Recognizing Food & Land-Use Systems as Contributors to Climate Change — Global Issues

Credit: UNICEF/Safidy Andriananten
  • Opinion by Vibha Dhawan (new delhi, india)
  • Inter Press Service

However, in recent decades, intensive land use and inequitable water resource management, compounded by a swelling population, prevailing poverty, depletion of natural resources, and a rapidly changing climate have put tremendous pressure on the country’s agricultural output.

The 2023 Global Hunger Index ranked India 111th out of 125 countries, indicating a serious level of hunger, with concerns growing about the possibility of long-term food scarcity. And earlier this year, The Women and Child Development Ministry found that nearly 8% of the country’s children were malnourished.

A similar situation pervades in various parts of the world:?139 million people?plunged into acute food insecurity in 2021, and in 2022, an estimated?2.4 billion people worldwide did not have regular access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food.

The Famine Early Warning Systems Network has projected approximately 100 million people worldwide will need food assistance through early 2024, in large part because of the El Niño.

The food crisis continued to worsen last year, as the tremors of the Russo-Ukrainian War and its trade policies and the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic were felt across the globe. As of October 30, 2023, 19 countries have implemented 27 food export bans, and seven have implemented 15 export-limiting measures.

At the upcoming COP28 (30 November- 12 December in Dubai), governments must commit to taking serious action to curb the impacts of our food and land use systems on our climate. This includes: (1) urging nations to include emissions from food systems in their climate commitments; (2) addressing poor water management; and (3) adopting climate-resilient agriculture practices.

Agriculture and GHG emissions

A lack of sustainable agriculture production has made the food and land use sector a major contributor to total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Global food systems account for?31% of global emissions?and could become a major factor in exceeding 1.5°C of warming between 2051 and 2063.?

Moreover, agricultural?land today takes up 38 percent of the global land surface. Nearly one-third of this is used as cropland, while the remaining two-thirds consist of meadows and pastures for grazing livestock. This comes at the cost of extensive deforestation and biodiversity loss. ?Agriculture accounts on average for? 70%?of all freshwater withdrawals globally.

The challenge is even more acute for India, which accounts for about 17% of the world’s population but only 4% of the world’s freshwater resources. In fact, nearly 55% of Indians are dependent on agriculture. With the Indian population estimated to reach 1.67 billion by 2050, the demand on water, food and energy is only expected to increase.

Addressing Poor Water Management

Climate change has substantially impacted agricultural productivity, making better water management a necessity. India’s chief crop produce—rice, wheat, and sugarcane—consume the most water. Indian agriculture accounts for 90% water use due to fast-track groundwater depletion and poor irrigation systems. Due to an inept water resource management system and persistent climate change, the country faces regular water shortages.

Distorted water pricing has compounded the issue and is chiefly responsible for the over-extraction of India’s groundwater. Furthermore, subsidized electricity to farmers for pumping water for agricultural activities has led to instances of increased groundwater extraction, and shifting cropping pattern towards more water-intensive crops, like the rice paddy.

Efficient irrigation systems should be developed and implemented to economize water and reduce crop vulnerabilities. The use of water-saving technologies and conservation agriculture technologies, such as drip sprinkler irrigation and sub-soil irrigation, have proven extremely effective in both water conservation and increasing crop yields.

Alternate wetting and drying (AWD) and Direct Seeded Rice have also demonstrated success as water management techniques for rice plantations, whereas efforts to expand the use of millets, a highly nutritious crop that can grow on arid lands and is resilient to climate changes, in emerging economies should also be accelerated.

Climate Resilient Agriculture

It is well established that climate change is a threat to agriculture, and resilient agriculture practices forged through efficient technologies, innovations, and circular economy practices must be incentivized and scaled.

Despite being the world’s leading producer in jute, milk, wheat sugarcane, vegetable, and rice, India continues to face post-harvest losses. A 2022 study revealed that between harvesting and consumption, the country lost 5-13% of its fruits and vegetables and around 3-7% of crops that included oil, seeds, and spices.

In particular, the significant use of chemical fertilizers by Indian farmers due to huge subsidies given by the government is a major contributor not only to emissions and environmental pollution, but to the degradation of soil.

Sustainable alternatives, such as nanofertilizers and bioinoculants like mycorrhizaes should be explored to both reduce burdens on the government as well as curb the environmental impacts of traditional fertilizers. Combined agro-waste (crop-residue and livestock manure) management and increasing the use of biogas plants can also help to reduce carbon emissions and produce more resilient crops.

The world is ready to make a transition towards sustainable food and land use practices, and national leaders should seize this opportunity to intensify their fight against climate change. COP28 offers an important platform to accelerate the transformation of our food and land-use systems towards a better, progressive future.
?
Vibha Dhawan is Chair of SDSN South Asia and Director General of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Fast-Track Climate Resilience Building of Small and Vulnerable Nations Ahead of COP28 — Global Issues

Coastal protection at Anse Kerlan Beach in the Seychelles where residents often take the initiative to protect their properties from the impact of climate-change-induced environmental changes. The Commonwealth Climate Finance Access Hub assists small island states, among others, with climate finance and technical assistance. Credit: Kadir van Lohuizen/NOOR/UNEP
  • by Joyce Chimbi (nairobi)
  • Inter Press Service
  • Climate change finance will continue to be a focal point during the upcoming COP28 negotiations in the UAE. Dr Oldman Koboto, manager and advisor for the Commonwealth Climate Finance Hub, speaks about what’s expected.

The hub was established through the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in 2013 to provide technical assistance aimed at enhancing the countries’ access to international climate finance. This is achieved through technical assistance around project proposal development, policy support, human and institutional capacity building, knowledge management, and learning, all of which are anchored on gender and youth mainstreaming.

The hub embeds climate finance experts in individual government ministries to work with and offer technical support. The experts help identify project proposals, provide policy support, and, above all, build the capacity of both technical and institutional capacity in those ministries to develop bankable funding proposals. Since its operationalization in 2016, the hub has supported member countries to access USD 315 million in climate finance. Additionally, projects amounting to over USD 800 million are in the pipeline.

Here are excerpts from the interview.

IPS: What is the nature of climate negotiations thus far?

Koboto: Negotiations are progressing well, in my view, considering the historical background. Negotiations started when climate jurisprudence was still in its infancy. It has since progressed to a point of more certainty around legal systems and transformative approaches to address the climate change convention’s objectives. Negotiations have moved from the actual architect for implementing the convention to innovative approaches toward achieving the 1.5°C Paris Agreement aspiration.

One of the pending issues, especially on finance, is the establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund – to be operationalized through the COP28. The draft outcome document for the Transitional Committee on operationalizing the Loss and Damage Fund showed consensus that could catalyze its operation. That being said, critical gaps still exist.  IPCC cautions that even if we were to implement all the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), we would still not achieve the 1.5°C targets, many of them centered around mitigation actions.

This is an indictment on the international community, through these negotiations, to make progress on adaptation-related issues. And fast-track resilience building and adaptative capacities of small and other vulnerable member states. One of the innovative approaches is leveraging private sector finance for NDCs towards climate mitigation action. But, the design parameters for both adaptation and mitigation projects are such that mitigation actions are attractive to the private sector more than adaptation measures. This creates innovation gaps toward adaptation actions, and yet mitigation initiatives do not build significant resilience. There are, therefore, successes and challenges to these negotiations.

IPS: Have countries voiced concerns regarding these negotiations?

Koboto: Almost all countries raise concerns around the pending areas and celebrate progressive areas. Countries prepare to go into the COPs by developing country positions informed by developments in international negotiations. They then build interventions around points of divergence to be ironed out in upcoming negotiations to inform or shape COP outcomes. This, on its own, is a demonstration of the countries’ concerns around those specific agenda items. It is not about one country speaking about being unhappy, but the process itself, through the established legal frameworks, enables countries to raise their concerns through platforms where such consensus could become part of the formal documentation for the COP process.

IPS: Is Africa better placed for COP28 negotiations, having recently held its inaugural Climate Summit?

Koboto: The inaugural Africa Climate Summit was a step in the right direction. It allowed African countries to paint their own vision and develop a basket of issues to push forward within international negotiations. The Nairobi Summit was consistent with other platforms for engagement on development challenges facing Africa. The message was that Africa is part of the solution and requests to be treated as equals, which is consistent with the messaging at the World Economic Forums and UN General Assembly. The draft outcome of the Loss and Damage Fund Transitional Committee indicates that developed countries’ parties will contribute to the financing of loss and damage and that developing country parties are also encouraged to contribute.

IPS: What sustains the impasse on climate financing between developed and developing countries? What will it take to break the impasse?

Koboto: This is a tough one because it falls at the heart of the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities of the UNFCCC. Having said that, it is also very difficult to target one country with the capability or capacity to provide support because of foundational principles of state policy, which sets the direction of each country regarding national and international interests. It goes without saying that national interests take precedence over international interests in areas where the two compete.

There is a willingness at the international level for developed countries to help. Meanwhile, the African continent must design innovative financing instruments to facilitate access to climate finance and attract investments to the continent. Such innovative mechanisms can be developed in subsequent African climate summits. The global climate solution lies in Africa, for the continent still has a lot of unexploited potential both in resources and opportunities around geothermal, hydrothermal, and solar energy.

IPS: What are the expectations from small island states and other vulnerable countries on new funding mechanisms and the Loss and Damage Fund going into COP28?

Koboto: The newest funding mechanism is the Loss and Damage Fund. Others are the Global Environment Facility, the Green Climate Fund, and the Adaptation Fund. African countries are unrelenting about the USD100 billion pledge made at COP15. All these funds must trickle down to developing states so that the Loss and Damage Fund becomes just an additional funding to existing funding sources.

African countries are focused on building enough consensus and influencing developed countries to deliver on promises made. Institutions such as the Commonwealth Climate Finance Access Hub, which I lead, stand ready to facilitate African countries’ access to those Funds as soon as there is predictable and adequate funding in those Funds.

CCFAH can provide technical assistance to enhance access to climate investments at a country level and to build capacities to access these funds without the use of third parties. But these countries are unrelenting and are firmly focused on unlocking much-needed climate finance to establish and or accelerate climate action.

IPS UN Bureau Report


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

PPPs Fiscal Hoax Is a Blank Financial Silver Bullet — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Jomo Kwame Sundaram (kuala lumpur, malaysia)
  • Inter Press Service

Public-private partnerships?
PPPs usually involve long-term contractual arrangements in which private businesses provide infrastructure and services traditionally provided by governments. In recent years, PPPs have built or run hospitals, schools, prisons, roads, airports, railways, water and sanitation.

Most international financial institutions (IFIs) advise governments to guarantee profits for their private partners. The IFIs continue to urge governments to ‘de-risk’ commercial providers to attract their investments.

Private investor preferences for specific types of PPPs may vary over time and with circumstances, often reflecting changing needs and priorities. As no one type fits all, changing circumstances and preferences have increased the variety of PPPs.

PPP problems
PPPs are far more complex than suggested by their cheerleaders’ narratives. Their negative impacts on infrastructure and public service delivery have been highlighted again by a Eurodad-led report. Public expenses rise as governments bear private costs and risks.

Following World Bank and other IFI advice, national authorities attract commercial financial investments by appealing to private greed. PPPs have been used to ‘de-risk’ such investment, by using their terms to ensure profits for private investors.

The report also exposed PPPs’ negative impacts for democratic governance. PPP arrangements typically lack transparency, and rarely involve prior consultation with affected communities. Thus, they have been more prone to corruption and abuse.

While private partners are guaranteed profits, their PPPs may still fail. In recent years, PPPs’ fiscal and other costs kept mounting as their shortfalls grew despite their rising profitability. As such problems grow, criticisms and dissent have risen.

Why PPPs fail?
PPPs have increasingly been touted as the magic solution to many problems, particularly financial constraints, poor management and delivery. PPPs have become popular among elites in the global South, where their ‘middle classes’ were enticed by the promise of better services and ‘trickle-down’.

The private sector is supposedly more efficient and better able to deliver public amenities including energy, education, health, water and sanitation. But better value for money has rarely ensued, as many studies show. Instead, the converse is more typical.

A 2020 study by the European Federation of Public Service Unions and Eurodad identified eight major reasons why PPPs in Europe have not improved outcomes.

First, PPPs rarely raised additional funds. Instead, they have typically incurred more public debt in the form of government guarantees, rather than direct borrowing. But such additional public debt has often been obscured from the public.

Second, private commercial loans generally cost much more than government borrowings. Third, public authorities, especially central governments, still bear ultimate responsibility, especially in the event of project failure.

Fourth, PPPs have rarely delivered better ‘value for money’ than reasonably managed public projects. Fifth, seeming PPP efficiency gains have been largely due to risky cost-cutting, e.g., in public infrastructure or healthcare provision.

Sixth, PPPs distort public policy priorities, typically requiring even more cost-cutting. Seventh, PPPs have rarely delivered both ‘on-time’ and ‘on-budget’. Eighth, PPP deals are typically opaque, rather than transparent, often involving abuses and corruption.

From early 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic exposed the long-term adverse effects of earlier austerity and underfunding of public health. More recently, inflation, stagnation and more extreme weather have exposed other vulnerabilities and their causes.

What can be done?
As the world faces multiple and interconnected crises, PPPs offer bogus, even dangerous solutions. Eurodad has made policy recommendations to national governments and development finance institutions (DFIs) to improve infrastructure and public service financing.

• Stop promoting PPPs. The World Bank, IMF, regional development banks and DFIs should all end the promotion of PPPs, especially for social services. Access to health, education, water and sanitation should not depend on capacity to pay.

• Fiscal and other major PPP risks should be publicly acknowledged. Governments should be warned of PPPs’ generally poor outcomes, and of the pros and cons of various financing arrangements. DFIs should all more effectively finance national plans for sustainable and equitable development.

Countries should be helped to find the best financing means to deliver responsible, transparent, gender-sensitive, environmentally and fiscally sustainable public infrastructure and social services consistent with national and multilateral obligations.

• Informed public consultations should always precede any infrastructure and public service provision agreement by PPPs. These should include ensuring the rights of all affected communities, including those to fair remedy or compensation.

• Exercise rigorous and transparent government regulation, especially for public spending, PPP contract values, project impacts, and long-term fiscal implications. The public interest must always prevail over commercial ones.

DFIs should only finance projects serving the public interest. Appropriate, publicly funded public services should be promoted, with transparent contracts for and accountable reporting on social service and infrastructure project delivery.

PPPs have often proved to be budgetary frauds, exacerbating, rather than reducing national fiscal deficits. Far from being the financial silver bullet they have been touted as, PPPs have proven to be blanks, making much noise, but with little real benefit.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Even Rich Nations Now Worried About ISDS — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Jomo Kwame Sundaram (kuala lumpur, malaysia)
  • Inter Press Service

Typically favouring powerful transnational corporations (TNCs), ISDS blocks policy changes needed to address new challenges. Companies have successfully sued governments for policy changes which allegedly reduce their profits.

The company then transferred Philip Morris Australia to Philip Morris Asia in Hong Kong. Invoking ISDS in the bilateral investment treaty (BIT) between Australia and Hong Kong, it sued Australia. Luckily, the ISDS tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction as considering the case would constitute an abuse of process.

More recently, Australian Clive Palmer has hired a former Attorney-General to demand nearly A$341 billion from state governments after moving his major mining companies to Singapore in 2019. His two ISDS claims invoke the Australia-New Zealand-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (ANZAFTA).

The first seeks about A$300 billion in compensation and for ‘moral damages’ after Australia’s highest court ruled in favour of the Western Australian (WA) state government. Palmer is challenging the 2022 WA legislation to indemnify the state, ensuring he would get nothing.

He is also demanding A$41.3 billion in compensation for rejecting exploration permits for the Waratah coal mine in Queensland. The licence was refused on environmental grounds, including increasing carbon emissions.

Palmer is expected to take a third ISDS case against Australia’s Federal and Queensland government decisions to reject his coal mine licence application due to its likely adverse impacts on the local environment, including waterways, and the Great Barrier Reef.

Even if the governments win these cases, they would still incur millions in legal expenses. The Philip Morris cases against Australia took five years, and cost A$24 million in legal expenses, of which only half was recovered by the government.

Evading ISDS?
After such costly experiences, almost a decade ago, Australia successfully demanded a ‘tobacco carve-out’ to the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s (TPP) ISDS provisions.

Australia’s new Southeast Asia Economic Strategy to 2040, announced on 6 September 2023, promises to review existing free trade agreements (FTAs) with the region. This will include agreements containing ISDS clauses, including the ANZAFTA and other bilateral and plurilateral agreements.

Using side-letters, Australia has already opted out of the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) ISDS provisions with both the UK and New Zealand.

In an ISDS case, the World Bank Group’s International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes ruled Pakistan had to pay over US$5.8 billion to an aggrieved investor. This is equivalent to its entire US$6 billion new IMF loan, about an eighth of its annual budget.

Other ISDS second thoughts
The New Zealand government is now also against ISDS. While ISDS is part of several of its FTAs – e.g., the CPTPP and China-New Zealand FTA – its government has opposed ISDS provisions in FTA negotiations since 2018.

Hence, there is no ISDS in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the New Zealand-United Kingdom FTA, and the New Zealand-European Union FTA.

While it was considered too late to exclude ISDS entirely from the CPTPP at a late stage in negotiations, New Zealand has secured side letters with Australia, Brunei, Malaysia, Peru and Viet Nam. This means ISDS does not apply between New Zealand and these countries.

The current Chilean government is also concerned about ISDS. Hence, it has asked all other CPTPP governments for side-letters excluding ISDS between them, but only New Zealand has agreed so far!

Rich nations wary of ISDS
The US removed most ISDS provisions when the Trump administration replaced the old North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2020.

ISDS was in the TPP because Obama administration negotiators wanted it. But most 2016 presidential aspirants to succeed him, including Democrats, rejected the TPP. Trump’s US Trade Representative (USTR) Lighthizer specifically cited ISDS as the reason for US withdrawal from the TPP.

Biden and his USTR have maintained Trump’s anti-ISDS stance instead of reverting to Obama’s position. ISDS is not in Biden Administration ‘economic cooperation’ agreements such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework.

Meanwhile, the EU is urging withdrawal from the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) as its ISDS provisions will block needed European climate policies. Several EU and non-EU countries have already begun withdrawing from the ECT, arguing it constrains their ability to act against global warming.

Developing countries saying no
Many developing countries have already been withdrawing from their BITs while the RCEP does not include ISDS. So, the CPTPP, other BITs and FTAs’ ISDS provisions are out of date. Worse, they block addressing emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and global warming.

Countries should reject and even withdraw from BITs and FTAs with ISDS. After all, there is no evidence ISDS attracts foreign direct investment. More and more developing nations – including India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Ecuador, South Africa, etc. – have already withdrawn from such BITs.

Governments should urgently review and remove ISDS provisions in all existing BITs and FTAs, or withdraw from them, to avoid more costly ISDS cases. They must be more critical and careful in ensuring future economic cooperation agreements to ensure they really serve their current and future best interests.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Can Creativity Change the World? — Global Issues

Adama Sanneh, CEO of Moleskine Foundation. Credit: Luca Dimoon/Moleskine Foundation
  • by Elena Pasquini (milan, italy)
  • Inter Press Service

Crossing a bridge. That’s what creativity leaders do, according to Lwando Xaso. She is a lawyer, writer, and storyteller from South Africa, and in mid-October, she was in Milan moderating a panel that posed a challenging question: “Can creativity change the world?” She was present at “A Creativity Revival,” an “un-conference” whose participants shape the agenda and content. They are the “Creativity Pioneers,” women and men whose work is supported by a fund from the Moleskine Foundation and who had gathered in Italy from various corners of the world. Much like Rowand and Sydelle, they answered that challenging question with a resounding “yes.” “Creativity is not just something cute. It’s not just something nice. But creativity is something relevant. That is the key element nowadays to transform society for the better,” said Adama Sanneh, CEO of the Moleskine Foundation.

Crossing a bridge. That’s what South Africa is doing as well. “Our starting point is a place of violence. We come from a history of inequality, injustice, indignity, and oppression … We are moving across the bridge towards freedom, human dignity, equality, and justice. We’re moving away from trauma toward healing,” Xaso said. The tool her country is employing is its democratic Constitution, its “transformative constitutionalism.” But how does creativity relate to this transformation?

According to “Assessing the Impact of Culture and Creativity in Society,” a course and publication from the Impact Research Center of Erasmus University in Rotterdam, one of the most significant challenges in effecting social change is changing people’s behavior. Or, perhaps, their “hearts,” as Xaso emphasized. “A revolution can change regimes, but for transformation, we need to change hearts.” Xaso also explained: “Creativity and art were instruments of liberation. At the core of the anti-apartheid movement lay creativity. The majority of the country was never going to win the war against the apartheid government with arms alone … It was never going to happen. So, what are the other tools that can change the world? There was music. There was poetry. The ANC built a culture and a department for culture because they saw it as an instrument that can liberate the country …Art and justice reinforce each other.”

Rowand Roydon Pybus is also in Milan, sharing his experiences in crossing bridges. His tool is a network of solar-powered theaters that screen films made in Africa for those who lack access or cannot afford it. These films spark conversations on critical issues such as land rights and gender rights, thereby fostering change. They shed light on often-overlooked subjects. It’s not about just screening; Sunshine Cinema engages young people and train them as facilitators for these discussions. They use a vast collection of African movies to address vital questions in hyper-local environments, where the impact is most significant.

However, assessing the scale of creativity’s social impact remains a challenge. As Eva Langerak writes in Erasmus University’s magazine, “The assumption that the cultural and creative sector adds substantial value to society is widely debated, and the discussion on how that value takes shape is quite controversial.” The social impact of arts, culture, and creativity can be defined as “those effects that go beyond the artifacts and the enactment of the event or performance itself and have a continuing influence on people’s lives.” This definition draws from the 1993 multi-authored work “The Social Impact of the Arts: A Discussion Document.” Measuring the social impact of creativity is not a straightforward task, but the significance of the cultural dimension has been recognized to the extent that participation in cultural life is considered a human right, as outlined in Article 27 of the Universal Declaration. This participation is crucial as it underpins ‘the ability to represent oneself and exercise other rights, including freedom of expression.’

Representing oneself is closely tied to identity, which is one of the questions that “creative pioneers” in Palestine are addressing through the “Wonder Cabinet,” a project in Bethlehem. Designed by architects Elias and Yousef Anastas, the Wonder Cabinet is a space for creative communities to come together and establish a safe place for Palestinian voices to express themselves, not only with regard to creative fields but also to share, learn, and gain exposure to different experiences. As Ilaria Speri, managing director, explained, “It brings together communities that have been physically separated over decades of occupation, with 65% of the West Bank under military rule, including checkpoints and segregated roads with different access permits.” This space offers the Palestinian community machinery, tools, knowledge, and an opportunity for reflection on identity and self-representation, thereby ensuring that the regional and local versions of their story are heard.

Art and creativity have a profound impact on society, encouraging critical thinking and prompting individuals to question their own experiences as well as those of others. This perspective is championed by authors such as François Matarasso, an artist, writer, and policy advisor, as well as Pascal Gielen. These insights hold particular significance in regions affected by conflict and warfare. In the words of Olena Rosstalna, the founder and manager of the Youth Drama Theater “Ama Tea” in Chernihiv, a city in northern Ukraine near the Russian border, the impact of art transcends the physical battlefronts. She observed, “It’s not just the war on the land; it’s also the war in the minds and for the minds, because the propaganda is very big. Brainwashing has persisted for decades.” Countering propaganda is among Ama Tea’s actions devoted to engaging the youth. Olena explained the genesis of their project: “We conceived this project in the early days of April or late March 2022, when the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation happened. We were in a bomb shelter, thinking about what we could do to help in this dire situation.” Teaching critical thinking through a “fresh perspective” on art and literature has been a central focus for her team: “We manage to show the cases of propaganda not only in Ukrainian history, but in European history, in Polish, in Germany, also taken in the context of World War Two,” she said. Olena’s work is geared primarily toward the youth. She stressed the importance of nurturing “the small seeds of creativity, conscientiousness, and responsibility” in the young generation, firmly believing that by doing so, they can secure a future for their country.

Olena describes herself as a “very small fish in a very big ocean,” yet she believes that everything starts from the ground up. “That’s why I’m deeply involved in grassroots initiatives in my work. Supporting local initiatives worldwide is crucial. It all begins with small steps and grassroots efforts. If we have a world of pioneers, one by one, all these initiatives will flourish into a beautiful garden,” she said. Communities often play a pivotal role in propelling social change. Community-led art projects, unite people to brainstorm solutions for local issues, according scholars. Solutions even where it seems impossible – that’s the essence of creativity, as Adama Sanneh eloquently wrote in Folios, the Moleskine Foundation’s periodical: “Revealing and exploring what is possible in seemingly impossible contexts. It’s about radical imagination and enlightenment during times of ignorance and resignation”.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Women and War — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Jan Lundius (stockholm, sweden)
  • Inter Press Service

War is not healthy and it is far from normal. It makes people abnormal, and its fatal effects linger. Furthermore, war is affecting men and women in different ways. It is driving up domestic violence, as stress levels raise when traumatized men return to their families after long spells on the front lines, finding their domestic situation changed.

War veterans returning from Germany after World War I committed more crimes against women than ever before. The same happened after World War II in the US and the Soviet Union, a country where as late as 1959 there were still 20 million more women than men due to male casualties from war and repression. This is just one indication that war is extremely gendered. Police reports of domestic violence spiked in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Many women and children fled the war and some of those who stayed behind bore the brunt of male frustration. Battered women confess: “With all due respect to our military, we may indeed find ourselves in a situation where a veteran returning from war will be respected and sympathized with to such an extent that such a minor offense as domestic violence may well be forgiven on all levels.” This occurs in Russia as well, and all over the world in countries suffering from armed conflicts. All levels of human interaction are affected by an unavoidable process of “militarization”, meaning that belligerent values become dominant, lingering long after armed aggression has ceased.

In modern warfare civilian casualties by far outnumber those of armed combatants. Defenceless civilians suffer human rights violations, while women are subjected to specific gender related abuses. Women and girls targeted by sexual violence often face insurmountable obstacles if they try to seek justice. Many suffer from social stigma, worsened by the fact that women and girls tend to have a disadvantaged social position . This despite the fact that women constitute the backbone of most communities. Their ideas, energy and involvement are crucial for maintaining resilience during conflicts, as well as they are important during the rebuilding of society in the aftermath of war. To ensure lasting peace, it is thus essential that women’s specific exposure to violence is recognized and that they are allowed to play an essential part at all stages of a peace process.

Combatting soldiers often find themselves surrounded by civilians who they consider to be their enemies, or even worse – inferior beings. It is quite common that soldiers are by their commanders’ eagerness to increase their fierceness are given licence to ignore normal boundaries of civil behaviour. Women might be perceived as upholding and embodying “enemy culture, and support”. Destroying the enemies’ domestic security and sense of cultural/ethnic belonging might become a military goal and violence against women thus becomes legitimized.

Attacks on women may sometimes focus on their role as mothers. During the Nazi regime’s ruthless extermination of Jews, Roma and Sinti, as well as several other ethnic groups, the elite troopers of SS considered their victims to be vermin “unworthy of life”. The leader of these ruthless exterminators, Heinrich Himmler, reminded them that not only grown-ups, but their children as well had to be killed: “Otherwise they will grow up and revenge themselves on their parents’ murderers”. Similar arguments have been used by other perpetrators of massacres on ethnic minority groups; killing children, destroying foetuses and mutilating women’s sexual organs to “eliminate guerrilla spawn”.

In more than 150 countries there are currently child soldiers within government and opposition armed forces and an estimated 30 percent are girls. China Keitetsi remembers :“We were bodyguards to our bosses, we cooked, and we looked after them, instead of them looking after us. We collected firewood, we carried weapons and for girls it was worse because we were girlfriends to many different officers. Today, I can’t think how many officers slept with me, and at the end it became like I don’t own my body, it’s their body. It was so hard to stay the 24 hours a day thinking which officer am I going to sleep with today.”

The widespread use of rape is common in any armed conflict. Rape is employed to intimidate, conquer and control women and all members of their communities. It is used as a form of torture to extract information, to punish and intimidate. Wartime rape is committed by a wide range of men. Even those mandated to protect civilians tend to sexually abuse women and girls under their care. Women may be targeted for rape not just because they are women, but also because of their social status, ethnic origin, religion or sexuality. In Rwanda, it is estimated that between a quarter and half a million rapes were committed during the 100 days of genocide between 7 April and 15 July 1994.

Rape is often accompanied by extreme brutality. Women and girls often die during the attack, or later of their wounds. This is particularly true of young girls. Other medical consequences include transmission of HIV and serious complications in reproductive health. Fear, nightmares and psychosomatic body pain are just some of the problems experienced by survivors. Sometimes women are raped in front of others, often family members, to deepen their sense of shame. Some rape survivors state they would rather die than let what has happened become public.

Widowhood and/or separation increase during armed conflicts and it is often women who have to flee and bring their children with them, since men and boys are targeted to be killed or forcefully recruited by warring factions. Homes are destroyed and entire families uprooted. The loss of the family home brings about specific problems for women, including rise in domestic violence, enormous practical and financial difficulties and a harmful dependency on strangers. Women and girls in flight may be forced to offer sex in return for safe passage, food, shelter and/or documentation. Government officials (such as immigration officials or border guards), smugglers, pirates, members of armed groups and male refugees have all been known to abuse refugee women in transit. Desperate women may be forced into illegal activities, putting them at risk for repercussions from authorities.

If homes have been destroyed and families evicted, women are particularly hard hit because of their responsibility for providing shelter and food for their families. Even in assumed “safe havens”, like refugee camps, women and girls are at risk of sexual exploitation by those who control access to food and supplies, and if they venture out of the camps to find water, food and fire wood, perpetrators may be lurking, ready to attack them.

A slogan like “You’ve come a long way, baby” is, to say the least, offensive to millions of women suffering hardship from war and displacement. The list of historical and current abuse and suffering of women in war is immense and constantly updated. Some examples:

During World War II women were by the Imperial Japanese Army forced into sexual slavery. Estimates vary with numbers ranging from as low as 20,000, to as high as 360,000 to 410,000 ( according to Chinese sources). In Europe, large numbers of women were during World War I “recruited” to “field brothels” by both warring factions and the practice was continued in the eastern territories occupied by the German army and its auxiliary forces. Even the horrific concentration camps were equipped with brothels.

During World War II, the eastern front was a veritable hell. German officers and soldiers were violating women and girls, while military commanders did not attempt to put an end to such atrocities. The Russian vengeance was horrible. The exact number of German women and girls raped by Soviet troops during war and occupation is uncertain, but historians estimate their numbers are likely in the hundreds of thousands, and possibly as many as two million. During the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, Pakistani military and so called Razakar paramilitary raped between 200,000 and 400,000 Bengali women and girls. There are no exact figures on how many women and children who were systematically raped by Serb forces in various concentration camps, estimates range from 20,000 to 50,000. In Eastern Congo, the prevalence and intensity of rape and other sexual violence is described as the worst in the world. A 2010 study found that 20 percent of men and 30 percent of women reported conflict-related sexual violence and the brutal bloodshed has not yet abated.

We may all agree that war is horrible and women and girls are suffering from its effects. However, we also have to admit that violence against women take such horrific proportions due to the fact that in most countries women are even in peacetime victims of misogyny, religious/traditional contempt and subjugation, unequal rights and a wide range of other types of discrimination. In war, injustices and mistreatment are multiplied many times over. One means to avoid the horrors of war would be to guarantee equal rights to women and men, ensuring that laws are enacted for that purpose, followed to the letter and that those who violate them are duly punished. Only then can women be said to have come a long way.

Main Sources: Keitetsi, China (2005) Child Soldier: Fighting for My Life. Johannesburg: Jacana Media. Lamb, Christina (2020) Our Bodies, Their Battlefield: What War Does to Women. Glasgow: William Collins. Wiiliams, Jessie (2023) “’This War Made Him a Monster.’ Ukrainian Women Fear the Return of Their Partners”, Time, March 13.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Revisiting the Operational Credibility of the United Nations — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Anwarul K. Chowdhury (new york)
  • Inter Press Service

I commend wholeheartedly the UN-ANDI and its dedicated team for their work, particularly its recent survey report on racism and racial discrimination despite the constraints of the global Covid pandemic of last few years. I am proud to be associated with the conceptualization of UN-ANDI in late 2019.

As the first ever effort to bring together the diverse group of personnel from Asia and the Pacific in the UN system, UN-ANDI needs all our support and encouragement.

In my decades of work for the United Nations, both representing my country as well as representing the organization, I have seen many faces of the world body – positive and not so positive, spirit-uplifting and also frustrating, focused and determined and also confused and politicized.

But the most enduring experience for me about the work of the United Nations in its 78 years of existence has been its contribution to making a positive difference in the lives of the millions of people of our planet.

Over the years, the United Nations has been tested time and again by conflicts, humanitarian crises and poverty and deprivation, but has always risen to live up to the challenges in a determined and inclusive way. It has been rightly called the “indispensable common house of the entire human family.” Respected global peace leader and philosopher Daisaku Ikeda describes it as the “Parliament of the World.”

It is worth reminding us that without attracting attention, the United Nations and its family of agencies and entities are engaged in a continuing gigantic endeavour against enormous odds to improve every aspect of people’s lives around the world. It is also worth remembering that the UN’s inspirational norm-setting role covers a very broad range of areas.

In my personal association with the application of my country, Bangladesh for membership of the United Nations in 1972 and since then, in my fifty-one years of collaborative involvement with the UN, I can affirm with great pride that all major aspects of Bangladesh’s development architecture reflect the stamp of the UN.

Last Tuesday, as we observed the UN Day, I received many “Happy UN Day” text messages. I did not have the intellectual and moral energy to join them. So, reflecting the current realities, I responded by saying “A not-so-happy UN Day in a conflict-ridden world where the UN is found to be helpless.” That helplessness pains me immensely.

The progressive British newspaper Guardian in its editorial on 26 October echoed that perception by saying that “The United Nations marked its 78th birthday on Tuesday but had little cause for celebration.” It went on to say that “On the same day, Israel called for António Guterres to resign over his remarks on the Israel-Hamas war, and accused him of ‘blood libel’.”

The well-meaning peoples of the world should not be cocooned in our own isolation without recognizing and understanding the reality where we are at this of time. In the most unbecoming manner and forsaking all diplomatic decency, the Israeli Permanent Representative to the UN turned on the Secretary-General at the open session of the Security Council is inconceivable and totally unacceptable.

The earlier Guardian editorial appropriately wrote that “But 10 years ago, it would have been hard to imagine the contempt radiating from the Israeli Ambassador’s announcement that UN representatives would be refused visas because ‘the time has come to teach them a lesson’. That surely reflects the UN’s reduced status.”

The conservative Wall Street Journal went even further the day before on 25 October in its editorial board’s opinion to say that “This is how the UN makes itself a fellow traveler in the advancing march of global disorder.”

We need to revisit the operational credibility of our much-cherished world body. What was needed in 1945 to be enshrined in the UN Charter is to be judged in the light of current realities. If the Charter needs to be amended to live up to the challenges of global complexities and paralyzing intergovernmental politicization, let us do that. It is high time to focus on that direction. Blindly treating the words of the Charter as sacrosanct may be self-defeating and irresponsible. The UN could be buried under its own rubble unless we set our house in order now.

I am often asked, during ‘questions and answers’ segment following my public speaking, if I want to recommend one thing that would make the UN perform better, what would it be. My clear and emphatic answer always has been “Abolish the Veto!” Veto is undemocratic, irrational and against the true spirit of the principle of sovereign equality of the United Nations.

In an opinion piece in the IPS Journal in March 2022, I wrote that “Believe me, the veto power influences not only the decisions of the Security Council but also all work of the UN, including importantly the choice of the Secretary-General.”

The same opinion piece asserted that “I believe the abolition of veto requires a greater priority attention in the reforms process than the enlargement of the Security Council membership with additional permanent ones. Such permanency is simply undemocratic. I also believe that the veto power is not ‘the cornerstone of the United Nations’ but in reality, its tombstone.”

Abolishing the veto would also release the election of the Secretary-General from the manipulating control of the veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council.

I would also recommend that in future the Secretary-General would have only one term of seven years, as opposed to current practice of automatically renewing the Secretary-General’s tenure for a second five-year term, without even evaluating his performance.

After choosing nine men successively to be the world’s topmost diplomat, I strongly believe that it is incumbent on the United Nations to have the sanity and sagacity of electing a woman as the next Secretary-General.

Also, I am of the opinion that a formalized and mandated involvement of and genuine consultation with the civil society would enhance the UN’s credibility. The UN leadership and Member States should work diligently on that without fail for a decision by the on-going session of the General Assembly.

Transparency and accountability are essential in the budget processes of the UN and personnel recruitments at all levels. Two other areas which need more scrutiny are extra-budgetary resources received from Member States and consultancy practices including budgetary allocations for that by the organization. Special attention in these areas is needed to restore the UN’s credibility and thereby effectiveness and efficiency for the benefit of the humanity as a whole.

The international community has reached a fork in the road. One path is to resign ourselves to the idea that an effective multilateral system is beyond our grasp, with the potential for reversion to the dangerous, anarchic world order that the United Nations was set up to improve upon. The other path, also rocky but considerably more hopeful, leads to global solidarity based on shared principles, objectives, and commitments, on oneness of humanity and on a global security architecture that has a chance of commanding the genuine respect as well as the true acceptance and adherence of all States.

Let me conclude by asserting that, all said, I continue to hold on to my deep faith in multilateralism and , my belief and trust in the United Nations as the most universal organization for the people and the planet is renewed and reaffirmed!

This opinion piece is the enhanced version of the keynote address by Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, former Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of the United Nations at the virtual observance of the United Nations Day (24 October) by the United Nations Asia Network for Diversity and Inclusion (UN-ANDI) on 27 October 2023.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Population Growth — Global Issues

Source: United Nations.
  • Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
  • Inter Press Service

Some addictions, such as illicit drug use, tobacco smoking, alcohol abuse, gun violence and junk food consumption, are contributing to chronic diseases, illnesses, injuries and the premature deaths of millions of men, women and children. The sustained growth of human populations, however, is far more troubling as it is undermining the wellbeing of humanity.

As it contributes to the climate crisis, environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, natural resource depletion and pollution, world population growth poses a serious threat to the sustainability of humans on the planet. Concerned with its serious and far reaching consequences, climatologists, environmentalists, scientists, celebrities and others have repeatedly called for human population stabilization, with some urging gradually reducing the size of world population.

Despite those calls and warnings of life on the planet being under siege, the proponents of continued demographic growth, including many elected government officials, business leaders, investors and economic advisors, have by and large disregarded the widely available evidence on the consequences of population growth, especially on climate change and the environment. In both their policies and actions, they have dismissed the warnings and recommendations urging for world population stabilization and its gradual reduction.

Pro-growth proponents erroneously claim that the numerous cited consequences of population growth on the world’s climate, environment, biodiversity, natural resources and human wellbeing are greatly exaggerated and amount to simply fake news. Some have even called climate change a hoax and ignore warnings that the time for action is running out with the world entering uncharted territory and humanity making minimal progress in combating climate change.

Also, some proponents of population growth argue that the consequences of climate change, including higher average temperatures, severe droughts and hurricanes, excessive heat waves, floods, rising sea levels and high tides, melting Antarctic ice shelves, degraded environments, record wildfires, endangered wildlife, exploited natural resources and increased pollution, should be calmly and resolutely brushed aside.

Less than one hundred years ago, i.e., in 1927, world population reached 2,000,000,000. Less than fifty years later, i.e., in 1974, the planet’s human population doubled to 4,000,000,000. And nearly fifty years later in 2022, world population has doubled again to 8,000,000,000 (Figure 1).

Despite the calls for the stabilization of human populations, any slowdown in the growth of population is typically viewed with concern, alarm, panic and fear. Economic growth, advocates claim, requires sustained population growth. In brief, they see a growing population vital to the production of more goods and services leading to higher economic growth.

Besides being viewed as fundamental for economic growth, pro-growth advocates consider population growth essential for profits, taxes, labor force, politics, cultural leadership and power.

Any slowdown in a country’s demographic growth, such as has been experienced by some countries during the past decade and expected for even more countries in the coming decades, is met by political, business and economic leaders ringing alarm bells and warning of economic calamities and national decline.

Calls for limited immigration in order to achieve population stabilization are also strongly resisted, particularly by businesses and special interest groups. Reducing immigration levels, they often claim, is incompatible with the needs for labor, the promotion of innovation and sustained economic growth.

Some have even claimed that population decline due to low birth rates is a far bigger risk to civilization than climate change. In addition, as others have stressed, worker shortages coupled with population ageing are having social and economic repercussions, especially with regard to the financial solvency of national retirement pension programs.

The pro-growth advocates warn of a pending population crisis due to low fertility rates, many of which are below the replacement level. Their solution to the low fertility levels is to encourage the public, in particular women, to have more babies.

Since 1976, the proportion of countries with government policies to raise fertility levels has tripled from 9 to 28 percent. Europe has the highest proportion of countries seeking to raise fertility rates at 66 percent, followed by Asia at 38 percent.

Many governments have introduced various pro-natalist policy measures to raise fertility levels. Those measures include tax incentives, family allowances, baby bonuses, cash incentives, government loans, maternal and paternal leave, publicly subsidized child care, flexible work schedules, parental leave and campaigns aimed at changing public attitudes.

Of the 55 countries with policies to raise fertility, nearly three-quarters of them have low fertility and one-third have a total fertility rate lower than 1.5 births per woman. The populations of those 55 countries range in size from more than 1.4 billion to less than 10 million. The diverse group of countries seeking to raise their fertility levels includes Armenia, Chile, China, Cuba, France, Hungary, Iran, Israel, Italy, Japan, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, Turkey and Ukraine (Figure 2).

In addition to policies aimed at raising fertility levels, nearly 40 percent of countries have relied on immigration to increase their rates of population growth. Without immigration, the population of some of those countries, such as Australia, Canada and the United States, would also decline in size due to below replacement fertility levels.

Many of those calling for ever-increasing populations are simply promoting Ponzi demography, a pyramid scheme that makes sustainability impossible. In general, economists don’t talk about the scheme and governments won’t face it. Also, the underlying strategy of the Ponzi demography scheme is to privatize the profits and socialize the economic, social and environmental costs incurred from ever-increasing populations.

Many provinces, cities and local communities also seek to have growing populations and lament slowdowns and declines in demographic growth. By and large, population stabilization is viewed as “population stagnation”, which they maintain not only suppresses economic growth for businesses but also reduces job opportunities for workers. At the same, however, the claim is made that population slowdowns are contributing to worker shortages.

In contrast to the dire warnings of population stagnation or collapse, others believe that lower fertility and smaller populations should be celebrated rather than feared. In addition to positive consequences for climate change and the environment, lower birth rates are frequently linked to increased education of women, greater gender equality, improved health levels and higher living standards.

Despite the calls for population stabilization, the world’s addiction to population growth is likely to persist for some time. World population is expected to continue growing throughout the 21st century, likely reaching 10,000,000,000 by 2058.

Moreover, more than half of the global population growth between today and midcentury is expected to occur in Africa. The populations of many sub-Saharan African countries are likely doubling in size over the coming several decades.

In sum, the repeated warnings by scientists, commissions and concerned others about the serious consequences of human population increase for climate change, the environment, pollution and sustainability appear insufficient to modify the addiction to demographic growth any time soon. As a result, possible future policies and programs aimed at addressing those consequences are likely to be too little and too late to mitigate the profound effects of population growth on the planet and humanity.

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division and author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

A World, Mostly Dominated by Men, in Turmoil — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Azza Karam (new york)
  • Inter Press Service

Despite the peace agreement allowing access to Tigray, the humanitarian crisis following the conflict in Ethiopia has not abated, nor has the civil conflict in the Sudan. As fighting raged on in Somalia, the country faced its worst drought in forty years, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths.

The UN warned in June, that 400,000 of the 6.6 million Somalis in need of aid are facing famine-like conditions, and 1.8 million children are at risk of acute malnutrition in 2023. To add to the disaster, the World Food Programme has been forced to drastically cut its services in the country, due to lack of funding.

While there are more conflicts brewing in Africa, we have to take note of the fact that Asia also has its painful shares thereof, with ongoing Turkish government attacks against Kurdish groups as we write this. While talks between Iran and Saudi Arabia in April 2023 (mediated by China), raised hopes of a political settlement to end the conflict in Yemen, hostility between the two warring sides remains.

Further East, the civil conflict in Myanmar is resulting in more civil strife and untold misery also for minority communities. In Iran, a uniquely women-led uprising, continues to be brutally repressed, even as the country remains heavily vested in regional conflicts.

Another continent, Latin America, is host to serious political and economic instability – as in Venezuela – sometimes compounded by violence – as in Haiti – with significant humanitarian consequences. The continent also has its fair share of rising criminal gang violence, suspected to be closely aligned with certain political, arms and drugs’ interests, which are on the rise in several countries.

On October 7, 2023 the world witnessed atrocities committed by a religiously inspired (although by no means faith-justified) group, Hamas (self-designated as the Islamic resistance movement), on Israeli land, with ongoing mourning for the deaths, the trauma, and the fate of hundreds of hostages taken.

All of which appears to be used by some (largely western) governments to justify retaliatory actions which are resulting in millions of Palestinians (in Gaza) now living even without water, thousands already killed, many of whom are women and children, and over a million of them are being pushed, by a state actor, to become forcibly displaced.

In relatively (much) more peaceful countries, the rise of those advocating right-wing xenophobic actions and hate – some of whom are elected, by millions, to serve positions of senior most executive authority – is not unusual.

So, our world is not in a good place right now.

In each of these conflicts most of the key decision makers, are – perhaps coincidentally – male leaders. In all of these contexts, the ones paying the highest price in terms of loss of life, limb, deteriorating mental health, traumas, and denial of basic dignity – let alone access to basic needs – are women, children and those living with disabilities (which includes all genders, social classes, and age groups).

Yet in very few of any of those contexts, do we hear from the women leaders who are serving humanitarian needs, struggling to keep communities surviving, still speaking with one another and helping one another across the painful chasms and divides, and speaking out against the calls, and the murderous rationales, of war.

While there is data which implicates some women leaders in conflicts and violence – from suicide bombings to mainstream army and navy leaders and officers, members of right-wing extremist groups, non-state actors and gangs – these are not the norm. In fact, there is no comparative scope. As long as the majority of world’s senior-most political and military leaders are male, one cannot compare them to the legacies of the far fewer, and much more recent, women, in similar positions of power.

Women’s organisations tend to be among the most vocal and numerous, in their rejection of any and all forms of war and violence. The women who uphold this simple, and profoundly life changing and life affirming stances, of not choosing war, are often seasoned veterans of serving their communities and their nations. Many do not only speak from a place of aspiration, but from where they are rooted in taking collective actions for the common good.

Many women human rights defenders, and veterans of peacebuilding efforts in their communities and nations, tend to put into effect, the most pragmatic rationale of all: that my safety and welfare depends on yours. That you are part of me as I am of you. That in your annihilation, is mine own. That our collective resilience, is necessary, for this very precious planet, on which we are but (seriously disrespectful) guests, graciously hosted.

Yet these very same women, and their organisations, all of which are legacy builders, have to struggle to have their voices heard in the existing diversity and cacophony of media channels. Their absence from the seats of global decision making – because they are busy serving communities who have long lost their connection to today’s multilateral elitist spaces – affords them little to no opportunity to be part of the voices mainstream media prioritises. Indeed, media sometimes makes, select leaders, who appear to speak to the angry masses – or make the masses angry – but rarely showcases the work of the women building peace.

“We would not choose war” is not a temporary motto of convenience. It is a state of mind, and a state of being, which is struggled for, often at high personal, and professional cost. Its minimal threshold is the art of compromise. Its maximal achievement is peaceful coexistence. Both of which are sorely needed. It is also what most women’s organisations, and women-led efforts in all corners of the world, would say, and mean.

Given the state of our world, we need to make sure the track record of women’s peaceful leadership is actively and systematically supported, specifically when and where such efforts revolve around partnerships, and build on grassroots multilateral engagements. Such women-led peace initiatives should be a strategic developmental priority, within nations and between them. At the same time, this support should diligently avoid the all too frequent trap of creating new, parallel , duplicative, and replicative efforts, and/or focusing on supporting the already privileged elites.

We (should) have learned after decades of international development, that effective partnerships – advocated for in the 17th Sustainable Development Goal – are not optional. Partnerships in conceptualising, addressing, planning, delivery, and all forms of service, are a sine qua non, of social inclusion, social cohesion and peaceful coexistence. Not because they are easy to effect.

Perhaps precisely because they are challenging. But the challenge of partnerships around social cohesion are far more tolerable than the destructions of war. Away from the spaces of media, pomp and ceremony, media frenzy around temporal events, and elitist noise, women-led grassroots and international efforts are already providing alternatives to the current madness.

Dr Azza Karam, Professor of Religion and Development at the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, and President and CEO of the Women’s Learning Partnership, based in Washington, and working with women’s human rights organisations in the southern hemisphere. She has decades of experience serving women-led multi stakeholder coalitions for democracy, peace and security.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Human Action Pushing the World Closer to Environmental Tipping Points, UN University Warns — Global Issues

COP 15 in Paris. A reminder of global warming and glacier melting. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS
  • by Alison Kentish (saint lucia)
  • Inter Press Service

The University released its 2023 Interconnected Disaster Risks Report on October 25. It states that climate change and human behavior are among the drivers of these tipping points.

“Human actions are behind this rapid and fundamental change to the planet. We are introducing new risks and amplifying existing ones by indiscriminately extracting our water resources, damaging nature and biodiversity, polluting both Earth and space and destroying our tools and options to deal with disaster risk,” it stated. 

In terms of accelerated extinction, it states that the current species extinction rate dire – at as much as hundreds of times higher than usual due to human action.

It says the life-saving resource groundwater, which is stored in reserves known as “aquifers,” is a source of water for over 2 billion people and is used overwhelmingly (around 70%) in the agriculture sector. It adds, however, that 21 of the world’s 37 major aquifers are being used “faster than they can be replenished.”

In terms of space debris, while satellites make life easier for humanity, including providing vital information for early warning systems, only about one-quarter of the objects identified in orbit are working satellites. This means that satellites critical for weather monitoring and information are at risk of colliding with discarded metal, broken satellites, and other debris.

According to the report, climate change and increasing extreme weather events have resulted in skyrocketing insurance prices in some parts of the world. The report warns that rising coverage costs could mean an uninsurable future for many.

Another tipping point, unbearable heat, is a cause for major concern. The report states that, “currently, around 30 percent of the global population is exposed to deadly climate conditions for at least 20 days per year, and this number could rise to over 70 percent by 2100.”

And a warming earth is resulting in glaciers melting at twice the speed of the last two decades.

Report authors say the six risk areas of concern are interconnected, which means that going beyond the brink of any tipping point would heighten the risk and severity of others.

“If we look at the case of space debris, it has to do with the practice of putting satellites into our orbit without regard for handling the debris that comes as a result. At present we are tracking around 34,000 objects in our orbit and only a quarter of these are active satellites. We’re planning thousands more launches in the coming years. We may reach a point where it gets so crowded in our orbit that one collision can create enough debris to set off a chain reaction of collisions that could destroy our space infrastructure entirely,” said Dr. Jack O’Connor, Senior Scientist at UNU-EHS and Lead Author of the Interconnected Disaster Risks report.

“We use satellites every day to monitor our world. For example, we observe weather patterns that can give us data to generate early warnings. We sometimes take these warnings for granted, but can you imagine if we pass this space debris tipping point and we are no longer able to observe weather patterns? Now a storm is coming to a populated area, and we can’t see it coming,” he said.

While the report is sobering, its authors are quick to point out that there is hope. Lead Author Dr Zita Sebesvari suggests using the tipping points’ interconnectivity as an advantage for finding solutions.

“These tipping points share certain root causes and drivers. Climate change is cutting across at least four out of the six points. Therefore, decisive climate action and cutting our emissions can help to slow down or even prevent; accelerating extinction, unbearable heat, uninsurable future, and mounting glacier melting,” she said.

The report was published just one month before the United Nations Climate Conference (COP28). Dr O’Connor says the report can be instructive for policymakers.

“I think the report is connected to the COP process. Reducing our emissions is key, and we will need to integrate this with other contributing factors such as global biodiversity loss.”

The authors say passing these tipping points is not inevitable. They say the points are meant to spur action, to adequately plan for future risks, and to tackle the root causes of these serious issues.

IPS UN Bureau Report


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version