Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Delegates at the Second Africa Climate Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Credit: Farai Shawn Matiashe/IPS

By Farai Shawn Matiashe
ADDIS ABABA, Sep 11 2025 (IPS)

Despite climate change being a health risk multiplier, health is often underrepresented in climate negotiation processes.

Experts attribute this to a lack of funding by the African governments and a lack of capacity building among climate negotiators.

At the Second Africa Climate Summit (ACS2) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 8 to 10 September, health experts are calling for funding to bring health negotiators to the table at the Conference of the Parties (COP30) in Belém, Brazil, to demand more funding for the health sector.

Amref Health Africa, a Kenyan-based non-governmental organization providing community and environmental healthcare across Africa, launched a Climate Change and Health Negotiators’ curriculum on 9 September at the summit.

The Climate Change and Health Negotiators’ curriculum, developed for the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), seeks to address this gap by equipping African negotiators with the technical, policy understanding, and advocacy skills required to integrate health considerations into climate policy and finance Agendas.

Desta Lakew, a group director of partnerships and external affairs at Amref Health Africa, said when they started conversations around climate and health, health was not included.

“At COP27, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, there were no health ministers because health was not included. We thought we needed to bring the health issues in Africa,” she said while speaking at a side event at the Rockefeller Foundation Pavilion during the ACS2.

“We have developed a curriculum to bring health to the climate negotiation process. AGN; they speak for us and people in the rural areas who are affected by climate change.”

At COP28 in Dubai in 2023, health was included only in the declaration.

But this was seen as progress by climate experts.

Climate change is devastating health in Africa 

Though Africa contributes less than 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, it continues to experience the effects of climate change.

Climate change presents a fundamental threat to human health.

It affects health by increasing heat-related illnesses, worsening respiratory conditions and air quality, expanding the range of infectious diseases and disrupting food and water security.

Extreme weather events like floods in Africa cause injuries and distress while also damaging essential health infrastructure.

In southern Africa, countries such as Botswana, eSwatini, Namibia, and Zimbabwe experienced a dramatic surge in malaria cases in 2025.

From 2023 to 2024, the region was hit by El Niño-induced drought, a natural climate phenomenon in which surface waters of the central and eastern Pacific warm, causing changes in global weather patterns.

In 2025, the region experienced La Niña, which brought above-average rainfall.

The prolonged rains fuelled mosquito breeding.

In other parts of the continent, climate variability is also facilitating the spread of non-communicable and infectious diseases, such as dengue, malaria, West Nile virus, and Lyme disease.

Climate change is not just an environmental issue-it is a health emergency.

Yet, only a tiny fraction of climate funding goes to the health sector.

Many health systems in Africa, which are underfunded and collapsing, were not built for this.

They are being overwhelmed, under-resourced and on the brink.

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO), in a report last year, revealed that Africa warmed faster than the rest of the world.

The WMO report revealed that African countries lost up to 5 percent of their gross domestic product on average, with many of them forced to allocate 9 percent of their budgets to deal with climate extremes.

The WMO estimated that the cost of climate adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa would be between USD 30 and USD 50 billion annually over the next decade.

Adaptation and climate finances could make a difference, giving many people in the path of extreme danger a new lease of life, increasing their access to health infrastructure, smart agriculture, and improved nutrition.

Africa receives less than 5 percent of global climate finance.

Capacitating negotiators on health and climate change issues

The Climate Change and Health Negotiators’ curriculum was developed with support from different partners, including AGNES and Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), a specialized technical institution of the African Union that works to support public health initiatives across Africa.

Dr Modi Mwatsama, head of capacity and field development for climate and health at Wellcome Trust, a London-based charity focused on health research, said the curriculum would ensure that Africa’s health issues are prioritized in climate negotiation processes.

Dr. Martin Muchangi, a director for population health and environment at Amref Health Africa, said the curriculum targets negotiators, including health and environment ministers, as well as mid-level state and non-state actors.

He said the idea is to train negotiators to understand the technical aspects of climate and health.

Muchangi said the curriculum provides a place where negotiators can always refer.

“We want health to be at the negotiating table. We want to empower AGN by building the capacity of negotiators,” he said while speaking at the same side event.

Muchangi said the curriculum will equip negotiators to use evidence and data to make a strong case at COP30 in Brazil as well as develop actionable plans.

Dr. Petronella Adhiambo, a capacity building officer at AGNES, said the curriculum is in line with what they want, which is to have health featured in the climate negotiation process.

“We will be able to provide evidence,” she said.

Adhiambo said it is possible to have health as an agenda item at COP30 in Brazil in November.

Dr. Jeremiah Mushosho, a regional team lead for climate at the World Health Organization, said the curriculum is aligned with Global Climate Action and is relevant to the needs of African countries.

“This is quite a big opportunity to prepare negotiators and create a regional pool of climate expert negotiators,” he said.

Mushosho said it is critical to push for resources to be allocated equitably.

Dr. Yewande Alimi, Antimicrobial Resistance and One Health Unit lead at Africa CDC, said her organization will amplify this initiative.

She said the curriculum is timely and Africa will no longer just sit at the negotiating table, but negotiators will be able to demonstrate that health should be prioritized.

Health Experts called for more funding to bring health and environment ministers to COP30 to demand health to be on the Agenda, as well as increase funding to the health sector.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• A New Solar Power Plant Powers Progress in Zimbabwe’s Renewable Energy Sector
• Girls in Kenya Are Repurposing the Invasive Mathenge Tree Into Furniture

The State of Qatar delivered a message, September 10, to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and to Sangjin Kim, the Charge d'Affaires at the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea and President of the Security Council for September, “regarding the cowardly Israeli attack that targeted residential buildings housing several members of the Hamas Political Bureau” in the capital, Doha. The message was delivered by the Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar to the United Nations Sheikha Alya Ahmed bin Saif Al-Thani. The State of Qatar requested that the message be circulated to members of the Security Council and issued as an official document of the Council.

By Alon Ben-Meir
NEW YORK, Sep 11 2025 (IPS)

Israel’s brazen attack on Hamas’ negotiating team in Qatar while they were deliberating a new ceasefire with Israel raises serious questions not only about the legality of the attack, which violated international laws and norms, and concerns over Qatar’s sovereignty, but also the potential regional and international fallout.

The fact that Israel notified the Trump administration of its impending attack and was given the green light to proceed adds another troubling dimension for all those who will be affected, especially the Gulf states.

Israel’s attack was calculated to achieve several objectives. First, Prime Minister Netanyahu did not want a new ceasefire at a time when the Israeli military is engaged in a major incursion into Gaza City to eliminate the remaining Hamas leaders and fighters.

Second, the gathering of Hamas’ top leaders in one place provided him with an opportunity to eliminate many of them, which he did not want to miss.

Third, he wanted to send a clear message to other Arab states that he would not hesitate to undertake bold action against what he considers an existential enemy, regardless of where they reside and how that might affect their relationship with the Arab countries involved.

Fourth, he wanted to project Israel as the dominant power in the Middle East, if not the hegemon, especially at this juncture when Israel is enjoying nearly unconditional support of the Trump administration.

Fifth, Netanyahu wanted to prevent the collapse of his government by complying with the demands of two of his extremist ministers who threatened to resign if he were to stop the war before the elimination of Hamas “from the face of the earth,” however lofty and unattainable a goal that might be. The attack in Doha was too tempting to pass up.

It is rather hypocritical of Netanyahu to attack Hamas on Qatari soil, when in fact Qatar’s years-long aid payments to the Gaza Strip through Hamas, meant to pay public salaries and prevent a humanitarian crisis, was approved by Netanyahu himself and sent through Israeli territory in cash-filled suitcases—all in an effort to create a wider divide with the Palestinian Authority and prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres condemned the attack and noted that Qatar has played a constructive role in efforts to secure a Gaza ceasefire and the release of hostages held by Hamas.

France’s President Macron said, “Today’s Israeli strikes on Qatar are unacceptable, whatever the reason. I express my solidarity with Qatar and its Emir, Sheikh Tamim Al Thani. Under no circumstances should the war spread throughout the region.”

The adverse implications of Israel’s attack will reaffirm the prevailing international view of Israel as a rogue state that blatantly ignores international norms of conduct and believes it can do so with complete impunity. Still, there will be a time when Israel will have to account for its mischiefs.

The attack further strained the relationship between Israel and Egypt, in particular, because it has been and continues to be involved in the ceasefire negotiations.

Moreover, the attack has certainly further damaged the chance of normalizing relations with other Gulf Arab states, even though both Netanyahu and Trump wanted to expand the Abraham Accords.

The Gulf states are now concerned about the US’ commitment to their security, given that the Trump administration allowed a close ally—Israel—to attack another ally, especially as Qatar hosts the largest US military base in the region.

According to Al Jazeera, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani condemned Tuesday’s strike on Doha, calling it “state terrorism” allegedly authorized by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said the attack demanded a firm regional response and warned that Qatar would defend its territory, reserving the right to retaliate and take all necessary measures.

To be sure, the pitfall of all of these developments transcends the Israel-Hamas war and the prospect of a new ceasefire. Israel’s habitual assassinations of its enemies, irrespective of their country of residence, raises a serious question as to how far Israel, with the support of the Trump administration, will go in violating international norms of conduct and laws with presumed impunity.

Indeed, beyond the green light that Trump gave Netanyahu to attack Hamas leaders in Doha, his unrelenting support of Netanyahu’s genocidal war in Gaza is deeply troubling for many countries around the world. They now see the US, which has been leading and preserving the world order in the wake of World War II, as a country that lost its way and poses an extraordinary danger to global stability.

Without the US’ consent, Netanyahu would not have dared to attack any of Israel’s enemies across the region, be they Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, Syria, and now Qatar. They see the US as the culprit and are extremely concerned about what might come next.

None of this augurs well for either Israel or the United States because sooner or later, these actions will sow consequences that neither nation can ignore and will come back to haunt them in a very real way.

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

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

A powerful 6.0-magnitude earthquake struck eastern Afghanistan late on 31 August 2025, with its epicenter near Jalalabad in Nangarhar province. Early reports indicate a significant loss of life, including many children, with hundreds of fatalities and thousands injured, alongside widespread destruction of homes and infrastructure. Credit: UNICEF/Amin Meerzad

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Over the past week, Afghanistan’s humanitarian situation has deteriorated significantly following the August 31 earthquake, which measured over 6.0 in magnitude and caused an immense loss of life and widespread destruction of critical infrastructure. Compounded by the nation’s fragile economy, severe shortages of essential resources, and persistent access challenges, humanitarian organizations have found it increasingly difficult to reach vulnerable communities—especially women and children.

On September 9, the United Nations (UN) launched a four-month emergency response plan totaling to USD 139.6 million in an effort to support roughly 457,000 people left struggling to survive in the aftermath of the earthquake. The response will prioritize communities in high-elevation areas as well as women, children, and the disabled, who are the most vulnerable populations. The International Rescue Committee (IRC) also announced a response plan that would target the Nangarhar and Laghman provinces, aiming to distribute cash assistance and essential items such as dignity kits.

“The Afghanistan earthquake has caused massive devastation. Hundreds of thousands of people in remote areas already scarred by decades of conflict and displacement have lost their homes and livelihoods,” said UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs Tom Fletcher. “Communities hit include those where people returning from Iran and Pakistan had only just begun to rebuild their lives”.

Prior to the earthquake, Afghanistan was already in the midst of a multifaceted humanitarian crisis marked by pervasive poverty, restrictive measures on women’s autonomy, and some of the lowest civic space conditions globally. According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), roughly 22.9 million people in Afghanistan urgently required humanitarian assistance prior to the earthquake, nearly half of the nation’s population.

Additional figures from OCHA show that as of September 7, approximately 500,000 people across the Kunar, Laghman, and Nangarhar provinces of eastern Afghanistan have been directly impacted by the earthquake, with over 2,200 civilian fatalities and 3,600 injuries recorded. Over 6,700 homes were destroyed or damaged, with many families losing their food stocks and finding refuge in open, makeshift settlements that leave them exposed to the elements, compromising safety and privacy.

OCHA warns that millions are facing limited access to essential services, with critical infrastructures for sanitation, healthcare, water, food, and education having been damaged or destroyed by the earthquake. Stephen Rodriques, the resident representative for the UN Development Programme (UNDP) in Afghanistan, informed reporters that 68 major water sources have been destroyed, leaving thousands without access to clean water. Shannon O’Hara, Head of Strategy and Coordination for OCHA Afghanistan, has said that outbreaks of infectious diseases such as cholera are imminent due to an overwhelming lack of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services, as well as roughly 92 percent of civilians residing in open shelters practicing open-defecation.

Afghanistan’s ongoing hunger crisis has further escalated following the earthquake. The World Food Programme (WFP) have reported that nearly 10 million people are facing acute food insecurity. Rates of child malnutrition have also skyrocketed to the “highest levels on record”, as roughly one in three children face stunted development and urgently require medical intervention. WFP projects that approximately 15 people will need lifesaving food assistance in the coming months, with winter weather conditions expected to amplify health risks and access challenges for humanitarian personnel.

Women and girls are projected to face the heaviest burden of this crisis. Estimates from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) show that thousands lack access to essential feminine hygiene supplies, while around 11,600 pregnant women have been directly impacted by the earthquake. This is particularly concerning as Afghanistan holds one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the entire Asia-Pacific region.

“For pregnant women, a natural disaster can turn an already challenging time into a life-threatening crisis,” said UNFPA Representative in Afghanistan, Kwabena Asante-Ntiamoah.

“In a context like Afghanistan, it is essential that women are delivering assistance to women and girls,” added UN Women Afghanistan Special Representative, Susan Ferguson. “Cultural restrictions can make it harder for women to access support and services – as we have seen with the Afghan women returnees from Iran and Pakistan,” the UN Women official stressed. “Women humanitarians are vital to overcome these barriers. Without them, too many women and girls will miss out on lifesaving assistance.”

Currently, humanitarian access to vulnerable communities in high-elevation areas remains severely strained, as landslides and rock falls have destroyed critical roads and cut off remote populations. The approaching winter season is expected to exacerbate these challenges. “Even before the earthquake, these villages were difficult to reach,” O’Hara said. “Now, with the earthquake, it takes extraordinary effort to get there.”

Additionally, numerous aid groups have warned that persistent funding shortfalls threaten to curtail lifesaving emergency services in Afghanistan. WFP’s top official in Kabul John Aylieff noted that current funds can only feed earthquake victims in Afghanistan for a few more weeks before being depleted entirely. Meanwhile, helicopter support from the UN Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS)— critical for reaching remote areas— has been suspended until additional funding is secured.

“As relief efforts are well underway, this week is a tragic testimony to the devastating impact of aid cuts on one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries,” said Ibrahim. “The international community must step up now to address Afghanistan’s escalating humanitarian needs—from drought-affected communities and returnee crises on both sides of its borders, to sudden natural disasters like the one that has just struck.”

Through its newly-announced emergency response plan, the UN is dedicated to providing multi-sectoral support, including shelter, clean water, food assistance, protection, education, and agricultural and livestock aid to help foster livelihoods. Relief efforts have already begun in the hardest-hit areas, with humanitarian personnel delivering hot meals, tents, warm clothing, and blankets to communities in need. Additionally, the UN is in the process of establishing safe spaces for women and children, aiming to keep high-risk populations at the center of their response.

“This is a moment where the international community must dig deep and show solidarity with a population that has already endured so much suffering”, said Indrika Ratwatte, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Afghanistan. “With winter fast approaching, we are in a race against time to support affected communities with just the bare minimum. The resilience of the Afghan people has been continually tested and there is a real danger, with each crisis that hits, that the fragile gains made in recent years will be reversed.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Secretary-General António Guterres arrives to brief reporters on the launch of his report, 'The Security We Need - Rebalancing Military Spending for a Sustainable and Peaceful Future.' Credit: Manuel Elías/UN Photo

By Naureen Hossain
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Global military spending has been on the rise for more than 20 years, and in 2024, it surged across all five global regions in the world to reach a record high of USD 2.7 trillion. Yet, such growth has come at the cost of diverting financial resources away from sustainable development efforts, which the United Nations and its chief warn puts pressure on an “already strained financial context.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Tuesday that member states needed to prioritize diplomacy and multilateralism to protect global security and development. His new report, The Security We Need: Rebalancing Military Spending for a Sustainable and Peaceful Future, goes into detail on the conditions that have allowed for increased military spending in contrast to an overall reduction in global development financing.

Amid rising tensions and global and regional conflicts, military spending has increased as an indication of governments’ priorities to address global and regional security concerns through military strength and deterrence. As some countries engage in conflicts, neighboring nations may boost military spending to mitigate what the report describes as “the external risks of conflict spillover.”

Military expenditure has also increased in its share of the global economy. Between 2022 and 2024, it grew from 2.2 to 2.5 percent of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP). More than 100 countries alone boosted their military spending in 2024, with the top ten spenders accounting for 73 percent of the global expenditure. Europe and the Middle East recorded the sharpest increases in recent years, while Africa accounted for just 1.9 percent of the total world military spending.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres (left) address reporters in New York at the launch of his new report on global military spending in 2024.  Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

To put this into scale, the USD 2.7 trillion in military expenditure is equivalent to each person in the world contributing USD 334. It is seventeen times greater than the total spending on COVID-19 vaccines, the total GDP of every African nation, and thirteen times greater than the amount of official development assistance (ODA) provided by OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) countries in 2024. It is 750 times higher than the UN’s annual budget for 2024.

The report also warns that development financing has not kept up with this increased spending. As the development financing gap widens, official development assistance (ODA) has reduced. The annual financing gap for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is already at USD 4 trillion and could widen to USD 6.4 trillion in the years to come. This is critical at a time when the world is far off track to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)’ 2030 deadline.

The report indicates that governments allocate less of their budgets to social investments when they increase their military spending. This has reverberated across multiple civil sectors, notably education, public health and clean energy. Military spending can create employment and these benefits can be critical in times of severe insecurity. But it also generates fewer jobs per dollar compared to the civilian sectors needed to contribute to sustaining long-term productivity and peace. If USD 1 billion can generate 11,000 jobs in the military, that same amount can create 17,200 jobs in health care and 26,700 jobs in education.

What this latest UN report reveals are the misaligned priorities in global spending and the growing resource scarcity for essential development and social investments. It also warns that countries are moving away from diplomacy and prioritizing militarized strategies.

At the report’s launch Izumi Nakamitsu, the UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, remarked that the global trends in military spending indicated a systemic imbalance, where “militarization is prioritized over development.”

“We need a new vision of security—human-centered and rooted in the UN Charter. A vision that safeguards people, not just borders; that prioritizes institutions, equity and planetary sustainability,” said Nakamitsu. “Rebalancing global priorities is not optional—it is an imperative for humanity’s survival.”

“We are in a world where fissures are deepening, official development assistance is falling, and human development progress is slowing,” said Haoliang Xu, the Acting Administrator of the UN Development Programme (UNDP). “But we know that development is a driver of security and multilateral development cooperation works. When people’s lives improve, when they have access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, and when they can live lives of dignity and self-determination, we will have more peaceful societies and a more peaceful world.”

Xu warned that the progress made towards development in the past 30 years may start to decline and even regress, noting that progress in the Global Human Development Index has dramatically slowed down in the last two years.

Military spending puts debt burdens and fiscal constraints on both developed and developing countries, yet the impact is more significant for developing countries, as the report notes that their domestic resources are diverted away from development projects, while simultaneously international support through ODAs is reduced. A one-percent increase in military spending in low- and middle-income countries also aligned with a near-equal reduction in spending on public health services.

In his statement, Guterres acknowledged that governments have legitimate security responsibilities, including safeguarding civilians and addressing immediate threats, while also remarking that “lasting security cannot be achieved by military spending alone.”

“Investing in people is investing in the first line of defense against violence in any society,” he added. He noted that even a fraction of the budget allocated to military spending could “close vital gaps” in essential sectors such as education, healthcare, energy and infrastructure.

“The evidence is clear: excessive military spending does not guarantee peace. It often undermines it—fueling arms races, deepening mistrust, and diverting resources from the very foundations of stability,” he said.

The report concludes with a five-point agenda for the international community to address global spending across multiple sectors and promote diplomatic dialogue:

1. Prioritize diplomacy, peaceful settlement of disputes, and confidence-building measures to address the underlying causes of growing military expenditure through 2030.
2. Bring military expenditure to the fore of disarmament discussions, and improve links between arms control and development.
3. Promote transparency and accountability around military expenditure to build trust and confidence among Member States and increase domestic fiscal accountability.
4. Reinvigorate multilateral finance for development.
5. Advance a human-centered approach to security and sustainable development.

Just prior to the report’s official launch on Tuesday, news broke that Israel launched a strike targeting Hamas members in Qatar’s capital, Doha, who stand as one of the key mediators in ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas. Guterres called the attack a “flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Qatar.”

“It lays bare a stark reality: the world is spending far more on waging war than on building peace,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Excerpt:

Just prior to the UN Secretary-General releasing his report on global military spending, news broke that Israel launched a strike targeting Hamas members in Qatar’s capital, Doha. António Guterres commented, “It (the strike) lays bare a stark reality: the world is spending far more on waging war than on building peace.”

Protestors torched the administrative headquarters of Nepal, the palace of Singha Durbar. This was one of several public properties that were set alight. Credit: Barsha Shah/IPS

By Tanka Dhakal
KATHMANDU, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Nepal entered into a new era of constitutional and political crisis after deadly protests by the deeply frustrated young generation (Gen-Z). Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli resigned on Tuesday after protests grew out of control.

Gen-Z protestors took to the streets on Monday, where the government used force. Security forces opened fire at youth protests against corruption, nepotism, and a social media ban. At least 19 people were killed on a single day. It’s one of the deadliest protest days in Nepal’s history. So far, at least 24 people have been confirmed to be dead during this ongoing unrest.

Protesters took to the streets after the government of Nepal banned most social media last week. Social media ban was the final straw, and on TikTok and Reddit, Gen-Z (13-28 years old) users organized peaceful protests, but they escalated. Now the Himalayan country with nearly 30 million people is facing uncertainty.

On Tuesday many of the government agencies and courthouses were set on fire. The country’s administrative headquarters and parliament house burned down. The homes of political leaders were also torched.

Initially reluctant, Oli resigned on Tuesday, citing “the extraordinary situation” in the country. He submitted his resignation to the President effectively immediately.

Later Tuesday, Nepal President Ramchandra Paudel issued a statement urging protestors to cooperate for a peaceful resolution.

“In a democracy, the demands raised by the citizens can be resolved through talks and dialogue, including Gen-Z representatives,” he said in a statement. Paudel urged Gen-Z representatives to “come to talk.”

Balen Shah, mayor of Kathmandu metropolitan city, who is seen as one of the possible leaders, also urged youth protestors to stop destroying public property and come to talk.

“Please gen Z, the country is in your hands; you are the ones who will be building. Whatever is being destroyed is ours; now return home,” he wrote on social media on Tuesday evening.

After the security situation got out of control, the Nepal Army deployed throughout the country from late evening on Tuesday. Army chief also urged protesters to come forward to talk with the president to find solutions.

After the rapidly escalating situation, international agencies, including the United Nations, issued their concerns.

Expressing deep concern over the deaths and destruction, UN human rights chief Volker Türk called on authorities and protesters to de-escalate the spiraling crisis. In a statement, Türk said he was “appalled by the escalating violence in Nepal that has resulted in multiple deaths and the injury of hundreds of mostly young protesters, as well as the widespread destruction of property.”

“I plead with security forces to exercise utmost restraint and avoid further such bloodshed and harm,” he said. “Violence is not the answer. Dialogue is the best and only way to address the concerns of the Nepalese people. It is important that the voices of young people are heard.”

The UN Secretary-General is also closely following the situation, according to his spokesperson. During Tuesday’s daily briefing in New York, Stéphane Dujarric said António Guterres was “very saddened by the loss of life” and reiterated his call for restraint to prevent further escalation.

“The authorities must comply with international human rights law, and protests must take place in a peaceful manner that respects life and property,” Dujarric said, noting the dramatic images emerging from Nepal.

The UN Country team in Nepal urges authorities to ensure that law enforcement responses remain proportionate and in line with international human rights standards.” UN Resident Coordinator Hanaa Singer-Hamdy described the situation as “so unlike Nepal.”

Nepal is known for its political insatiability and has seen more than a dozen governments since it transitioned to a republic after abolishing its monarchy. In 2008, after long protests and a decade-long Maoist war, Nepal transitioned into a republic and got its new construction in 2015.

One decade later, Nepal has again found itself in a political crisis.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• ICJ Ruling Is a Pivotal Moment for Climate and Health Justice, Experts Say
• Extreme Weather Will Place Toll on Asia’s Economies and Ecosystems, Says World Meteorological Organization
• Glaciers More Sensitive to Global Warming, Now in Extreme Danger—Study

Abu Amer Al-Sharif and his family in Gaza City remove their belongings and household items from their home, preparing for yet another displacement. Credit: UN News
 
One million people being forced towards unlivable, so called “humanitarian area” in mass forced displacement.

By Oxfam International
MEXICO CITY, Mexico, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Israel’s intent to displace around 1 million civilians, half of whom are living in famine, is impossible and illegal Oxfam said, while the Israeli military continued to flatten Gaza City building by building as its mass forced displacement of civilians in the city gains terrifying momentum.

Displacement orders, on leaflets thrown from the sky, or posted on social media, signal grave next steps, a scene all too familiar in Gaza where every order has preceded new waves of destruction and mass casualties. This is the latest chapter in the genocide that Israel is committing in Gaza and part of a broader campaign of ethnic cleansing engulfing the entire
Gaza Strip, where nothing and no one has been spared.

Israel’s plan to concentrate around 1 million people into tiny slivers of already overcrowded and ill-equipped “camps” has no basis in reality, with just 42.8 square kilometres (under 12% of the Gaza Strip) allocated to this so-called “humanitarian area” for people to move to.

That would mean an additional 1 million people are expected to live in under–resourced spaces located in the Southern part of the Gaza Strip, whilst most of the remaining humanitarian and emergency infrastructure is currently located in the middle area of the Strip, further limiting access to support.

The plan is not only inhumane it is physically impossible and would compound disease and hunger and be a flagrant breach of international humanitarian law (IHL).

These orders cannot be carried out in a way in which Israel can meet its IHL obligations, or the terms of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Mass forced displacement is not a pressure tool to replace negotiations and amounts to collective punishment.

Under IHL, there must be guarantees of support to ensure Palestinians forced to flee Gaza City can do so in safety and safely return. There also needs to be guaranteed provision of accommodation, hygiene, health, nutrition, water and non-separation of families. Without these supports in place, it amounts to forcible transfer, which in current circumstances amount to war crimes and a crime against humanity.

It is the latest result of a deliberate policy of the Government of Israel to use starvation and forced mass displacement, food and water as weapons of war. Mass forced displacement is not a pressure tool to replace negotiations and amounts to collective punishment.

“The ongoing displacement orders and the push of people deeper into “humanitarian zones”- which we know have never been safe at all- mean it becomes almost impossible to deliver aid effectively. Israel’s siege and severe limitations placed on the entry of aid also means people already in these zones lack the most basic of services even before hundreds of thousands more are forced into the same area,” said Ruth James, Oxfam’s Regional Humanitarian Coordinator, speaking from Gaza.

Oxfam’s partner organisations are under attack and facing severe pressure. On Sunday, an Israeli attack near the headquarters of the Aisha Association for Woman and Child Protection in Gaza City, resulted in the killing of one of the employees, a pregnant woman, and a 7-year old boy and critically injuring many others.

The organization plays a leading role in the protection of women and children. Their premises are used as shelters by displaced people.

Dr Umaiyeh Khammash, Director of Juzoor, an Oxfam partner, and working in Gaza City promoting health as a basic human right, said: “While Juzoor’s team continues its humanitarian mission, moving alongside the forcibly displaced population and sharing in their suffering and uprooting, the coming days will inevitably bring more loss of lives and even further deterioration in the health and well-being of the population”.

“Mental health is collapsing under the weight of sustained trauma—people are enduring daily nightmares of fear, shock, and hopelessness, with no sense of safety anywhere, in a crisis that will leave deep scars, not just on this generation, but on generations to come.”

Many of those already ordered to leave their homes are too weak from starvation, cannot afford the exorbitant transport costs to move, or are unwilling to leave for an area already over-crowded and not guaranteed safe.

A recent multi-agency survey found that while 53% of surveyed residents said they would move if they received an official order, only 27% of those said they would move out of Gaza City, with others saying they would move to another area within Gaza City. 14% said they would not move.

This indicates that hundreds of thousands of people will be trapped in the city under increasingly heavy bombardment, with little or no aid reaching them.

“As the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza City deepens by the hour, there must be an end to this violence and deprivation,” said Ruth James. “There must be an urgent halt to all forced displacement operations, and large-scale delivery of food, water, medicine, vital water-infrastructure repair equipment and fuel.”

Oxfam is calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire and release of all hostages and unlawfully detained prisoners. The unimaginable violence and suffering Palestinians in Gaza have been enduring for over 700 days needs to end now. The moral failure of states to act is palpable. For as long as they are silent and continue to send arms support to Israel, they are complicit in the genocide that continues to unfold.

Customary IHL Rule 129 and Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 explicitly prohibits an occupying power from deporting or forcibly transferring members of the occupied civilian population, regardless of motive. This provision is a cornerstone of the laws of occupation; it is designed to prevent demographic changes being made by the occupying power to the occupied territory, regardless of any ‘justification’ it may provide for such changes.

It underscores the principle that the rights and dignity of the civilian population must be protected, reflecting an occupying power’s obligations to ensure the welfare and security of those under its administration. There are exceptions for evacuation of civilians for their own safety, but only on a temporary basis and where adequate shelter, food, water and access to medical care are provided.

Crimes Against Humanity: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court states that:

– Article 7(1)(d): Treats deportation or forcible transfer of population, when perpetrated as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians, as a crime against humanity. Ohchr+1

– Article 8(2)(a)(vii) and (2)(b)(viii): Make it a war crime to transfer, directly or indirectly, by the occupying power, parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies or to deport or transfer civilians of the occupied territory, in whole or in part, within or outside that territory.

Harvard Dataverse report with mapping and analysis of “humanitarian” zone announcement.

The recently published Intergrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) report determined that Famine (IPC Phase 5) is currently occurring in Gaza Governorate. Furthermore, the FRC projects Famine (IPC Phase 5) thresholds to be crossed in Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis Governorates in the coming weeks.

According to the UN, at least 1.9 million people – or about 90 per cent of the population – across the Gaza Strip have been displaced during the war. Many have been displaced repeatedly, some 10 times or more.

On 6 September, Israeli authorities published a map of the new “humanitarian zone” comprising Al Mawasi, including the western parts of Khan Younis city (mainly Khan Younis Camp and al-Amal district) and excluding the Middle Governorate.

As of 3 September, 86.5 per cent of the Gaza Strip remains within the Israeli-militarized zone, under displacement orders, or where these overlap.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Ahead of the Conference of the Parties (COP30), the Second Africa Climate Summit (ACS2) in Addis Ababa is looking to mobilize billions for renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, green housing, and gender-focused financing.

Displaced persons’ tents crowded along the coastal strip of Gaza City in the northern part of the Gaza Strip. Credit: UN News

By Alon Ben-Meir
NEW YORK, Sep 9 2025 (IPS)

During the upcoming annual UN General Assembly, several key European countries are expected to recognize a Palestinian state. The question that looms is how to translate such a significant development into reality, whereby the Palestinians will realize their national aspiration for statehood

One of the main issues that may take center stage at the upcoming UN General Assembly is the ongoing devastating war in Gaza, and the international outcry for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state to end the plight of the Palestinians in the context of a two-state solution.

What will make the discussion at the UN about Palestinian statehood more potent and relevant is the expectation that several Western powers, including the UK, France, Canada, Australia, Belgium, and Portugal, will formally recognize a Palestinian state, joining Spain, Ireland, and Norway, which recognized Palestine last year.

That said, although such recognition is significant, it remains symbolic unless many critical measures are taken by all the players involved to mitigate the following four reasons behind the failures in advancing the prospect of establishing such a state.

First, Israel has done everything within its reach, especially now with the support of the Trump administration, to prevent that from happening.

Second, the Palestinian Authority has done little to establish a legitimate representative government and a political apparatus responsive to public needs, even though 147 countries have already recognized it.

Third, the Arab states, though publicly supportive, have provided some financial support but have made no concerted effort over the years to bring the idea to fruition.

And four, the countries that have recognized Palestinian statehood have not taken significant measures to ensure its implementation.

To realistically pave the way to Palestinian statehood, the players involved will have to take momentous measures and remain on course, even though Israel will vehemently resist and lean on the US to use its weight to prevent such an outcome.

The Palestinian Authority

The PA must now wake up to its bitter reality and recognize that independent statehood will remain only a slogan unless it takes the following steps:

First, new elections must be held. Every Palestinian faction must be invited to participate, as long as they commit themselves to a peaceful solution to the conflict with Israel. The Palestinians need to demonstrate a unity of purpose and forsake violent resistance, which has only worked in favor of Israel over the years.

Second, the PA should reiterate its recognition of Israel and commit to entering unconditionally into peace negotiations. This is not a capitulation to Israel’s whims; to the contrary, it will put Israel on the defensive, as it would have no legitimate excuses in the eyes of the international community to reject the Palestinians’ initiative.

Third, the PA must actively engage in public diplomacy by strengthening diplomatic outreach and using the media and public relations to show readiness for dialogue and shape global opinion positively to increase support for the Palestinian cause.

Fourth, it must demonstrate its commitment to democratic principles and human rights, which is essential for the Western countries planning to recognize Palestinian statehood.

Fifth, economic development plans should be presented to gain international confidence, which would encourage many countries supportive of the Palestinians to offer financial support.

Sixth, Palestinian leaders ought to actively promote nonviolent means to highlight the Palestinian cause and gain the high moral ground internationally.

The role of the European Countries

The important role of European countries in supporting Palestinian independence cannot be overstated. Their support must transcend symbolism and focus on the nitty-gritty of what is needed to advance the Palestinians’ cause. The measures to be taken include:

Providing direct economic support to Palestinian institutions and infrastructure while ensuring accountability.

Establishing bilateral trade agreements with the Palestinians to boost their economy, independent of Israel.

Pushing for enhanced observer status and participation of Palestine in international bodies while providing legal forums to pursue international acceptance and rights.

Upgrading Palestinian consulate representative offices in their capitals to a higher diplomatic level.

Funding a public diplomacy campaign in their respective capitals to build support for Palestinian statehood.

Offering training and support for Palestinian internal security forces in coordination with Israel to maintain order and stability.

The Role of the Arab States

The Arab states must play a far greater role than ever before in advancing the Palestinian cause, particularly because it is directly linked to the nature of their desired future relationship with Israel. To that end, the Arab states should work in unison and send a clear message that their relations with Israel hinge directly on finding an amicable solution to the conflict.

The Arab states, led by Saudi Arabia, should:

Make it abundantly clear that no other Arab state would normalize relations with Israel unless there is a clear path that would lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Threaten Israel that continued violations of the Palestinians’ human rights will lead to the severing of diplomatic relations, especially with the signatories to the Abraham Accords.

Provide targeted financial aid for Palestinian governance and infrastructure, focusing on sustainable development projects, and use collective economic leverage to encourage other countries to support Palestinian statehood.

Open new or upgrade existing Palestinian embassies in Arab capitals.

Support Palestine in the international legal arena for rights and recognition, and enhance the Palestinian narrative and position in Arab and international media outlets.

Align regional policies to support Palestinian diplomatic efforts, work through UN bodies and behind-the-scenes talks, and adopt measures to minimize frictions between Israel and the Palestinians and prevent confrontations.

It would be grossly misleading to suggest that taking all the measures enumerated above will offer smooth sailing toward realizing a Palestinian state. Being in total control of the West Bank and Gaza, Israel, especially under the current Netanyahu-led government, with staunch support of Trump, will stop at nothing to sabotage any effort that could improve the prospect of a Palestinian state.

Notwithstanding the uphill battle, however, the concerted and consistent efforts by all the players will eventually lead to a dramatic change in the trajectory of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

It has been demonstrated that after 80 years of violent conflict, Netanyahu’s strategy to maintain a state of constant hostilities and make incremental gains has now run its course. And the Palestinian strategy of resistance has failed, too. Hamas’ attack and Israel’s retaliatory war have demonstrated that there will be no enduring Israeli-Palestinian peace short of a two-state solution.

The Netanyahu government and the Trump presidency will end, but the Palestinian reality will never fade away. The Western European countries’ decision to recognize a Palestinian state will be a historic game-changer if steady and concrete steps follow their recognition, and they remain determined to realize Palestinian statehood regardless of the changing times and circumstances.

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

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Sep 9 2025 (IPS)

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have risen over the last two centuries, with current and accumulated emissions per capita from rich nations greatly exceeding those of the Global South.

Tropical vulnerability
The last six millennia have seen much higher ‘carrying capacities’, soil fertility, population densities, and urbanisation in the tropics than in the temperate zone.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Most of the world’s population lives in tropical and subtropical areas in developing nations, now increasingly threatened by planetary heating.

Different environments, geographies, ecologies and means affect vulnerability to planetary heating. Climate change’s effects vary considerably, especially between tropical and temperate regions.

Extreme weather events – cyclones, hurricanes, or typhoons – are generally much more severe in the tropics, which are also much more vulnerable to planetary heating.

Although they have emitted relatively less GHGs per capita, tropical developing countries must now adapt much more to planetary heating and its consequences.

Many rural livelihoods have become increasingly unviable, forcing ‘climate refugees’ to move away. Increasing numbers in the countryside have little choice but to leave.

Worse, economic and technological changes of recent decades have limited job creation in many developing countries, causing employment to fall further behind labour force growth.

Unequal development has also worsened climate injustice. Adaptation efforts are far more urgent in the tropics as planetary heating has damaged these regions much more.

Technological solutions?
While science may offer solutions, innovation has become increasingly commercialised for profit. Previously, developing countries could negotiate technology transfer agreements, but this option is becoming less available.

Strengthened intellectual property rights (IPRs) limit technology transfer, innovation, and development. The World Trade Organization (WTO) greatly increased the scope of IPRs in 1995 with its new Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) provisions.

Thus, access to technology depends increasingly on ability to pay and getting government permission, slowing climate action in the Global South. Financial constraints doubly handicap the worst off.

Despite rapidly mounting deaths due to the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, European governments refused to honour the West’s public health exception (PHE) concession in 2001 to restart WTO ministerial talks after the 1999 Seattle debacle.

Instead of implementing the TRIPS PHE as the pandemic quickly spread, Europeans dragged out negotiations until a poor compromise was reached years after the pandemic had been officially declared and millions had died worldwide.

With the second Trump administration withdrawing again from the World Health Organization (WHO) and cutting research funding, tropical threats will continue to dominate the WHO list of neglected diseases.

Climate finance inadequate
Citing the 2008 global financial crisis (GFC), rich nations claimed they could only afford to contribute a hundred billion dollars annually to climate finance for developing countries in line with the sustainable development principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’.

This hundred-billion-dollar promise was made before the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties (COP) to secure support for a significant new climate agreement after the US Senate rejected the Kyoto Protocol before the end of the 20th century.

Rich nations promised to raise their concessional climate finance contributions from 2020 after recovery from the recession following the GFC. However, official development assistance has declined while military spending pledges have risen sharply.

The rich OECD nations now claim that the hundred-billion-dollar climate finance promise has been met with some new ‘creative accounting’, including Italian government funding support for a commercial gelateria chain abroad!

In recent climate finance talks, Western governments increasingly insist that only mitigation funding should qualify as climate finance, claiming adaptation efforts do not slow planetary heating.

Meanwhile, reparations funds for ‘losses and damages’ remain embarrassingly low. Worse, in recent years, much of the West has abandoned specific promises to slow planetary heating.

Despite being among the greatest GHG emitters per capita, the USA has made the least progress. The two Trump administrations’ aggressive reversals of modest earlier US commitments have further reduced the negligible progress so far.

In late 2021, the Glasgow climate COP pledged to end coal burning for energy. But less than half a year later, the West abandoned this promise to block energy imports from Russia after it invaded Ukraine.

Concessional to commercial finance
Responding to developing countries’ demands for more financial resources on concessional terms to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and address the climate crisis, World Bank president Jim Kim promoted the ‘from billions to trillions’ financing slogan.

The catchphrase was used to urge developing countries to take much more commercial loans as access to concessional finance declined and borrowing terms tightened.

With lower interest rates in the West due to unconventional monetary policies following the 2008 GFC, many developing nations increased borrowing until interest rates were sharply raised from early 2022.

Funds leaving developing countries in great haste precipitated widespread debt distress, especially in many poorer developing countries. Thus, purported market financial solutions compounded rather than mitigated the climate crisis.

Meanwhile, growing geopolitical hostilities, leading to what some consider a new Cold War, are accelerating planetary heating and further threatening tropical ecologies, rural livelihoods, and well-being.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

• Net Zero by 2050 Delays Needed Urgent Climate Action
• Western Climate Hypocrisy Exposed by NATO Energy Policy
• Rich Nation Hypocrisy Accelerating Global Heating
• Carbon Markets Biased, Distorted, Undermined
• Insider Exposé of ESG Greenwashing
• Beware Climate Finance Charade
• Can Carbon Trading Stop Global Heating?
• COP27 Fiddling as World Warms
• Climate Hypocrisy Ensures Global Warming

Credit: brutto film / shutterstock.com

By Anna Naupa
Sep 8 2025 (IPS)

 
Globally, there is a 0.36% deterioration in average levels of peacefulness, as more countries are increasing their levels of militarisation against the backdrop of rising geopolitical tensions, increasing conflict, and rising economic uncertainty.

But this statistic omits most Pacific island countries. In 2025, only three are ranked by the Global Peace Index (GPI): New Zealand in 3rd place, Australia in18th and Papua New Guinea ranking 116th out of 163 nations.

As regional dialogue about an ‘Ocean of Peace’ concept advances, a dedicated Pacific Peace Index—as suggested by Solomon Islands’ Professor Transform Aqorau at the July 2025 Pacific Regional and National Security Conference—might provide additional form to an evolving political dialogue amongst Pacific Islands Forum member states.

But, how is Pacific peace defined? How might our own Pacific measure of peacefulness complement existing efforts to safeguard peace and security in the region?

What is Pacific Peace?

Peace is more than the absence of conflict or violence; it is a global public good that enables people to live full, healthy and prosperous lives without fear.

“Peace must serve the people, not geopolitics, not elites in the region, not distant interests,” Professor Aqorau says, in articulating a vision for Pacific peace. Peace must also tackle broader factors affecting safety and wellbeing across the Pacific, particularly for women and vulnerable populations, says Fiji’s Shamima Ali.

Peace and development are two sides of the same coin. The Pacific 2050 Strategy for a Blue Pacific Continent places peace alongside harmony, security, social inclusion, and prosperity, as a key element for attaining free, healthy, and productive lives for Pacific peoples. Delivering Pacific peace, therefore, entails securing well-being; protecting people, place and environment; advancing development; and securing futures for present and future generations, the latter efforts entailing climate action and protection of sovereignty.

While global indices are variably critiqued for omissions of Pacific Islands data, unilateral development and indicator bias, poorly contextualized methodologies, or the significant resourcing required to produce Pacific datasets, indices can nonetheless usefully inform policy-makers.

What could a Pacific Peace Index measure?

The current starting point for measuring and monitoring peace in the region is found in the form of existing country commitments to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16 (the ‘Peace Goal’).

The Pacific Roadmap for Sustainable Development has contextualised eight SDG 16 indicators for regional reporting that address experiences of violence, access to justice, civil registration and legal identity, transparency of public expenditure, and public access to information and views on participation in decision-making processes.

In 2022, a regional monitoring report led by the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat found that limited data availability for SDG16 hampered measurement of progress in the Pacific. This is broadly reflective of global trends, where investment is needed in further data generation efforts and statistical capacity to measure SDG 16.

The report also found that the Pacific was regressing on advancing effective institutions, transparency, and accountability.

But are SDG16’s Pacific contextualised indicators sufficient to meet the expectations of the Boe Declaration on Regional Security and the Pacific 2050 Strategy’s Peace and Security pillar? Can this type of reporting serve as a potential proxy ‘Pacific Peace Index’?

While answers to these questions are both technical and political in nature, there are two things to keep in mind:

1) Peace has deep roots in Pacific social and cultural structures

Despite close alignment with regional strategies, the current SDG 16 contextualised indicators do not encapsulate the depth of a Pacific vision for peace.

Pacific Islands Countries’ policy commitments to aspects of peace are well-documented. Each year new initiatives are announced that respond to an expanded concept of security, ranging from traditional security cooperation to tackling gender-based violence, climate mitigation and humanitarian assistance or investing in democratic processes.

But, knowledge gaps remain about the contribution of locally driven peace initiatives to national and regional efforts, and how these contribute to overall Pacific well-being. Addressing these gaps allows for a more comprehensive telling of an aggregated Pacific narrative of peace, which could be factored into a Pacific Peace Index. For example, peace-building dialogues following the Bougainville crisis, Solomon Islands’ ethnic tensions, and series of Fiji coups have highlighted the important contributions of locally-driven approaches, including drawing on traditional dispute resolution.

2) Telling a story of purposeful peace

Yet, Pacific peace is more than a collection of discrete data points and time-bound security-related projects. Peace is an evolving process, it is future-oriented and a proactive, purposeful exercise.

Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Baron Waqa has stressed that peace must be “anchored in sovereignty, resilience, inclusion and regional solidarity.” Many Pacific scholars agree, arguing that there is no real peace without addressing longstanding issues of colonisation, militarisation, restricted sovereignty and justice, which continue to bear on many Pacific islanders.

To tell a regional story means connecting, for example, Tuvalu’s international statehood recognition, the recent landmark ICJ advisory opinion on climate change, the nuclear legacies in the region, political instability, elections, and well-being measures, to the region’s vision of peace. Combined, we can then begin to grasp all the elements that contribute to a cumulatively peaceful region.

So, where to from here?

Another tool is the Positive Peace Index which measures the ‘attitudes, institutions and structures that sustain and create peaceful societies’. It assesses socio-economic development, justice, good governance and effective institutions, inclusion, resilience and diplomacy. A Pacific Peace Index could adapt this to incorporate Pacific indigenous philosophies of peace and values of social cohesion, well-being and reconciliation that are absent from existing global indices, for example, and track the region’s journey, disaggregated by country.

Multi-country indices demand considerable capacity so a State of Pacific Peace assessment may instead offer a simpler option. This could entail a dedicated section in the existing Pacific Regional Security Outlook report produced by regional organisations. Alternatively, the region’s academic institutions (e.g. via Track 2 mechanisms) could be invited to assist. Investing in peace summits also provides the opportunity for ongoing regional peace dialogue.

The emphasis, however, must be on building, not duplicating, existing regional mechanisms.

The opportunity of a Pacific Peace Index would be in owning and telling a coherent peace narrative that: a) bridges security and development and, b) reflects how the peace interests and dignity of Pacific peoples are being upheld over time.

As political dialogue about a Pacific ‘Ocean of Peace’ evolves, Pacific peoples’ visions of peace must drive any framing and subsequent action. Professor Aqorau offers further wisdom: ” Our peace should not depend on choosing sides, but on asserting our needs, on our terms and on our collective aspirations.”

Related articles:
Peacebuilding: The Missing Peace in COP30 Climate Ambition

Climate Change in Pasifika Relational Itulagi

Anna Naupa is a ni-Vanuatu PhD candidate at the Australian National University.

This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and is being republished from the original with their permission.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Half of Afghanistan's population – the women – have been pushed out of public life by the Taliban. Credit: Learning Together.

By External Source
KABUL, Sep 8 2025 (IPS)

In recent weeks, the walls of the Afghan capital have been plastered with slogans about women’s hijab: “Unveiling is a sign of ignorance”; “Hijab is a father’s honour and the pride of Muslims”.

They are messages from the Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, created to enforce the Taliban’s strict interpretation of Islamic rule on Afghanistan. Women, once again, are at the sharp end of it all.

Presented as efforts to uphold public morality, the slogans have instead weighed heavily on the mental and emotional well-being of women.

 

Walls That Echo Fear, Not Faith

Many women complain that the constant messaging makes them feel anxious and unsafe. Even those who are fully dressed up in hijab in accordance with the law have become fearful of stepping outside the house, not because of what they are wearing, but because the atmosphere has become so tense and judgmental. When they see slogans staring down at them from the walls, they “echo fear not faith”.

Women are not allowed to wear perfume; laugh out loud or speak openly in front of men. They must not interact with men who are either non-relatives or non-Muslims and are required to always walk with a male guardian in public

Parwin, a young woman traveling on a city bus with her mother, recalls a time when the walls of Kabul were covered with colorful murals promoting women’s rights, peace, freedom, and equality. She said, “Sadly, the Taliban have wiped those away and replaced them with messages that put limits on women”, she complains.

“What women need more than ever is more education not slogans that only scare them”, says Parwin.

Instead, after four years of living under Taliban rule women continue to live with fear, deprivation, and many restrictions.

Maliha, another Kabul resident, raised her concerns over a steady increase in the number of restrictions women now face: women are not allowed to wear perfume; laugh out loud or speak openly in front of men. They must not interact with men who are either non-relatives or non-Muslims and are required to always walk with a male guardian in public.

She said, “Women are born free and should not be cut off from the rest of society. These restrictions do not protect us. Rather, they push us out and exclude us from community life”.

The Taliban came with promises of ‘preserving Islamic values,’ but instead of respecting women’s dignity as recognized in Islam, they have subjected them to repression and exclusion.

Islam recognizes the dignity of women and grants them the right to work, participate in society and to have an education. Using religious values as a tool to suppress women only presents a harsh and unjust image of the faith.

Instead of focusing on dress codes and restrictions, the government should be helping women who have no home. They should be supporting widows and women with nowhere to turn to—by providing them shelter, jobs, and a way to live with dignity.

 

Restrictions That Have Paralized Life

Four years after the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan, life has only gotten harder for Afghan women. From the beginning, strict rules were put in place to limit their freedom and instead of easing up, those restrictions have only grown tighter.

Girls are banned from attending school after six grade or university. Women are no longer allowed to work outside their homes. In effect, half the population has been pushed out of public life.

In response to these criticisms, the spokesperson for the Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice told the media that these slogans are a way to promote Islamic morals.

But in reality a law passed last year with 35 articles severely restrict women’s personal freedoms.

Afghan women today are living without basic rights, and in an unsafe and deeply stressful environment.

If the Taliban continue with the policies of shutting women off women from the rest of society, it not only threatens the future of an entire generation of women, it also holds back progress and development of the whole country.

 

Excerpt:

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

By Sania Farooqui
BENGALURU, India, Sep 8 2025 (IPS)

This year marks half a century since the start of Lebanon’s civil war in 1975 – a conflict that lasted 15 years, killed over 150,000 lives, and resulted in as many as 17,000 missing. Decades later, the legacy of that war is still everywhere: in the silence of classrooms without history books, in families who never knew what happened to their missing loved ones, and in violence made mundane in all parts of society.

Lina Abou-Habib

For Lina Abou-Habib, Director of the American University of Beirut (AUB), Lebanon’s failure to reconcile with its history has lefts wounds festering. In an interview by IPS Inter Press News, she discusses memory, impunity, and the need for a feminist, justice-oriented peace building process. “When the war started in 1975, I was 13 years old. When it ended in 1990, I was 28,” Lina recalls. “I believe we may be the last generation that truly holds this first hand memory of those 15 years of war.”

And yet, today, much of Lebanon’s younger generation has no real knowledge of what happened. There is no state history book of the civil war in the nation, leaving a void in collective memory.

“One of the most striking moments I’ve had with my students at AUB was when I asked them, ‘What is the Taif Agreement?’” Lina says, referring to the Saudi-brokered accord that formally ended the war. “Most of them didn’t know. When they searched for visuals, their first observation was this: there were no women in the room. Not a single one.”

And that absence matters. Women’s experiences of the war, and their understanding of peace were excluded from the official record. After the war, Lebanon’s parliament passed a general amnesty law, which granted immunity to political parties and leaders for wartime practices and absolved individual and group militia members for sexual violence, murder, torture and forced disappearance. “After the war, there was a general amnesty law, which basically told everyone to ‘turn the page’ and move on – without justice, without accountability, and without healing,” Lina explains. “This amnesty institutionalized impunity.”

The consequences, she says, are far-reaching. “If men who committed heinous crimes during the war walked away free, then why wouldn’t impunity extend into other spheres? If someone can get away with mass murder, then femicide or gender-based violence becomes ‘no big deal.’”

This normalisation of violence permeates everyday life, from the political sphere to domestic. It teaches citizens, particularly women, that accountability is not something they can expect. Impunity has been succeeded by a culture of silence – a wilful forgetting that allows the wounds of war to remain unhealed. “Impunity doesn’t just happen politically, it’s also personal,” Lina reflects. “To normalize it at the national level, you need to go through a kind of intentional amnesia. But of course, you can’t truly forget. You internalize trauma, and when you don’t heal it, you pass it on.”

Without truth, without accountability, trauma is passed down generations. Families whose relatives disappeared still do not know where they were buried, or whether they survived. Entire communities grow up with questions that remain unanswered.

It was in this silence that the women in Lebanon got together to become guardians of memory, collectively forming the Committee of the Families of the Disappeared, a movement led primarily by mothers, sisters, and wives of those who went missing during the war.

“Of the 17,000–18,000 people still missing in Lebanon, 94% are men,” Lina notes. “But it’s women who have led the search for truth. And that truth-seeking is not about revenge. It’s about recognition. It’s about the right to know.” For these women, truth is not a weapon but its dignity. They echo similar struggles in Latin America, the Balkans, and Africa, where women have been at the forefront of truth-telling and reconciliation movements. Even years after the war, Lebanon remains highly militarized. Weapons are common, often associated with masculinity and control.

“Peace and carrying arms cannot coexist,” Lina says bluntly. “They are fundamentally incompatible – it’s an oxymoron.”

She emphasizes that weapons are never neutral. “Who carries weapons? Who decides who should be protected and who is a threat? Guns are not neutral – they are tools of power, of dominance.” For women, patriarchy contributes to militarization. Violence against women in war is often dismissed as private, hidden, or silenced – and war only makes it worse. “War doesn’t stop gender-based violence. It amplifies it. Bombings don’t stop rape. Displacement doesn’t stop domestic violence. On the contrary, it exacerbates it.”

This reality is not an exception in Lebanon. Everywhere, from Sudan to Libya, women are still subjected to rape, sexual slavery, and femicide as instruments of war. And too many times, their suffering goes unnoticed. Other countries that endured mass violence – from Rwanda to the former Yugoslavia to Latin America – have built transitional justice processes around one central truth: you cannot rebuild without memory.

“You cannot move forward without truth,” Lina stresses. “You didn’t get to write a new constitution or form a new government without first addressing what had happened – without naming the pain, the crimes, and the people who suffered.” But the truth does not come easily. Power, she warns, is patient. “The powers that be will always try to wait you out. That’s exactly what has happened in Lebanon. They’ve just been waiting for the families of the disappeared to die – to literally disappear, one after another.”

The lesson, then, is perseverance: truth-telling must outlast systems of denial.

Despite Lebanon’s collapse in recent years, economic crisis, political stagnation, and social disillusionment, Lina sees a moment of possibility in recent political change. “If any real change is to happen, this is our window. And I fear we won’t get another one,” she says. The change requires bold steps, “Disarming unlawfully militarised groups; dismantling corruption; building a just and inclusive legal system; and strengthening independent civil society”. “These are not small asks,” Lina admits. “But this is what real peace looks like. Not just the absence of conflict, but the presence of justice.”

Ultimately, Lina’s hope lies in Lebanon’s resilient civil society, a multi-generational network of activists, academics, feminists, and everyday citizens who refuse to give up. “The true actors of peace – the real builders of peace – are elsewhere,” she says. “Peace simply won’t happen if everyone isn’t included – especially not if women’s voices are excluded.”

Sania Farooqui is an independent journalist and host of The Sania Farooqui Show. She is soon launching her new podcast, The Peace Brief, a platform dedicated to amplifying women’s voices in peacebuilding and human rights.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

From local production of vaccines to digital infrastructure and renewable energy, Japan is investing in health innovation in Africa. Credit: UNDP

By Mandeep Dhaliwal and Osamu Kunii
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 8 2025 (IPS)

At a time of great transformation for global health, solidarity is more important than ever. As other countries have retreated from their commitments, Japan has instead continued its steadfast investment in a shared future that prioritizes human dignity and security.

Japan is reaffirming its commitment to this vision at the Ninth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) —a forum that champions African-led development—by placing youth employment and digital transformation at the heart of its agenda.

In line with these priorities, the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) announced US$160 million in bonds to support infrastructure, education and innovation across Africa. Significantly, the initiative invites Japanese companies and financial institutions to partner with and invest in African countries for mutual benefit.

Japan’s leadership on global health has long been underpinned by a strong sense of shared responsibility and solidarity. Wealthy countries should follow Japan’s lead, by building partnerships, scaling up proven innovations and fostering sustainable growth in Africa.

This approach could be particularly transformative for local manufacturing, digital health innovations and climate-resilient health systems—areas where African-led solutions are already gaining ground.

The Accra compact, adopted by the Africa Health Sovereignty Summit convened by Ghanaian President John Mahama, asserts the leadership and sovereignty of African countries in determining the health of their people.

For over a decade, Japan has supported both the Access and Delivery Partnership (ADP) and the Global Health Innovative Technology Fund (GHIT Fund) to develop and deliver health technologies to the people who need them most.

This innovative partnership between the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the GHIT supports the journey of medical innovations, including vaccines, medicines and diagnostics, from lab to bedside. GHIT stimulates research and development, while ADP—led by UNDP—works with countries and communities to introduce and scale up the finished products.

For over a decade, Japan has supported the Access and Delivery Partnership, led by UNDP, to deploy health technologies on the continent. Credit: UNDP Ghana

One recent success is the development and rollout of a new paediatric treatment option for schistosomiasis, an infection caused by a parasitic worm that affects 50 million preschool-aged children. Schistosomiasis, which is found primarily in tropical regions, causes anaemia, stunted growth and impaired cognitive development.

Children aged 6 years and under can now take a small pill for treatment. The GHIT Fund and the Pediatric Praziquantel Consortium—led by German pharmaceutical company Merck—worked together to develop the medicine and transfer the technology to Kenyan pharmaceutical manufacturer Universal Corporation Limited (UCL). Thanks to this collaboration, UCL is now producing medicine locally in Kenya, ensuring sustainable access to treatment for affected communities.

This shift toward local manufacturing is gaining momentum across Africa. Countries from Senegal to Rwanda and beyond are rapidly becoming regional manufacturing hubs for diagnostics, vaccine and medicine production.

In 2024, the Institut Pasteur de Dakar (IPD) inaugurated a new diagnostic manufacturing site, while in 2023, Rwanda collaborated with BioNTech to open what could become Africa’s first mRNA vaccine manufacturing facility. At the same time, digital technologies and AI are reshaping the future of African health care systems.

In June, 50 African Union Member States endorsed a digital micro-planning tool co-created by the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization and other partners, to accelerate the elimination of neglected tropical diseases like onchocerciasis and dengue.

Scaling up homegrown tools will strengthen epidemic preparedness, and when disaster strikes, they can mean the difference between containment and catastrophe.

The rise of these innovations underscores Africa’s position as an emerging hub for digital transformation. With Africa’s digital economy projected to grow to $712 billion by 2035, investors have a strong incentive to support the digital infrastructure boom

Japan is already ahead of the curve. Over the past few years, Japan has partnered with Ghana to establish mobile laboratories at the country’s four main points of entry to strengthen pandemic preparedness.

Earlier this year, Japan and Cote d’Ivoire jointly committed to supporting UNDP’s timbuktoo initiative, which promotes entrepreneurship opportunities for startups led by young Africans, including a health tech accelerator focused on amplifying innovation across the health sector in Africa.

Finally, innovation and investment are especially urgent in countries disproportionately affected by climate extremes. African nations are pioneering approaches to climate-resilient health systems that other countries can learn from.

The continent’s leading initiative—the Africa Adaptation Acceleration Programme—has already mobilized more than $15 billion to protect countries against climate shocks. Joint initiatives like Solar for Health and Smart Health Systems, a collaboration between UNDP, governments and other partners, has brought reliable power to 1,000 health facilities across 14 countries, ensuring medicines and vaccines stay cool and lights stay on.

As the impact of climate change on health systems accelerates, programmes like these must be scaled sustainably to protect health systems from current and future threats.

Investment priorities must align accordingly. As Japan leads the way, other countries should follow by funding sustainable, equitable, inclusive and mutually beneficial interventions. This is more than sound policy—it is an imperative for our shared future.

This article was originally published in Nikkei Asia.

Source: UNDP

Mandeep Dhaliwal is Director of the HIV and Health Group, UNDP; Osamu Kunii is CEO and Executive Director, Global Health Innovative Technology Fund

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Protesters demonstrate outside the Columbia University campus in New York City. October 2024. Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 8 2025 (IPS)

When the high-level meeting of over 150 world leaders takes place at the United Nations, September 22-30, one of the political highlights would be the announcement by at least 10 Western nations to recognize Palestine as a sovereign nation state.

The 10 countries– some already announcing their recognition ahead of the UN meeting — include UK, France, Canada, Australia, Portugal, Malta, Belgium, Spain, Ireland and Norway– proving the longstanding support for Israel is gradually diminishing in the Western world.

According to Cable News Network (CNN), Israel’s Foreign Ministry has “rejected” the European nations’ recent calls for recognition, describing it as a “reward to Hamas” that undermine efforts to reach a ceasefire– while US President Donald Trump has blasted the calls for recognition.

Still, the United States, a relentless supporter of Israel, will exercise its veto in the Security Council against any attempts at recognition of a Palestinian state as “a full-fledged member of the United Nations.”

So far, the State of Palestine has been recognized as a sovereign nation state by 147 of the 193 member states, or just over 76% of all UN members. It has been “a non-member observer state” of the UN General Assembly since November 2012.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, was quoted in the New York Times, as saying: “We told all these (European) countries, if you do this recognition stuff, it’s all fake, it’s not even real. If you do it, you are going to create problems. There’s going to be a response.”

The Trump administration, perhaps in a counter move, has revoked US visas to all Palestinian delegates due to address the General Assembly (GA) next week.

As a result, there were moves either to re-locate at least one GA session to Geneva, as it did when PLO leader Yasser Arafat was denied a US visa back in 1974, or for the Palestinian delegates to participate remotely.

Asked for an update, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters last week: “We’re in touch with the State Department to try to get some clarification, and obviously (and) hopefully, a reversal of the decision based on their obligations under the [US-UN Headquarters] Agreement.”

Given the US visa restrictions, is there a possibility that the high-level week of the General Assembly be held somewhere outside of US? one of the reporters asked.

“No”, said Dujarric. “I’ve not seen any credible movement on that, but added, “I mean, Member States can decide to hold a meeting wherever they decide to hold it. That would be a decision of the General Assembly. But frankly, I have not seen any serious traction on that”.

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS the important role of European countries in supporting Palestinian independence cannot be overstated.

Their support, he said, must transcend symbolism and focus on the nitty-gritty of what is needed to advance the Palestinians’ cause. The measures to be taken include:

Providing direct economic support to Palestinian institutions and infrastructure while ensuring accountability.

Establishing bilateral trade agreements with the Palestinians to boost their economy, independent of Israel.

Pushing for enhanced observer status and participation of Palestine in international bodies while providing legal forums to pursue international acceptance and rights.

Upgrading Palestinian consulate representative offices in their capitals to a higher diplomatic level.

Funding a public diplomacy campaign in their respective capitals to build support for Palestinian statehood.

Offering training and support for Palestinian internal security forces in coordination with Israel to maintain order and stability, said Dr Ben-Meir, who has taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies

Dr James Jennings, President of Conscience International and a longtime advocate for Palestinian human rights, told IPS the group of European countries that intend to recognize Palestine and demand Palestinian statehood in New York in September will unfortunately not make a dent in the situation on the ground. They are decades late to the party and not in any position to empower the Palestinians to establish their state.

“The sincerity of the plan can also be questioned. The move may be timed to distract attention from the UN General Assembly’s vote and the almost certain failure to gain Security Council recognition. After all, some of these same countries have been arming Israel with the bombs that over the past two years have regularly killed unarmed Palestinian women and children in Gaza,” he pointed out.

Palestine is not yet a nation despite its widespread diplomatic recognition. It must first achieve genuine sovereignty. History shows that true independence must be taken, not given, he said.

“The West Bank of the Jordan River and the Gaza Strip are occupied territories. At this point Palestine is just an idea, a group of people with a flag, and a limited political and administrative apparatus. The Palestinians’ strong group identity is their major asset, meaning that no matter what happens, the people of Palestine are in their land to stay”, said Dr Jennings, who is also Executive Director of US Academics for Peace.

Palestinian nationhood is supported by a growing number of people in the United States and Western Europe, but the question is how to implement the idea.

The Two-State Solution has been discussed for a long time but is now considered dead by close observers of international politics.

The facts on the ground, with nearly six decades of oppressive military occupation and the high number of Israeli settlers now living inside the 1967 Green Line, make it extremely difficult if not impossible to establish a Palestinian state, said Dr Jennings.

Worldwide recognition of Palestine Is growing. The joint position of European nations may help focus attention on the problem of Palestinian statelessness, but is no substitute for actively challenging Israel’s dominance of the West Bank and Gaza. Its greatest value may be to focus attention on the international community’s lack of collective will to impose a solution.

“So far Israel has refused even to define its own borders. The Knesset, under the Likud, is poised to seize and nationalize all Palestinian territory, meaning that there cannot be two states, but only one: Israel. The US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, endorses that, proclaiming that God gave Palestine to the Jews.”

External pressure on Israel from this group of countries is therefore unlikely to work absent leadership from Israel’s main backer, the United States, declared Dr Jennings.

Elaborating further, Dr Ben-Mier said although such recognition is significant, it remains symbolic unless many critical measures are taken by all the players involved to mitigate the following four reasons behind the failures in advancing the prospect of establishing such a state.

First, Israel has done everything within its reach, especially now with the support of the Trump administration, to prevent that from happening.

Second, the Palestinian Authority has done little to establish a legitimate representative government and a political apparatus responsive to public needs, even though 147 countries have already recognized it.

Third, the Arab states, though publicly supportive, have provided some financial support but have made no concerted effort over the years to bring the idea to fruition.

And four, the countries that have recognized Palestinian statehood have not taken significant measures to ensure its implementation.

“To realistically pave the way to Palestinian statehood, the players involved will have to take momentous measures and remain on course, even though Israel will vehemently resist and lean on the US to use its weight to prevent such an outcome”, declared Dr Ben-Meir.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

IOM teams are assessing damage and delivering life-saving support to those in urgent need after a devastating earthquake in Afghanistan. Credit: IOM

By Jennifer Xin-Tsu Lin Levine
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 5 2025 (IPS)

United Nations aid organizations are rallying after a series of earthquakes and powerful aftershocks wreaked unprecedented havoc across eastern Afghanistan—particularly in the mountainous provinces of Kunar and Nangarhar.

Preliminary reports show that at least 1,400 people were killed and more than 3,100 injured. Widespread destruction of homes and critical infrastructure has displaced thousands more, while rockfalls and landslides have slowed rescue teams’ efforts to reach remote communities.

In response, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) released 10 million US Dollars within hours of the earthquake to provide shelter, food, water, child protection, and healthcare.

Countries including the United Kingdom and South Korea have pledged money through the United Nations—the UK does not recognize the Taliban government. Working alongside OCHA, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) is working with local partners to link immediate humanitarian assistance with long-term recovery and resilience-building strategies. The United Nations is also preparing an emergency appeal, with an initial USD 5 million from the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) already released.

UNHCR’s partner, AREWO, assesses the needs of the population affected by the earthquake that hit the region on 31 August. Credit: UNHCR/ARWEO

Despite these rapid mobilizations, questions remain about whether the flow of aid can be sustained. Tom Fletcher, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, warned, “This is the latest crisis to expose the cost of shrinking resources on vital humanitarian work. Massive funding cuts have already brought essential health and nutrition services for millions to a halt, grounded aircraft, which are often the only lifeline to remote communities, and forced aid agencies to reduce their footprint.”

He urged donors to “once again” step up for the people of Afghanistan, rallying resources for those in need.

Against this backdrop of urgency and shrinking resources, UNDP officials have sought to outline a vision for recovery that extends beyond immediate survival.

Stephen Rodriguez, UNDP’s resident representative in Afghanistan, addresses a UN press conference via videolink on the impact of the earthquakes on the country and its people. Credit: Jennifer Xin-Tsu Lin Levine/IPS

Stephen Rodriguez, UNDP’s resident representative in Afghanistan, emphasized that the country is facing a “perfect economic storm.”

In a press briefing, he shared data from the UN’s 25 assessment teams showing that 84,000 people have been affected by the earthquake so far.

Rodriguez also detailed the UNDP’s initiative of “community-driven recovery,” which includes cash support for families clearing rubble and rebuilding homes. Pointing to the success of a similar community-oriented approach after the 2023 earthquake in Herat, he called on member states to join the initiative in “building back better,” improving infrastructure and uniting communities.

Both Rodriguez and other UN representatives also addressed the additional challenges created by restrictions on women and girls in Afghanistan and how they affect UN work.

Aid groups are barred from recruiting female aid workers, and as UN Women Afghanistan Special Representative Susan Ferguson said, “women and girls could miss out on lifesaving assistance or information in the days ahead.”

However, Rodriguez denied any organized effort to block women’s access to humanitarian services and medical aid. He described reports of women being prevented from getting emergency medical care as “isolated incidents… rather than a systematic restriction.”

Despite these concerns and the reluctance of some countries to channel funds through Afghanistan’s authorities, UN officials stressed that the humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, and independence remain central to their engagement with the Taliban.

Rodriguez recalled difficulties during the 2023 earthquake recovery that have since been resolved and stated that closer coordination has enabled aid to reach mountainous areas with the Taliban’s helicopters.

He called the “growth” in the relationship between the UN and the Taliban “exemplary,” citing their “full understanding that humanity comes first, tending to those most in need, irrespective of ethnicity, of gender, of anything else.”

For now, the focus remains on immediate survival—reaching those trapped beneath debris or isolated from aid, providing food and clean water, and preventing disease outbreaks. But UN officials emphasize that rebuilding shattered homes and livelihoods will require far more than emergency aid—it necessitates sustained support and long-term commitment.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Excerpt:

After a series of earthquakes and aftershocks struck Afghanistan this week, the United Nations and its member states have been prioritizing “community-driven recovery.”

By CIVICUS
Sep 5 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses recent protests in Angola with Florindo Chivucute, founder and executive director of Friends of Angola, a US-based civil society organisation established in 2014 that works to promote democracy, human rights and good governance in Angola.

The Angolan government’s 1 July decision to remove diesel subsidies, sharply pushing up public transport costs, triggered a series of protests. Angola is one of Africa’s biggest oil producers, but many have seen little benefit from its oil wealth and continue to live in poverty. People have taken to the streets in unprecedented numbers to demand an end to corruption and mismanagement, presenting the ruling party, in power for 50 years, with its biggest test. Security forces have responded to incidences of looting and vandalism with lethal violence. At least 30 people have been killed, 277 injured and over 1,500 arrested.

What triggered the protests?

Fuel subsidy cuts sparked the crisis. The protests began on 28 July, after the government’s decision to remove diesel subsidies immediately pushed up fuel prices. What started as a drivers’ strike in Luanda, the capital, quickly spread to other provinces and escalated into bigger protests.

The impact was devastating. For many families, even a small rise in fuel costs is crushing, because wages have been eroded by years of recession and currency devaluation. When transport costs rise, food prices and school fees rise too, leaving those already struggling unable to make ends meet.

But fuel was just the trigger. The unrest reflected much deeper frustrations, including high unemployment, particularly among young people, growing poverty and anger at corruption and mismanagement. People see public resources channelled into luxury spending and infrastructure deals benefiting a few powerful figures connected to the ruling People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), while basic services and jobs are neglected. Combined with the immediate shock of higher fuel prices, these grievances fuelled widespread anger.

Why are people struggling in such a resource-rich country?

This is the irony at the heart of the crisis. Angola produces large quantities of oil, along with diamonds, yet most people don’t see the benefits. Mismanagement and entrenched corruption are central to the problem. Revenues from natural resources have too often been captured by networks close to political power and channelled abroad or invested in ways that don’t create jobs.

Angola’s dependence on fuel imports makes the situation worse. We don’t have sufficient domestic refining capacity. Instead of using oil revenues to build refineries and strengthen local industry, a system emerged in which those with political connections profited from importing refined products back into the country. This removed incentives to invest in local processing or agriculture. The result is a tiny wealthy elite and a large majority with very low wages and limited access to services.

What do these protests reveal about the government’s grip on power?

The protests have marked a turning point. The MPLA has dominated politics since independence in 1975, and large-scale protests are not common. The fact that so many people were willing to take to the streets, particularly in and around the capital, shows growing discontent with the government and ruling party.

The authorities’ reaction has been heavy-handed. Security forces have used teargas and live ammunition in some cases, and carried out numerous arrests, including of union leaders and journalists. In some areas protests were accompanied by looting and, tragically, by deadly clashes with security forces. Civil society has since called for investigations into the killings and for accountability for those responsible.

The government’s strategy risks backfiring. By responding with force and detentions, it risks creating a greater sense of mistrust and frustration, which could influence how people engage with political processes as we approach the 2027 election.

How is civil society organising and what challenges does it face?

Civil society – including church groups, trade unions and local associations — has mobilised quickly to call for accountability and transparency. New coalitions are forming; for example, groups such as the Bishops’ Conference of Angola and São Tomé and Príncipe’s Episcopal Commission for Justice and Peace, Friends of Angola, the Justice, Peace and Democracy Association and Pro Bono Angola are working with religious organisations to push for investigations into the killings and provide humanitarian support to families affected by the unrest.

But the environment is hostile. Funding for democracy and human rights work is scarce, so organisations struggle to pay staff or sustain programmes.

State surveillance creates another barrier. The state has invested heavily in surveillance infrastructure, and civil society organisations are often targeted by cyber intrusions and closely monitored. The legacy of communist authoritarian rule creates deep mistrust, which makes organising more difficult.

Language barriers limit international support. Much of the work happens in Portuguese, which limits reach to the wider international audience that often communicates in English, French or Spanish.

Additional restrictions threaten to further tighten civic space. Recent draconian measures include the 2024 National Security Bill and the Bill on the Crime of Vandalism of Public Goods and Services. In addition, the 2023 draft law on Non-Governmental Organizations, approved by presidential decree, imposed harsh regulations. These restrictive laws and policies undermine fundamental freedoms and, if fully implemented, risk worsening the already limited environment for civil society in Angola.

What would it take to address the underlying problems?

Strong political will is needed to tackle corruption and manage public finances transparently. This means opening up procurement and fiscal data, pursuing accountability for past abuses, and ensuring resource revenues are channelled into public priorities such as hospitals, local industry and schools. Investment in education, healthcare and small-scale agriculture would create jobs, strengthen livelihoods and reduce dependence on imports.

Institutional reform is equally vital. This means protecting property rights, improving the business environment so investment generates employment and strengthening an independent judiciary and electoral processes so people can seek change through democratic channels.

International partners have a role to play by supporting electoral transparency and demanding accountability from companies and governments that operate in Angola.

The 2027 election will offer a crucial test. The international community should pay close attention and support reforms that increase transparency and electoral integrity. Electoral reforms and the clear, public release of results at the local level would go a long way towards restoring confidence in democratic processes.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Angola: ‘Criticising the government means risking arbitrary detention, intimidation and physical assault’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Pedro Paka 30.Jul.2025
Angola: Repressive new laws threaten civic space CIVICUS Monitor 15.Sep.2024
Angola: ‘The untrue government narrative reveals an aversion to civil society denouncing malpractice’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Emilio José Manuel 01.Jan.2025

 

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

Elephants at the Kappukadu elephant rehabilitation center in Kottoor.

By Bharath Thampi
NEW DELHI, Sep 5 2025 (IPS)

In the early part of this year, two deaths in Kerala garnered major media attention. A farmer in Wayanad and a female plantation worker in Idukki were killed in two separate events, within a matter of a few days, by wild elephants.

Arikomban, another wild elephant, has become a media favorite recently due to his brushes with human settlements near his habitat. Named so because of his love for ari (rice), the elephant had been relocated from Kerala to Tamil Nadu in 2023 following constant protests from people who also claimed him to be ‘life-threatening.’ Kerala’s news outlets widely covered Arikomban’s relocation.

These aren’t one-off cases in Kerala, which has seen a spike in human–wildlife conflict, especially involving elephants.

According to a news report, 451 people have been killed in wildlife conflicts in the past five years alone in the state, with 102 of them caused by elephants.

However, wildlife biologists and environmentalists have been at odds with the narratives promoted by the media and society regarding what constitutes conflict.

“I think we shouldn’t be using the terminology ‘wildlife conflict’ itself. I would prefer addressing it as ‘negative wildlife interaction,’” says Dr. P.S. Easa, who holds a PhD on Elephant Ecology and Behavior and is a member of the National Board for Wildlife and the IUCN, Asian Elephant Specialist Group.

The conflict between wild animals and humans has been going on for centuries, and what we witness in the current era has been influenced by the transformation in the behavior of both these groups, as well as humans’ perception towards wildlife in general, he adds.

In Kerala’s social framework, the rising phenomenon of human–elephant conflict takes on a much deeper and more complex meaning than the broader topic of conflict with wildlife. Elephants have been an integral part of Kerala’s culture and tradition for centuries—domesticated not just for heavy labor but also as part of temple festivals. In the last few decades, machines have replaced elephants in much of the labor environment in the state, yet the land giants continue to be a part of the festival parades. Animal behavioral experts and activists have been consistently raising their voices against this practice in this century, citing the need to treat elephants as solely wild animals.

Easa refuses to even use the term “domesticated” for them.

“Captive elephants are the only right way to address them in this age and time,” he says.

In 2024 alone, there had been nine reported deaths in Kerala by such captive elephants. The Hindu reported six such deaths, including an elephant mahout, within the first two months of this year. Although there have been stricter rules and regulations in recent years on using captive elephants for temple festivals, they have mostly been restricted to paper. The religious nature of the festivals that these elephants are made to be a part of makes the topic even more sensitive, and political parties tend to stay away from addressing the issue.

Kerala’s elephant reserves have been categorized mainly into four regions, namely Wayanad, Nilambur, Anamudi, and Periyar. Periyar Reserve had the highest count of elephants, followed by the Anamudi Reserve. According to the Kerala Government’s Forest Statistics and the report of the ‘Wild Elephants Census of Kerala,’ the four reserves have a combined total extent of 11,199.049 sq. km., out of which only 1,576.339 sq. km. is assessed to be devoid of elephant population. According to a 2024 official assessment, Kerala had an elephant population of just under 1800, a decline of more than 100 from the previous year.

As Kerala’s elephant reserves border the neighboring states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, natural factors that affect the elephant population, like extreme drought and heavy, abrupt rainfall, influence the elephants’ migration across the states during the year.

In Kerala, particularly, shrinking forest habitats caused by deforestation and the increasing presence of human settlements in regions historically occupied by elephant populations, coupled with climate change and the invasive plant species erasing the elephants’ natural food sources, are some of the factors causing unnatural elephant migration, according to experts, and as a consequence, resulting in frequent interactions with humans.

The phrase “descent of wildlife into human settlements” itself is a misnomer, Eesa says.

“In almost all such cases, human settlements had crossed over to those places where the wildlife had existed peacefully before. Wayanad and Idukki are classic examples of this.”

“There was a report that I had come across a while ago—of an ‘elephant attack’ that happened in Sholayar Forest Reserve. Look at the irony of that news. It’s a forest reserve—the habitat belongs to the elephant, not the people who were driving through it. What I’m saying is, every time an elephant conflict is reported, you need to dissect all the circumstances surrounding it. Where—was it within the jungle or outside it? When was it, during the daytime or at night? And how? What were the circumstances leading up to the interaction?” he explains.

The drastic increase in food waste owing to tourism in Kerala has been another factor for wild animals encroaching into human spaces lately. Elephants, wild boars, and monkeys have been observed to have come to human settlements to feed on the food waste.

There is no one, foolproof method to resolve the human–elephant conflict, scientists opine. Easa points out that several techniques that had been fruitful in African countries proved ineffective when used in countries like Sri Lanka and Indonesia.

A mahout is seen riding a captive elephant. Kerala continues to make use of elephants for temple festivals and parades.

Wildlife biologist Sreedhar Vijayakrishnan, in an interview given to Mongabay in 2023, suggests five main long-term measures that will help mitigate human-elephant conflict. This includes initiating long-term studies to understand elephant movements and spatiotemporal patterns of conflict, which will help ascertain where and how interventions are required; tracking areas of elephant movement and identifying regions of intense use while installing alert lights at vantage points that can be triggered in case of elephant sightings; raising awareness among local populations to discourage feeding elephants or unwanted interactions; training local rapid response teams to prevent negative interactions and indiscriminate drives; and fitting satellite collars on elephants that frequently cause issues.

Kerala also has an elephant rehabilitation center established in Kottoor, Thiruvananthapuram, for rescuing, rehabilitating, and protecting both captive and wild elephants. The state, like other forest reserves in India, has historically chosen to turn many of the captured conflict-making elephants into ‘Kumkis’ (a Kumki elephant is a specially trained and domesticated elephant used in rescue operations and to train other wild elephants and manage wildlife conflict).

Apart from the above, one of the most effective measures that has been implemented in Kerala is through the Wayanad Elephant Conflict Mitigation Project by the Wildlife Trust of India (WTI). The project, first initiated in 2002–2003 by WTI, has evolved into a successful model for tackling human–elephant conflict in Kerala. The model has focused on relocating human settlements from places identified as ‘elephant corridors’ in the Wayanad district of Kerala. Wayanad, spanning a total of 2,131 sq. km., has an elephant reserve spread over 1,200 sq. km., with an elephant density of 0.25 elephants/sq. km.

Shajan M.A., a Senior Field Officer with WTI who handles the project currently, tells me, “Our method is to buy such sensitive land from the people, including both tribal and other communities, and relocate them to safer regions, away from wildlife conflict.” Ultimately, WTI hands over the purchased land to the Kerala Forest Department.

In regions like the Tirunelli–Kudrakote elephant corridor, the human–elephant conflict had escalated so much that it had resulted in several human deaths. For the communities, leaving a land they had occupied for decades and considered home is never easy, Shajan acknowledges. But of all the tried and tested methods to deal with the human–wildlife conflict, this approach has been the most effective in the long run, he points out.

Shajan also muses on the question of what exactly comprises a ‘conflict.’

“Conflict can hold different meanings. From a monkey stealing food from the house to a tiger or an elephant attack on a human, even leading to deaths, it’s all considered a human–wildlife conflict. Sadly, we, as a society, tend to be reactive once it transforms into a conflict and place the blame wholly on the wildlife.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• Rampant Tourism, Climate Change Threatens Varkala’s Unique Geodiversity
• Mussel Divers in Kerala Face Livelihood Loss, with Species Habitat Under Threat

Fatou Diene, an oyster farmer in the mangroves near Dionewar Island, Senegal. Across the globe, farmers are adopting low-emission practices, restoring degraded lands, and protecting biodiversity. With the right support, they can do much more. Credit: ©FAO/Sylvain Cherkaoui

By Kaveh Zahedi
ROME, Sep 5 2025 (IPS)

Despite absorbing a quarter of climate-related losses and having the potential to reduce one-third of global emissions, agrifood systems receive less than 8% of climate finance. This imbalance threatens progress in addressing global climate challenges. If we’re serious about solutions, we need to start where the impact—and the promise—is greatest: investing in the systems that feed the world.

As countries move forward along the Baku to Belem Roadmap and the collective goal of mobilizing $1.3 trillion in climate finance by 2030, a critical juncture is fast approaching. At the upcoming Standing Committee on Finance Forum, to be held at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Rome, governments will have a chance to correct this imbalance – and seize an opportunity that is already yielding results.

No serious path to achieve climate goals exists without agriculture. Yet despite this central role, the sector remains chronically overlooked in climate finance strategies and often is associated only with high perceived risks instead of its potential.

No serious path to achieve climate goals exists without agriculture. Yet despite this central role, the sector remains chronically overlooked in climate finance strategies and often is associated only with high perceived risks instead of its potential

The result is a persistent underinvestment in one of the few areas where mitigation, adaptation, and development gains can be achieved together—and at scale. Strategic investments in agriculture can strengthen national resilience, deliver measurable climate mitigation, reduce inequality, and expand economic opportunities.

Small-scale producers, who grow a third of the world’s food, received less than 1% of climate finance in the most recent two-year window. Livestock systems, which are major contributors to methane emissions, drew just 2% of climate development funding in 2023.

This gap represents a missed opportunity to accelerate progress on climate, food security, and livelihoods – especially in vulnerable regions.

We know what works. Between 2000 and 2022, emissions per value of agricultural production declined by 39%. Smarter, more efficient food systems are already taking shape. While current emissions from the agriculture sector are a major concern, these early successes demonstrate the potential of large-scale investments.

When we invest in agrifood systems, we are doing more than reducing emissions. We are expanding access to nutritious food, creating jobs in rural communities, increasing productivity, and restoring ecosystems. These are compound gains, spanning development and climate priorities alike.

Unlocking this potential will require deploying the full range of financing tools. The $1.3 trillion target cannot be met through public finance alone. It will require a mix of public, private, and domestic resources, aligned with countries’ needs and grounded in strong partnerships. Bilateral and multilateral finance will continue to play an important role.

Recent debt relief initiatives, including those from the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, are also expected to help countries create the fiscal space needed to prioritize agrifood transformation.

The private sector is beginning to respond. From 2016 to 2021, climate-focused blended finance transactions targeting smallholder farmers grew from 26% to 36%, with 60% achieving both adaptation and mitigation benefits.

But this momentum must be sustained and expanded. Private investors still face real barriers: limited data, unclear policies, and a lack of investment-ready projects. Initiatives like FAO’s Green Climate Fund Readiness Programme are helping countries close those gaps and attracting greater capital into agricultural transformation.

Carbon markets offer another avenue to unlock value. Properly designed, they can reward farmers and rural communities for climate-positive practices. But current structures in voluntary carbon markets fall short.

As of 2023, agrifood projects made up just 1% of credits from voluntary carbon markets, with three-quarters concentrated in five countries. Smallholders and low-income economies are effectively excluded.

New global mechanisms under the Paris Agreement Article 6 offer a chance to reset this system. Countries need support to prepare robust measurement frameworks, reliable data and inventories, and inclusive governance. With the support from the Global Environment Facility in over 70 countries, this foundation is already being laid.

There are also powerful opportunities in optimizing how existing public funds are spent. Modelling in 6 Sub-Saharan countries shows that reallocations across different policy-support measures can generate additional agrifood GDP growth points, create almost a million off-farm jobs, lift more than 2 million people out of poverty, and reduce more than 700,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions.

This is not unique to a country. Through the GEF Food Systems Integrated Programme, co-led by FAO and IFAD, countries around the world are finding ways to make public budgets go further—generating climate benefits, economic growth, and social inclusion at once.

The challenge before us is simple to state, but difficult to resolve. Mobilizing climate finance is not simply a function of volume but also of the quality of the investments and the people it serves.

Without greater ambition, climate finance will not flow at the necessary scale and with the appropriate instruments. But climate ambition will stall unless finance reaches the sectors most capable of delivering transformation.

The Rome forum is a critical moment. It is a chance to align climate finance with climate opportunity. Through partnerships like the Food and Agriculture for Sustainable Transformation (FAST) Partnership and with a growing coalition of public and private actors, we can mobilize new resources, build better systems, and deliver real outcomes.

Farmers are already leading the way. Across the globe, they are adopting low-emission practices, restoring degraded lands, and protecting biodiversity. With the right support, they can do much more.

The window for action is narrowing. But the opportunity in agriculture is wide open. The question now is whether we will invest in it – at the scale and speed this moment demands.

Excerpt:

Kaveh Zahedi is the Director of the Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

Plastic waste washed up on a beach in India. Credit: Ocean Image Bank/Srikanth Man
 
The international push for consensus on a legally binding deal to end plastic pollution proved beyond the grasp of weary UN Member States meeting in Geneva in mid-August, as they agreed to resume discussions at a future date, according to UN News.
 
“This has been a hard-fought 10 days against the backdrop of geopolitical complexities, economic challenges and multilateral strains,” said Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP). “However, one thing remains clear: despite these complexities, all countries clearly want to remain at the table.”

By Craig Boljkovac
GENEVA, Sep 5 2025 (IPS)

The debacle that was the latest round of negotiations for a global treaty on plastics (including in the marine environment); known as “INC 5.2” has already been written about at length by many colleagues on all sides of the issues. Despite all the very informative posts, articles, and other analyses, I believe I have several key observations to make, particularly about the process to-date.

After being absent from the previous two INCs (INC-4 and INC-5), I may have a slightly different perspective from those who have been completely immersed in the process all the way along. I managed to observe virtually every (painful) minute of INC 5.2, and, below, I list some things that participants may want to consider as the process continues.

Backing up a bit, for those who may be less familiar with the issue, we clearly have a problem with plastics globally. Mounting evidence of the presence of plastics and a clear lack of recycling capacities: from blatantly visible plastics in the marine environment (massive floating gyres of overwhelmingly plastic garbage in our oceans – particularly in but not limited to the Pacific) to the presence of microplastics in our bodies (and those of wildlife as well), including in the placenta and mother’s milk, and the use of clearly harmful chemicals (such as endocrine disrupters released when certain plastics are used) in the manufacture of at least some plastics – has led to decisions on the international level that merely complement significant action at other levels of governance that are already in place.

This situation resulted in the decision, from March, 2022, by the UN Environment Programme’s UN Environment Assembly, to pass a resolution authorizing a negotiating process (the “Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, or INC) to realize a global plastics treaty by 2024 (a highly ambitious timeline that, to many, was likely unachievable).

And, here we are, late in 2025, after six unsuccessful negotiation sessions and some preparatory work, without an agreed treaty text, and with, it seems, a wide gulf of differences between UN member states that seems, frankly, virtually unbridgeable.

Much has been written about the various positions of UN Members States, who have informally organized themselves (for the negotiations) into the “Like-Minded Group” of countries that want the treaty to focus mainly on waste management and not impinge on their plans to not only maintain, but greatly expand plastics production; and the “High Ambition Coalition” countries who, in part, want a strong global treaty that addresses plastics at all stages of their life cycle, severely limit “single-use plastics” and include human health concerns, particularly with regard to the harmful effects of chemical inputs to plastics production (which the “Like-Mindeds” reject, particularly for what some delegations say is a clear lack of evidence of harm to human health and the environment).

In my long experience with international environmental negotiations under the UN rubric, such differences in positions are not unprecedented, and have been solved by having a team of negotiators that are solutions-oriented, and a secretariat (the UN staff assigned to coordinate and facilitate the negotiations) and chair (usually a diplomat or high-level civil servant from an environment or similar ministry) that work together to bridge differences in a transparent, inclusive, and participatory manner, where trust is built over time and solutions are eventually found.

Something is clearly blocking the process. The secretariat and bureau (including the chair, in particular) have shown commitment, but the goal of an agreed treaty, despite the presentation of many textual proposals by negotiators, several chairs’ drafts, and some movement on at least some of the issues, has not been realized over six energy- and resource-intensive negotiation sessions.

Why is this the case? A few thoughts/observations from my side (the list is not comprehensive):

1) Apart from some closed events earlier on in the negotiations, there now seems to be an almost total lack of intersessional activities (both formal and informal) essential for the further building of trust and understanding of each other’s positions (although some may be planned but are not yet announced). Regional efforts, in particular, might help to bridge some of the wide differences that are apparent, even within regions (where there is clearly a lack of consensus as well).

2) There has been a clear lack of transparency and communication in/from both subsidiary groups (such as contact groups, where various issues are “unpacked” and grouped for more detailed negotiations) and, more significantly and consistently, at the broader level (directly led by the chair/bureau and supported by the secretariat) such as plenary sessions (which were few and far between and even resoundingly brief – one was 43 seconds at the latest INC). Relatively untransparent processes have worked in the past (such as with the climate change negotiations); but from what I understand there was more trust and confidence in the chair/bureau and secretariat than exists in our present negotiations.

3) The chair, bureau and secretariat were always present, but rarely available. The absence of regular plenary sessions was keenly felt. There was also a clear lack of consistency in the way contact groups operated – some put textual proposals on a screen for all to see and negotiate with; while others simply heard interventions and then came out with proposals for text at the very end (not the most transparent of ways to operate!). In addition, there was a heavy reliance on informal negotiations throughout (this became apparent with news, in the final plenary, of a long, closed negotiation on the final day chaired by Chile and Japan). A lot seemed to be going on, but only a limited number of participants (including a fair number of government delegations that I conversed with) seemed only vaguely aware of them, if at all.

4) During the course of this, the sixth negotiating session, positions taken by both the Like-Minded Group and the High Ambition Coalition more closely resembled opening salvos that one might expect would be typical of the early stages of negotiations – not positions that would still be raised at such a late stage, when one would expect at least some compromises to have been made along the way. To me, this is symptomatic of a lack of trust in the process to-date.

This apparent situation (lack of clear negotiating milestones/organization, lack of visibility of the chair and lack of transparency) seems to have, in my opinion, possibly been used by delegations to hold back on reaching any sort of even basic compromises.

How to solve this as we try to move forward?

1) Make every possible attempt to put into place a proper, formal, and transparent intersessional process (along with informal and regional activities as needed), even if it results in a significant delay until the next INC (5.3). A rumour is going round that INC 5.3 may be scheduled for February, 2026. In my opinion this is far too soon if a properly designed intersessional process, focused on bridging the key gaps and reaching some sort of consensus, at least informally, is to be realized. An adequate “break” is needed to clearly think through all the options. If needed, even keep bringing in the UN Secretary-General to “knock heads together” to find some compromises in advance of the next negotiations. And report back to all INC participants regarding the process of intersessional work on a regular basis.

2) Hold in-depth “debriefs” and “lessons learned” sessions for the secretariat and bureau, with additional participants from the INCs who have valuable observations to contribute (both from government and observer delegations). A suggested focus could be on how to expand the obvious organizational strengths of the secretariat into other areas, such as a finer level of facilitation aimed at bridging differences among delegations through improved intersessional activities (see 1), above).

3) Without formally reopening the original (2022) resolution, seek backing from UNEA-7 for the original mandate (since delegations have clearly not followed the original resolution, particularly regarding the scope of the convention, during the INCs. A complementary resolution which could guide member states towards a possible framework convention would also allow negotiation of the difficult and time-consuming issues in a more extended, party-based process.

4) Once experiences and lessons learned are gathered, consider holding a special, more internally-focused intersessional process between secretariat and the chair and bureau, in order to have a detailed set of lessons learned so far, and to try to readjust the relationship as we move forward. Perhaps such a process could have a trusted and even renowned external facilitator that could help find some new and more effective way of working together. Such trust-building exercises were essential in other forums that I have participated in (although they were done more up-front, towards the beginnings of such processes, it’s never too late!).

5) At the next, eventual INC (presumably 5.3 will take place), put into place more plenary time (at least brief plenaries) where regular updates can be given. This would display more transparency, potentially build more confidence in the process, and benefit small delegations in particular, who cannot cover the breadth of different negotiations we saw in previous INCs.

In conclusion, there is no doubt in my mind that we have a huge task still at hand, but not an insurmountable one. Recently, Forbes published what I think is a fantastic, forward-looking piece that basically says the “train has left the station” for the plastics industry. Even if the global process fails (which I firmly believe will not happen), at other levels of governance from California to the EU and beyond, clear commitments have been made that are even above and beyond the current UNEA mandate.

This will drive the investments and planning of the industry for decades to come. The writing is on the wall. Now is the time to find compromises at the global level (even a framework treaty like the Paris Agreement on climate change would be a good start!) to ensure a sustainable future for all in this field. Otherwise, we may be facing a failure that results in a long-term stalemate where no treaty (or alternative) is agreed for the foreseeable future.

1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/trondarneundheim/2025/08/16/plastics-manufacturing-at-crossroads-pivot-to-lead-or-lose/

Craig Boljkovac is a Geneva-based Senior Advisor with a Regional Centre for the Basel and Stockholm Conventions, and an independent international environmental consultant with over 35 years of experience in relevant fields. His opinions are his own. He has participated in several INCs and related meetings for the global plastics agreement.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Google's first data center in Chile lies in the industrial sector of the municipality of Quilicura, on the northern outskirts of Santiago. It has no symbols or logos to identify it, but covers an extensive area. Water vapor is visibly emitted as part of the process to cool the servers. Credit: Orlando Milesi / IPS

By Orlando Milesi
SANTIAGO, Sep 4 2025 (IPS)

Chile wants to be a hub in Latin America in data storage and transmission by developing data centers, leveraging its wealth of renewable energy, and its optimal digital interconnection.

In contrast, the massive water required for cooling servers and resistance from social and local organizations who were not consulted are the main obstacles in this strategy.

The authorities are promoting a tech hub, as the concentrator or logistical connection point for centralizing numerous nodes of a computer network is called, where companies, investments, and talent converge.“Chile's technological development is at a turning point that will define our position as a relevant player in the region. In the future, this could mean having the capacity to host infrastructure for training large artificial intelligence models”–Andrés Díaz.

A key step in this direction is the National Data Center Plan (PData), launched by the government of leftist president Gabriel Boric in December 2024.

PData complemented the Cybersecurity Framework Law, enacted in April 2024, which established minimum requirements for the prevention, containment, resolution, and response to cybersecurity incidents, applicable to state agencies and private companies.

PData aims to position this elongated South American country as a Latin American hub for data centers.

It was launched 10 months after an environmental court in Santiago, the capital of this country of 18.4 million people, halted a multi-million dollar Google project in the municipality of Cerrillos, on the outskirts of Santiago, preventing it from using water to cool its servers.

The stoppage was a victory for residents organized in the Socio-Environmental Community Movement for Water and Territory (Mosacat), an environmental coalition that emerged in Cerrillos.

Google had announced it would modify the cooling system to use less than the planned 169 liters of water per second. But, following the court decision, it suspended the project and a US$40 million investment in what would have been its second data center in the country, after the one operating since 2015 in Quilicura, also on the outskirts of Santiago.

Tania Rodriguez, a spokesperson for Mosacat, praised the strength of the residents to “convince a multinational that its project was not possible with such scarce water resources. Companies are the ones that must become aware of the excessive use of our resources,” she stated in an interview with a union media outlet.

New reality

To promote data centers, the Boric government brought all interested parties together and managed to finalize PData, with the goal of providing certainty to all sectors and enabling their massive installation in the country.

Chile has abundant low-cost renewable energy, 62,000 kilometers of optical fiber, a network of 69,000 kilometers of submarine cables, as well as 3.8 million devices connected to the 5G network.

Alejandro Barros, a professor of engineering and researcher at the Public Systems Center  of Industrial Engineering at the public University of Chile, told IPS that the main lesson after the crisis with Google was the need to equip Chile with a public policy for the establishment and management of data centers.

According to Barros, PData “advances very significantly by establishing the governance model for these projects because multiple state institutions will be involved. How synergy and coordination is achieved across all sectors linked to these projects is relevant.”

“My concern is that the plan was presented at the end of an administration,” he said, recalling that Boric’s term concludes in March 2026.

“The question is what will the next administration do. Data centers will have to be built, but how do we agree so that Chile meets standards, has good dialogue with communities, and we don’t start from scratch again?” he asks.

Google’s fenced and patrolled data center in Quilicura, on the outskirts of Santiago, where huge water tanks are visible. The tech company was unable to establish another data center in the Chilean capital due to a court ruling against the massive use of water. Credit: Orlando Milesi / IPS

Microsoft installs its regional cloud

In 2017, there were six data center projects in Chile. Today, 38 are in operation.

It seems more likely that companies of various sizes will export data and processed information from Chile to meet external demand.

According to Fitzgerald Cantero, Director of Studies and Projects at the  Latin American Energy Organization  (Olade), the growth in the use of artificial intelligence will exceed an annual rate of 31% by 2029.

In the Latin American region, 78% of data centers are currently concentrated in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico.

During the Data Centers and Energy forum, organized by the Institute of the Americas  and held in Santiago on August 21, Cantero said that investment in artificial intelligence in 2025 will be 7 billion dollars and will jump to 10 billion in 2029.

Juan Carlos Olmedo, Chile’s electrical coordinator, stated at the forum that the electrical energy required by data centers in this country will quadruple by 2032, rising from the current 325 megawatts (MW) to 1,360.

On June 18, Microsoft opened its first Data Center Region in Santiago to support economic growth, technological innovation, and social development, indicated the transnational tech company.

According to Microsoft, this state-of-the-art infrastructure will provide digital services to businesses and public organizations, improving their speed, privacy, security, and data storage in compliance with local regulations and high availability

The new network of data centers, called the Microsoft Cloud Region, is also located in Santiago, consisting of three independent physical locations, each with one or more data centers, and will provide services to several South American countries.

According to the U.S.-based software developer, the opening of this regional Data Center will generate US$35.3 billion in net income over the next four years, both for Microsoft and for partners and customers using its cloud.

“Of that total, approximately US$3.3 billion will be invested directly in Chile, contributing to this country’s development and creating about 81,041 jobs between 2025 and 2029,” detailed the tech company.

At the time, Boric expressed his joy for this new project, calling it a show of confidence for Chile to continue integrating and transforming into a major tech hub in Latin America.

Chile is now connected to a global network that spans the planet, he said, which reinforces the country as “an excellent destination for investment, placing us at the regional forefront of innovation and technology.”

“Data centers and the digital economy are transforming society, and this is not just for some sectors—it is for everyone,” emphasized the president.

Representatives from companies, Latin American energy institutions, Chilean electrical sector authorities, and academics gathered in Santiago for a forum on Data Centers and Energy, which debated the challenges and conditions for Chile to become a regional hub. Credit: Orlando Milesi / IPS

The pros and cons of data centers

Andrés Díaz, director of the School of Industrial Engineering at the private Diego Portales University, believes that Chile has managed to position itself as a tech hub by attracting investments in digital infrastructure.

Regarding the projections for this strategic industry, he maintains that the important thing is to send clear signals of stability and security.

“The country has favorable conditions, from natural resources to technical capabilities; however, confidence to ensure the attraction of investment remains key,” he told IPS.

According to this academic, “Chile’s technological development is at a turning point that will define our position as a relevant player in the region. In the future, this could mean having the capacity to host infrastructure for training large artificial intelligence models.”

Data centers enable the operation of applications such as instant messaging or viewing content on platforms. And they are essential for sending, storing, and interconnecting information for companies, public administration, hospitals, and banking entities.

If a data center stops functioning, it would affect everything from traffic lights to email and ATMs. Teleworking, video calls, food delivery, and home cinema are also activities derived from their operation.

So-called data centers have thus become critical infrastructure, like other basic services.

“Both in Europe and the United States, the demand for massive data processing is exponential, especially because of what is happening with artificial intelligence,” professor Barros told IPS.

“This is what we see in the technological infrastructure plans driven by the United States and China, with all their positive and negative variables,” he added.

He warned of risks and challenges as a result, especially for the environment, including the type of energy that will be used: renewable or fossil-based.

“In Europe, they are starting to reuse nuclear energy again, and in the United States, they are beginning to use fossil-based energy. Chile has the advantage of its very significant renewable energy production,” he explained.

In 2024, renewable energies contributed nearly 68% of Chile’s electricity generation, with 35% coming from variable sources such as solar and wind.

But the main challenge is water due to the large volumes consumed to cool the servers, given that air cooling is less efficient.

“That means having clarity about how much water will be consumed, what impact it will have on the area where the data centers will be installed, and knowing if it is an area with water problems or drought for long periods,” emphasized Barros.

He also highlighted the importance of providing greater transparency and access to information when discussing the issue of water with local communities, specifying how much will be required and what impact it will have on basins or human consumption.

Droughts have affected various regions of Chile over a 40-year period, from 1979 to 2019. Furthermore, northern Chile is one of the driest regions in the world, and the central region, which is home to 70% of the national population, has had a permanent water deficit since 2010.

Leaders of the involved localities insist that data centers be required to undergo the Environmental Impact Assessment System, which includes a government evaluation and a citizen consultation.

Currently, to install a data center, only an Environmental Impact Declaration must be made, where the company itself reports on potential risks.