Matilda Bogner, Head of the UN’s human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine, said that, over the past few months, her team had interviewed 159 prisoners of war – or POWs – both men and women, held by Russia, and 175 male prisoners of war held by Ukraine.
Ukraine gave the mission access to Russian POWs where they were being held. Russia did not, so interviews were conducted with Ukrainian POWs when they were released.
Beatings, dog attacks
Ukrainian POWs have said that they were frequently subjected to prolonged beatings, threats, electric shocks and dog attacks. Nine people are said to have died during such attacks in April this year.
Women POWs told interviewers that they were not subjected to physical violence but described being psychologically tormented by the screams of male POWs being tortured in nearby cells. Both men and women prisoners reported being subjected to various forms of sexual violence.
The vast majority of Ukrainian prisoners who were interviewed said that during their internment they were tortured and ill-treated.
Intimidation, humiliation
They said their treatment was not only used to coerce them to give military information or statements about alleged crimes but to intimidate and humiliate them on a daily basis.
POWs described being beaten, including with batons and wooden hammers, being kicked, and given electric shocks with tasers and a military phone known as TAPik.
Summary executions
Russian POWs, held by Ukraine, told interviewers of summary executions and several cases of torture and ill-treatment, mostly when they were captured, first interrogated, or moved to transit camps and places of internment. In some cases, they said they were punched and kicked in the face and body after surrendering and when they were interrogated.
In several cases, Russian POWs said they were stabbed or given electric shocks with the ‘TAPik’ phone by Ukrainian law enforcement officers or military personnel guarding them.
Accountability key
Ms Bogner said that states must treat all prisoners of war humanely at all times, from the moment they are captured until their release and repatriation, and that the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment is absolute, even in times of armed conflict.
She also said that accountability is key to deterring and preventing further violations, adding that the parties to the conflict have clear legal obligations to investigate and prosecute all allegations of violations of international humanitarian law in relation to the treatment of prisoners of war within their control.
After more than three years without a reported case in Haiti, national authorities on 2 October reported two new confirmed cases of vibrio cholerae in the metropolitan area of the capital Port-au-Prince.
As of Monday this week, the Ministry of Public Health and Population reported 8,708 suspected cases, with 802 confirmed, and 161 deaths across the country.
Preventable and treatable
“Cholera is a preventable and treatable disease, and based on their experience and expertise, national institutions quickly put together a response strategy with the determined support of the entire local and international humanitarian community,” said UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, Ulrika Richardson.
“However, the surge in cases in recent weeks and the rapid spread of cholera in the country is worrying.”
500,000 at risk
According to PAHO/WHO, 500,000 people are at risk of contracting the disease.
The cholera crisis has hit already vulnerable populations hardest. The latest food security analysis for Haiti shows that 4.7 million people, nearly half the population, are experiencing high levels of food insecurity, with 19,200 people living in an official disaster situation, the first time this has happened in recent history.
Haitians are also facing increased violence due to the activities of armed gangs. These gangs use sexual violence as a weapon to terrorise the population and to gain control over territory.
Nearly 100,000 people have been displaced since June 2021 after fleeing violence.
Gang rule
The main roads linking the capital to the rest of the country are under the control or influence of gangs, which has limited or even deprived citizens of access to basic services for many months.
In this context, humanitarians are dependent on costly alternative means of transport to continue providing assistance throughout the country, which includes the battle to bring cholera under control.
The UN and partners are calling for funding to help Government-led effort to provide more clean water, hygiene and sanitation, and health activities, while addressing urgent food security, nutrition, and protection needs.
WHO’s updated landmark Family Planning Handbook, launched on Tuesday, informs health workers on protecting access to family planning services during emergencies, and provides policy makers with the most current information on contraceptive options.
“Family planning promotes self-actualization, empowerment, as well as health and wellbeing, and reduces maternal and infant deaths through the prevention of unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion”, said Pascale Allotey, WHO’s Director for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights.
Drawing on lessons learned, it also expands guidance for women and young people at high risk of HIV.
‘A vital resource’
Experience from recent outbreaks shows that family planning services can be severely compromised during emergencies.
During the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, approximately 70 per cent of countries reported disruptions to these vital services – intensifying risks of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections.
The manual advocates for continued family planning support services during epidemics, including through wider access to self-administered contraceptives, pharmacy distribution and multi-month supplies.
“This updated Family Planning Handbook is a vital resource, helping health workers support contraceptive users around the world in making informed choices about the right contraceptive options for them”, said the senior WHO official.
Self-injections
Self-administered contraceptives include condoms, contraceptive pills, some diaphragms, spermicides and most recently, the option of self-injection of a progestin-only contraceptive, called DMPA, which can now be safely administered just under the skin rather than into the muscle.
Many women prefer private and non-intrusive injectable contraceptives that require action only every two to three – making this option likely to increase uptake.
“The updated recommendations in this Handbook show that almost any family planning method can be used safely by all women, and that accordingly, all women should have access to a range of options that meet their unique needs and goals in life,” said lead author Mary Gaffield.
Family planning supports health and reduces maternal and infant deaths by preventing unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions.
High-risk focus
For the first time, the 2022 edition includes a dedicated chapter to guide family planning services for women and adolescents at high risk of HIV, including people living in high HIV prevalence areas and those with multiple sexual partners or whose regular partner is living with HIV.
While only condoms protect against HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, all contraceptive options – with the sole exception of nonoxynol-9 spermicide – are now considered safe for women and young people at high risk of HIV as they have not been found to increase risk of HIV transmission or contract infection.
For those at high risk of HIV, the manual states that testing, counselling and first-line clinical care and referrals should all be offered as part of family planning services.
“Family planning services can be provided safely and affordably so that no matter where they live, couples and individuals are able to choose from safe and effective family planning methods”, underscored the lead author.
Now in its fourth edition, the handbook is the most widely used reference guide on the topic globally, with over a million copies distributed or downloaded to date.
It is complemented by the medical eligibility criteria tool for contraceptive use, also downloadable as a dedicated App.
Opinion by Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Hezri A Adnan (kuala lumpur, malaysia)
Inter Press Service
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Nov 15 (IPS) – The latest annual climate conference has begun in the face of a worsening climate crisis and further retreats by rich nations following the energy crisis induced by NATO sanctions after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Copping out again
The 27th Conference of the Parties (COP 27) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is now meeting in Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt, from 6 to 18 November 2022.
Hezri A Adnan
COP27 takes place amidst worsening poverty, hunger and war, and higher prices, exacerbating many interlinked climate, environmental and socio-economic crises.
The looming world economic recession is likely to be deeper than in 2008. The likely spiral into stagflation will make addressing the climate crisis even more difficult.
Invoking the Ukraine war as pretext, governments and corporations are rushing to increase fossil fuel production to offset the deepening energy crisis.
Resources which should be deployed for climate adaptation and mitigation have been diverted for war, fossil fuel extraction and use, including resumption of shale gas ‘fracking’ as well as coal mining and burning.
War causes huge social and economic damage to people, society and the environment. The wars in Ukraine, Yemen and elsewhere impose high costs on all, disrupting energy and food supplies, and raising prices sharply.
Russia’s Ukraine incursion has provided a convenient smokescreen for a hasty return to fossil fuels, as military-industrial processes alone account for 6% of all greenhouse gases.
The future is already here
All these have worsened crises facing the world’s environment and economy. The most optimistic Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenario expects the 1.5°C rise above pre-industrial levels threshold for climate catastrophe to be breached by 2040.
Jomo Kwame Sundaram
Crossing it, the world faces risks of far more severe climate change effects on people and ecosystems, especially in the tropics and sub-tropical zone.
But the future is already upon us. Accelerating warming is already causing worse extreme weather events, ravaging economies, communities and ecosystems.
Recent floods in Pakistan displaced 33 million people. Wildfires, extreme heat, ice melt, drought, and extreme weather phenomena are already evident on many continents, causing disasters worldwide.
In 2021, the sea level rose to a record high, and is expected to continue rising. UN reports estimate women and children are 14 times more likely than adult men to die during climate disasters.
Popular sentiment is shifting, even in the US, where ‘climate scepticism’ is strongest. Devastation threatened by Hurricane Ida in 2021 not only revived painful memories of Katrina in 2005, but also heightened awareness of warming-related extreme weather events.
Stronger climate action needed
In international negotiations, rich nations have evaded historical responsibility for ‘climate debt’ by only focusing on current emissions. Hence, there is no recognition of a duty to compensate those most adversely impacted in the global South.
Last year’s COP26 Glasgow Climate Pact was hailed for its call to ‘phase-out’ coal. This has now been quickly abandoned by Europe with the war. And for developing countries, Glasgow failed to deliver any significant progress on climate finance.
At COP27, the Egyptian presidency has proposed an additional ‘loss and damage’ finance facility to compensate for irreparable damage due to climate impacts.
After failing to even meet its modest climate finance promises of 2009, the rich North is dithering, pleading for further talks until 2024 to work out financing details.
Meanwhile, the G7 has muddied the waters by counter-offering its Global Shield Against Climate Risks – a disaster insurance scheme.
Get priorities right
What the world needs, instead, are rapidly promoted and implemented measures as part of a more rapid, just, internationally funded transition for the global South. This should:
replace fossil fuels with renewable energy, including by subsidizing renewable energy generation for energy-deficient poor populations.
promote energy-saving and efficiency measures to reduce its use and greenhouse gas emissions by at least 70% (from 1990) by 2030.
implement a massive global public works programme, creating ‘green jobs’ to replace employment in ‘unsustainable’ industries.
develop needed sustainable technologies, e.g., to replace corporate agricultural practices with ‘agroecological’ farming methods, investment and technology.
Another world is possible
Another world is possible. A massive social and political transformation is needed. But the relentless pursuit of private profit has always been at the expense of people and nature.
Greed cannot be expected to become the basis for a just solution to climate change, let alone environmental degradation, world poverty, hunger and gross inequalities.
The COP27 conference is now taking place in Sharm-al-Sheikh, an isolated, heavily policed tourist resort. Only one major road goes in and out, as if designed to keep out civil society and drown out voices from the global South.
The luxury hotels there are charging rates that have put COP27 beyond the means of many, especially climate justice activists from poorer countries. The rich and powerful arrived in over 400 private jets, making a mockery of decarbonization rhetoric.
Thus, the COP process is increasingly seen as exclusive. Without making real progress on the most important issues, it is increasingly seen as slow, irrelevant and ineffective.
Generating inadequate agreements at best, the illusion of progress thus created is dangerously misleading at worst.
By generating great expectations and false hopes, but actually delivering little, it is failing the world, even when it painstakingly achieves difficult compromises which fall short of what is needed.
Multilateralism at risk
Multilateral platforms, such as the UNFCCC, have long been expected to engage governments to cooperate in developing, implementing and enforcing solutions. With the erosion of multilateralism since the end of the Cold War, these are increasingly being bypassed.
Instead, self-appointed private interests, with means, pretend to speak for world civil society. Strapped for resources, multilateral platforms and other organizations are under pressure to forge partnerships and other forms of collaboration with them.
Thus, inadequate ostensible private solutions increasingly dominate policy discourses. Widespread fiscal deficits have generated interest in them due to the illusory prospect of private funding.
Private interests have thus gained considerable influence. Thus, the new spinmeisters of Davos and others have gained influence, offering seductively attractive, but ultimately false, often misleading and typically biased solutions.
Meanwhile, global warming has gone from bad to worse. UN Member States must stiffen the backs of multilateral organizations to do what is right and urgently needed, rather than simply going with the flow, typically of cash.
Hezri A Adnan is an environmental policy analyst and Fellow of the Academy of Sciences, Malaysia. He is author of The Sustainability Shift: Reshaping Malaysia’s Future.
The UN Secretariat building in New York City. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías
Opinion by Peter A Gallo (new york)
Inter Press Service
NEW YORK, Nov 15 (IPS) – The U.S. Government has recently published ‘Engagement Principles’ on Protection from Sexual Exploitation Abuse & Sexual Harassment within International Organizations’, and while any involvement from Member States is to be encouraged, these principles do not address the fundamental need for either deterrence or for accountability.
The concept of a “survivor-centred approach” – sadly – is an irrelevant sound bite to appease a political lobby. Post-incident care and support for the victim is not only admirable but very necessary but serves no deterrent purpose, and any bearing it might have on the prosecution of an offender will be indirect at best.
Nothing done for victims after an incident will prevent future victims being similarly assaulted.
One of the accepted tenets of criminology is that criminal activity is not discouraged by procedures, committees, working groups or focal points, nor is there any deterrent effect in increasing the penalty for anyone convicted of the offence; criminal activity is minimised by maximising the likelihood of the perpetrator being held accountable for their actions. The UN choses to ignore that, and will not acknowledge three basic truths the Member States must recognise:
FIRST: that any sexual assault is a serious criminal offence that should be prosecuted as such.
In the real world, where both a criminal case and a civil one arise from the same event; the civil case will be sisted to give priority to the more important criminal prosecution. The UN, however, does the opposite and insists that their administrative investigation take priority over the criminal investigation of the same incident.
As a result, even where a rape is reported in the UN, the chances of the perpetrator being successfully prosecuted in a criminal court is minimised to the point where the risk is insignificant.
SECOND: that while UN personnel require and deserve the protection of the 1946 Convention on Privileges & Immunities, that Convention does not grant immunity for sexual offences.
Abuse of the concept of immunity has greatly influenced the evolution of the UN culture into one of narcissistic entitlement, where sexual predators believe they can act with impunity.
Functional Immunity was afforded to UN staff members under the Convention which states, very clearly, in Section 18:
Officials of the United Nations shall : (a) be immune from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and all acts performed by them in their official capacity; (Emphasis added.)
Given that any sexual activity – whether consensual, contractual, or coerced – is not part of the “official duties” of any UN staff member; it is self-evident that no immunity can apply in the case of any sexual offence. If such an offence appears to have been committed; the host nation must therefore have jurisdiction over the matter.
The Convention was adopted to protect UN staff against harassment by a hostile government, and in those conditions, there will always be a risk that criminal charges might be fabricated. There is no doubt, therefore that the UN must take an interest in any accusations against staff members, but as soon as their preliminary enquiries establish reasonable grounds to believe that a sexual offence has been committed; the matter should be handed over to local law enforcement immediately – for them to proceed with a criminal investigation.
The Convention was never intended to protect offenders from the consequences of their own criminality. That is made clear in Section 20 which reads:
Privileges and immunities are granted to officials in the interests of the United Nations and not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves. The Secretary-General shall have the right and the duty to waive the immunity of any official in any case where, in his opinion, the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the United Nations.
If the Secretary-General can give an example of how the prosecution of a sexual predator could possibly “prejudice to the interests of the UN” – the world deserves an explanation.
The UN interprets the Convention to protect UN staff members from sexual offences even when no staff member is accused of any such thing, as was demonstrated in 2015 by the Organization’s response when French authorities sought to investigate allegations against French peacekeepers in the Central African Republic.
The Convention states in Section 21:
The United Nations shall cooperate at all times with the appropriate authorities of Members to facilitate the proper administration of justice, secure the observance of police regulations and prevent the occurrence of any abuse in connection with the privileges, immunities and facilities mentioned in this article.
That is a provision the Secretariat appears to ignore, because “immunity” was cited as the reason why UN staff members could not assist French investigators by introducing them to victims. The UN has never explained how that could be justified.
Immunity was created for the best of reasons, it has now become part of the problem.
THIRD: that ‘self-regulation’ by the UN has clearly been a failure; the Organization cannot properly investigate itself.
What most people fail to appreciate about the corruption in the UN is that it is almost always “procedurally correct” – which may mean the resulting administrative decision cannot be challenged before the UN Dispute Tribunal, it does not make the decision ethical or legitimate – but OIOS investigations will not pursue any such line of enquiry for fear of what it might reveal.
Complaints about malpractices, misconduct, bias or abuses of authority by investigators are common, but are routinely ignored – because there is no independent oversight of OIOS (Office of Internal Oversight Services) and the management of the office is tied up in the same network of mutually supportive patronage that is ingrained in the UN culture.
The OIOS “leadership” is widely believed to do the bidding of the USG/DMSPC in particular, legitimising the most patent retaliation – because the USG/DMSPC protects them from any accountability for their own shortcomings. The former Director of Investigations admitting that their primary objective was simply “to get the Americans off our backs” – for which, naturally, he was promoted.
As for sexual misconduct investigations; the term “survivor-centered approach” makes little sense. It is described as an innovative approach but in any sexual assault, the victim has always been the most important witness – so how exactly were these cases actually investigated in the past?
Post-incident care for the victim has no bearing on the burden of proof. Cases must be proved by established facts, and that requires diligent and competent investigators – not “investigators” promoted for their personal loyalty, or whose misconduct has routinely been overlooked for the same reason.
Gross incompetence by managers, rampant misconduct and corruption anywhere in the UN must be considered serious in its own right, but incompetence, misconduct and corruption in the investigative function is more serious because that facilitates the corruption everywhere else.
Einstein is said to have defined insanity as doing same thing over and over, and expecting a different result, but that has been the UN’s approach to investigating sexual misconduct for the last 20 years.
The solution clearly lies with someone capable of thinking differently – but within the UN culture; anyone who dares to think differently is a dangerous heretic who cannot be promoted.
Peter Gallo is a lawyer and former OIOS investigator, whose disagreements with the Organization began when OIOS sought to demand that as an investigator, he must “never ask questions just to satisfy his curiosity” – a bizarre instruction that the UN did not consider even unusual, despite the fact that no one was ever able to point out a single example of his ever having done so….He has written extensively on the UN’s failure to properly investigate misconduct, been quoted in the media, featured on television documentaries and twice testified before congressional committees on the subject.
UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. General Assembly approved a resolution Monday calling for Russia to be held accountable for violating international law by invading Ukraine, including by paying reparations for widespread damage to the country and for Ukrainians killed and injured during the war.
The vote in the 193-member world body was 94-14 with 73 abstentions. It was close to the lowest level of support received by any of the five Ukraine-related resolutions adopted by the General Assembly since Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of its smaller neighbor.
The resolution recognizes the need to establish “an international mechanism for reparation for damage, loss or injury’” arising from Russia’s “wrongful acts” against Ukraine.
It recommends that the assembly’s member nations, in cooperation with Ukraine, create “an international register” to document claims and information on damage, loss or injury to Ukrainians and the government caused by Russia.
Before the vote, Ukraine’s U.N. Ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya told the assembly that “Russia has tried its best to destroy Ukraine — in a very literal sense.”
He cited Russia’s bombing and shelling of cities and villages, “targeting everything from plants and factories to residential buildings, schools, hospitals and kindergartens” as well as roads, bridges, railways and almost half of Ukraine’s power grid and utilities in the last month alone. He also cited accounts of atrocities committed by Russians in territory it occupied, including murder, rape, torture, forced deportations and looting.
“Ukraine will have the daunting task of rebuilding the country and recovering from this war,” Kyslytsya said. “But that recovery will never be complete without a sense of justice for the victims of the Russian war.”
In establishing a mechanism to document claims, he said, “Ukraine is committed to a transparent, impartial and objective process that will be managed and overseen by the international community in order to avoid even the slightest perception of bias.”
“It is time to hold Russia accountable,” Kyslytsya said, calling the resolution “a signal of hope for justice.”
Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia urged assembly members to vote against the resolution, calling it “an attempt to legalize something that from the view of existing international law cannot be legalized.” It is “legally null and void,” he said.
Nebenzia accused the West of “doing everything it can to provide a veneer of legitimacy” to start spending frozen — or actually “stolen Russian assets amounting to billions of dollars.” And he accused the West of seeking a General Assembly decision “as a screen to hide this open robbery” whose “beneficiaries will end up being the Western military corporations.”
He warned that approval of the resolution “can only increase tension and instability in the entire world,” and said supporters of the resolution “will become implicated in illegal expropriation of sovereign assets of a third country.”
Sixteen countries and the Palestinians echoed Russia, saying in a joint statement that the resolution didn’t have “sufficient legal basis.”
Its signatories, including China, Iran, Angola and Venezuela, said countries suffering from foreign interference, colonialism, slavery, oppression, unilateral sanctions “and other internationally wrongful acts, also deserve the right for remedy, reparation and justice, which should be addressed through sound legal processes.”
The Palestinians sent a letter to all countries late Monday saying they did not join the statement.
Canada’s U.N. Ambassador Robert Rae shot back that the resolution makes no mention of forcibly seizing assets or destroying the powers of sovereign states, and said Russia is only making the allegations because it doesn’t want to admit the resolution’s call for an international register to document evidence of damage, loss and injury.
“The assembly is not being asked to perform a function as a judge or jury,” he said. And Russian claims that “this is some systematic, Western plot to steal the assets of sovereign states — It’s just complete balderdash. It’s nonsense, and we have to have the courage to say it.”
Russia’s veto power in the 15-member Security Council has blocked the U.N.’s most powerful body from taking any action since President Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion. But there are no vetoes in the General Assembly, which previously adopted four resolutions criticizing Russia’s invasion.
Unlike Security Council resolutions, General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, but they do reflect world opinion and have demonstrated widespread opposition to Russia’s military action.
The resolution adopted Monday was sponsored by Canada, Guatemala, Netherlands and Ukraine and co-sponsored by dozens of others.
It reaffirms the General Assembly’s commitment to Ukraine’s “sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity” and reiterates its demand for Russia to immediately “cease its use of force against Ukraine” and withdraw all its forces from Ukrainian territory.
It also expresses “grave concern at the loss of life, civilian displacement, destruction of infrastructure and natural resources, loss of public and private property, and economic calamity caused by the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine.”
The resolution recalls that Article 14 of the U.N. Charter authorizes the General Assembly to “recommend measures for the peaceful adjustment of any situation … which it deems likely to impair the general welfare of friendly relations among nations” including violations of the Charter.
Soon after Russia’s invasion, the General Assembly adopted its first resolution on March 2 demanding an immediate Russian cease-fire, withdrawal of all its troops and protection for all civilians by a vote of 141-5 with 35 abstentions.
On March 24, the assembly voted 140-5 with 38 abstentions on a resolution blaming Russia for Ukraine’s humanitarian crisis and urging an immediate cease-fire and protection for millions of civilians and the homes, schools and hospitals critical to their survival.
Monday’s vote was close to the lowest vote for a Ukraine resolution: The assembly voted 93-24 with 58 abstentions on April 7 to suspend Russia from the U.N.’s Geneva-based Human Rights Council over allegations Russian soldiers in Ukraine engaged in rights violations that the United States and Ukraine have called war crimes.
The assembly voted overwhelmingly by its highest margin — 143-5 with 35 abstentions — on Oct. 12 to condemn Russia’s “attempted illegal annexation” of four Ukrainian regions and demand its immediate reversal.
KHERSON, Ukraine — A triumphant President Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday visited this southern city recaptured just days ago by his country’s troops, saying in a speech in front of several hundred gathered in the central square that the victory marked the “beginning of the end of the war.”
CIA Director William J. Burns met in Ankara on Monday with his Russian counterpart to warn Moscow against using nuclear weapons in its war on Ukraine, according to a White House spokesperson who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive conversation.
The Pentagon assesses that “tens of thousands of Russian forces” have evacuated to the eastern side of the Dnieper river in the retreat from the city of Kherson, in what a senior military official called a “very significant” development in the war. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity under terms set by the Pentagon, added that Russians are “shoring up their defensive lines” on the eastern banks of the river in a bid to hold on to the territory on that side.
Here’s the latest on the war and its ripple effects across the globe.
1. Ukraine reclaims Kherson
2. Other key developments
5. From our correspondents
Fighting-age men in Russia are still hiding in fear of being sent to war:Even though Putin has proclaimed Russia’s recent military mobilization complete, many are scared they could be conscripted and deployed against their will to battle on the Ukrainian front. The Washington Post’s Mary Ilyushina interviewed six men who have spent weeks hiding in rented apartments, country houses and even a music studio — among thousands believed to be evading enlistment officers while remaining in Russia.
Among them is a young IT worker who lives in a tent in the forest to prevent military authorities from catching him, using solar panels and a satellite dish to work remotely. “I feared that I’d get drafted if I go to the store or that someone will come to my house,” he told The Post. He requested anonymity because he is hiding from the authorities. Survival in a forest is challenging, but better than the fate he believes would await him in Ukraine.
“They are suffering even before they get to the front line and can easily get, say, pneumonia, and no one will care, which put it into perspective for me,” he said. “I’m either mobilized and put into something akin to a prison, where you have no rights, just obligations, or I stay here, where I still have many problems and issues, but I am free.”
Pietsch reported from Seoul and Sands from London.
Climate activist Taren Chilia knows firsthand the impact of climate change on the island of Vanuatu. Cyclone Pam hit the South Pacific Ocean island in 2015, displacing nearly half of its 270 000 people. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS
by Busani Bafana (sharm el sheik)
Inter Press Service
SHARM EL SHEIK, Nov 14 (IPS) – Taren Chilia lost his school; his mother lost her job to Cyclone Pam – both are survivors of increasingly intense climate-change-induced weather patterns. At COP27, the Pacific Community voiced its conviction that a loss and damage fund is required to compensate for climate impacts.The only thing Taren Chilia remembers about Cyclone Pam was that it flattened his school in Vanuatu, washing away books, equipment, and – well, almost his dreams too.
Cyclone Pam – a category 5 cyclone, was one of the worst to hit the South Pacific Ocean island in 2015, displacing about 45 percent of its 270 000 people. It also left several people dead and destroyed property, houses, and crops. Scientists say human-induced climate change is warming ocean temperatures, fuelling tropical storms driven by warm, moist air.
In Vanuatu, the cyclone tore through the Efate Island in Shefa Province, close to Port Vila’s capital.
Chilia, now 20, from Mele village, recalls fleeing rising water as the storm swept through his village.
“I was at home with mum and dad, and the school was closed, and everyone was in the house. We could not go outside, but we could hear the wind howling and the thunder strike when my neighbour came to fetch us to leave our house, which was not safe from the storm,” Chilia, who was then in his primary school, narrated to IPS on sidelines of the COP27 summit.
On the agenda of the global meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the issue of loss and damage and how developing countries can be compensated for the losses as a result of the severe impacts of climate change.
“As we rushed out of our house, I heard a loud roaring wave, and our village was flooded. The school was washed away, just like everything else around,” said Chilia, who was chosen to lay the first brick to rebuild the first block of classrooms in his village after the devastating Cyclone Pam.
With donations by well-wishers in Australia after Cyclone Pam hit, villagers were challenged to rebuild Chilia’s school within three days, and they did.
“We used big white tents donated by UNICEF as classrooms until we built the school. The whole village pitched in to build on day one (which was) on a Friday. On the second day, we painted the school, and on the third day, we celebrated as we opened the school. On Monday, we were back to school,” he said.
Climate Justice Delayed is Justice Denied
Chilia believes that Pacific Islands like Vanuatu need to be compensated to repair and restore infrastructure lost to the impacts of climate change. He says developed countries responsible for high carbon emissions that have led to global warming should take responsibility for their action and pay up.
“I am calling on all countries of the world to step up on climate justice for the Pacific Islands by supporting (the creation of) a loss and damage facility at this COP27,” Chilia told IPS. He explained that the Vanuatu government should seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice in settling the issue of payments for loss and damage caused by climate change.
Developing countries arguing that they have suffered the impacts of climate change to which they have not contributed are pushing for a loss and damage fund to compensate them for climate impacts.
Espen Ronneberg, Senior Adviser, Multilateral Climate Change Agreements for the Pacific Community (SPC), says loss and damage will continue without ambitious mitigation action and reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. He says the impacts of climate change are already being experienced.
“We are also looking into the future and how those impacts will get much worse unless mitigation is ramped up and unless technical assistance, finance, for instance, are also ramped up,” said Ronneberg, who explained that available resources were not fit-for-purpose in addressing the current impacts of climate change in pacific island countries.
“The type of loss and damage that we are seeing now and that we are anticipating given the different scenarios is not really going to address those impacts. We know there is humanitarian assistance available, there is the Green Fund and the Adaptation Fund, but these do not meet the needs we are seeing,” he said.
“The loss and damage facility is a key to the Pacific Islands, but there are a lot of unknowns at the moment. We know what we do not want. This has to be worked out in common with our development partners, and everyone has to be on the same page regarding loss and damage issues. We are not quite there yet.”
For Chilia, the impact of climate change is real.
“Climate change has hit me personally and has impacted human rights,” Chilia said. “My mother used to be a tourism sales lady, but she is back home because the cyclone destroyed her stall.”
Chilia says he now supports his family.
“I am the breadwinner of the house with seven of us in the family, and I work the one job at the restaurant and bar just to feed the family.”
Chilia could not complete his secondary school after he was forced to drop out when his mother lost her tourism business. His father is unable to work after developing a painful back. He used to take on seasonal jobs picking apples in Australia and New Zealand.
He said coming to COP27 was his first opportunity to travel, but the experience left him enriched. He had learnt so much about climate change and could not wait to tell his village about restoring lost coral reefs.
“I love snorkelling, and when I go snorkelling, I do not see any coloured reefs anymore, but we can do a lot to restore our coral reefs that we are losing because of climate change.”
The Island of Vanuatu relies on coral ecosystems for their economic, livelihood, and coastal protection benefits. A rise in ocean temperatures has led to coral bleaching, while acidification has reduced the availability of calcium minerals in the water that corals need to grow and repair themselves.
“I have a dream – even though my dream has been broken because I did not get to finish my year 10 at school and had to get a job to help my family,” said Chilia. “But I want to bring (the world’s) attention to climate change,” said Chilia, who believes that his activism as a member of Greenpeace Australia Pacific will help make a difference.
A Dalit woman stands outside a dry toilet located in an upper caste villager’s home in Mainpuri, in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. Credit: Shai Venkatraman/IPS
by Baher Kamal (madrid)
Inter Press Service
MADRID, Nov 14 (IPS) – For those who have it, a toilet is that ‘thing’ in the bathroom, next to the bidet, the hand-washing sink with hot and cold water faucets, and the bathtub.
Given their ‘unprestigious’ function, some billionaires, in particular in the Gulf oil-producer kingdoms, fancy to pose their buttocks on a solid-gold toilet. Once they are there, why not also solid-gold faucets?
Many others prefer a more comfortable use of their toilets, thus endowing them with both automatic heating and flushing. And anyway, being given-for-granted, nobody would give a thought to the high importance of all these ‘things’.
The other side of the coin shows an entirely different picture. A shocking one by the way.
Billions of humans without one
And it is a fact that close to 4 billion people –or about half of the world’s total population of 8 billion– still live without access to a safe toilet and other sanitation facilities.
Nearly a full decade ago, the international community, represented in the United Nations General Assembly, decided to declare 19 November every single year, as a world day to address such a staggering problem.
And year after year, the UN continues to behave ‘politically correct’ by saying that progress and achievements were anyway made, however much would still be to do.
Despite such ‘correctness,’ the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, stated on the Day that the world is “seriously off track to keep our promise of safe toilets for all by 2030 – a crucial indicator in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Investment in sanitation systems is too low and progress remains too slow.”
Death of the children: Every day, over 800 children under age five years old die from diarrhoea linked to unsafe water, sanitation and poor hygiene.
Poor sanitation is linked to the transmission of diarrhoeal diseases such as cholera and dysentery, as well as typhoid, intestinal worm infections and polio. It exacerbates stunting and contributes to the spread of antimicrobial resistance.
Globally, 1 in 3 schools do not have adequate toilets, and 23% of schools have no toilets at all. Schools without toilets can cause girls to miss out on their education. Without proper sanitation facilities, many are forced to miss school when they are on their period.
Open defecation: about 900 million people worldwide practice open defecation, meaning they go outside – on the side of the road, in bushes or rubbish heaps. It’s often a matter of where they live: 90% of people who practice open defecation live in rural areas.
Of these, 494 million still defecate in the open, for example in street gutters, behind bushes or into open bodies of water.
Moreover, the lack of sanitation services, just in the year 2020, stood behind the fact that 45% of the household wastewater generated globally was discharged without safe treatment.
Consequently, at least 10% of the world’s population is thought to consume food irrigated by wastewater.
Safely managed sanitation protects groundwater from human waste pollution. Credit: Lova Rabary-Rakontondravony/IPS
The impact on underground water
Should all this not be enough, the 2022 World Toilet Day focuses on another invisible fact: the grave impacts of such a sanitation crisis on groundwater, which is the source of up to 99% of the world’s fresh water.
The 2022 campaign ‘Making the invisible visible’ explores how inadequate sanitation systems spread human waste into rivers, lakes and soil, polluting underground water resources.
However, this problem seems to be invisible. Invisible because it happens underground. Invisible because it happens in the poorest and most marginalised communities.
Groundwater is the world’s most abundant source of freshwater. It supports drinking water supplies, sanitation systems, farming, industry and ecosystems. As climate change worsens and populations grow, groundwater is vital for human survival.
The invisible dangers
The central message of World Toilet Day 2022 is that safely managed sanitation protects groundwater from human waste pollution.
See why:
Safe sanitation protects groundwater. Toilets that are properly located and connected to safely managed sanitation systems, collect, treat and dispose of human waste, and help prevent human waste from spreading into groundwater.
Sanitation must withstand climate change. Toilets and sanitation systems must be built or adapted to cope with extreme weather events, so that services always function and groundwater is protected.
The above shows how those ‘things’ in the bathroom can be life-saving.
Moreover, for those who are obsessed with measuring human suffering in purely money-making terms, it should be enough to know that providing adequate sanitation is a good business: each 1 US dollar invested in it means 5 US dollars saved in health services.
EXPERT PERSPECTIVE – Following recent Russian airstrikes on Kyiv, Germany sent the first of four planned IRIS-T SLM air defense systems to Ukraine. France, the UK and the Netherlands all promised to speed up new air defense system packages. And the US has now delivered a few units of National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System, known as NASAMS.
As Kyiv calls for air defense systems to counter Russian strikes, others are also assessing their missile defense systems. Latvia has asked NATO to establish a missile shield over the Baltic states to bolster the alliance’s eastern flank against potential Russian attacks. Fifteen NATO allies recently pushed this further by signing a letter of intent to develop a German-led missile shield over Europe under the “European Sky Shield Initiative.” In the Middle East, Israel and a number of Arab countries have considered joint missile defenses against potential Iranian attacks. Israel’s recent sale of advance air defense systems to the United Arab Emirates underscores the new urgency to address this threat.
The US has also expressed concern over heightened missile threats. The Biden administration’s recently released Missile Defense Review (MDR) focuses on the cruise missile threat, highlighting heightened risks with the development of hypersonic technology. In addition to regional threats in Europe and the Middle East against US overseas military bases and allies, the MDR also notes threats to the homeland.
BACKGROUND
A July report from the CSIS Missile Defense Project Team entitled “North America is a Region, Too,” focused on the homeland threat. The report warns that a long-term homeland missile defense is likely far-off due to issues with integration into the wider missile defense portfolio and lack of sensor coverage.
The US military has received relatively modest support for developing cruise missile defense systems and policy, especially for the US homeland. Funding for cruise missile defense is usually added to so-called wish lists rather than being included in base budget requests. There is also ambiguity on the desired scope of cruise missile defenses. The Pentagon also only recently designated the Air Force to be the acquisition authority for homeland cruise missile defenses following years of bureaucratic logjam on the matter.
Past US defense doctrine prioritized wider strategic nuclear deterrence since it assumed cruise missile attacks would be coupled with nuclear attacks. However, with the rise of precision-guided missiles, new stealth capabilities and hypersonic technology, this assumption is being challenged. More military planners are expressing concern that China or Russia could launch an attack below the nuclear threshold, thus making proper cruise missile defenses necessary.
There is movement by Congress and the US military to address the cruise missile defense gap. North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) say they are working on a design framework for cruise missile defenses in the US homeland. NORTHCOM is also seeking $278 million for new over-the-horizon radars and nearly $1 billion for cruise and ballistic missile defenses for Guam for the 2023 fiscal year. Likewise, Senate’s version of the FY23 National Defense Authorization Act includes another $50.9 million for cruise missile defenses.
THE EXPERTS
The Cipher Brief tapped two former NATO Supreme Allied Commanders, Admiral James Stavridis (Ret.) and General Phil Breedlove (Ret.); former Vice Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral James ‘Sandy’ Winnefeld; and Stanton Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Ankit Panda for a wide-range expert perspective on the state of US cruise missile defenses and how best to improve them.
Admiral James ‘Sandy’ Winnefeld, Former Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
Cipher Brief Expert Admiral James ‘Sandy’ Winnefeldserved for 37 years in the United States Navy. He retired in 2015 after serving four years as the ninth Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the United States’ number two ranking military officer.
Admiral James Stavridis, Former Supreme Allied Commander, NATO
Cipher Brief ExpertAdmiral James Stavridiswas the 16th Supreme Allied Commander at NATO and the 12th Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. He is currently Vice Chair, Global Affairs and Managing Director at The Carlyle Group and Chair of the Board of the Rockefeller Foundation.
General Philip M. Breedlove, Former Supreme Allied Commander, NATO
General Philip M. Breedlove retired as the Commander, Supreme Allied Command, Europe, SHAPE, Belgium and Headquarters, U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany. He served in several senior staff positions including Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force; Senior Military Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force; and Vice Director for Strategic Plans and Policy on the Joint Staff.
Ankit Panda, Stanton Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Ankit Panda is the Stanton Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Panda is also editor-at-large at the Diplomat. He is an expert on the Asia-Pacific region with research interests ranging from nuclear strategy, arms control, missile defense, nonproliferation, emerging technologies and US extended deterrence.
Expert Perspective
The Cipher Brief: Where does the US face a serious threat from the use of cruise missiles?
Stavridis: In terms of staging defenses against, for example, sea-launched cruise missiles, it would seem prudent to begin by defending major cities, large military complexes, and of course the capital of the United States.
Winnefeld: Most likely in the Middle East, where Iran has not hesitated to strike American troops hosted by our regional partners, especially given its resolve to avenge the death of Qasem Soleimani. U.S. troops could also be collateral damage from an Iranian strike on a host nation itself, such as Iran’s attacks on Saudi Arabian oil infrastructure.
Panda: The Army’s primary focus on cruise missile is for Guam, where there are concerns about emerging threats from China potentially in a future Indo-Pacific conflict. An Iron Dome unit is deployed temporarily on Guam and is undergoing testing and evaluation.
Breedlove: There are immediate threats in Europe, at European bases. We used to have the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and it covered a whole range of things. We don’t have the INF anymore.
Also, the cruise missile problem from submarine launch platforms on our coasts is a very real problem. We do not have the kind of radars we need to defend against a cruise missile attack,… nor the numbers to protect either our West coast or our East coast. Those are big, big places, and our radars are fairly limited in range. The big, over the horizon radars, look at medium and high altitude airplanes, that’s a different problem. But sea skimming cruise missiles are hard to see on the coasts. We’ve looked at systems like the JLENS, systems that hang in balloons and other things to try to get vision down so that we can see cruise missiles.
The Cipher Brief: What are the biggest challenges the US faces in developing cruise missile defenses? Is there a lack of developed capabilities, issues with integration or lack of strategy?
Stavridis: As technology matures and cruise missiles become more stealthy, higher speed (into the hypersonic zone), miniaturized, and carrying advanced explosive loads – they are simply much more dangerous and difficult to defend against.
Winnefeld: The U.S. possesses sophisticated cruise missile defense capability in the form of Patriot and the NASAMS systems. These systems will only improve with the introduction of the Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense System (or LTAMDS), which is a replacement for existing Patriot radar systems (Disclosure: I am on the board of Raytheon Technologies, which produces all three systems).
However, these defensive systems are expensive relative to the threats they are designed to counter and are effective at fairly short ranges against extremely low altitude threats (and thus have a relatively constrained defended area footprint). Moreover, as cruise missiles (particularly anti-ship cruise missiles) increase in sophistication, and are combined with ballistic missile attacks, they will be harder to counter. Given current technology, the issue is less strategy than it is resource constraints — there are simply not enough systems to go around.
Panda: A big challenge with cruise missile defense is on the sensor side: unlike ballistic missiles, cruise missiles remain entirely within the Earth’s atmosphere and are challenging to track with space-based sensors. Radars will often only detect cruise missiles late in their flight, making area defenses of the type the U.S. pursues for homeland ballistic missile defense infeasible at acceptable costs. NORAD and NORTHCOM have explored various cruise missile defense architectures and this continues to be a focus.
Breedlove: The first thing is detecting them. Hitting a ballistic missile, which is almost completely predictable, is far easier than hitting a cruise missile, which flies low and therefore is harder to see. Also, almost all cruise missiles maneuver. Sensing and being able to engage a cruise missile is an extremely hard kinetic problem.
The Cipher Brief: As the US works on an enduring cruise missile defense solution, what should it prioritize?
Stavridis: Iron Dome and other such systems can be helpful but over time, it seems inevitable that we have to move toward effective laser systems for speed and ability to overcome swarms of missiles.
Winnefeld: A good start would be to procure more launcher systems and ensure we have enough interceptors to manage perceived worst-case demand, both overseas and domestically (see my disclaimer above). As we all know, capacity has a capability all its own. That said, the U.S. should give priority to development of directed energy systems, especially high powered microwaves (HPM), designed to counter cruise missile threats, both ashore and at sea. Unlike lasers (which are mostly effective against close-in threats such as unmanned aerial systems), HPM systems actually do not require much power (contrary to commonly-held belief, due to their extremely short burst lengths), have an unlimited magazine size (as long as power is available), are more effective than lasers in dust and poor weather, and do not require dwell time on a target in order to render it ineffective. They should be a developmental priority, and used in conjunction with existing kinetic systems.
Panda: My sense is that cruise missile defense should focus on point defenses for critical military facilities and less on the homeland mission, which doesn’t strike me as being cost effective or feasible.
Breedlove: This is a step by step thing. We’ve got to see it. And that is not going to be accomplished by the type and number of radars that we have right now. We’re going to have to have something like a JLENS, or we’re going to have to have something in orbit, we need something that looks down if we expect to see it at a range that allows engagement. And then a highly manuevering target is going to take a highly maneuvering and capable interceptor.
The Cipher Brief: Do you think the US has been prioritizing ballistic missile defenses over cruise missiles? Is this an understandable development?
Panda: The U.S. has historically prioritized ballistic missile defense—especially since the National Missile Defense Act of 1999 and the 2002 exit from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. This was a function of the anticipated missile threats at the time to the U.S. homeland and to deployed U.S. forces.
Stavridis: We have been very focused of course on ballistic missiles which for decades have been the greatest threat; but in an era of advanced hypersonic nuclear tipped cruise missiles we are underweight in our ability to defend.
Breedlove:We’re worried about ballistic missiles because that has been the threat due to their intercontinental capability. That is not easy either, by the way, just because of speed. They’re not maneuvering, but the speed they’re entering makes an intercept really hard. So we’ve been working on that because that’s where almost all the throw weight of Russia is. But Russia and China are now moving towards cruise missiles because of all the problems. They know the problems, they have them. They have the same thing defending them against ours.
Winnefeld: The U.S. has been improving its cruise missile defense capability at the same time it has developed ballistic missile defenses. Again, this is a problem more related to capacity. From my point of view, however, we have not done enough in the realm of homeland defense. We are vulnerable to a cruise missile attack launched either from Russian long range bombers or, more worrisome, from cruise missile carrying submarines off our coast. Warning times will be too short for fighter aircraft to respond from anything other than a continuous airborne posture, and even then these assets need cueing and almost perfect geometry. Better to focus on point defense systems, such as Patriot and HPM systems, stationed to defend our highest value government, economic, and military assets.
Cipher Brief Writer Ethan Masucol contributed to this report
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
