.

UNSU will be attending the upcoming Staff Management Committee Meeting in Kosovo, from 23-28 June 2025 and will report on the outcome of that meeting.

If you have experienced inconsistencies, have questions, or wish to share your perspective, please reach out to your staff representative.

For offices without designated representation, the UNSU leadership is your point of contact and stands ready to advocate on your behalf. You can also submit feedback directly to newyorkstaffunion@un.org.

Together, we will ensure that your voice is heard and your rights are protected.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Negotiators at then UN Climate conference in Bonn, Germany. Credit: Friday Phiri

By Friday Phiri
BONN, Jun 20 2025 (IPS)

In recent years, there has been growing evidence of how climate change is impacting human health in several ways.

The Lancet Countdown has been producing ‘eye-popping’ reports, highlighting  how climate change is breaching health thresholds across multiple indicators—heat, disease vectors, food security, air quality, and socioeconomic stability.

With record-breaking heat threats exposing individuals to dangerous heat compared to pre-industrial expectations; worsening environmental stressors in the form of droughts and flooding, exposing people to heightened risks of waterborne and vector-borne diseases; and the cost of extreme weather events running into billions of dollars globally, the global community is being called upon to act swiftly.

Without urgent, health-centered transformation in energy, finance, health systems, urban planning, and governance, the world is not just delaying action—it’s fueling a global health crisis, the 2024 Lancet Countdown report warns.

Like other sectors, Africa’s health is highly vulnerable to climate impacts and in dire and urgent need of adaptation strategies. A quick perusal of the 2024 State of Africa Climate Report released in May, 2025, by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reveals how extreme weather and climate change impacts are hitting Africa the hardest.

The report highlights several health-related impacts of climate change in Africa, ranging from extreme heat events leading to serious heatwaves; flooding and landslides resulting in displacements and loss of lives; food and nutrition insecurity emanating from prolonged droughts; and tropical cyclones leaving a trail of destruction and loss of lives, among others.

These health-related impacts underscore the urgent need for climate adaptation strategies to mitigate risks and protect vulnerable populations across Africa. ​

“The State of the Climate in Africa report reflects the urgent and escalating realities of climate change across the continent,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo. “It also reveals a stark pattern of extreme weather events, with some countries grappling with exceptional flooding caused by excessive rainfall and others enduring persistent droughts and water scarcity.”

“WMO and its partners are committed to working with Members to build resilience and strengthen adaptation efforts in Africa through initiatives like Early Warnings for All,” she said. “It is my hope that this report will inspire collective action to address increasingly complex challenges and cascading impacts.”

Armed with such devastating information, African climate change negotiators at the UN Climate conference in Bonn, Germany, are calling on parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to take the climate and health nexus seriously and consider mainstreaming it into the main agenda items of climate negotiations, in addition to the health sector target in the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) framework.

“The African Group of Negotiators reaffirms that Africa experiences some of the most severe climate change impacts on human health and health systems, despite contributing minimally to global greenhouse gas emissions. With African countries already having very precarious health systems, climate change impacts exacerbate and overwhelm these systems, putting lives at risk. Urgent help and adaptation support is needed for countries. We call for ambitious and urgent collaboration of parties to address these multifaceted challenges in a holistic manner,” said Dr. Richard Muyungi, Chair of the African Group of Negotiators on Climate Change (AGN).

The AGN is the mandated negotiating group, which represents all 54 African countries in the UNFCCC processes.

In his opening statement at the Bonn Climate Conference, Muyungi said the group was prepared to work with other parties to spearhead the climate and health agenda and called for the initiation of mandated dialogues on human health and climate change from COP30 and beyond.

Meanwhile, African civil society continues to raise its voice on the importance of climate finance for Africa’s adaptation.

“It is unfortunate that developed parties continue to evade their obligation to provide climate finance as enshrined in Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement. This is the hallmark of the climate convention, without which we might as well forget about these negotiations. It is becoming increasingly frustrating that the climate finance agenda item continues to cause serious divisions, including the agenda fight that we have, once again, witnessed here in Bonn. But this should not be the case because both the convention and the Paris Agreement are clear on developed parties’ obligation to provide finance,” said Mithika Mwenda, Executive Director of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).

Climate financing and capacity-building support through health systems strengthening have, likewise, dominated recent discussions in the climate and health sub-sector.

At a side event hosted by the Rockefeller Foundation, Wellcome Trust, and the World Meteorological Organization during the 78th World Health Assembly in Geneva, investments in early warning systems were a key agenda.

Desta Lakew, Group Partnerships and External Affairs Director at Amref Health Africa, highlighted the existing gaps and the need for investments.

“Our early warning systems are not keeping pace. Investments in early warning, data, and information systems lag behind, forcing our governments to continue relying on outdated technologies and equipment that fail to capture and transmit real-time weather information to the public,” said Lakew. “This undermines the public’s preparedness, leading to avoidable losses of both property and lives. We therefore need to strengthen climate-health data systems, surveillance, early warning, and climate risk assessment by enhancing capacity to detect, predict, monitor, and respond to climate-sensitive health risks through improved data integration, early warning systems, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments.”

“At Amref, we believe in community investment; that’s why we are actively working with governments in Africa to build the technical capacity required for health systems adaptation and resilience to climate impacts. We thus advocate for financing that puts community-centered initiatives at the heart of climate adaptation of health systems,” added Lakew.

Local communities’ involvement is touted as the starting point for climate action. And the    Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) is leading local communities’ climate adaptation action through the promotion of agroecology.

The Alliance argues for and promotes the practice as a panacea to local farmers’ climate-related production and nutrition security challenges.

“Rooted in traditional knowledge and biodiversity, agroecology promotes healthy soils, thriving ecosystems, and resilient food systems,” says Bridget Mugambe, AFSA Programme Coordinator.

Mugambe argues that agroecology and health are deeply interconnected. “With thriving ecosystems free from chemical inputs, local farmers are guaranteed well-nourished crops, rich in nutrients and devoid of harmful residues, contributing to better human health,” she points out.

“At its core, agroecology respects cultural diversity and traditional food systems, which are central to promoting healthy diets rooted in local, indigenous foods that have nourished African communities for generations.”

As the climate talks continue, what is clear is that health voices calling for total inclusivity are getting louder each passing day, particularly due to the growing list of health-related impacts underscoring the urgent need for climate adaptation strategies to protect vulnerable populations across Africa.

The author is Climate Change Health Advocacy Lead at Amref Health Africa

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Police line up at an anti-government outside the parliament building in Tbilisi. Credit: Gvantsa Kalandadze

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Jun 20 2025 (IPS)

Having attended hundreds of anti-government protests in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, Gvantsa Kalandadze is no stranger to police intimidation and violence.

Police brutality has become common at the daily protests that have taken place in the city since the end of last year, when the autocratic government of the Georgian Dream party said it was stopping the country’s process of integration into the EU.

Kalandadze has seen others fall victim to police brutality and experienced it on more than one occasion herself—soon after leaving a protest in December last year, she was pushed to the ground and kicked viciously by a group of officers for questioning the arrest of a man in the street, and during another gathering a few weeks later, she was knocked out when officers pushed her and other protestors into a ditch.

But when the protests began, police violence against protesters seemed indiscriminate; research by rights group Amnesty International suggests that women protesters are now being targeted specifically and are facing escalating violence and gender-based reprisals.

Kalandadze says she is not surprised by the news.

“It’s true. The police are aggressive and they harass women both verbally, using demeaning terms such as ‘slut,’ ‘daughter of a whore,’ and others, and threaten us with rape and assault,” she says.

Amnesty’s research details the police’s methods to target women, which involves increasing use of gender-based violence including sexist insults, threats of sexual violence and unlawful and degrading strip searches against women involved in protests.

“We have spoken to people personally about what they experienced at the hands of the police, such as being forced to undergo strip-searches and threats of rape during detention,” Denis Krivosheev, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, told IPS.

The group’s research also highlights individual cases of this abuse, including cases of women being violently restrained by officers, forced to strip naked, denied access to medical treatment, threatened with rape, and subjected to sexual insults.

Amnesty says these abuses not only violate Georgian law, which prohibits full undressing during searches, but also international human rights law and standards aimed at safeguarding human dignity and protecting people from gender-based violence.

“Forcing someone to completely strip naked [in detention] is against both international and Georgian law, yet despite this, the police are forcing protesters to do this. It is clearly a deliberate police policy, despite it being against the law,” said Krivosheev.

While Amnesty says it has spoken to numerous women about such abuse, Krivosheev said, “the number [of women who are victims of this targeting] is far more than we have been able to document simply because many victims are scared to speak out about what happened to them.”

Female protesters who spoke to IPS confirmed that police harassment of women at protests was widespread, but also that it was often used to provoke a specific response, and not always just from women.

“The thing is that women are never violent at protests; they would never attack police, and the police are insulting us—usually with sexual slurs like saying we’re all sluts, bitches, whores, and insults about oral and anal sex—to try and provoke us into doing something that would get us arrested or force the men around us to try and protect us and do something that will get those men arrested,” Vera*, who has attended scores of protests in Tbilisi, told IPS.

“I know multiple women who were physically pushed, dragged, or detained. Some were insulted with misogynistic language. A few were groped during arrests—and that isn’t isolated… many of us know someone personally who’s experienced this abuse,” Tamar*, a civil rights campaigner from Tbilisi who has attended scores of protests, told IPS.

She added that police were even cooperating with, or at least tolerating, criminals abusing women protesters.

“The police have used violence—tear gas, water cannons, rubber bullets, and physical force—but that’s only part of the story. What’s even more disturbing is the presence of organized criminal gangs. These groups operate with impunity, clearly coordinated, yet the police don’t intervene. They specifically target women activists—chasing them, splashing green substances on their faces, shouting threats, and trying to scare them off the streets.

“I was personally hit in the head with a stone by one of these thugs. When I asked a police officer for help, he sarcastically told me to ask my ‘fellow democratic fighters’ who did it, as if it had come from among the people protesting. There’s zero accountability when the violence comes from those orchestrated to look like random citizens. It’s a deliberate tactic to terrorize protesters, especially women, while maintaining official deniability,” she said.

Many female protesters believe the reasons behind the targeting of women are rooted in not just the role women are playing in the current protests but also the “misogynist tendencies” of many officers.

“There is also a culture of toxic masculinity that goes hand in hand with the conservative part of society—the police are angry that women are taking the initiative [in protests]—female participation in the current protests is a lot larger than ever before—and that causes their aggression. The police see (or, at least, saw at the beginning) women at protests as ‘inferior’ compared to men and think they will be easier to break morally and easier to overpower physically.

“Another factor is the sexual deviations of individuals in the police force—when they feel power over the women after detaining them, their perversion takes over,” Vera explained.

Others put it down to how police perceive women as a serious threat to their authority.

“I think that the real reason the police are targeting women is that women are truly fearless in these protests. They are very resilient and persistent and always on the frontlines. They have actually physically saved a lot of men from the hands of violent police. I truly believe that the police feel threatened by them,” Paata Sabelashvili, a rights campaigner in Tbilisi who has taken part in protests, told IPS.

He added, though, that “in light of the misogyny and sexism among police officers, this is, sadly, not unexpected, and I fear it will only get worse in the future.”

While Amnesty has called on Georgian authorities to immediately end all forms of gender-based reprisals and all unlawful use of force by law enforcement, investigate every allegation of abuse during the protests, and ensure accountability at all levels, neither the group itself nor protesters who spoke to IPS, believe that is likely to happen soon.

“There is little hope under the current government for accountability and effective investigation [of police abuse during protests],” said Krivosheev.

Local media have reported that investigations into complaints made by women about the violence and threats they have faced from police at protests have largely gone nowhere, as have investigations by the Special Investigation Service, which is tasked with independently investigating crimes committed by police, despite hundreds of reports of police violence in 2024 alone.

The government has not commented on claims of women protesters being targeted by police, but in the past it has justified police action at protests as being a response to violence from protesters and has claimed, without evidence, that the protests are being funded from abroad.

But while women protesters are suffering from abuse and harassment by police, the tactics appear to be galvanizing female participation in protests.

“These gender-based reprisals may have been aimed at scaring women into giving up, but that has not been the case. Women have continued protesting, and if anything, even more intensively. Many women continue to speak up about how the police are treating them,” said Krivosheev.

Kalandadze says that despite her experiences, she will not stop attending protests.

“The day the government announced it would suspend Georgia’s EU integration, I decided to join the street protests, and the violent suppression began the same night. Since then, I have attended every protest where protesters have been in danger—every gathering where the police special forces were called in. Even today, I take part in every protest where police forces are mobilized,” she says.

Vera pointed out that although the size of street protests in Tbilisi has grown smaller, they continue on a daily basis.

“The fact that there is some kind of protest in the capital every day is discomfiting for the government and also serves to ensure that the regime is not legitimized in the eyes of the country’s former western partners. There are lots of female activists and the leaders of the protest marches are always women. We have shown so much resilience. We believe in each other. This country is ours,” she said.

Tamar was even more defiant.

“When women lead, especially in a patriarchal society, it destabilizes the whole narrative. It’s not just about political dissent; it’s about cultural control. Yes, I fear things may get worse before they get better. But we aren’t taking a step back,” she said.

*Names have been changed for their safety.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• A Step Closer to Justice For Slain Journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia
• Health Workers in Conflict Zones Experience an Epidemic of Violence
• Hungary’s LGBTQI Amendment an Affront to Human Rights, Say Activists

Credit: Kim Hong-Ji/Reuters via Gallo Images

By Andrew Firmin
LONDON, Jun 20 2025 (IPS)

On a resounding 79.4 per cent turnout, South Korean voters have delivered a clear mandate for change. Lee Jae-myung of the centrist Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) decisively won the 3 June election, becoming the country’s new president after a turbulent time for South Korean democracy.

Just six months before, South Koreans took to the streets to defend their democracy when President Yoon Suk Yeol tried to impose martial law. Their determination to protect democratic institutions paved the way for electoral change, proving once again that South Koreans deeply value hard-won freedoms.

Failed coup

The road to democratic renewal began with an unprecedented constitutional crisis. Yoon, of the centre-right People Power Party (PPP), had won the presidency in 2022 by the narrowest of margins, benefiting from a backlash against the country’s emerging feminist movement. But his success wasn’t long lived: the PPP suffered a heavy defeat in the 2024 parliamentary election. Hamstrung by a DPK-controlled National Assembly, the besieged Yoon took an unprecedented gamble. On 3 December, he declared martial law.

Yoon claimed his decision was motivated by the need to combat ‘pro-North Korean anti-state forces’, attempting to conflate political opposition with support for the totalitarian menace across the border. Yoon allegedly instructed the military to launch drones into North Korea. He also ordered the army to arrest several political leaders, including Lee and the head of his own party, Han Dong Hoon, and sent troops to try to stop the National Assembly meeting.

Most South Koreans saw this for what it was: an attempt by a failing president to hang onto power through undemocratic means. Their response was immediate and overwhelming. People flooded the streets, massing outside the National Assembly. As the army blocked the gates, politicians climbed fences. Some 190 lawmakers managed to get in, unanimously voting to repeal the martial law declaration.

Yoon made a televised apology but a few days later issued a statement of defiance, insisting his decision had been legitimate and pledging to ‘fight to the end’. The end came quickly. An impeachment vote suspended his presidency. His impeachment trial concluded on 4 April, with the court ordering the end of his presidency and a fresh election. Yoon is now on trial on insurrection charges. His arrest on 15 January followed a dramatic failed attempt on 3 January, when Yoon supporters and his security blocked access to the presidential palace, leading to violent clashes. Protests have continued both for and against Yoon.

Campaign issues

Lee has benefited from the public appetite for change. His campaign tacked rightwards, deemphasising some of the more progressive policies he’d previously championed, such as basic income for young people. This positioning helped win over former PPP supporters appalled by Yoon’s actions and the party’s continuing failure to condemn them.

Lee comfortably beat PPP candidate Kim Moon-soo. But another important factor was a split in the vote on the right: a more conservative party, the Reform Party, had broken off from the PPP and captured 8.3 per cent of the vote. Had these two reunited, they could have prevailed despite Yoon’s dismal record in office.

The martial law crisis dominated the campaign, but it wasn’t the only issue. Economic matters were important for many voters, with South Korea’s once-mighty economy faltering and high living costs and inequality becoming pressing concerns. These worries were exacerbated by the threat of US tariffs: South Korea, the fourth-biggest steel exporter to the USA, faces 50 per cent tariffs.

Political polarisation seems sure to continue following a bruising election campaign that saw the two main candidates accuse each other of planning to destroy democracy. Lee, who survived an assassination attempt in 2024 and faces death threats, campaigned under heavy security. One crucial test of his presidency will be whether he can heal these divides.

Challenges ahead

Lee however enters office carrying his own baggage, in the form of corruption allegations. In 2023, he was indicted on multiple charges over alleged collusion with property developers when he was mayor of Seongnam city. In November 2024, he received a one-year suspended sentence for making false statements about his relationship with the former head of the Seongnam Development Corporation.

A retrial is pending following an appeal, postponed until 18 June to take place after the election; a guilty verdict could have prevented Lee standing. Lee insists the charges against him are politically motivated, but the trial could bring further uncertainty and a potential constitutional crisis.

On the international front, Lee faces the challenge of repairing relations with the USA. The White House made a bizarre comment hinting at Chinese election interference, apparently picking up on far-right disinformation and attempts by the defeated candidates to paint Lee as a China sympathiser.

Relations with North Korea will present perhaps the biggest foreign policy challenge. DPK politicians typically focus on dialogue and bridge-building, and Lee promises to resume the cross-border dialogue that halted under Yoon.

While anything that promotes peace is welcome, civil society that campaigns on North Korea’s dire human rights situation and works with defectors will be on the lookout for potential restrictions. Under the last DPK government from 2017 to 2022, relations with North Korea thawed but civil society groups working on North Korean issues experienced heightened pressure. The government tried to ban the practice of activists using balloons to send humanitarian supplies and propaganda across the border. Civil society will be hoping the new administration doesn’t follow suit.

Time to build bridges

Lee can expect to face little short-term political opposition. Yoon’s actions have left the PPP in disarray and the next parliamentary election isn’t due until 2028. But Lee’s honeymoon isn’t likely to last long. Economic anger could drive more people to embrace regressive politics. In globally tough times, Lee will need to both offer political stability and deliver meaningful economic success.

That’s a difficult task, but there’s a key asset that can help. South Koreans have demonstrated they value democracy. South Korea’s civil society is active and strong. The new administration should commit to working with and nurturing this civic energy.

South Korea’s December resistance proved what people won’t tolerate. Now comes the harder task of building what many will embrace: a more stable, equitable democracy.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

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

 

Picture alliance | Eibner-Pressefoto/Florian Wiegand
 
European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde wants a larger global role for the euro, but Europe’s economic realities may turn privilege into pressure.

By Peter Bofinger
WURZBURG, Germany, Jun 20 2025 (IPS)

In a recent speech, Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank (ECB), articulated a clear desire for the euro to play a more significant role as an international currency.

This, she argued, could bring substantial benefits to the euro area: ‘It would allow EU governments and businesses to borrow at a lower cost, helping boost our internal demand at a time when external demand is becoming less certain.

It would insulate us from exchange rate fluctuations, as more trade would be denominated in euro, protecting Europe from more volatile capital flows. It would protect Europe from sanctions or other coercive measures.’

Lagarde’s aspiration is that a greater reserve role for the euro would bestow upon Europe some of the so-called ‘exorbitant privilege’ that has, until now, been exclusively enjoyed by the United States.

This ambition stands in stark contrast to the views expressed by the Deutsche Bundesbank (the German Federal Bank) several decades ago, which in 1972, explicitly referred to ‘the Deutsche Mark as a reluctant reserve currency.’

A double-edged sword

The term ‘exorbitant privilege’ was coined in the 1960s by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, then the French minister of finance. It describes the unique position of the United States, which allows it to sustain a permanent current account deficit without triggering an exchange rate crisis.

The underlying mechanics are straightforward: when a country imports more than it exports, its liabilities to the rest of the world increase. Exporters abroad accumulate higher deposits denominated in the importing country’s currency.

If these exporters are unwilling to increase their exposure to a deficit country, they typically sell their export receipts on the foreign exchange market, exchanging them for deposits in their own currency.

Consequently, the currency of the deficit country depreciates. If the country fails to address its deficit, the exchange rate will continue to depreciate, risking a currency crisis.

This dynamic changes significantly with the ‘exorbitant privilege’. Foreign investors are willing to increase their holdings of US Treasuries by exchanging US dollar deposits, thereby financing the current account deficit without the dollar depreciating.

Therefore, it is a complete misconception for President Donald Trump to interpret the US current account deficit as exploitation of the United States by the rest of the world. As he once stated, ‘The United States of America is going to take back a lot of what was stolen from it by other countries.’

The opposite is true: The current account deficit has enabled US citizens to enjoy a higher standard of living, financed by the rest of the world through the purchase of US government IOUs. Over the past two decades, the current account deficit and the amount of Treasuries purchased by foreigners have moved in roughly tandem.

If Lagarde is now arguing that Europe could benefit from such a privilege by increasing the reserve role of the euro, one must recognise that Europe and the euro area have, until now, typically been current account surplus countries.

As long as this fundamental situation remains unchanged, Europe does not require the ‘privilege’ of foreigners purchasing euro-denominated government securities.

Given this entirely different current account position, it is unclear whether Europe would genuinely benefit from making euro government bonds more attractive as foreign exchange reserves.

If foreigners were to increase their holdings of euro-area government bonds, they would need to purchase euro deposits on the foreign exchange market against other currencies. This would lead to an increase in the effective exchange rate of the euro, resulting in a deterioration in the price competitiveness of euro-area producers.

It was precisely this fear that prompted the Bundesbank to adopt a cautious approach to an increased reserve currency role for the D-Mark in the 1970s.

Therefore, when discussing the ‘exorbitant privilege’, it is crucial to recognise its dual nature. For a currency area with a structural deficit, it prevents the currency from depreciating. For a currency area with a structural surplus, however, it causes an appreciation of the currency, which can have negative effects on its price competitiveness.

Switzerland provides a compelling example. Traditionally, it has maintained a structural current account surplus. The Swiss franc enjoys a strong reputation as a global reserve currency, leading to permanent capital inflows. To prevent the destabilising appreciation of its currency, the Swiss National Bank has had to purchase massive amounts of foreign currencies.

With reserves exceeding $900 billion, it is now the third-largest holder of foreign exchange reserves in the world, surpassed only by China and Japan. A significant portion of these reserves is invested in government bonds.

It would be ironic if the ECB, by increasing the reserve role of the euro, had to intervene to prevent a depreciation of the dollar and invest these funds in Treasuries.

A fundamental deficiency

However, if the aim is to increase the international role of the euro, it is necessary to determine how to boost this process. Since its introduction in 1999, the euro’s share of global exchange reserves has stabilised at approximately 20 per cent after some fluctuations. The euro has not, however, benefited from the decline in the US dollar’s share, which has fallen from over 70 per cent to under 60 per cent.

Instead, other currencies such as the Swiss franc, the pound sterling and the Japanese yen have been able to increase their position as reserve currencies. Therefore, it is unclear whether the euro would benefit from future shifts in international investors’ portfolios away from the US dollar due to ‘Trumpian policies’.

In her speech, Lagarde described the ‘economic foundation’ of a reserve currency role as a virtuous circle between ‘growth, capital markets and international currency usage’. She explained, ‘The development of US capital markets boosted growth… while simultaneously establishing dollar dominance. The depth and liquidity of the US Treasury market in turn provided an efficient hedge for investors.’

Lagarde believes that ‘Europe has all elements it needs to produce a similar cycle’ and concluded: ‘If we truly want to see the global status of the euro grow, we must first reform our domestic economy.’ The ‘reforms’ she outlined included the usual suspects: completing the Single Market, enabling start-ups, reducing regulation, and building the savings and investment union.

Surprisingly, she did not mention the most obvious obstacle to the euro playing a more prominent international role. While US capital markets offer a total treasury supply of $28.3 billion, the euro area’s government bond market remains a patchwork of larger and smaller national issuers. The largest volume is provided by the French market, totalling €3.3 billion.

It would be naïve to believe that this fundamental deficiency of European capital markets could be overcome by ‘structural reforms’ or by the more homeopathic measures for completing the capital market union.

However, Lagarde also offered a promising step forward: joint financing of European public goods, particularly defence. This would help to increase the supply of truly European safe assets.

In sum, there is no obvious case for increasing the role of the euro as a global reserve currency. If the ECB wants to allow ‘businesses to borrow at a lower cost, helping boost our internal demand’, it must simply reduce its policy rate further.

In addition, the fundamental flaw of a segregated market for European government bonds is very difficult to overcome. Nevertheless, attempts to finance European public goods with jointly issued bonds will undoubtedly lead in the right direction.

This is a joint publication by Social Europe and IPS Journal.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Peter Bofinger is professor of economics at Würzburg University and a former member of the German Council of Economic Experts

Chie Sunada of SGI (left) moderates the first panel discussion, “From Deterrence to Disarmament: The Path Forward”. Credit: SGI

By Katsuhiro Asagiri
SANTA BARBARA/Tokyo (INPSJ) , Jun 19 2025 (IPS)

Marking 80 years since the dawn of the nuclear age, peace advocates, diplomats, educators, and atomic bomb survivors from around the world gathered for the “Choose Hope” symposium on March 12–13, 2025, in Santa Barbara, California. Co-organized by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (NAPF) and Soka Gakkai International (SGI), the event was held at the Music Academy of the West.

Tomohiko Aishima of SGI opens the symposium with reflections on the dialogue between Daisaku Ikeda and David Krieger, which he witnessed during his time as a reporter at Seikyo Shimbun. Credit: SGI

The symposium was inspired by the 2001 dialogue book Choose Hope co-authored by NAPF founder David Krieger and SGI President Daisaku Ikeda, revisiting the ethical and strategic urgency of nuclear abolition.

“This is not just about legacy,” said Dr. Ivana Nikolić Hughes, president of NAPF. “We are here to continue the journey they started and to build a world free from the threat of nuclear weapons.”

Tomohiko Aishima, Director of Peace Affairs at SGI, recalled witnessing their dialogue firsthand: “What impressed me most was that their dialogue was not merely about ideals—it was a call to action, rooted in practical solutions.”

A Warning Against Nuclear Deterrence

Annie Jacobsen, Pulitzer Prize finalist and author of Nuclear War: A Scenario delivers the 20th Frank K. Kelly Lecture on Humanity’s Future at the start of the symposium. Credit:Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

In the keynote lecture, Pulitzer Prize finalist and author Annie Jacobsen posed the question, “What happens if nuclear deterrence fails?” Drawing from confidential interviews with U.S. government and military insiders, Jacobsen warned: “No matter how it begins, nuclear war will end in total annihilation.” She explained that once a nuclear exchange is triggered, retaliatory strikes could spread globally within just seven minutes, leading to uncontrollable destruction and the collapse of human civilization.

Annie Jacobsen, Pulitzer Prize finalist and author of Nuclear War: A Scenario delivers the 20th Frank K. Kelly Lecture on Humanity’s Future at the start of the symposium. Credit:Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

In a following panel, moderated by Dr. Hughes, Princeton University’s Professor Emeritus Richard Falk, Dr. Jimmy Hara of Physicians for Social Responsibility–Los Angeles (PSR-LA), Professor Peter Kuznick of American University, and ICAN Executive Director Melissa Parke addressed policy transformations urgently needed to prevent such a catastrophe.

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, signed 20 September 2017 by 50 United Nations member states. Credit: UN Photo / Paulo Filgueiras

On the second day, SGI’s Director for Disarmament and Human Rights, Chie Sunada, moderated the session titled “From Deterrence to Disarmament: The Path Forward.” She warned against the increasing role of nuclear weapons in national security doctrines and reported: “At the Third Meeting of States Parties to the TPNW, it was reaffirmed that nuclear deterrence itself is a threat to human survival.”

Ambassador Elayne Whyte, who presided over the 2017 UN negotiations that adopted the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), emphasized the need for sincere dialogue, even with those who hold opposing views.

Listening to Testimony

Atomic bomb survivor Masako Wada from Nagasaki (representing Nihon Hidankyo) addressed the symposium via video message, urging participants to “continue telling the truth about the horrors of the bomb.”

Nagasaki, Japan, before and after the atomic bombing of August 9, 1945./ Public Domain

Mary Dickson, a thyroid cancer survivor and U.S. “downwinder” affected by nuclear testing, declared: “We were deliberately exposed. Justice is needed not only for us, but for victims in the Marshall Islands, Kazakhstan, Polynesia, and everywhere else.”

In the session “Legacy of Nuclear Use and Testing: A Call for Justice,” SGI United Nations Office Disarmament Program Coordinator Anna Ikeda shared testimony on the health effects, stigma, and trauma experienced by victims. “Nuclear justice means establishing the collective understanding that the use, testing, or threat of nuclear weapons can never be justified,” she said.

Dr. Togzhan Kassenova presented findings on the intergenerational health effects stemming from Soviet-era nuclear tests in Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan. Christian Ciobanu, representing Kiribati and Youth for TPNW, proposed establishing an international fund for victim assistance and environmental remediation. Veronique Christory of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) stressed the importance of humanitarian principles in disarmament efforts.

Anna Ikeda of SGI (center) speaks as a panelist on the second panel discussion, “Legacy of Nuclear Use and Testing: A Call for Justice”　Credit: SGI

The Intersection with Climate Justice

The final panel, “The Intersection of Climate and Nuclear Justice: Empowering Youth for Change,” was moderated by SGI Disarmament Program Coordinator Miyuki Horiguchi.

Anduin Devos of NuclearBan.US reflected on how concern over the climate crisis led her to become involved in the anti-nuclear movement. “Resources spent on nuclear weapons should be redirected to address climate solutions,” she said.

Young activists Kevin Chiu and Viktoria Lokh spoke on the importance of integrating youth voices into nuclear policy discussions. Horiguchi cited a Native American proverb—“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”—and a quote from Choose Hope: “Hope is another name for youth,” emphasizing the unique power of young people to open new eras.

Miyuki Horiguchi of SGI (left) moderates the final panel discussion, “The Intersection of Climate and Nuclear Justice: Empowering Youth for Change” Credit: SGI

Art as a Catalyst for Change

Film director Andrew Davis and artist Stella Rose discussed the role of art in inspiring awareness and action. “Art doesn’t just reflect truth—it makes us feel it, and move us to act,” said Davis.

The symposium’s final declaration also underscored the role of culture and creativity in promoting peace and deepening empathy.

The Final Declaration: Choosing Hope

The symposium concluded with the adoption of the Choose Hope Declaration. With the Doomsday Clock set at “89 seconds to midnight,” the declaration warned that a nuclear-free world is possible only through intentional and collective choices. “We choose hope over despair,” it stated.

This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

IPS UN Bureau

 

The removal of tens of thousands of Maasai from Ngorongoro to Msomera is part of a disturbing global trend known as "fortress conservation," where Indigenous people are cast as threats to biodiversity rather than its protectors.

Opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye and co-accused Obeid Lutale before a civilian court in Kampala. They have been in jail since they were abducted from Kenya by Uganda's security forces. Credit: Wambi Michael/IPS

By Wambi Michael
KAMPALA, Jun 19 2025 (IPS)

In East Africa’s Tanzania and Uganda, political tensions are rising as they prepare for the next elections. Tanzania goes to the polls in October 2025, while Uganda’s presidential and general elections will take place early in 2026.

In both countries, the leading political leaders, Tundu Lissu of the Chadema party in Tanzania and Dr. Kizza Besigye, a former leader of the once largest opposition party, are under detention facing treason charges.

Political and civil actors in the two countries and their neighbor Kenya say a wave of repression is sweeping across the region and that democracy and civil liberties are dying across East Africa.

Civil actors have reported numerous cases of torture, abductions, and general human rights abuses that have shrunk civic spaces.

On 10 April 2025, Lissu was charged with treason, along with three offenses of publication of false information under cybercrime laws. The charges are connected to his nationwide campaign pushing for electoral reform under the slogan “No Reforms, No Election.” He appeared in court this week (June 16) and was granted permission to represent himself because, he argued, he was denied access to private consultations with his lawyers.

Shortly after Lissu’s arrest, Chadema was disqualified from the October 2025 presidential and parliamentary elections, based on the party’s refusal to sign an electoral code of conduct.

Lissu narrowly survived an assassination attempt in 2017 and was forced into exile, only to face renewed persecution upon his return to Tanzania.

In the run-up to the November 2024 local elections, Tanzania’s government has impeded opposition meetings, arbitrarily arrested hundreds of opposition supporters, imposed restrictions on social media access and banned independent media.

Four government critics were forcibly disappeared and one Chadema official was abducted and brutally killed.

Forced Deportations, Allegations of Torture

On May 19, when Lissu was returning to the court, authorities in Tanzania ordered the deportation of Kenya’s former Justice Minister, Martha Karua, and Dr. Willy Mutunga, the former Chief Justice of Kenya, together with a couple of journalists from Kenya.

They had traveled to Tanzania under the invitation of the East Africa Law Society. Further, a Kenyan human rights activist, Boniface Mwangi, and a Ugandan activist, Agather Atuhaire, were arrested and held incommunicado for five days despite protests. The two activists said they were badly tortured by Tanzanian police and security operatives.

Atuhaire told IPS that she was blindfolded and sexually molested by her captors, who had driven her and Mwangi out of the Central Police Station in Tanzania.

“They took off all my clothes and threw me down and handcuffed my feet and hands and turned my feet upside down. They put a board between my feet and hands. One was hitting my feet and the other was attacking my private parts,” said Athuaire, a mother of two.

Atuhaire, awardee of the US State Department’s International Women of Courage Awards (IWOC) and winner of the 2023 EU Human Rights Defenders’ Award in Uganda said she has seen impunity in Uganda but what she went through and experienced in Tanzania was at a higher level.

“I faced a policeman who seemed very angry. He threatened us. I think with Boniface, he said they will circumcise him the second time. With me, he said they will teach me, so I have a good story for Uganda when I come back,” Atuhaire recounted.

“He also asked me if I had a child. And I said, ‘What do my children have to do with this?’ I told him that I have two children. Then you will get a third one. When we got out, I told Boniface that I think that is a rape threat,” she said.

Mwangi was found on the border with Tanzania near the coast following widespread condemnation by Kenyans. He was carried to the car because he could hardly walk following the torture.

“My body is broken in so many ways that you will never know but my spirit is very strong. They did very horrible things to us. And those things were recorded. And they told us that if we get back home and share what happened, they will share the videos with everyone,” said Mwangi.

“The situation in Tanzania is very bad. I think what happened to us is what happens to all Tanzanian activists,” he said.

He wondered why a country that belongs to the East African Community could torture citizens from the other member states the way it did to them.

“I had just gone there to attend a court case. I didn’t have any ulterior motive. I was treated worse than a criminal and yet I had not committed any offense,” he said.

Foreign Activists Warned

Tanzania’s President Samia Suluhu, in a televised address, warned foreign activists to stay away from her country.

“Let’s not give them space. They already ruined their own countries. They have already caused chaos. The only country that has not been ruined, where people have security, peace, and stability, is ours. There have been attempts and I strongly urge our security and defense forces, as well as you who manage our foreign policy, not to allow undisciplined individuals from other countries here,” said Suluhu.

Tigere Chagutah, Regional Director, Amnesty International, East and Southern Africa, condemned the torture and inhumane treatment of the two activists.

“For four days, these two human rights defenders were subjected to unimaginable cruelty. Their ordeal highlights the dangers faced by human rights defenders in Tanzania and there must be accountability and justice,” he noted.

Chagutah raised concern about Suluh’s call for a crackdown on human rights defenders, labeling them “foreign agents.”

“Such statements provide state authorities with an unlawful and spurious pretext to impose restrictions flouting international human rights obligations. Trial observation is central to the transparency of court processes and guarantees of fair trials and is not a threat to security,” said Tigere Chagutah.

Social Justice Campaigner, Khalid Hussein in response to Samia Suluhu, said, “You cannot hold foreign nationals, torture them, and then pretend they are meddling and so they deserve what they got.”

Before the arrest of the two activists, Tanzania had deported Kenya’s former Justice Minister, Martha Karua, and Willy Mutunga, the former Chief Justice of Kenya. The two were in Tanzania for a trial observation too.

Karua denied that she was in Tanzania to meddle in its internal affairs, as alleged by Suluhu.

“I was in Tanzania to watch a political trial. In Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda, criminal trials are public. One is entitled to a trial before an impartial court, a trial that is public,” said Karua.

Karua suspected that the authorities in Tanzania were disturbed by her addressing a press conference in April on the need to observe the rule of law, when Tundu Lissu was due to appear in court.

“So as a citizen of the Jumuhiya (East African Community), I went to observe a trial. Nothing wrong with that. We feel as citizens of East Africa we have a duty to stand in solidarity with one another to ensure that we push back on autocratic tendencies and the violation of rights,” said Karua.

Professor Peter Kagwanja, a Kenyan intellectual, advisor, and policy strategist, told IPS that what is happening in Tanzania and its neighbors is regrettable.

“If they are chasing Martha Karua and Dr. Willy Mutunga like that. Can you begin to imagine what is happening to the Tanzanians themselves? Who are Dr. Kabudi and others who want to defend Tundu Lisu?” asked Kagwanja, the President and Chief Executive at the Africa Policy Institute (API).

Lack of Tolerance for Opposition

Kagwanja said what is happening in Tanzania is a sheer lack of tolerance for the opposition, yet the countries claim to be operating under a multiparty democracy.

“And that attitude is what we are seeing in Zimbabwe. It is the same attitude you find in Botswana. That you can push the leader of the opposition to exile. You want to constrain the opposition and their leadership. Rather than talk to them and defeat them politically, you want to defeat them at a battle of violence,” he explained.

“It appears that in Uganda and Tanzania, your ambition to be President is not legitimate. You will either be shot at or languish in jail. And no people from outside should help you out,” Kagwanja added.

While in Uganda for Besigye’s trial, Karua told IPS that it appears like the leaders in Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania are collaborating in oppressing citizens.

“We feel as citizens of East Africa that we have a duty to stand in solidarity to ensure that we push back against autocratic tendencies and the violation of rights,” said Karua.

Besigye was abducted in Nairobi on 16 November 2024. He was arraigned in a military court in Uganda. He was charged with offenses relating to security and unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition.

While the Kenyan government has denied involvement, it has been accused by human rights activists of supporting and facilitating an extraordinary rendition.

In August 2024, 36 leaders of Uganda’s FDC were abducted from Kisumu city in Kenya. They were charged with terrorism in Ugandan courts and remanded.

Uganda’s Attorney General, Kiryowa Kiwanuka, refuted claims of kidnap, saying that the suspects were lawfully arrested.

“Even the manner in which people are collected, if at all, from a neighboring country or another country is prescribed by law and we are saying that these people were charged,” he said

Karua and Besigye’s lawyers insist that the abduction was the result of collusion between Kenyan and Ugandan authorities.

“I’m stressing rendition because Kenya has an extradition Act which demands that anybody being removed from Kenya to another country for trial must be due process. Due process was not followed. Nor were they documented at the border when being transported into Uganda,” Karua told IPS.

Besigye and the co-accused, Obeid Lutale, were arraigned before the military court.  The Supreme Court in Uganda at the end of January ruled that civilians should not be tried in a military court. After the ruling of the Supreme Court, Besigye was taken to the civilian court with a new charge of treason. The charge before the military court was treachery.

The Ugandan Parliament hastily debated and passed the Uganda People’s Defence Forces Amendment Bill 2025 on 20 May. President Yoweri  has assented to the law, which, among others, broadens the jurisdiction of military courts, authorizing them to try a wide range of offenses against civilians.

Trying Civilians in Military Courts Contravene Human Rights Obligations

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk in May 2025 expressed concern at the passing in Uganda’s Parliament of proposed legislation to allow for civilians to be tried in military courts.

“I am concerned that rather than encouraging efforts to implement the Supreme Court’s crystal-clear decision of January this year, Uganda’s legislators have voted to reinstate and broaden military courts’ jurisdiction to try civilians, which would contravene international human rights law obligations,” said Türk.

As Uganda heads to the polls, diplomats from the European Union have raised concern over the torture of the opposition leaders and their supporters. The diplomats particularly expressed concern about the conduct of the Chief of Defence Forces, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, President Yoweri Museveni’s son.

Early May, Uganda’s Chief of Defence Forces Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who is Museveni’s eldest child, said he had detained Eddie Mutwe, the chief bodyguard for opposition leader Bobi Wine.

He wrote on X that he had captured Mutwe “like a grasshopper” and was “using him as a punching bag.” The tortured Mutwe was presented in court and slapped with robbery charges.

Uganda’s Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister, Norbert Mao, said, “Bringing illegally detained, brutalized, and tortured suspects before the courts of law is an abuse of judicial processes.”

Meanwhile, Kainerugaba has promised a showdown on Presidential aspirant, Wine and his supporters.

“I want to remind you to advise your children to stay away from NUP gangs. Intelligence reports indicate that NUP is not merely a political party but is also involved in activities that raise concerns related to terrorism. The leaders of NUP are recruiting young people for activities that could be harmful to our beautiful country,” he warned.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Civilians Face Humanitarian Disaster in Great Lakes, Horn of Africa Conflicts
• Expand choices for Women, Prevent New HIV Infections in Africa
• Grey Market Charcoal East Africa — Why Prohibitionist Interventions Are Failing

Parents and caregivers line up with their children at an immunization centre in Janakpur, southern Nepal. Meanwhile recent funding cuts have caused “severe disruptions” to health services in almost three-quarters of all countries, according to the head of the UN World Health Organization (WHO), Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. April 2025. Credit: UNICEF

By Hatice Beton, Roberto Durán-Fernández, Dennis Ostwald and Rifat Atun
LONDON, Jun 19 2025 (IPS)

As G7 leaders of the world’s wealthiest nations wrapped up their summit in Kananaskis June 16, a critical issue was absent from the agenda: the future of global health financing.

Amid escalating geopolitical tensions, trade conflicts and cuts to development aid, health has been sidelined – less than five years since COVID-19 devastated lives, health systems and economies.

With the fiscal space for health shrinking in over 69 countries, it’s time to recognise that health financing is no longer solely a public sector concern; it is a fundamental pillar of economic productivity, stability, and resilience.

A glimmer of hope has emerged from South Africa, the current G20 Presidency host, and from the World Health Organization (WHO). A landmark health financing resolution, adopted at last month’s World Health Assembly calls on countries to take ownership of their health funding and increase domestic investment.

While this is a promising step, the prevailing discourse continues to rely on outdated solutions which are often slow to implement and fall short of what is needed.

Invest Smarter, Not Just More, in Health

Recent trends among G20 countries show that annual healthcare expenditure is actually declining across member states. In 2022, health expenditure dropped in 18 out of 20 G20 nations, leading to increased out-of-pocket expenses for citizens.

While countries like Japan, Australia, and Canada demonstrate a direct correlation between higher per capita health expenditure and increased life expectancy, others, such as Russia, India, and South Africa, show the opposite.

This disparity underscores a crucial point: the quality and efficiency of investment matters more than quantity. Smart investment encompasses efficient resource allocation, equitable access to affordable care, effective disease prevention and management, and broader determinants of health like lifestyle, education, and environmental factors.

Achieving positive outcomes hinges on balancing health funding – the operational costs – with sustainable health financing – the capital costs.

Private capital is already moving into health, what’s missing is coordination and strategic alignment

Despite the surge in healthcare private equity reaching USD 480 billion between 2020 and 2024, many in the sector remain unaware of this significant shift. Recent G20 efforts have focused on innovative financing tools, but what’s truly needed are systemic reforms that reframe health as a core pillar of financial stability, economic resilience, and geopolitical security, not just a public service.

This year’s annual Health20 Summit at the WHO, supporting the G20 Health and Finance Ministers Meetings, addresses this need by launching a new compass for health financing: a groundbreaking report on the “Health Taxonomy – A Common Investment Toolkit to Scale Up Future Investments in Health.”

Why do we need an investment map for health?

The answer is simple: since the first ever G20 global health discussions under Germany’s G20 Presidency in 2017, there has been no consistent effort to rethink or coordinate investments. G20 countries still lack a strategic dialogue between governments, health and finance ministries, investors and the private sector.

Market-Driven, Government-Incentivised: The Path Forward

Building on the European Union’s Green Taxonomy, the health taxonomy aims to foster a shared understanding and common language among governments, companies, and investors to drive sustainable health financing. Investors, Asset Managers, Venture Capitalists, G20 Ministries of Health and Finance, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), and International Organisations broadly agree that a market-driven taxonomy is both credible and practical.

Governments can have greater confidence knowing it has been tested with investors and is grounded in market realities.

The Health Taxonomy report identifies a key barrier to progress: the fundamental confusion between health funding and health financing: Health financing refers to the system that manages health investments, such as raising revenue, pooling resources and purchasing services. In contrast, health funding refers to the actual sources of money.

Increasing health funding alone will not improve health outcomes if the financing system is poorly designed. Conversely, a well-developed health financing framework won’t succeed without sufficient funding. Both are essential and must work together.

The health taxonomy has the potential to serve as a vital tool for policy planning sessions, strategic boardroom discussions and investment committees, thereby enabling health to be readily integrated into existing portfolios and strategies. It could also support more systematic assessments of health-related risks and economic impacts, including through existing processes like the IMF’s Article IV consultations and other macroeconomic surveillance frameworks.

The report urges leading G20 health and finance ministers to rethink and align on joint principles for health funding and financing.

The next pandemic could be more severe, more persistent, and more costly. Failure to invest adequately in health before the next crisis is a systemic risk our leaders can no longer afford to ignore.

Hatice Beton is Co-Founder, H20Summit; Roberto Durán-Fernández; PhD, is Tec de Monterrey School of Government, Former Member of the WHO’s Economic Council; Dennis Ostwald is Founder & CEO, WifOR Institute (Germany); Rifat Atun is Professor of Global Health Systems, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

IPS UN Bureau

 

Credit: UN Photo/John Isaac

By Stephanie Hodge
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 19 2025 (IPS)

Ten years ago, I lost more than a job.

When my post was abolished, there was no warning, no closure, no golden parachute—just a quiet erasure. Overnight, I went from a UN professional with decades of service to an invisible statistic in a system that eats its own.

I wasn’t just de-linked from my role—I was cut off from my health insurance, my professional identity, my community, and the safety net I thought I’d built after a lifetime of service.

What’s the real cost of that? Let me try to count it.

The Financial Toll

Over ten years, I’ve conservatively lost between $1.7 and $2.4 million USD—not in stock options or startup fantasies, but in the very basic elements of working life:

• Salary: Gone. A UN professional with my experience (at the P5/D1 level) typically earns around $120,000–$150,000 a year. That’s over $1.2 million in wages lost—and that’s before accounting for inflation.
• Pension: For every year you’re out of the UN system, your pension erodes. I’ve lost another $300,000+ in employer and personal contributions to retirement.
• Health Insurance: When you lose your job, you lose your healthcare. For ten years, I’ve covered out-of-pocket care for my dependent—including during health emergencies. I’ve spent $50,000–$200,000 USD just trying to keep her well and safe.
• Missed Opportunities: I should have been leading evaluations, directing global programs, mentoring the next generation. Instead, I was just trying to survive. Lost networks, lost credibility, lost consulting income. Easily another $200,000–$400,000 in forgone earnings.

The Emotional Toll

The numbers don’t tell the whole story. They don’t reflect what it’s like to wake up every morning wondering if your work ever mattered. They don’t show the moments I had to choose between groceries and another round of lab tests for my mother. They don’t capture the professional shame, the panic, the quiet disbelief that no one came looking.

It’s not just a system failure. It’s a human one.

Why Reform Can’t Wait

You can’t claim to be a values-based organization while discarding your own people in silence. And yet that is what too many international agencies do—cutting technical posts under the guise of restructuring, while retaining bloated management layers and generalist positions with no clear public value.

We need a reset. Here’s where to start:

1. Guarantee Transitional Support for Abolished Posts

Abolition should never mean abandonment. Staff whose posts are cut must be offered:

• Transitional pay and benefits (healthcare continuation, pension bridging)
• Career re-entry guarantees within a defined period
• Support for relocation, re-skilling, and reference protections

2. Protect Technical Expertise

Organizations must stop privileging coordination over content. The future depends on knowledge—gender, climate, health, evaluation, biodiversity, education. We need fewer PowerPoint czars and more people who’ve actually done the work.

Create:

• Technical career tracks with promotion potential
• Fixed-term roles with mobility protections for those in niche or field-based posts
• Internal pools for technical surge deployment

3. Build Accountability into Human Resource Systems

Too often, posts are abolished due to politics, personal vendettas, or vague restructurings. There must be:

• Transparent criteria for abolishment
• Independent review panels for contested decisions
• Data tracking on who is let go and why—disaggregated by gender, nationality, race, and contract type

4. Rebalance Power and Purpose

The system is top-heavy and risk-averse. It’s time to rebalance:

• Elevate field voices, not just headquarters control
• Fund delivery and results—not endless strategy papers
• Measure success by impact, not institutional expansion

Rebuilding, Not Returning

I’ve spent the last decade slowly rebuilding. Consulting, evaluating, speaking truth to power. I’ve advised governments, walked the garbage-strewn backstreets of Jakarta, listened to stories from herders in Mali and coral farmers in Seychelles. My skills didn’t vanish. My value didn’t die.

But I’ve had to fight for every contract. Every inch of ground.

And I’ve come to understand this: abolition doesn’t end a career—it reveals what the system never saw in the first place.

To Those Who’ve Been Abolished

If you’ve lost your job, your anchor, your sense of place—this is for you. You are not expendable. You are not a line in a budget or a casualty of “restructuring.”

You are the system’s conscience, even if it forgot your name.

We are still here. We are still needed.

And we are not done.

Stephanie Hodge is an international evaluator and former UN advisor who has worked across 140 countries. She writes on governance, multilateral reform, and climate equity.

IPS UN Bureau

 

By CIVICUS
Jun 18 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses the dangers of live facial recognition technology with Madeleine Stone, Senior Advocacy Officer at Big Brother Watch, a civil society organisation that campaigns against mass surveillance and for digital rights in the UK.

Madeleine Stone

The rapid expansion of live facial recognition technology across the UK raises urgent questions about civil liberties and democratic freedoms. The Metropolitan Police have begun permanently installing live facial recognition cameras in South London, while the government has launched a £20 million (approx. US$27 million) tender to expand its deployment nationwide. Civil society warns that this technology presents serious risks, including privacy infringements, misidentification and function creep. As authorities increasingly use these systems at public gatherings and demonstrations, concerns grow about their potential to restrict civic freedoms.

How does facial recognition technology work?

Facial recognition technology analyses an image of a person’s face to create a biometric map by measuring distances between facial features, creating a unique pattern as distinctive as a fingerprint. This biometric data is converted into code for matching against other facial images.

It has two main applications. One-to-one matching compares someone’s face to a single image – like an ID photo – to confirm identity. More concerning is one-to-many matching, where facial data is scanned against larger databases. This form is commonly used by law enforcement, intelligence agencies and private companies for surveillance.

How is it used in the UK?

The technology operates in three distinct ways in the UK. Eight police forces in England and Wales currently deploy it, with many others considering adoption. In retail, shops use it to scan customers against internal watchlists.

The most controversial is live facial recognition – mass surveillance in real time. Police use CCTV cameras with facial recognition software to scan everyone passing by, mapping faces and instantly comparing them to watchlists of wanted people for immediate interception.

Retrospective facial recognition works differently, taking still images from crime scenes or social media and running them against existing police databases. This happens behind closed doors as part of broader investigations.

And there’s a third type: operator-initiated recognition, where officers use a phone app to take a photo of someone they are speaking to on the street, which is checked against a police database of custody images in real time. While it doesn’t involve continuous surveillance like live facial recognition, it’s still taking place in the moment and raises significant concerns about the police’s power to perform biometric identity checks at will.

What makes live facial recognition particularly dangerous?

It fundamentally violates democratic principles, because it conducts mass identity checks on everyone in real time, regardless of suspicion. This is the equivalent to police stopping every passerby to check DNA or fingerprints. It gives police extraordinary power to identify and track people without knowledge or consent.

The principle at the heart of any free society is that suspicion should come before surveillance, but this technology completely reverses this logic. Instead of investigating after reasonable cause, it treats everyone as a potential suspect, undermining privacy and eroding presumed innocence.

The threat to civic freedoms is severe. Anonymity in crowds is central to protest, because it makes you part of a collective rather than an isolated dissenter. Live facial recognition destroys this anonymity and creates a chilling effect: people become less likely to protest knowing they’ll be biometrically identified and tracked.

Despite the United Nations warning against using biometric surveillance at protests, UK police have deployed it at demonstrations against arms fairs, environmental protests at Formula One events and during King Charles’s coronation. Similar tactics are being introduced at Pride events in Hungary and were used to track people attending opposition leader Alexei Navalny’s funeral in Russia. That these authoritarian methods now appear in the UK, supposedly a rights-respecting democracy, is deeply concerning.

What about accuracy and bias?

The technology is fundamentally discriminatory. While algorithm details remain commercially confidential, independent studies show significantly lower accuracy for women and people of colour as algorithms have largely been trained on white male faces. Despite improvements in recent years, the performance of facial recognition algorithms remains worse for women of colour.

This bias compounds existing police discrimination. Independent reports have found that UK policing already exhibits systemic racist, misogynistic and homophobic biases. Black communities face disproportionate criminalisation, and biased technology deepens these inequalities. Live facial recognition technology can lead to discriminatory outcomes even with a hypothetically perfectly accurate algorithm. If police watchlists were to disproportionately feature people of colour, the system would repeatedly flag them, reinforcing over-policing patterns. This feedback loop validates bias through the constant surveillance of the same communities.

Deployment locations reveal targeting patterns. London police use mobile units in poorer areas with higher populations of people of colour. One of the earliest deployments was during Notting Hill Carnival, London’s biggest celebration of Afro-Caribbean culture – a decision that raised serious targeting concerns.

Police claims of improving reliability ignore this systemic context. Without confronting discrimination in policing, facial recognition reinforces the injustices it claims to address.

What legal oversight exists?

None. Without a written constitution, UK policing powers evolved through common law. Police therefore argue that vague common law powers to prevent crime oversee their use of facial recognition, falsely claiming it enhances public safety.

Parliamentary committees have expressed serious concerns about this legal vacuum. Currently, each police force creates its own rules, deciding deployment locations, watchlist criteria and safeguards. They even use different algorithms with varying accuracy and bias levels. For such intrusive technology, this patchwork approach is unacceptable.

A decade after police began trials began in 2015, successive governments have failed to introduce regulation. The new Labour government is considering regulations, but we don’t know whether this means comprehensive legislation or mere codes of practice.

Our position is clear: this technology shouldn’t be used at all. However, if a government believes there is a case for the use of this technology in policing, there must be primary legislation in place that specifies usage parameters, safeguards and accountability mechanisms.

The contrast with Europe is stark. While imperfect, the European Union’s (EU) AI Act introduces strong safeguards on facial recognition and remote biometric identification. The EU is miles ahead of the UK. If the UK is going to legislate, it should take inspiration from the EU’s AI Act and ensure prior judicial authorisation is required for the use of this technology, only those suspected of serious crimes are placed on watchlists and it is never used as evidence in court.

How are you responding?

Our strategy combines parliamentary engagement, public advocacy and legal action.

Politically, we work across party lines. In 2023, we coordinated a cross-party statement signed by 65 members of parliament (MPs) and backed by dozens of human rights groups, calling for a halt due to racial bias, legal gaps and privacy threats.

On the ground, we attend deployments in Cardiff and London to observe usage and offer legal support to wrongly stopped people. Reality differs sharply from police claims. Over half those stopped aren’t wanted for arrest. We’ve documented shocking cases: a pregnant woman pushed against a shopfront and arrested for allegedly missing probation, and a schoolboy misidentified by the system. The most disturbing cases involve young Black people, demonstrating embedded racial bias and the dangers of trusting flawed technology.

We’re also supporting a legal challenge submitted by Shaun Thompson, a volunteer youth worker wrongly flagged by this technology. Police officers surrounded him and, although he explained the mistake, held him for 30 minutes and attempted to take fingerprints when he couldn’t produce ID. Our director filmed the incident and is a co-claimant in a case against the Metropolitan Police, arguing that live facial recognition violates human rights law.

Public support is crucial. You can follow us online, join our supporters’ scheme or donate monthly. UK residents should write to MPs and the Policing Minister. Politicians need to hear all of our voices, not just those of police forces advocating for more surveillance powers.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Instagram
TikTok
Twitter/Big Brother Watch
Twitter/Madeleine Stone
YouTube

SEE ALSO
Facial recognition: the latest weapon against civil society CIVICUS Lens 23.May.2025
Weaponised surveillance: how spyware targets civil society CIVICUS Lens 24.Apr.2025
Human rights take a backseat in AI regulation CIVICUS Lens 16.Jan.2024