UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Twenty-five years after a landmark U.N. resolution demanded equal participation for women in all efforts to promote peace, the United Nations chief said Tuesday that far too often women remain absent.
At the same time, sexual violence against women and girls is on the rise and 676 million women live within 50 kilometers (30 miles) of deadly conflicts, which the head of the U.N. women’s agency says is the highest number since the 1990s.
“Around the globe, we see troubling trends in military spending, more armed conflicts, and more shocking brutality against women and girls,” Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told a U.N. Security Council meeting marking the anniversary.
Since the resolution’s adoption on Oct. 31, 2000, there has been some progress, he said. The number of women in uniform as U.N. peacekeepers has doubled, women have led local mediation, advanced justice for survivors of gender-based violence, and women’s organizations have been instrumental in promoting recovery from conflicts and reconciliation.
“But gains are fragile and – very worryingly – going in reverse,” Guterres said.
In no-nonsense language, Guterres said too often nations gather in rooms like the Security Council chamber “full of conviction and commitment,” but fall far short of the resolution’s demand for equal participation of women in peace negotiations — and protection of women and girls from rape and sexual abuse in conflicts.
Despite the horrors of war, UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous also pointed to some progress. She said women have reduced community violence in the disputed Abyei region between Sudan and South Sudan and in the Central African Republic.
In Haiti, women have achieved near parity in the new provisional electoral council, and women’s representation in Chad’s National Assembly has doubled, she said. Syria’s interim constitution guarantees rights and protections for women, and in war-torn Ukraine women have succeeded in getting national relief efforts helping women codified into law.
But Bahous also said it’s lamentable that the world today is witnessing “renewed pushback against gender equality and multilateralism.” She said the situation is being exacerbated by what she called short-sighted funding cuts.
These cuts are undermining education opportunities for Afghan girls, curtailing life-saving medical care for tens of thousands of sexual violence survivors in Sudan, Haiti and beyond, and limiting access to food for malnourished women and children in Gaza, Mali, Somalia and elsewhere, Bahous said.
She stressed that change is possible.
“It is understandable that some might conclude that the rise and normalization of misogyny currently poisoning our politics and fueling conflict is unstoppable,” Bahous said. “It is not. Those who oppose equality do not own the future, we do.”
Guterres urged the U.N.’s 193 member nations to increase their commitment to women caught in conflict with new funding and by ensuring their participation in peace negotiations, accountability for sexual violence and their protection and economic security.
The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) is the largest aid agency in the Gaza Strip where it provides emergency and other assistance to vulnerable Palestinians. Credit: UNRWA
Opinion by James E. Jennings (atlanta, usa)
Inter Press Service
ATLANTA, USA, Oct 31 (IPS) – The most solemn and terrifying words ever uttered are those inscribed over the gateway to Hell in Dante’s Inferno: “Abandon all hope, ye who enter here!” Hope is essential for human survival both as individuals and as nations.
Surveying the history of the seemingly endless series of wars and counter-wars between Israel and its foes in Gaza and Lebanon from 1948 until now—a period of 76 years—it seems that all hope for peace has been lost. Palestinians, Lebanese, the people of Gaza—and yes, the Israelis too—are all residents of this inferno, the endless Hell of war.
If you pay close attention to the weak, mealy-mouthed utterances of US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken—the emissary of the equally weak President Joe Biden—you’ll understand that the Middle East region and therefore the world is rapidly approaching the Ninth Circle of Hell.
Both of them utter meaningless phrases that reveal their lack of understanding at best, or at worst their vicious, inhumane complicity.
Now, the latest, and possibly most obscene, third act in this modern Greek tragedy was played out October 28 in Israel’s Knesset. Nearly 100 of the 120 members of that wise and honorable body voted to cut the lifeline for millions of Palestinians who depend on the UN’s Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for health care and education.
Credit: UNRWA
Besides irrationally imposing new cruelties—rubbing salt in the wounds of an entire population of innocent people—the Knesset’s decision constitutes cultural genocide, an essential factor underlying the supreme international crime of Genocide as defined by the United Nations.
UNRWA’s registry constitutes the primary link millions of 1948 War refugees and their descendants have to their lost properties. Destroying that link erases an entire people from history. It obliterates Israel’s “Crime of the Century,” which is the theft of the nation of Palestine.
Is this the hand of friendship, the “Light to the Nations” Israel’s founder Ben Gurion promised in 1948? Review the numbers: there are still 1.2 million registered Palestinian refugees dependent on food aid in 68 camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the West Bank, and Gaza. UNRWA services in Gaza alone include 140 health care centers and 700 schools educating 300,000 students.
Is there hope in this darkened scenario? Actually, there is. Sun Tzu’s long-ago Chinese classic, The Art of War, records the following sardonic, understated observation: “There is no example of a long war benefitting anybody.”
Which means that at some point people will have to come to their senses, or else generations will pass away before their descendants, with new issues to deal with, will wonder what the fuss was all about.
But that’s in the future—perhaps the distant future. What about now? Is there any hope? Surprisingly, yes, there is.
In an interview on al-Jazeera television on October 25, 2024, after more than a year of the most devastating and genocidal war on Palestine’s civilian population, leading Palestinian politician and spokesman Mustafa Barghouti, expressed optimism.
He said that the single positive development during the longest and most destructive war against Palestine in its history is the continuing determination of the Palestinian people to remain on their land and to resist efforts to expunge their national identity, as is their right.
In Arabic it is called Sumud, “steadfastness,” loosely translated as “Staying power.” Hope survives. Where there’s life, there’s hope.
James E. Jennings is President of Conscience International, an international aid organization that has responded to wars in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Palestine, and Gaza since 1991.
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 16 (IPS) – The next round of the polio vaccination campaign in Gaza, a major undertaking for health partners, began on October 14, as continuous attacks and strains whittle down the healthcare and humanitarian systems.
This Monday, October 14 marked the start of the second round of the polio vaccination campaign in Gaza. This follows the relatively successful first round of vaccinations, which ran from September 1-12 and ended up immunizing over 559,161 children aged ten years or younger. The second round of vaccinations will provide an estimated 591,700 children with a crucial second dose of the nOPV2 vaccine.
The United Nations (UN) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have urged Israeli authorities for a humanitarian pause, allowing for immunization efforts to run smoothly. However, continued attacks in the Gaza Strip have threatened to impede relief efforts and have put the lives of aid workers in danger.
“We cannot vaccinate children under a sky full of bombs. All parties to the conflict must respect the agreed-upon humanitarian pauses to allow the roll-out of this campaign”, said the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
On Monday, the UN reported airstrikes on a school-turned-shelter in Nuseirat and a hospital courtyard in Deir Al-Balah, the latter of which set multiple tents on fire. Images and video footage shared by UNRWA showed aid personnel searching through rubble for survivors, as well as retrieving charred bodies from tents. Approximately 20 people were killed in this attack and vaccination efforts at the school were halted.
“We miraculously survived, the fire caught everywhere, even the tent where we were sleeping burnt. This is just one of many incidents that we’ve had overnight in the Gaza Strip. These are people that are just sheltering. They’re just trying to find somewhere to sleep trying to find some safety in the Gaza strip where there absolutely is none”, said Louise Wateridge, a spokesperson for UNRWA.
Repeated evacuation orders issued by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have also put a strain on vaccination efforts. Muhannad Hadi, the UN’s top aid official in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, confirmed that over 50,000 people have been displaced from the Jabaliya camp due to evacuation orders on October 7, 9, and 12.
According to the World Food Programme (WFP), the most difficult areas to vaccinate are the northern regions of Gaza, where food deliveries have been halted since October 1. Additionally, further blockages have occurred in southern Gaza, in which all checkpoints leading north have halted the delivery of essential resources.
Despite these numerous access challenges, the second round of polio vaccinations is off to a promising start. In a statement by UNRWA, it was confirmed that roughly 93,000 children under ten years old have been immunized so far. Approximately 43 percent of children who have been reached received the second dose of nOPV2, along with a vitamin A dose in order to maximize overall immunity. Much like the first round of this campaign, the second round will consist of three phases, targeting the northern, southern, and central regions of Gaza. Each phase is set to consist of three days and an additional catch-up day.
Approximately 1,000 aid workers have been mobilized to assist in vaccination efforts and educational services. Additionally, assessments are being conducted by the UN to determine the scale of needs following Monday’s attacks on the Al-Aqsa hospital in Deir Al-Balah. Tents, bedding, clothing, children’s supplies, hygiene kits, and food are urgently needed.
WFP distributed the last of their food supplies in the north, where the hunger crisis has escalated significantly in the past two weeks. Canned food, high energy biscuits, and nutritional supplements have been distributed to displacement camps, bakeries, medical facilities, and kitchens. It is unknown how long these resources will last as restrictions on aid continue to tighten in northern Gaza.
September 26th marks the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. Credit: International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN)Darren Ornitz
Opinion by Tariq Rauf (vienna, austria)
Inter Press Service
VIENNA, Austria, Oct 08 (IPS) – In recent years, the rhetoric, strategy and practice of nuclear deterrence has grown riskier, more urgent, more dangerous, less stable, and increasingly in the hands of deficient leaders and policymakers.
Playing Nuclear Games
The ten States that have manufactured and test detonated nuclear weapons since 1945, each have received and/or provided assistance to other States – no existing nuclear weapon development and acquisition programme is truly indigenous or independent.
Furthermore, all ten nuclear-armed States have in place policies to use their nuclear weapons in circumstances assessed by them as threatening their vital security interests, sovereignty and territorial integrity; and in this context, all of them at one time or another have made implicit or explicit threats to use nuclear weapons.
On 26th September this year, at the commencement of the United Nations General Assembly’s annual high-level commemoration of the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, Secretary-General António Guterres warned that, “We are heading in the wrong direction entirely. Not since the worst days of the cold war has the spectre of nuclear weapons cast such a dark shadow”. He noted that nuclear-armed States “must stop gambling with humanity’s future” and must honour their commitments and obligations for nuclear disarmament.
The President of the General Assembly, Philémon Yang (Cameroon), also warned that, “This is a time when nuclear blackmail has emerged, and some are recklessly threatening to unleash a nuclear catastrophe. This simply cannot continue. We must step back from the nuclear precipice, and we must act now”.
In this regard, let’s take a brief detour back into the early history of the nuclear age. Following the Trinity nuclear test detonation of 16th July 1945, nuclear scientist Leó Szilárd observed that, “Almost without exception, all the creative physicists had misgivings about the use of the bomb” and further that “Truman did not understand at all what was involved regarding nuclear weapons”.
Last year, the movie Oppenheimer had been the rage based on a noteworthy biography of Robert Oppenheimer entitled American Prometheus written by historians Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin. Though the movie spared its viewers the horrors of the atomic bombing of Japan, it did reflect the warnings of the early nuclear weapon scientists about the long-term or permanent dangers of a nuclear arms race and associated risks of further nuclear weapons use.
On the other hand, the film overlooked other historical works including A World Destroyed: Hiroshima and its Legacies also by Martin Sherwin, that disputes and negates the US government’s narrative about the necessity of using nuclear weapons twice over civilian targets in Japan and suggests that the decisions were driven mainly by geostrategic and prestige considerations – criteria still in operation today to justify continuing retention of nuclear weapons.
Leó Szilárd’s observation that I have cited above that President Truman did not understand at all what was involved regarding nuclear weapons, unfortunately still rings true nearly 80 years on when it comes to the leaders of today’s nuclear-weapon possessor States as well as of most of their diplomats and those of 30-plus countries in military defence and security arrangements underpinned by nuclear weapons.
Now, why do I say this? In addition to nuclear doctrines based on nuclear weapons use, the UN nuclear disarmament system is in disarray. The Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, the single multilateral arms control negotiating forum, has been stymied since 1996, unable to agree on a sustained programme of work on any of its “decalogue” of agenda items.
The Disarmament Commission as the specialized, deliberative subsidiary body of the General Assembly that allows for in-depth deliberations on specific disarmament issues, inter alia “Recommendations for achieving the objective of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons”, also has been deadlocked.
The First Committee of the General Assembly deals with disarmament, global challenges and threats to peace that affect the international community and seeks out solutions to the challenges in the international security regime. Every year it adopts more than 60 resolutions on various aspects of disarmament, but with no practical results in recent years.
The 2015 and 2022 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conferences failed to agree on any measures to reduce the risks of nuclear weapons and their elimination. As did the 2023 and 2024 preparatory sessions for the 2026 NPT review conference.
The UN Summit of the Future, held on 22-23 September this year, agreed on a Pact for the Future that regrettably was a big disappointment as it lacked any concrete actions, even though it paid lip service to the call that the “The time for the total elimination of nuclear weapons is now”. The document failed to reaffirm commitments to existing global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation treaties, or to call for new ones to be negotiated.
Notably the late UN Secretary General Kofi Annan had referred to this state of affairs as “mutually assured paralysis“, and that the “disarmament machinery is rusting”.
It is unfortunate that the above-referenced developments and the current nuclear rhetoric demonstrates that knowledge of nuclear history is waning thin and diplomats, academics and the mainstream media pundits are caught up with the emotions, pressures and even confusion of challenging technological advances in weapons, an ongoing territorial war in the heart of Europe, a genocidal war against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, along with tensions in Northeast Asia and South Asia.
In effect, those in control of nuclear weapons today, along with the echo chambers in allied States in defence arrangements underpinned by nuclear deterrence, are playing games tickling the tail of the Promethean nuclear fire dragon.
Tickling the Tail of the Promethean Nuclear Fire Dragon
All nuclear-armed States today have in place policies and doctrines to use their nuclear weapons. In order to constrain the further proliferation of nuclear-armed States, the five NPT recognized “nuclear-weapon States” each have advanced negative security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States parties to the NPT and to nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties, on the non-use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
China is the only nuclear-weapon State to assert that it would not use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State. The other four nuclear-weapon States – France, Russia, UK and US – each have attached conditions to their negative security assurances to the effect that such an assurance would not be honoured were it to be attacked by a non-nuclear-weapon State in collaboration or with the assistance of another nuclear-weapon State.
The nuclear weapons employment policy of the United States clearly posits that “using nuclear weapons could create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic stability”. For its part, Russian military doctrine envisions the threat of nuclear escalation or even first use of nuclear weapons to “de-escalate” a conflict on terms favourable to Russia.
China’s evolving nuclear doctrine envisions a “strong military dream” based on military-civil-fusion to achieve by 2049 full spectrum power projection. In South Asia, both India and Pakistan have nuclear doctrines positing use of nuclear weapons including pre-emptive nuclear strikes.
In the current heated and volatile atmosphere in central Europe in the context of the Ukraine war, it is reported that Russia is re-asserting the conditions it has traditionally laid down in its negative security assurances to States parties to the NPT and to nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZ), which essentially are similar to that of the US, to the effect that: Russia will not attack or threaten to attack a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the NPT or NWFZ treaty with nuclear weapons, unless that non-nuclear-weapon State attacks Russia in collaboration with another nuclear-weapon State.
Now, since we’re in a proxy war involving France, UK and US (all three are nuclear-weapon States) that are considering material assistance to Ukraine to attack military sites inside the territorial borders of Russia; it is not surprising that Russia has retaliated by warning Ukraine and its NATO backers that long range fires against Russia targeting its strategic military bases could trigger a nuclear response by Russia.
Strategic nuclear bases are those housing strategic nuclear delivery systems (long- and medium-range bombers, road and rail mobile ballistic missiles), command and control centres, early warning radars, naval bases for submarines, etc.
It is never a good idea for a non-nuclear-weapon State to threaten to target or to target strategic military sites in a nuclear-weapon State and it would be foolhardy to set such a precedent or to carry out military strikes that could provoke a nuclear response.
Were Ukraine to strike strategic military sites inside Russia proper, that would be the first time that a non-nuclear-weapon State would strike the continental homeland of a nuclear-armed State; though one might add that Iran’s recent missile strikes against nuclear-armed Israel fall into the same category.
Should the US/NATO allow long range fires against strategic military sites in Russia from Ukraine, that would further compound the already unacceptably high risk of a central strategic war involving four nuclear-weapon States and thus would be highly irresponsible and indefensible.
Departing NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg made comments in Washington to the effect that long range fires from Ukraine into Russian territory is the only one way to hit military targets behind the Russian lines, on Russian territory.
And that NATO should not be deterred by Russia’s “nuclear threats and rhetoric”; this in a way is questioning the credibility of Russian nuclear doctrine which is tantamount to “tickling the tail of the nuclear dragon” and could result in a Promethean nuclear fire of a central strategic war.
The new NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte also has claimed that “targeting Russian fighter jets and missiles before they can be used against Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure can help save lives”.
A just and equitable peace arrangement must be sought urgently under UN auspices to end the Ukraine war with the restoration of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territory; and all sides must strive to avoid any further escalatory moves that could trigger a central strategic war.
Seek Peace, Not War!
It is highly reprehensible that these days the voices of war are prevalent over the voices seeking peace. The UN disarmament machinery has failed as has the Summit of the Future to curb nuclear risks. The architecture of nuclear disarmament and arms control is steadily crumbing with our eyes wide shut!
Unless we can mend our ways, it might be too late to avert a Promethean nuclear fire that consumes us all. We urgently must rethink how we manage nuclear risks; security based on nuclear deterrence is inherently flawed and risky and cannot continue on a long term basis.
A new international security system must be envisaged on the basic design principle that the effects of system failure cannot result to fundamentally disrupt or end civilization. We urgently need a new international security paradigm that can prevent an existential global nuclear catastrophe and keep the Promethean nuclear fire dragon firmly bottled up.
The views expressed in this article are personal comments by Tariq Rauf, former Head of Verification and Security Policy at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The panel for the session on “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World without Nuclear Weapons.” Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS
by AD McKenzie (paris)
Inter Press Service
PARIS, Sep 27 (IPS) – In any discussion of world peace and the future of humanity, the issue of nuclear arms must be addressed, and now.
That was the message from a range of delegates at the “Imaginer la Paix / Imagine Peace” conference, held in Paris September 22 to 24, and organized by the Sant’Egidio Community, a Christian organization founded in Rome in 1968 and now based in 70 countries.
Describing its tenets as “Prayer, service to the Poor and work for Peace,” the community has hosted 38 international, multi-faith peace meetings, bringing together activists from around the world. This is the first time the conference has been held in Paris, with hundreds traveling to France, itself a nuclear-weapon state.
Occurring against the backdrop of brutal, on-going conflicts in different regions and a new race by some countries to “upgrade” their arsenal, the gathering had a sense of urgency, with growing fears that nuclear weapons might be used by warlords. Participants highlighted current and past atrocities and called upon world leaders to learn from the past.
“After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we have been blessed with many who have said ‘no’—’no’ a million times, creating movements and treaties, (and) awareness… that the only reasonable insight to learn from the conception and use of nuclear weapons is to say ‘no’,” said Andrea Bartoli, president of the Sant’Egidio Foundation for Peace and Dialogue, based in New York.
Participating in a conference forum Monday titled “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World Without Nuclear Weapons,” Bartoli and other speakers drew stark pictures of what living in a world with nuclear weapons entails, and they highlighted developments since World War II.
“After the two bombs were used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, humans built more than 70,000 nuclear weapons and performed more than 2,000 tests. Still today we have more than 12,500, each of them with power greatly superior to the two used in August 1945,” Bartoli said.
Despite awareness of the catastrophic potential of these weapons and despite a UN treaty prohibiting their use, some governments argue that possessing nuclear arms is a deterrent—an argument that is deceptive, according to the forum speakers.
Anna Ikeda, program coordinator for disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International. Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS
Jean-Marie Collin, director of ICAN (the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a movement launched in the early 2000s in Australia and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017), said that leaders who cite deterrence “accept the possibility of violating” international human rights.
“Nuclear weapons are designed to destroy cities and kill and maim entire populations, which means that all presidents and heads of government who implement a defense policy based on nuclear deterrence and who are therefore responsible for giving this order, are aware of this,” Collin told the forum.
ICAN campaigned for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons that was adopted at the United Nations in 2017, entering into force in 2021. The adoption came nearly five decades after the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which entered into force in 1970.
The terms of the NPT consider five countries to be nuclear weapons states: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China. Four other countries also possess nuclear weapons: India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel.
According to a 2024 ICAN report, these nine states jointly spent €85 billion (USD 94,6 billion) on their atomic weapon arsenals last year, an expenditure ICAN has called “obscene” and “unacceptable.” France, whose president Emmanuel Macron spoke about peace in broad, general terms at the opening of the conference, spent around €5,3 billion (about USD 5,9 billion) in 2023 on its nuclear weapons, said the report.
The policy of “deterrence” and “reciprocity,” which essentially means “we’ll get rid of our weapons if you get rid of yours,” has been slammed by ICAN and fellow disarmament activists.
“With the constant flow of information, we often tend to lose sight of the reality of figures,” Collin said at the peace conference. “I hope this one will hold your attention: it is estimated that more than 38,000 children were killed in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Children!”
All those killed—an estimated 210,000 people by the end of 1945—died in horrific ways, as survivors and others have testified. Delegates said that this knowledge should be the real “deterrent.”
At the forum, Anna Ikeda, program coordinator for disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International, a global Buddhist movement, described testimony from a Hiroshima a-bomb survivor, Reiko Yamada, as one she would never forget.
“She (Yamada) stated, ‘A good friend of mine in the neighbourhood was waiting for her mother to return home with her four brothers and sisters. Later, she told me that on the second day after the bombing, a moving black lump crawled into the house. They first thought it was a black dog, but they soon realized it was their mother; she collapsed and died when she finally got to her children. They cremated her body in the yard,” Ikeda told the audience with emotion.
“Who deserves to die such a death? Nobody!” she continued. “Yet our world continues to spend billions of dollars to upkeep our nuclear arsenals, and our leaders at times imply readiness to use them. It is utterly unacceptable.”
Ikeda said that survivors, known as the “hibakusha” in Japan, have a fundamental answer to why nuclear weapons must be abolished—it is that “no one else should ever suffer what we did.”
Note: This article is brought to you by IPS Noram in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.
A student participates in an art therapy session at an ECW-supported school in Kyiv, Ukraine. In partnership with UNICEF Ukraine and Caritas Ukraine, the school offers vital mental health and psychosocial support, alongside essential learning materials, helping children recover from trauma and promoting social cohesion between host communities and displaced children and families. Credit: ECW
by Joyce Chimbi (kyiv kyiv & nairobi)
Inter Press Service
KYIV Kyiv & NAIROBI, Sep 13 (IPS) – In a major escalation of a conflict that started in 2014 and which is the largest in Europe since World War II, Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. Since then, thousands of Ukrainian civilians—many of them women and children—have lost their lives. Countless others have been displaced from their homes, clinging to what remains of the education system as their communities disintegrate.
On a high-level UN mission to Ukraine this week, Education Cannot Wait (ECW)—the global fund for education in emergencies and protracted crises within the United Nations—met with children affected by the war and local partners. The mission took stock of the impact of the conflict on approximately 4 million children across Ukraine whose schooling has been severely disrupted.
“We visited a school in Kyiv, where classes continue despite the constant threat of attack. Alarms frequently signal imminent danger. The school has a bomb shelter for 500 children, but there are over 1,000 students enrolled. To ensure everyone has access to the shelter when needed, primary school children attend in the morning, and secondary school children attend in the afternoon,” Yasmine Sherif, ECW’s Executive Director, told IPS.
“We also spoke with psychologists and parents, including single mothers displaced from the east, north, and south of the country. They’ve come to Kyiv, leaving behind the fathers and grandparents of their children. We were able to see how a strong focus on mental health and social services is helping children and families cope with these challenges, with excellent collaboration between teachers, psychologists, parents, and the broader community. The Ministry of Education is working tirelessly to ensure safe learning environments for all children,” Sherif added.
Yasmine Sherif, Education Cannot Wait Executive Director and children participate in an art therapy session at an ECW-supported school in Kyiv, Ukraine. In partnership with UNICEF Ukraine and Caritas Ukraine, the school offers vital mental health and psychosocial support, alongside essential learning materials, helping children recover from trauma and promoting social cohesion between host communities and displaced children and families. Credit: ECW
According to Sherif, children in Ukraine continue their education in core subjects like reading and mathematics, alongside arts education, even under these difficult circumstances. ECW was among the first to invest in education in Ukraine, starting in 2017, with an initial emergency response supporting children along the front lines in eastern Ukraine.
Since then, ECW has provided USD 27 million in funding to support quality, holistic education programmes in Ukraine since 2017. As conflict continues to escalate and education needs multiply, ECW has received much-needed donations from additional donors, including Germany and Japan, to support education in Ukraine.
At last year’s Education Cannot Wait High-Level Financing Conference, the Global Business Coalition for Education pledged to mobilize USD 50 million from the business community to support ECW’s four-year strategic plan. In partnership with GBCE, TheirWorld, HP and Microsoft, USD 39 million in partnership and device donation for ECW has already been mobilized, and over 70,000 laptops have been shared with schools, teachers and other people in need, both inside Ukraine and in neighboring countries.
This is a huge investment in expanding educational opportunities for children who are unable to access in-person learning. Delivered by a consortium of partners including Finn Church Aid, the Kyiv School of Economics, Save the Children and UNICEF—in coordination with Ukraine’s Ministry of Education and Science—ECW’s education programmes have thus far reached more than 360,000 children, about 65 percent of whom are girls.
Yasmine Sherif, Education Cannot Wait (ECW) Executive Director, mission delegation, school staff, children and their parents during a visit to an ECW-supported school in Kyiv, Ukraine. Credit: ECW
Against this backdrop, Munir Mammadzade, UNICEF Representative to Ukraine, emphasized that the “support from Education Cannot Wait is critical for children, their parents and teachers who are doing everything they can to keep classrooms open and to continue in-person learning despite the impact of the war across the country.”
However, more funding is urgently needed. Over 1,300 educational facilities have been damaged or destroyed, and nearly 600,000 children remain unable to access in-person learning since the start of the school year in early September, due to ongoing deadly and destructive fighting, attacks and displacement.
“This atrocious war must stop now! For as long as the children, adolescents and teachers in Ukraine suffer this unfathomable horror, schools must be protected from attacks. As a global community, we must rise to the challenge before us to ensure that every girl and every boy in Ukraine impacted by this brutal war and the refugees have access to the safety, hope and opportunity that only a quality education can provide,” Sherif said.
ECW and its strategic partners are calling for USD 600 million in additional funding from private and public donors to deliver on the global targets outlined in the Fund’s 2023-2026 Strategic Plan. This funding would provide 20 million children in crisis-impacted countries around the globe with safe, inclusive, and quality education, and the hope for a better tomorrow.
A young learner at an ECW-supported school in Kyiv, Ukraine, welcomes Education Cannot Wait’s high-level mission delegation. Credit: ECW
According to Sherif, ECW’s investment in education is an investment in recovery, peace, security, and justice for Ukraine and beyond. It is an investment in the vast potential of future generations. Earlier this year, ECW announced an USD 18 million allocation to roll out a Multi-Year Resilience Programme in Ukraine. The investment aims to raise an additional USD 17 million to reach over 150,000 children across 10 of the country’s most affected areas.
The programme aims to improve learning outcomes in safer, more accessible environments while expanding digital learning options as an alternative. There is also a strong emphasis on mental health, psychosocial support, and targeted assistance for girls and children with disabilities.
The UN high-level mission concluded at the Fourth Summit of First Ladies and Gentlemen, where ECW called on world leaders to commit to protecting education from attack and to scale up funding to provide life-saving access to safe education, both in-person and through remote learning opportunities, when necessary, as well as catch-up classes for children who have fallen behind.
Central Downtown Astana with Bayterek tower. Credit: Wikimedia Commons
Opinion by Katsuhiro Asagiri (tokyo/astana)
Inter Press Service
TOKYO/ASTANA, Aug 19 (IPS) – In a world increasingly shadowed by the threat of nuclear conflict, Kazakhstan is stepping up its efforts in the global disarmament movement. On August 27-28, 2024, in collaboration with the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), Kazakhstan will host a critical workshop in Astana. This gathering, the first of its kind in five years, is set to reinvigorate the five existing Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones (NWFZs) and enhance cooperation and consultation among them.
This initiative aligns with UN Secretary-General António Guterres’s Agenda for Disarmament, particularly Action 5, which emphasizes the strengthening of NWFZs through enhanced collaboration between zones, urging nuclear-armed states to respect relevant treaties, and supporting the establishment of new zones, such as in the Middle East. This effort reflects the global community’s ongoing push to reduce the nuclear threat and foster regional and global peace.
Kazakhstan’s Historical Commitment to Disarmament
Kazakhstan’s vision for a nuclear-free world is deeply rooted in its leadership in global disarmament efforts. This vision is not just aspirational; it is grounded in the country’s lived experience of the devastating impact of nuclear weapons. The Semipalatinsk Test Site in northeastern Kazakhstan, often referred to as “the Polygon,” was the site of 456 nuclear tests conducted by the Soviet Union between 1949 and 1989. These tests exposed over 1.5 million people to radiation, resulting in severe health consequences, including cancer and birth defects, as well as environmental degradation.
Kazakhstan’s dedication to disarmament is further highlighted by its initiative to establish August 29 as the International Day against Nuclear Tests, recognized by the United Nations. This date commemorates both the first Soviet nuclear test at Semipalatinsk in 1949 and the closure of the site in 1991, serving as a reminder of the horrors of nuclear testing and a call to action for the global community.
These zones prohibit the presence of nuclear weapons within their territories, reinforced by international verification and control systems. NWFZs play a crucial role in maintaining regional stability, reducing the risk of nuclear conflict, and promoting global disarmament.
Astana Workshop: A Critical Gathering for Disarmament
The upcoming workshop in Astana is a critical opportunity for states-parties to the five NWFZ treaties, alongside representatives from international organizations, to engage in vital discussions aimed at overcoming the challenges facing these zones. This gathering is particularly timely, given the escalating geopolitical tensions in regions where nuclear capabilities remain central to national security.
A key focus of the workshop will be on enhancing cooperation among the NWFZs, as outlined in the Secretary-General’s Agenda for Disarmament. This includes facilitating consultation between the zones and encouraging nuclear-armed states to adhere to the protocols of these treaties. The workshop builds on the 2019 seminar titled “Cooperation Among Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones and Mongolia,” co-organized by UNODA and Kazakhstan in Nur-Sultan(Astana), which produced key recommendations aimed at revitalizing cooperation among NWFZs.
Participants will discuss strategies to advance the objectives of NWFZs, with an emphasis on strengthening security benefits for member states and fostering more robust consultation mechanisms. The workshop will also address the challenges posed by the reluctance of certain nuclear-armed states, particularly the United States, to ratify protocols related to several NWFZ treaties. Despite being a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the U.S. has yet to ratify protocols to treaties covering the South Pacific (Treaty of Rarotonga), Africa (Treaty of Pelindaba), and Central Asia. This reluctance has impeded the full realization of the security benefits these zones could offer.
Kazakhstan’s Leadership in the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW)
Kazakhstan’s role in nuclear disarmament extends beyond NWFZs to include leadership in the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). In March 2025, Kazakhstan will host the 3rd Meeting of State Parties to the TPNW at the United Nations, further solidifying its position as a champion of nuclear disarmament.
Kazakhstan has been a vocal advocate of the TPNW and has actively pushed for the creation of an international fund to support victims of nuclear testing and remediate environments affected by nuclear activities, in line with Articles 6 and 7 of the treaty.
The Vienna Action Plan, developed during the First Meeting of States Parties to the TPNW（１MSP）, outlines actions for implementing these articles, including exploring the feasibility of an international trust fund and encouraging affected states parties to assess the impacts of nuclear weapons use and testing and to develop national plans for implementation.
At the Second Meeting of States Parties (2MSP), co-chaired by Kazakhstan and Kiribati, progress was made, but challenges remain. The informal working group on victim assistance, environmental remediation, and international cooperation presented a report, and its mandate was renewed, with the goal of submitting recommendations for the establishment of an international trust fund at the 3rd Meeting of States Parties (3MSP). Kazakhstan’s leadership in this area underscores its commitment to addressing the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons, drawing from its own experience with the devastating consequences of nuclear testing at Semipalatinsk.
Civil Society’s Crucial Role
As a part of the two day event, Soka Gakkai International (SGI) from Japan and the Center for International Security and Policy (CISP) will hold a side event in the evening of September 28 to screen the documentary “I Want to Live On: The Untold Stories of the Polygon,” highlighting the survivors of nuclear testing at Semipalatinsk. This documentary, produced by CISP with SGI’s support, was first shown at the UN during the second meeting of state parties to the TPNW in 2023. This side event is part of a broader initiative by SGI and Kazakhstan, which have co-organized several events focusing on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons at UN, Vienna, and Astana in recent years.
Also coinciding with the Astana workshop, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) will hold a conference convening civil society organizations and activists including Hibakusha from some countries. This confluence of governmental and civil society efforts in Astana marks a significant moment in the global disarmament movement. While diplomats and state representatives discuss policy and cooperation during the official workshop, the parallel activities organized by civil society will amplify the humanitarian message and emphasize the urgent need for a world free of nuclear weapons.
As global tensions rise, the Astana workshop represents a beacon of hope, a critical moment in the global journey toward disarmament. Through cooperation, dialogue, and a shared commitment to peace, the dream of a world free of nuclear weapons remains within reach. Kazakhstan, with the support of the international community, is at the forefront of this vital effort.
ROME, Aug 15 (IPS) – Corinne Fleischer, WFP’s regional director for the Middle East, North Africa and Eastern Europe, describes Gaza as “a terrible situation getting worse.” Over the past two weeks, 21 United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) food distribution points have been closed under evacuation orders.
“UNRWA says that 86% of the Strip is under an evacuation order,” she says on a video call from her office in Cairo. Fleischer visited the enclave in July.” 2 million people are crammed into 14% of the territory.”
Despite Immense Challenges, WFP Continues to Assist Gazans
With continuous evacuation orders forcing WFP to uproot food distribution sites, precise targeting of the most vulnerable groups becomes challenging. We provide ready-to-eat food, hot meals and nutrition support to breastfeeding women and small children.
Mohammed was severely injured in the conflict but all efforts to evacuate him for medical treatment failed. His family fully depends on food from WFP to survive.
“We support partners in almost 80 kitchens, where they cook meals, pack and distribute them to people in camps,” Fleischer explains. She previously visited Gaza last December. “Then, it was really about how do we bring food in – that’s still very much the case,” she says. “Now, at least we have a dedicated WFP operation on the ground.” Our main accomplishment? “We have helped prevent full-scale famine from happening,” she says.
There are currently nearly 500,000 people at IPC5/Catastrophe, the highest grade of food insecurity on the global standard for measuring food insecurity – down from 1.1 million people earlier this year.
Fleischer is keen to highlight the positive impacts of humanitarian supplies making it through.”Right now, we don’t bring enough food into Gaza,” she says. “We don’t bring in what we plan for the month because we don’t have enough crossing points open. We need all the crossings open and at full capacity.”
“Operations are super complicated,” Fleischer says. “We work in a war zone. Roads are destroyed. We are waiting hours at checkpoints for green lights to move.”
WFP, she stresses, also works to support the wider humanitarian community. “We are leading the Logistics Cluster (the interagency coordination mechanism) and supporting partners to bring in their goods through the Jordan corridor. We are receiving their goods in the north at the Zikim crossing point. We’re helping them in Kerem Shalom. So, of course, we’re helping with fuel supplies too.”
Nowhere Is Safe in Gaza
“Gazans cannot get out, and they’re asking to get out,” Fleischer says. “They’re beyond exhausted. There is no space – one makeshift tent after the other up to the sea. Streets are teeming with people.” Meanwhile, the breakdown of sewage systems, lack of water and waste management means diseases, such as Hepatitis A which is spreading among children, are allowed to fester.
Children eat fortified biscuits from WFP at a makeshift camp in southern Gaza.
“We are lucky that nothing has happened to our amazing staff – more than 200 UNRWA staff have been killed,” she says. “That is not acceptable.” She adds: “We have amazing security officers who advise management on which risks to avoid, so that we can stay and do our work safely and families can access our assistance safely. But the risks are high. Very high. We have bullets close to our convoys. We’re there repairing roads. We’re there moving with our trucks. We’re there reaching people. And it’s very dangerous.”
On the path to recovery, the private sector has a role to play, says Fleischer – take the reopening of shops. “If you think of a lifeline, of hope, or a sense of normalcy, it’s surely when the staple bread is back in the market,” she says of bakeries that have reopened with WFP support. “Bakeries need wheat flour, they need yeast, and diesel too – and that’s where we come in.”
High Prices Keep Basic Foods Out of Reach for Most Gazans
In the south of Gaza, “basic food items are slowly re-emerging in food markets. You can actually find vegetables, fruits in the markets but because prices are high, they remain out of reach for most,” she says “And in any case, people don’t have cash. There are no jobs. Even our own staff tell us, ‘We have a salary, but we can’t access cash’.”
Fleischer is keen for humanitarian efforts to reach a stage where people “stop eating things they have been eating for the past nine months” – to diversify diets heavily dependent on canned food (provided by WFP) and whatever people can get their hands on.
“This level of destruction I’ve never seen.”
Fleischer’s biggest fear for Gaza is “that there is no end to this . That we continue with ever less space for the people who already have nowhere to go back to. Even if they moved back to the north, where could they go?”
“Everything is flattened. There are no homes, it’s all destroyed. We need a long ceasefire that leads to peace so we can operate.”
After the Rafah incursion, many people returned to Khan Younis but there’s no means of living in the area. There are no homes left. Credit: WFP
Fleischer, who has served with WFP in Syria and Sudan’s Darfur Region, adds: “This level of destruction I’ve never seen. Hospitals and clinics are destroyed, food processing plants are destroyed. Everything is destroyed.”
Yet, “There is this never-give-up attitude from the people, from the families we serve,” she says. “I can’t believe children still run to you and laugh with you. They probably see in us hope that there will be an end to all this – a sign they are not forgotten.”
This story originally appeared on WFP’s Stories on August 8, 2024 and was written by the WFP Editorial Team.
Credit: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
Opinion by Azza Karam (new york)
Inter Press Service
NEW YORK, Jun 24 (IPS) – “Holy War” is how the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church referred to the Russian war on the Ukraine, and indeed, on “the West”1 . “Holy War”, aka “jihad” is a foundational principle of “the Base” or “al-Qaeda”, which has grown into a non-state hydra with too many names and atrocities to list here (but if you are curious, one of the hydra faces is ISIS).
In a recent opinion piece published in Foreign Policy, columnist Caroline de Gruyter noted that “Israel and Palestine Are Now in a Religious War”, in her attempt to argue why the Middle East conflict has been getting increasingly brutal, and increasingly hard to solve.
The intersection between holiness and war is even more nuanced in Zvi Bar’el’s Opinion piece in Haaretz, when he notes that “the war in Gaza is no longer about revenge for the murder of 1,200 Israelis or the hostages.
If they all die, along with hundreds of more soldiers, the price would still be justified for the Jewish Jihad waging a war for Gaza’s resettlement” . Hamas’ own name –the acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya (Islamic Resistance Movement) – needs no elaboration. Neither does Lebanon’s Hizbullah (Party of God).
In India, a report by the Indian Citizens and Lawyers Initiative (in April of 2023), entitled “Routes of Wrath: Weaponising Religious Processions”, notes
Indian history is rife with instances of religious processions that led to communal strife, riots, inexcusable violence, arson, destruction of property and the tragic deaths of innocent residents of the riot-hit areas. There have been horrific riots and bloodletting caused by other factors too, most prominently the anti-Sikh pogrom of 1984 and the Gujarat pogrom of 2002, but no cause of interfaith riots has been as recurrent and widespread as the religious procession. This is as true of pre-Independence India as during the 75 years since we became a free nation…Post-Independence, we have faced numerous communal riots in diverse parts of India, under different political regimes, and the vast majority of these have been caused by the deliberate choice of communally-sensitive routes by processionists, and the pusillanimity of the Police in dealing with such demands, or even their collusion and connivance in licencing such routes.2
Already back in August of 1988, in an article entitled “Holy War Against India”, explicitly speaks of “Sikh terrorism” in the Punjab, noting that it “took about a thousand lives in 1987 and more than a thousand in the first five months of 1988.
If it continues at the present rate, Sikh terrorism in the Punjab will have cost more lives in two years than the IRA campaign in Northern Ireland has cost in twenty.” 3 Speaking of Northern Ireland, the marching season remains a flashpoint among Catholics and Protestants.
Politicised religion, or religionised politics – whence religious discourse is part of political verbiage, tactics, expedient alliances, sometimes informing foreign policy priorities, occasionally used to justify conflict – are not new phenomena. In fact, they may well be one of the oldest features of politics, governance – and warmaking.
The Crusades against Muslim expansion in the 11th century were recognized as a “holy war” or a bellum sacrum, by later writers in the 17th century. The early modern wars against the Ottoman Empire were seen as a seamless continuation of this conflict by contemporaries. Religion and politics are the oldest bedfellows known to humankind.
What is relatively new, is that after the 100-year war in Europe, and the subsequent moves towards secularisation or the so-called ‘separation of Church and State’ (again, really only in parts of Europe), provided a false sense of the dominance of secular governance in modern times.
Yet, even in the citadels of secular Western Europe, a relationship binding Church and State always existed, for the religious institutions and their affiliated social structures, remain critical social service providers – and humanitarian actors – till today. A reality now understood to be relevant in all parts of our world.
Nevertheless, what we are seeing today is a resurgence of religious politics, and the politics of religion, in almost all corners of the world. Before the Russian Orthodox Church proclaimed its “holy war” narrative, the reference to religion and politics almost always focused on Muslim-majority contexts, specifically on Iran, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
Other realities would often go unnoticed, or somehow deemed as ‘odd’ or one-time phenomena – for instance the fact that the 2016 US elections delivered a Trump administration with full and public backing by a significant part of the Evangelical movement (many of whom are backing a potential comeback of him now); or the fact that related Evangelical counterparts backed Bolsenaro’s rise to power in Brazil; or the fact that religious arguments against abortion remain a key US electoral feature for decades; or the fact that a number of right-leaning anti-immigrant political discourses and blatant white supremacist politics have religious backing in parts of Europe and Latin America.
Was it perhaps that since these took place in ‘white’ and Christian-majority polities, somehow set these aside from being factored as part of the global resurgence of religious politics?
Whatever the case may be, it is time to smell that particularly strong brew of coffee, now. And as we do so, we are also obliged to note that it is no coincidence that this ‘brew’ is taking place at a time of remarkable social and political polarisation in many societies.
Indeed. we speak of multiple and simultaneous crisis (e.g. climate change, catastrophic governance, wars, famines, rampant inequalities, soaring human displacement, nuclear fears, systemic racism, rising multiple violence, drug wars, proliferation of arms and weapons, misogyny, etc.) and we also acknowledge the wilting multilateral influence to confront these. But as we acknowledge these, we must also recognise that social cohesion is a lasting and tragic victim.
Some governmental, non-governmental and intergovernmental entities have turned to religion(s) as a possible panacea. Religious leaders are being convened in multiple capitals (at significant cost) in almost all corners of the world.
Regularly touting the peacefulness and the unparalleled supremacy of their respective moral standpoints. Religious NGOs are being sought out, supported and partnered with more regularly to help address multiple crisis – especially humanitarian, educational, public health, sanitation, and child-focused efforts.
Interfaith initiatives are competing among each other, and with other secular ones, for grants from governments and philanthropists in the United States, Europe, Africa, many parts of Asia (with the notable exception of China), and the Middle East. Engaging, or partnering with religious entities is the new normal.
But just as the largely secular efforts we lived through (and some of us served for decades) in the 1960s to the 1990s, did not realise a brave new world, religious ones, on their own, cannot do so either. Especially not with the kind of historical baggage and contemporary narratives of holy war, we are living with now.
It is time we re-consider, re-engage and re-envision a poetics of solidarity rooted an abiding adherence to (and re-education about) all human rights for all peoples at all times. What would that entail?
Dr. Azza Karam is President and CEO of Lead Integrity; a Professor and Affiliate with the Ansari Institute of Religion and Global Affairs at Notre Dame University; and a member of the UN Secretary General’s High Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism.
NEW YORK, May 24 (IPS) – It is ironic how Prime Minister Netanyahu, who vehemently opposed the establishment of a Palestinian state, made it all but irreversible because of his misguided policies and extreme ideological bent.
The way he conducted the Gaza war has not only sealed the prospect of a Palestinian state but his political demise
The recent recognition of a Palestinian state by Spain, Ireland, and Norway is the latest blow to Netanyahu’s horribly misguided policy toward the Palestinians, which he pursued throughout his political career to prevent them from ever establishing their own state under his watch, as he stated time and gain.
This recognition is in addition to the overwhelming majority of United Nations General Assembly member states that have recognized Palestinian statehood. In truth, none of the above should come as a surprise, as the writing was on the wall for decades, and it was only a question of time before this inevitability unfolded.
The recent decision of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue an arrest warrant against Netanyahu, charging him with war crimes, was another degrading rebuke of Netanyahu for his ruthlessness in the way he is conducting the Gaza war.
The horrific death and destruction that has been inflicted on Israel and the Palestinians in Gaza as a result of Hamas’ October 2023 attack that resulted in the slaughter of 1,200 Israelis and the ongoing and unprecedented war against Hamas that killed 35,000 Palestinians, and the unspeakable human suffering has created a new paradigm.
The establishment of a Palestinian state, which has been particularly resisted by Netanyahu for the past 16 years, has become front and center in the search for a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide could not have put it clearer when he stated: “The fact that this Israeli government, led by Netanyahu, has been so clear that it has no intention to negotiate with the Palestinian side and has been so accepting and even supportive of new illegal settlements, all that has contributed to the recognition decision. In some sense, it’s a reaction to that.”
The tragic dimension of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that a majority of Israelis bought into Netanyahu’s false argument that a Palestinian state will pose an existential danger to Israel, and hence, the continuing occupation is necessary to prevent the Palestinians from realizing their aspiration for statehood. But what is the alternative to a two-state solution? After 57 years of occupation, even a fool would have concluded that the occupation is not sustainable.
How much more death and destruction must both peoples endure before Netanyahu and his blindly misguided followers come to understand that if it takes a hundred more years and the deaths of a million Palestinians, they will never give up or give in on establishing a state of their own.
What is further baffling is that the multitude of right-wing Israelis keep complaining about Palestinian violence. They ignore the elementary understanding that any people who have been living in servitude for decades under the harshest conditions would rise against the occupier, especially when they have a legitimate right to have their own state, enshrined by the same 1947 UNSC Resolution 194 that granted the Jews the right to establish their independent state.
For 80 percent of all Israelis (those born after 1967), the occupation is a normal state of existence irrespective of the daily suffering and often inhumane mistreatment of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, to which they have been and continue to be subjected.
On January 10, 2024, I wrote: “Sadly, it took the Israel-Hamas war to awaken both sides to their tragic reality. They must now realize there will be no return to the status quo ante. The circumstances that led to the Israel-Hamas war only reinforced the inescapable requirement for a two-state solution. Simply put, there is no other viable option other than continuing the bloody conflict for decades to come.”
But then, what would it take for Netanyahu and his messianic ministers, especially Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, to wake up and realize that every day that passes without a solution, not only will more Israelis and Palestinians be killed in vain, but the conflict will become ever more intractable.
It will exact a mounting price in blood and treasure from both sides without any prospect of changing the inescapable requirement for a Palestinian state to reach a sustainable, peaceful coexistence.
The hurdles to reaching this noble goal are massive; there is the psychological dimension to the conflict that must be mitigated, territorial claims and counterclaims, the dispute over the administration of the Temple Mount (Haram al-Sharif), mutual concerns over security, the final status of Jerusalem, and more. But then, regardless of how obdurate these conflicting issues may be, they will become far more daunting and perilous short of peace based on a two-state solution.
US National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby recently stated: “The president still believes in the promise and the possibility of a two-state solution. He recognizes that it’s going to take a lot of hard work. It’s going to take a lot of leadership there in the region, particularly on both sides of the issue, and the United States stands firmly committed to eventually seeing that outcome.”
Whereas I applaud President Biden’s position and sentiment regarding the requisite of a Palestinian state, he needs to move the needle further and warn Netanyahu that he can no longer take for granted the US position that the creation of a Palestinian state must emerge from direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
While Biden may choose, for political reasons, not to follow the footsteps of the prime ministers of Spain, Ireland, and Norway by recognizing the Palestinian state, he should, at a minimum, permit the Palestinian Authority to reestablish its mission in DC, and reopen the American consulate in East Jerusalem.
That is, if Biden is truly committed to that outcome, then he must demonstrate that by taking real action on the ground. This is the time when leadership is truly needed, and no head of state worldwide can demonstrate that more at this crucial hour than President Biden to bring closer the two-state solution to reality.
Surely, Biden believes in what Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez stated: “This recognition is not against anyone; it is not against the Israeli people. It is an act in favor of peace, justice and moral consistency.” And I might add, it is a moral imperative on which Israel itself was founded.
It is time for Netanyahu to pay the price for dragging Israel into this perilous morass. But then again, he who has resisted the creation of a Palestinian state with all his might made it now more likely than ever before.
Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
The Al-Helal Al-Emirati maternity hospital in Rafah is one of the last remaining functioning health facilities in southern Gaza. Midwives are delivering more than 70 babies per day in dire conditions and while drastically under-supplied. Credit: UNFPA Palestine/Bisan Ouda
Opinion by Natalia Kanem 2 (united nations)
Inter Press Service
UNITED NATIONS, May 10 (IPS) – Today, as millions of children and families celebrate their mothers, my thoughts turn to the pregnant women and new mothers our teams at UNFPA, the United Nations sexual and reproductive health agency, support in more than 130 countries around the world. And I hold in my heart all those who, tragically, will never live to see their newborns.
Natalia Kanem
More than 800 women a day – one woman every two minutes – die needless deaths from entirely preventable complications of pregnancy and childbirth. The situation is particularly dire for women and girls caught up in the world’s escalating crises and conflicts. Globally, more than half of all maternal deaths take place in countries affected by humanitarian crisis or fragility.
In Gaza, women face appalling conditions before, during and after birth. At a moment when new life is beginning, what should be a moment of joy is being overshadowed by death, destruction and despair. Severely limited access to health services and emergency obstetric care put the lives of women and newborns at risk.
Today, major hospitals lie in ruins across Gaza and not a single health facility is fully operational following more than 440 attacks on health care since the war began in October.
At the Al-Helal Al-Emirati Maternity Hospital, one of Gaza’s few remaining health facilities and now the main facility for pregnant women in Rafah, at the time of writing there are only five beds for deliveries and around 60 deliveries every day. Women hoping to give birth on the ward are told to bring their own mattress and pillow.
“We are delivering babies nonstop,” says midwife Samira Hosny Qeshta. “We tell the woman who has just given birth: we need the bed. Get up and sit on a chair.”
Most women have had no prenatal care, she says. They just arrive at the hospital hoping for the best. Many are suffering from infections, due to the unhygienic living conditions in the overcrowded camps, where hundreds of people may share a single toilet and there is a lack of clean water and hygiene supplies.
“We live in a tent, and every time it rains the tent floods, and our beds get wet,” says Suhad. She is nine months pregnant and scheduled for a C-section. Hours later, she will be back in the tent.
“It will be extremely difficult after the birth,” she says. “From the physical pain to the ice cold – and there are no clothes for the baby. What has she done to be born into a situation like this?”
Even if their babies are delivered safely, thousands of women like Suhad face the inevitable question: What next? How will they keep their newborn clean, warm, fed, alive?
Many of these mothers are themselves too dehydrated and malnourished to breastfeed their children, and there is no formula to be had.
UNFPA has delivered reproductive health kits that have enabled safe births for more than 20,000 women in Gaza. We have set up a mobile maternity clinic in Rafah, with two more on the way. Hundreds of UNFPA-trained midwives are supporting pregnant women and new mothers unable to access a health clinic or hospital. We have also distributed hygiene supplies, diapers, baby clothes, blankets and other essential items to thousands of new mothers. Yet all of this is just a drop in an ocean of need.
The world must not abandon the mothers of Gaza. They, their newborns, and all civilians must be protected and their needs met. Hospitals and health workers must never be targets.
From time immemorial, cultures across the globe have honoured the sacredness of motherhood. On this Mother’s Day, let us pay tribute to that sacred bond by remembering all the women who create, protect and nurture life, even under the most catastrophic circumstances. The mothers in flooded tents or fleeing bombs. The mothers of hostages still waiting for their families to be made whole. The mothers and newborns fighting for their lives in overcrowded hospital wards without adequate medicines or supplies. They need life-saving health services and support. They need dignity. Above all, they need peace. This war must end now.
Food is distributed to Sudanese refugees in Koufron, Chad. Credit: WFP/Jacques David
Opinion by James Elder (darfur, western sudan)
Inter Press Service
DARFUR, Western Sudan, May 09 (IPS) – As dawn breaks over Darfur, my return after two decades feels heavy. Many millions are suffering once again. Twenty years ago, I was part of the humanitarian effort to make a difference. That was in the early 2000s, when celebrities and world-famous journalists would make the trek in a well-intentioned effort to focus attention on the atrocities across Darfur.
Meanwhile, a former UN staff member who worked for a decade in Sudan’s Darfur region for the African Union-United Nations mission, UNAMID, has told UN News how she had to “avoid stepping on the bodies in the streets” as she fled for her life to neighbouring Chad. March 2024.
But despite years of progress, this return is difficult; something akin to a bleak déjà vu. Indeed, in many respects, this time it is much, much worse for children and women. Sudan’s Darfur region has long been plagued by conflict, displacement, and unimaginable suffering.
But now, as Sudan is torn apart by warring parties, there are no Hollywood actors, nor coordinated, concerted international pressure from politicians and media, to tackle what is the largest displacement crisis for children on the planet.
Darfur faces one of the world’s worst man-made disasters, yet so few people are talking about. After a year of fighting, more than 4.5 million children have been displaced. That’s more children than the entire population of many countries.
My initial experience 20 years ago left an indelible mark on me. Now, two decades later, I find myself standing once again on the soil of Darfur, the landscape hardly changed, but the problems all too familiar.
There’s a frightful, familiar pattern to this current war. The fighting has been brutal. The ceasefires almost non-existent. The clashes spreading. And the atrocities many, with girls and women so frequently targeted.
“If they couldn’t carry it, they burnt it”
Talking to the people, most of whom are displaced, I hear familiar themes from 20 years ago. Fighters didn’t just battle each other but looted whatever they could find, including basics like beds, mattresses, blankets, pots and pans or clothes. They took everything and, as an elderly woman told me in the city of Genenia: “If they couldn’t carry it, they burnt it.”
As I travel across West Darfur, I see evidence of a rebuilt life demolished once again, this time for the next generation. There were schools, health clinics and water systems less than 20 years old that now, after intense fighting, have been destroyed.
Lifesaving services that protect children and families again on the brink of collapse. Frontline workers like nurses, teachers, doctors, have not been paid in months. They are running out of medicines. Safe water is sparse.
Similarly, for those who were children the last time I was in Darfur it is again a desolate place. University students and graduates, mostly young men but some women – young people who wanted a job in economics, medicine or IT – are now refugees in Chad with next to nothing. They crave the tiniest opportunity.
Dreams on hold
In the chaos of this war, the brightest minds have been forced to abandon their studies, their ambitions shattered. As 22-year-old Haida said to me in Darfur: “I had a dream – to study medical science. I was living that dream. Now I have nothing. I do not dream. Sadness is my friend.”
Her gentle voice, perfect clarity, and utter grief floor me. I can only imagine how much more attention Sudan would get if the world could meet young Sudanese women like Haida.
Or Ahmed, 20, now in Farchana, Chad: “I cannot afford to dream here.” How then to reawaken their dreams? Those in power need to negotiate a ceasefire, and ensure aid is no longer blocked – from any side.
Those in the region need to show leadership. Those in donor countries need to show compassion – and translate that into funding to address immediate needs.
I speak to Nawal, 24, from Zelinge in West Darfur, for whom the stress of war had become so much that she delivered her baby, at home, two months premature. And then, as she was giving birth, Nawal’s house was bombed. Miraculously, she and her baby survived, but when I met her, the baby was badly malnourished. I will always remember the look of this mother, as she whispered to me, head bowed, “I am a nutritionist, but look at my child’.
She was ashamed. I thought she was heroic. She had walked for a day to get her baby to a facility where the baby could receive treatment from UNICEF, but without additional resources and improved access, she will be one of the few lucky ones.
James Elder is UNICEF’s spokesperson. Follow him @1james_elder
A view of the Earth and a satellite as seen from outer space. Credit: NASA via UN News
by Thalif Deen (united nations)
Inter Press Service
UNITED NATIONS, May 07 (IPS) – When the 15-member UN Security Council failed last month to adopt its first-ever resolution on outer space—co-sponsored by the US and Japan—the Russian veto led to speculation whether this was a precursor for a future nuclear arms race in the skies above.
The vetoed resolution was expected to “affirm the obligation of all States parties to fully comply with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, including not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.”
Randy Rydell, Executive Advisor, Mayors for Peace, and a former Senior Political Affairs Officer at the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), told IPS that the Security Council’s record on disarmament issues has long suffered from the same plague that has also tormented the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva: namely the veto and the CD’s “consensus rule.”
Sadly, this vote on the outer space resolution should surprise no one, he said.
The world is facing a crisis of the “rule of law” in disarmament. Key treaties have failed to achieve universal membership, failed to be negotiated, failed to enter into force, failed to be fully incorporated into domestic laws and policies of the parties, and failed to be fully implemented, while other treaties have actually lost parties, he pointed out.
While the Outer Space Treaty will remain in force despite this unfortunate vote, Rydell argued, the specters of the existing nuclear arms race proliferating one day into space, along with unbridled competition to deploy non-nuclear space weapons, have profound implications not just for the future of disarmament but also for the peace and security of our fragile planet.
“The Charter’s norms against the threat of use of force and the obligation to resolve disputes peacefully remain the most potentially effective antidotes to the contagion unfolding before us, coupled with new steps not just “toward” but “in” disarmament”.
“I hope the General Assembly’s Summit of the Future in September will succeed in reviving a new global commitment to precisely these priorities,” declared Rydell
By a vote of 13 in favor to 1 against (Russian Federation) and 1 abstention (China), the Council rejected the draft resolution, owing to the negative vote cast by a permanent member.
Jackie Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation, told IPS it is impossible, amidst the current geopolitical rivalries and fog of propaganda, to evaluate the ramifications of the Security Council’s failure to adopt this resolution—though it does underscore the dysfunction in the Security Council created by the P-5’s veto power.
“Russia and China have long been proponents of negotiations for a comprehensive treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, and in 2008 and 2014 submitted draft treaty texts to the moribund Conference on Disarmament,” she said.
The United States, under both the Bush and Obama administrations, rejected those drafts out of hand, said Cabasso, whose California-based WSLF is a non-profit public interest organization that seeks to abolish nuclear weapons as an essential step in securing a more just and environmentally sustainable world.
A week after its April 24 veto, Russia submitted a new draft resolution to the U.N. Security Council that goes farther than the U.S.-Japan proposal, calling not only for efforts to stop weapons from being deployed in outer space “for all time,” but for preventing “the threat or use of force in outer space.”
The resolution reportedly states this should include bans on deploying weapons “from space against Earth, and from Earth against objects in outer space.” By definition, this would include anti-satellite weapons.
With new nuclear arms races underway here on earth, with the erosion and dismantling of the Cold War nuclear arms control architecture, and with the dangers of wars among nuclear armed states growing to perhaps an all-time high, it certainly remains true, as recognized by the UN General Assembly in 1981, that “the extension of the arms race into outer space a real possibility.”
“We are in a global emergency and every effort must be made to lower the temperature and create openings for diplomatic dialogue among the nuclear-armed states. To this end, the U.S. and its allies should call Russia’s bluff (if that’s what they think it is) and welcome its proposed new resolution in the Security Council,” declared Cabasso.
Speaking after the vote, the representative of the United States said that this is not the first time the Russian Federation has undermined the global non-proliferation regime, according to a report in UN News. “It has defended—and even enabled—dangerous proliferators.”
Moreover, with its abstention, the US said, China showed that it would rather “defend Russia as its junior partner” than safeguard the global non-proliferation regime, she added.
“There should be no doubt that placing a nuclear weapon into orbit would be unprecedented, unacceptable, and deeply dangerous.”
The US said Japan had gone to great lengths to forge consensus, with 65 cross-regional co-sponsors who joined in support.
Japan’s representative said he deeply regretted the Russian Federation’s decision to use the veto to break the adoption of “this historic draft resolution.”
Notwithstanding the support of 65 countries that co-sponsored the document, one permanent member decided to “silence the critical message we wanted to send to the world,” he stressed, noting that the draft resolution would have been a practical contribution to the promotion of peaceful use and the exploration of outer space.
The representative of the Russian Federation, noting that the Council is again involved in “a dirty spectacle prepared by the US and Japan, said, “This is a cynical ploy. We are being tricked.”
Recalling that the ban on placing weapons of mass destruction in outer space is already enshrined in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, he said that Washington, D.C., Japan, and their allies are “cherry-picking” weapons of mass destruction out of all other weapons, trying to “camouflage their lack of interest” in outer space being free from any kinds of weapons.
The addition to the operative paragraph, proposed by the Russian Federation and China, does not delete from the draft resolution a call not to develop weapons of mass destruction and not to place them in outer space, he emphasized.
Meanwhile, outlining the treaty’s history, Cabasso said that in Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1967, States Parties agreed “not to place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.”
Yet, according to the UN Yearbook, by 1981, member states had expressed concern in the General Assembly that “rapid advances in science and technology had made the extension of the arms race into outer space a real possibility, and that new kinds of weapons were still being developed despite the existence of international agreements.”
In his May 1 testimony to the House Armed Services subcommittee, John Plumb, the first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, claimed that “Russia is developing and—if we are unable to convince them otherwise—to ultimately fly a nuclear weapon in space which will be an indiscriminate weapon” that would not distinguish among military, civilian, or commercial satellites.
In February, President Vladimir Putin declared that Russia has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space. It is troubling, therefore, that on April 24, Russia vetoed the first-ever Security Council resolution on an arms race in outer space, said Cabasso.
The resolution, introduced by the United States and Japan, would have affirmed the obligation of all States Parties to fully comply with the Outer Space Treaty, including its provisions to not deploy nuclear or any other kind of weapon of mass destruction in space. China abstained.
Before the resolution was put to a vote, Russia and China had proposed an amendment that would have broadened the call on all countries—beyond banning nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons—to “prevent for all time the placement of weapons in outer space and the threat of use of force in outer space.” The amendment was defeated, she said.
Note: This article is brought to you by IPS Noram, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with UN ECOSOC.
Robert A. Wood, deputy permanent representative of the United States to the United Nations, vetoes Palestine’s U.N. membership during the Security Council meeting on April 18, 2024. Credit: Manuel Elías/United Nations
by Thalif Deen (united nations)
Inter Press Service
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 23 (IPS) – The Biden administration, once again displayed its political hypocrisy by denying UN membership to Palestine, while continuing to advocate a “two-state’ solution” to the crisis in the Middle East.
But one lingering question remains: will the two-state solution include– or exclude– Palestine as a full-fledged UN member state?
Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of the Washington-based Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), told IPS: “That the US has once again resorted to its well-worn veto to block Palestine’s UN membership is all you need to know about why its pretend commitment to a ’two-state solution’ is nothing but empty rhetoric”.
The US has been Israel’s number one weapons supplier in ensuring that a Palestinian state never emerges, both by blocking meaningful action from the international community and providing Israel with a bottomless arsenal of weapons with which to terrorize Palestinians, she pointed out.
Meanwhile, the denial of UN membership to Palestine also underlines the continued abuse of veto powers not only by the US but also China and Russia who use it as a weapon to protect their political and military allies worldwide.
The beneficiaries mostly include Israel, North Korea, Syria and Myanmar.
Since 1992, according to Wikipedia, Russia has been the most frequent user of the veto, followed by the United States and China.
As of March 2024, Russia/USSR has used its veto 128 times, the US 85 times, the UK 29 times, China 19 times, and France 16 times. On 26 April 2022, the General Assembly adopted a resolution mandating a debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council.
Robert A. Wood, deputy permanent representative of the United States to the United Nations, vetoes Palestine’s U.N. membership during the Security Council meeting on April 18, 2024. Credit: Manuel Elías/United Nations
Stephen Zunes, professor of Politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco and who has written extensively on the politics of the Security Council, told IPS the US has vetoed no less than 45 resolutions critical of Israel, “thereby rendering the Security Council effectively impotent”.
Norman Solomon, Executive Director, Institute for Public Accuracy and National Director, RootsAction.org told IPS the U.S. solo veto again underscored its chosen isolation from world opinion and governmental lineup about Israel and the human rights of Palestinian people.
Washington’s position is morally untenable, based squarely on “might makes right” geopolitics, he said.
Even inside the United States, the political tide is shifting away from reflexive support for Israel, but — rhetoric aside — the White House remains locked into support for the Israeli system of apartheid and occupation, while a majority of Congress remains willing to fund Israel’s genocidal war on people in Gaza, Solomon pointed out.
“The U.S. government doesn’t want Palestine to have a seat at the U.N. table because the U.S. government actually doesn’t recognize that such an entity as “Palestine” even exists. Nor do top policymakers in the U.S. executive and legislative branches truly proceed as though Palestinian people have legitimate claims on Palestine”.
The tacit U.S. approach, he said, is that history in the region begins whenever convenient for the U.S.-Israeli alliance, whether in 1948 or 1967 or on Oct. 7, 2023.
There are many flaws in the stances and pretensions of members of the Security Council, whether permanent or rotating. The governments they represent vary from having significant elements of democracy to operating as de facto dictatorships.
“Yet, to a notable degree and to a wide extent, on matters involving Israel and Palestinians, the votes cast at the U.N. in both the Security Council and the General Assembly reflect as close to a consensus of governments and peoples as exists in the world today”.
Israel is an apartheid state, its occupation of territories since 1967 is absolutely illegitimate, and its war on the people living and dying in Gaza is mass murder, said Solomon, author of “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine”
According to an April 22 report on Cable News Network (CNN), Israel’s Foreign Ministry will summon ambassadors from several countries later this week to express its displeasure for their support for Palestinian membership at the UN, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz was quoted as saying.
“The diplomatic push involves countries that have voted in favor of Palestinian membership in the UN and have ambassadors stationed in Israel, including France, Ecuador, Japan, Malta, South Korea, Slovenia, China and Russia”.
Algeria, Sierra Leone, Guyana and Mozambique — which also supported the proposal — do not have embassies in Israel, CNN said.
In a statement last week, the Washington, D.C., based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said: “The Biden administration should be ashamed and embarrassed after 12 nations rejected its plea to vote against membership for the State of Palestine, forcing the United States to stand alone with another unjust veto.
“For decades, the UN Security Council has failed to prevent unjust wars and genocide around the world. The world should no longer accept a flawed system in which five nations can exercise veto power over the affairs of more than eight billion people, including nearly two billion Muslims who are not represented among the five permanent members.” CAIR said.
“Nations and people of the world must push for the UN Security Council to be either radically reformed or abolished altogether in the years ahead.”
According to the UN, States are admitted to UN membership by a decision of the 193-member General Assembly upon the recommendation of the 15-member Security Council.
The resolution needs a two-thirds majority (currently 128 votes) in the General Assembly– and no vetoes in the Security Council. The State of Palestine was accepted as “a non-member observer state” of the UN General Assembly in November 2012.
BERLIN, Germany, Apr 08 (IPS) – Russia and Iran currently appear to be pulling firmly in the same direction in terms of foreign policy; ‘What has caused humanity’s suffering is unilateralism and an unjust global order, one manifestation of which can be seen in Gaza today.’ These were the words of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi during a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on 7 December.
The content of the statement, coupled with its context – an Iranian-Russian summit in Moscow – succinctly summarises how the war in Gaza has shifted Iran’s perspective toward Russia as a steadfast partner in its stance against Israel and on the war, underpinned by shared viewpoints on major international topics.
Though Putin did not explicitly endorse Raisi’s comments, he did not disappoint his visitor either, pointing out the mutual comprehension between the two states on regional issues, including the Gaza conflict, as one of the topics of bilateral negotiations.
A shared vision on Gaza
The Raisi-Putin meeting, marking the most significant diplomatic engagement between Iran and Russia concerning Gaza since the start of the war, was not an isolated event. Since shortly after the war’s outset, the issue has consistently featured in phone discussions and in-person meetings among the two countries’ officials.
Beyond this bilateral framework, the shared stance on the Gaza issue has also been articulated in multilateral settings where both Iran and Russia are present. The most notable instance was the trilateral ‘Astana format’ meeting between Iran, Russia and Turkey.
While the forum is primarily focused on Syria, the three parties emphasised the significance of preventing the expansion of the armed confrontation in Gaza and the involvement of other regional states in the conflict.
They also ‘expressed deep concern over the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and stressed the need to end Israeli brutal onslaught against the Palestinians and send humanitarian aid to Gaza’.
The growing convergence between Iran and Russia on the Gaza issue is also evident in the official narratives promoted by each country separately; a convergence that has been apparent since the beginning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Iran’s support for it, attributing international problems and crises to the detrimental role of the West, notably the United States.
Iran and Russia have labelled Western responses to the Gaza conflict as hypocritical, juxtaposing them with Western actions in other global conflicts, especially in Ukraine. This narrative aims to spotlight perceived inconsistencies and biases in Western foreign policies.
Both governments also advocate for regional solutions to regional problems, contesting Western interventions in the Middle East.
Indeed, the alignment in narratives and perceptions between Iran and Russia transcends the immediate context of the war in Gaza. It is part of a broader strategy aimed at transforming the global order into a more multipolar structure, wherein Western dominance is contested and alternative power centres, such as Iran and Russia, assume a more pronounced role.
Concurrently, the negative impact of Western influence is blamed for the inefficacy of international institutions, including the United Nations, in ending the war in Gaza. This aspect also appears to have broader implications.
The Astana talks on Syria demonstrate the commitment of Iran and Russia, along with Turkey, which has equally criticised the Western response to the Gaza war, to establishing alternative platforms for conflict resolution and international cooperation.
In essence, the focus on Gaza in the final statement of the Astana meeting signifies that Iran, Russia and Turkey intend to extend their trilateral cooperation in Syria, which was partly also replicated in the South Caucasus after the latest war between Azerbaijan and Armenia (within the framework known as 3+3), to a wider Middle Eastern context.
Following Syria and the South Caucasus, Gaza may also emerge as a venue for the trilateral cooperation of Tehran, Moscow and Ankara – despite differences in positions – to manifest.
In any case, as many analysts anticipated from the onset of the Gaza war, Russia has sought to leverage the conflict as an opportunity to extend its outreach to the Global South, particularly to Muslim countries critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza. In this context, Russia’s relations with the Islamic Republic have been notably influenced.
On the one hand, the Islamic Republic, as a principal supporter of Hamas and Israel’s foremost adversary, seizes any opportunity to broaden international support for its ally and to weaken Israel’s position.
On the other hand, for the leaders of the Islamic Republic, Russia’s stance is an affirmation that their decision to back Moscow in the Ukraine conflict was judicious.
A nuclear-armed Iran?
The spillover of the Gaza war into other areas in the Middle East and the engagement of Iran’s proxies and non-state allies in the ‘axis of resistance’, from the Houthis in Yemen to Iraqi militias, has introduced an additional layer to the already complex Iran-West dynamics.
Western powers, particularly the United States and Britain, increasingly attribute responsibility to Iran for the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea and the operations of Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria. Indeed, following the expansion of Iran’s nuclear programme, Tehran’s support for Moscow in the Ukraine war and the suppression of the 2022 popular protests in Iran, the Gaza war has now added a new problem to Iran’s relations with the West.
At the same time, these developments have dimmed the prospects for reviving the Iran nuclear deal or achieving a new agreement between Iran and the US. Under these circumstances, Iran is expected to gravitate more toward its Eastern partners, namely Russia and China.
The war in Gaza has also laid bare the limitations of Iran’s asymmetric warfare strategy utilising proxies and non-state partners. American strikes in Yemen on one side and in Iraq and Syria on the other, although not having reinstated deterrence as Washington had hoped, have revealed that Iran’s network of non-state allies and proxies is quite vulnerable.
Meanwhile, the continuation of Israeli military operations against Hamas has significantly impaired the military capabilities of this Palestinian militia. Some analysts speculate that this might incline Iran toward developing nuclear weapons as the ultimate deterrent.
An alternative, or perhaps complementary, strategy could be forming a military alliance with friendly powers like Russia and China. Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Ali-Akbar Ahmadian’s visit to Moscow and the heightened emphasis from both sides on finalising a long-term strategic cooperation agreement should be viewed in this context.
Concurrently, reports have emerged suggesting that Iran has finally decided to provide Russia with ballistic missiles. Russia has also acquired a new model of Iranian drones, Shahed 238. All these indications show that both sides, driven by their practical needs as well as long-term strategic outlooks, are increasingly inclined to forge a robust military partnership.
In fact, even if Iran decides to pursue nuclear weapons, it needs to secure Russia’s support. Thus, fostering relations with Russia remains crucial. Currently, there’s no concrete evidence suggesting that Russia would endorse a nuclear-armed Iran. However, it’s not entirely implausible, depending on future Russia-West relations.
The above factors have reinforced Iran’s reliance on Russia as a strategic partner. Concurrently, it appears that Russia-Israel relations are approaching a point of no return. Indeed, it remains vital for Russia that Israel not support Ukraine.
But at least in the short term, Israel must prioritise its own security needs amid the war in Gaza and appears incapable of providing substantial security assistance abroad.
Furthermore, Russia is now relatively confident in its achievements in Ukraine. However, this does not imply that Russia desires a complete overhaul of its relations with Israel; rather, it simply perceives less necessity for Israel and believes it now has the upper hand in this relationship.
Yet, factors exist that could challenge the transformation of the Iran-Russia partnership into a steadfast alliance. Most notably, Russia’s ambition to cultivate relations with the Arab states of the Persian Gulf to attract investment and for diplomatic manoeuvring is significant enough that Russia was prepared to endorse the UAE’s stance on three islands in the Persian Gulf disputed between Iran and the UAE, eliciting unprecedented criticism of Moscow in Iran, even among top officials.
Ultimately, Russia was compelled to reaffirm its commitment to Iran’s territorial integrity. Currently, the improvement in Tehran’s relations with Arab capitals, partly facilitated by the Gaza war, may simplify Russia’s task of balancing its relations with both sides of the Persian Gulf. However, there’s no assurance that this approach will remain viable in the long term.
Dr. Hamidreza Azizi is a Visiting Fellow in the Africa and Middle East Division at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) in Berlin.
Source: International Politics and Society (IPS)-Journal published by the International Political Analysis Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin
A panel discussion with Kaoru Nemoto, director of the United Nations Information Center, and other youth representatives including Yuki Tokuda, co-founder of GeNuine(Extreme right) delved into nuclear weapons and climate change.
Opinion by Katsuhiro Asagiri (tokyo, japan)
Inter Press Service
TOKYO, Japan, Mar 27 (IPS) – In a significant precursor to the United Nations Summit of the Future slated for September, the “Future Action Festival” convened at Tokyo’s National Stadium on March 24, drawing a crowd of approximately 66,000 attendees and reaching over half a million viewers via live streaming. The event, a collaborative effort by youth and citizen groups, aimed to foster a deeper understanding and proactive stance among young people on nuclear disarmament and climate change solutions.
The festival featured interactive quizzes displayed on large screens, offering attendees a collective learning experience about the complex global crises currently challenging the international community. Additionally, a panel discussion with Kaoru Nemoto, director of the United Nations Information Center, and other youth representatives delved into nuclear weapons and climate change, facilitating a deeper exploration of these pressing issues. Adding to the event’s poignancy, performances included one by the “A-bombed Piano,” a relic from Hiroshima that endured the atomic bombing, and others that highlighted the value of peace through music and dances, reinforcing the call for action and solidarity as agents of change.
A panel discussion with Kaoru Nemoto, director of the United Nations Information Center, and other youth representatives including Yuki Tokuda, co-founder of GeNuine(Extreme right) delved into nuclear weapons and climate change.
Central to the festival’s impact were the insights shared by a participant of the panel discussion like Yuki Tokuda, co-founder of GeNuine, who shared her insights from a “youth awareness survey” conducted before the event. “The survey revealed that over 80% of young respondents felt their voices were not being heard,” she explained. “This suggests a systemic issue, not merely a matter of personal perception, which is discouraging the younger generation from engaging with vital issues.”
Despite this, the massive turnout at the festival offered a glimmer of hope. “The presence of 66,000 like-minded individuals here today signals that change is possible. Together, we can reshape the system and forge a future that aligns with our aspirations,” Tokuda remarked, emphasizing the power of collective action and the importance of carrying forward the momentum generated by the festival.
Equally compelling was the narrative shared by Yuki Tominaga, who captivated the audience with her dance performance at the event. “I have always been deeply inspired by my late grandmother’s life as a storyteller sharing her experiences of the atomic bombing in Hiroshima.” Tominaga shared. “My grandmother would begin her account with her own experiences of the bombing but then expand her narrative to include her visits to places like India and Pakistan, countries with nuclear arsenals, and regions afflicted by poverty and conflict where landmines remain a deadly legacy. She emphasized that the tragedy of Hiroshima is an ongoing story, urging us to spread the message of peace to future generations.”
Yuki Tominaga, a third generation Hibakusha from Hiroshima, continues her grandmothers legacy while using her passin for dance as a medium to communicate about peace and Hiroshima bombing. Credit: Yukie Asagiri, INPS Japan
Reflecting on her grandmother’s profound impact, Tominaga continued, “I once doubted my ability to continue her legacy; her words seemed irreplaceable. But she encouraged me, saying, ‘Do what you’re able to spread peace.’ That inspired me to use my passion for dance as a medium to communicate about peace and the Hiroshima bombing. I aim to serve as a conduit between the survivors of the atomic bomb and today’s youth, making peace discussions engaging and accessible through dance.”
The “Youth Attitude Survey,” which garnered responses from 119,925 individuals across Japan, revealed a striking consensus: over 90% of young people expressed a desire to contribute to a better society. Yet, they also acknowledged feeling marginalized from the decision-making processes. The survey illuminated young people’s readiness to transform their awareness into action, despite prevailing sentiments of exclusion.
This enthusiasm and potential for change have not gone unnoticed by the international community. High-profile supporters, including Felipe Paullier, UN Assistant Secretary-General for Youth Affairs, Orlando Bloom, UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador, and Melissa Park, Executive Director of ICAN, have all voiced their encouragement, recognizing young people’s crucial role in driving global advancements in sustainability and peace.
The upcoming UN Summit of the Future offers a pivotal platform for youth engagement, with the “Joint Statement” released by the festival’s Organizing Committee—encompassing key areas like climate crisis resolution, nuclear disarmament, youth participation in decision-making, and UN reform—serving as a testament to the collective will to influence global policies. Tshilidzi Marwala, the Rector of the United Nations University and UN Under-Secretary-General acknowledged the vital importance of young voices in shaping the summit’s agenda, urging them to be “a beacon of hope and a driving force for change.”
As the world gears up for the UN Summit of the Future, the Future Action Festival stands as a powerful reminder of the impact of youth-led initiatives and collective action in addressing the world’s most pressing challenges. Through education, advocacy, and direct engagement, the festival not only spotlighted the urgent need for action on nuclear disarmament and the climate crisis but also showcased the potential of an informed, engaged, and motivated youth to effect meaningful global change.
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 26 (IPS) – The UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution for a temporary cease-fire in the ongoing conflict in Gaza— adopted by a 14-0 vote with the US abstaining –- marks a significant step forward in momentarily halting the five-month-old fighting which has claimed the lives of over 32,000 Palestinians and 1,200 inside Israel.
But a lingering question remains: how will Israel respond?
Clearly, Israel has had a longstanding notoriety for flouting UNSC resolutions —and still never having to pay a price for such violations—primarily because of the unyielding support of the United States.
Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics, University of San Francisco, who has written extensively and authoritatively on the politics of the Security Council, told IPS: “By my count, Israel has initially stood in violation of as many as 40 UN Security Council resolutions for at least a decade following their passage, though they eventually came into compliance with about a dozen of those. They remain in violation of the others”.
Successive U.S. administrations, including the Biden administration, have made clear they would veto any UN Security Council resolution that would impose sanctions or any other kind of pressure to force Israel into compliance, he said.
While it is certainly a positive development that the Biden administration did not veto Monday’s Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire as it has previously, the United States again demonstrated its isolation in the international community by being the only country to not vote in favor.
The Biden administration threatened to veto the original draft resolution calling for a permanent ceasefire, only agreeing to not cast a veto in return for dropping the word “permanent.”
White House spokesperson John Kirby said the United States did not vote in favor because the resolution did not condemn Hamas, despite the fact that it did not condemn Israel either.
The wording of the various clauses which the Biden administration also apparently demanded are revealing: While it “demands” that Hamas release the hostages, the United States made sure that the resolution only “emphasizes the urgent need” to get desperately-needed aid to Palestinians and that it did not mention that it is Israel that is preventing it, said Dr Zunes, currently Torgny Segerstedt Visiting Research Professor, at the Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
At the same time, even though the ceasefire resolution, if honored, would only stop the fighting for two weeks, it is significant that the United States allowed for even a temporary ceasefire resolution to pass without conditioning it on the release of Israeli hostages, he noted.
“This is no doubt a reflection of the growing domestic and international pressure the Biden administration has been facing over its support for Israel’s horrific war on the people of Gaza.
Whatever the wording of the resolution, however, it is unlikely that Israel will abide by it and the United States would certainly veto any attempt by the United Nations to enforce it,” he declared.
Oxfam’s UN Representative and Head of New York Office Brenda Mofya said: “We welcome the Security Council’s adoption of a ceasefire resolution so Palestinians in Gaza can have much-needed respite from the relentless and devastating Israeli violence and critical aid can reach them”.
However, this resolution, while a step in the right direction, falls short of the permanent ceasefire which is truly required and comes too late for the over 32,000 Palestinians in Gaza that have been killed, and thousands more unaccounted for, while the Security Council wrung its hands over semantics, she argued.
“For nearly six months, the rest of the international community has repeatedly called for a permanent ceasefire, the release of all hostages, and the provision of unrestricted aid into Gaza. It is long overdue for UN Security Council Member States to finally heed these calls with the moral leadership that is rightfully expected of them and to stop the killing and suffering in Gaza.
“Now this resolution has passed, it is imperative for Member States to fulfil their obligations to ensure that it is implemented so that Palestinians never endure violence such as this again. This includes immediately halting the transfer of weapons, parts, and ammunition to Israel and Palestinian armed groups,” she said.
“A mere two-week pause is not enough. This initial cessation in violence must lead to a permanent ceasefire that lasts and a sustainable peace for Palestinians and Israelis alike, so people in Gaza can mourn their loved ones and begin the long road of recovery and reconstruction,” declared Mofya.
Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch said Israel needs to immediately respond to the UN Security Council resolution by facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid, ending its starvation of Gaza’s population, and halting unlawful attacks.
Palestinian armed groups should immediately release all civilians held hostage. The US and other countries should use their leverage to end atrocities by suspending arms transfers to Israel, said Charbonneau.
In a statement issued on March 25, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US abstention on the Security Council resolution comes on the heels of the Russian and Chinese veto “of our comprehensive draft resolution in the Council, reaffirms the U.S. position that a ceasefire of any duration come as part of an agreement to release hostages in Gaza”.
“While we do not agree with all provisions included in this text, adjustments made by the resolution’s sponsors over recent days are consistent with our principled position that any ceasefire text must be paired with text on the release of the hostages”, he said.
This resolution further explicitly recognizes the painstaking, non-stop negotiations being conducted by the Governments of Egypt, Israel, Qatar, and the United States to achieve such a release in the context of a ceasefire, which would also create space to surge more lifesaving humanitarian assistance for Palestinian civilians, and to build something more enduring.
“Because the final text does not have key language we view as essential, notably a condemnation of Hamas, we could not support it. This failure to condemn Hamas is particularly difficult to understand coming days after the world once again witnessed the horrific acts terrorist groups commit,” Blinken said.
“We reiterate the need to accelerate and sustain the provision of humanitarian assistance through all available routes – land, sea, and air. We continue to discuss with partners a pathway to the establishment of a Palestinian state with real security guarantees for Israel to establish long-term peace and security,” he declared.
Nihal Awad, National Executive Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), said the Biden administration’s long overdue decision to permit the passage of a Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire “will only be impactful if our government takes concrete steps to support it.”
The far-right Netanyahu government is already flouting the resolution and promising to continue its genocide in Gaza. The Biden administration should respond by ending the transfer of any new weapons to the Israeli government and taking steps to pursue a just, lasting peace, he said.
Paleki Ayang, Gender Advisor for the Middle East and North Africa, Equality Now
Opinion by Paleki Ayang (juba)
Inter Press Service
JUBA, Feb 27 (IPS) – Female genital mutilation (FGM) stands as one of the most egregious violations of human rights, particularly affecting women and girls worldwide. However, when conflict and forced displacement enter the equation, the horrors of FGM are exacerbated, creating a dire situation that demands urgent attention and action. Where instability and insecurity prevail, the prevalence of FGM often intensifies, exacerbated by factors such as displacement, poverty, and the breakdown of social systems.
On April 15, 2023, war erupted in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), plunging the country into an intense political and humanitarian crisis with unprecedented emerging needs. As of December 2023, over 7.4 million people were uprooted from their homes by the 9-month conflict, of which about half a million fled to neighboring Egypt, a country that also has similarly high records of FGM cases.
Equality Now and the Tadwein Center for Gender Studies are currently commissioning a study in Egypt among select Sudanese families in Cairo and Giza to understand the particularities of cross-border FGM, to analyze the attitude of Sudanese families in Egypt towards FGM and to assess possible changes in the practice, such as the type of cutting, and the age of girls when they are cut.
Nexus between conflict, displacement, and FGM
Although Sudan legally banned the practice of FGM in 2020, women and girls continue to face heightened risks of violence, exploitation, and abuse, including FGM. Ongoing conflict has led to the breakdown of the rule of law and governance structures in Khartoum and a few other states.
Declaring a state of emergency permits the government to prioritize security and stability over individual rights and the rule of law. In some locations with relative stability, there is selective enforcement of laws driven by social polarization, exacerbating discriminatory practices and inequalities.
Additionally, in the chaos of displacement, traditional practices may persist, perpetuating the cycle of FGM and denying women and girls agency over their bodies and futures.
The nexus between conflict, displacement, and FGM underscores the urgent need for holistic, multi-sectoral approaches that address the root causes of the practice and provide comprehensive support to affected populations.
However, it is critical to redefine how the multi-sectoral approach could roll out within the context of conflict, specifically where legal protections for women and girls are minimal or non-existent.
The usual activities undertaken by activists and civil society organizations—such as advocacy campaigns, community outreach programs, and legal reforms—may be hampered by the chaotic and unpredictable nature of conflict environments, making it challenging to mobilize support and raise awareness about the harms of FGM.
Strengthening responses to FGM during conflict and displacement
Conversations about new and innovative ways where legal frameworks and policy measures need to be strengthened to prohibit FGM must happen, and perpetrators must be held accountable for their actions, even amid conflict and displacement.
This is critical, as the prevention and response to FGM are not prioritized in humanitarian settings due to lack of funding and political will. The report underscores the importance of culturally sensitive approaches, community engagement, capacity building, and partnerships to combat FGM and support survivors in humanitarian settings effectively.
Medicalization of FGM requires urgent attention. Prior to the start of the current conflict, Sudan had the highest rate of medicalized FGM globally, accounting for 67% of cases in the country.
The collapse of healthcare systems and infrastructure brought about a different reality that necessitated changing health priorities. It could be argued that the medicalization of FGM diverts already strained resources, attention, and expertise in-country away from essential healthcare services, especially sexual and reproductive health services, including responding to conflict-related sexual violence and maternal and child health.
Women’s rights groups in Khartoum and other towns have established Emergency Response Rooms (ERRs) and other community-driven mutual aid efforts that could be used to mainstream FGM-related interventions as they respond to emerging humanitarian needs. Additionally, efforts to integrate FGM prevention and response into broader humanitarian assistance programs are essential in reaching displaced populations with life-saving interventions and support.
Engaging communities, religious leaders, and key stakeholders in the ‘new social structures’ shaped by conflict and displacement can foster much-needed dialogue, dispel myths, and promote alternative rites of passage that celebrate womanhood without resorting to harmful practices.
Despite having different priorities as displaced women and girls—such as humanitarian, livelihood, and other urgent needs— empowering them with knowledge and agency is essential in enabling them to assert their rights and resist pressures to undergo FGM.
Community-led initiatives to end FGM among Sudanese communities displaced from Khartoum into neighboring states or neighboring countries must take into consideration the diverse ethnic groups in Sudan—each with their distinct cultural traditions and practices relating to FGM, with some communities practicing different types of FGM. This requires an in-depth understanding of the sociocultural factors that drive it.
Although wealthier households in Sudan and people in urban areas were previously less likely to support FGM’s continuation, conflict highlights the intersectional impacts on different groups of women and girls, and forced displacement could result in the practice being carried to host countries that may lack effective legal frameworks or enforcement mechanisms to address cross-border FGM.
Considering anti-FGM interventions transcend geographical boundaries and ethnicities, they must be carefully tailored to community needs. Cross-border FGM could also be driven by a sense of struggling to maintain a cultural identity and uphold perceived social status in a new society.
Reaffirming commitments to end FGM
At the international level, concerted action is needed to address the intersecting challenges of FGM, conflict, and forced displacement. The United Nations and other multilateral organizations must prioritize the issue on the global agenda, mobilizing resources and political will to further research, support affected populations, and strengthen efforts to eradicate FGM in conflict-affected areas.
Moreover, partnerships between governments, civil society organizations, and grassroots activists remain essential in driving a collective response that transcends borders and builds solidarity among diverse stakeholders.
As Sudanese women bear the brunt of violence and displacement, women-led organizations are instrumental in fostering resilience and actively rebuilding their communities. Supporting and financing these organizations should be prioritized, as it is not only a matter of promoting rights but also a pathway to peace and stability.
As we confront the grim reality of FGM amidst conflict and forced displacement, we must reaffirm our commitment to the fundamental rights and dignity of every woman and girl. We cannot stand idly by as generations continue to suffer the devastating consequences of this harmful practice.
Now is the time for bold and decisive action guided by principles of justice, equality, and compassion. Together, we can break the chains of FGM, offering hope and healing to those who have endured untold suffering and paving the way for a future free from violence and discrimination for all.
Note:Paleki Ayang is Equality Now’s Gender Advisor for the Middle East and North Africa
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 23 (IPS) – At the start of 2024, we stand at a critical juncture: Geopolitical tensions are escalating, economic integration is unravelling, and multilateral cooperation is faltering. This global fragmentation threatens to undermine decades of progress made for children worldwide.
The choices we make today – whether to continue on this path or whether we should bolster global cooperation – will have a profound impact on generations to come.
Children are always the most vulnerable in times of crisis – a reality highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic, when school closures, economic hardship and disrupted health services jeopardized children’s rights and wellbeing.
Tensions among major powers are rising and the threat of new conflicts emerging is high. Beyond the immediate physical dangers, children can experience lasting psychological trauma and violations of their basic rights.
If military spending continues increasing at the expense of investments in healthcare, education and social protections, children’s development will be further compromised.
Meanwhile, economic fragmentation is widening disparities between countries. Restrictive trade policies and supply chain disruptions are leading to rising energy and food prices, reducing access to essential goods and negatively impacting child nutrition and household incomes.
Competition for critical minerals essential for the green economy is increasing the risks of trade fragmentation while threatening the pace of the green energy transition. At the same time, the drive to expand mining for minerals puts mining communities and children at risk of exploitative practices.
Despite continued global economic growth, the lukewarm and uneven recovery is diminishing prospects for reducing child poverty. From now until 2030, 15 million more children a year will be living in poverty than would have otherwise, due to the unequal post-COVID recovery.
This gloomy picture is compounded by the weakening of multilateral institutions, which is further undermining the potential for progress for children. Why?
Because a fragmented multilateral system that is hamstrung by competing interests will struggle to deliver on conflict prevention, climate change, effective digital governance, debt relief and enforcing child rights standards, fuelling dissatisfaction in the Global South with rising inequalities.
Children in the poorest nations also face continued barriers to financing for basic services. Crippling debt, high remittance fees and lack of voice in global economic governance restrict investments in healthcare, education and social protections – investments vital to children’s survival and development.
But amid all these concerning trends, we see still signs of hope. Alternative alliances are emerging in the developing world to advance cooperation, bringing novel policy solutions, more nimble policymaking and effective results.
Despite expressing discontent with current democratic political structures, young people remain optimistic that opportunities exist to reform and resolve deficiencies in the political system, whether at the national or international level. They are engaging as change-makers, breathing new life into civic participation and democratic renewal.
In addition, technological innovations are unlocking new opportunities to empower children and enhance their rights. Green transition, if carried out in a just and sustainable way – one that prioritizes young people’s needs, skills and access to jobs in emerging sectors (such as the digital and green economy) – can benefit younger generations.
Reforms and modernization of global governance and financing arrangements could still deliver greater justice for developing countries. This more hopeful path will not unfold on its own. It requires global leaders to make an active choice – to double down on solidarity, inclusion and cooperation despite tensions and instability.
Prioritizing children and their rights must be at the centre of this choice.
Jasmina Byrne is Chief, Foresight & Policy, UNICEF Innocenti – Global Office of Research and Foresight.
A view of part of Guayaquil, Ecuador’s second most populated city and main port, which is now dominated by violence as a hub for shipping drugs out of the country to the United States and Europe. CREDIT: Carolina Loza León / IPS
by Carolina Loza (guayaquil, ecuador)
Inter Press Service
GUAYAQUIL, Ecuador, Feb 12 2024 (IPS) – “For a couple of years now we’ve been seeing the violence growing so fast,” said José, who asked not to give his last name for fear of reprisals he may face in Monte Sinai, a low-income neighborhood in Ecuador’s most populous city, Guayaquil.
José, a 45-year-old Venezuelan, came here looking for a better life in 2019. “You could scrape by, barely, but you could make a living,” he said.
For José, Ecuador offered an opportunity for a peaceful life that allowed him to cover his expenses and raise his three children, something he could no longer do in his native Venezuela. He first moved to a shantytown in this part of western Guayaquil, which is also the country’s main port and one of its two economic hubs, along with Quito, the capital.
José paused before telling IPS: “In the last two years, the violence has accelerated, it’s impossible to live.”
This South American country has recently become one of the most violent in Latin America and the world. And José’s anxious observations coincide with the analysis of different organizations and experts.
Ecuador’s geographic position between two cocaine producers, Colombia and Peru, make it a strategic location for drug distribution across the Pacific Ocean.
The demand for drug trafficking, the gradual economic devastation and the weakening of the country’s political system exacerbated in 2023 with the dissolution of the legislature and a call for early elections, helped strengthen criminal gangs, which began to take root in Ecuador as part of the chain of trafficking of cocaine and other drugs.
Growing institutional corruption enabled the gangs to infiltrate the police and the prison system, making it easier for imprisoned criminal leaders to turn prison facilities, intended for rehabilitation, into their centers of operations and expansion.
In the gangs’ struggle to gain control, in 2021, the first large-scale massacre inside a prison in Ecuador occurred, something that became routine as the violence escalated.
For years in Ecuador, criminal organizations have been coordinating their actions against the State, according to Renato Rivera-Rhon, an organized crime and security analyst. “Prisons are an environment of opportunity for organized crime in Ecuador,” he said in an interview with InSightCrime, an organization that focuses on criminal activities.
Rivera-Rhon mentioned that networks within prisons facilitate dialogue, and gang leaders have lawyers within the network, indicating the existence of a web of a certain level of agreements between organized crime gangs.
Police officers prepare to patrol the streets in Guayaquil, on Ecuador’s Pacific coast, days after the declaration of a state of emergency as the government tries to combat the drug gangs that have turned Ecuador into one of the world’s most violent countries. CREDIT: Carolina Loza León / IPS
José told IPS how he went from being a street vendor outside schools in Guayaquil without any complications to becoming a victim of extortion, forced to make “protection payments” known locally as “vacunas” or vaccines.
Monte Sinai was one of the first areas in Guayaquil where residents and business owners became the victims of criminal gangs who began demanding “vacunas”, although none of the residents consulted by IPS would identify the group that controls the area, and they never refer to it by name.
The extortion method varies depending on the business and the payment can be demanded weekly, monthly or, as in José’s case, daily. “One of them (a gang member) would hang around when I was selling outside the schools, and would keep track of how much I sold and charge me a third of what I earned that day,” José said.
“You can’t live like this. They don’t let you do anything, you can’t survive,” he complained.
One of José’s three sons was also a victim of extortion when he set up a fast food business selling mainly hamburgers.
Friends of José told him that when they rode on public transportation buses, people would get on and ask for “a little donation,” which was actually another form of extortion. The charge was one dollar, which they had to plan for on top of the 0.35 cent fare.
“You prefer not to ride the bus, because you don’t have the money to pay a dollar for each trip,” said a friend of José’s who preferred not to be identified.
Monte Sinai is a rapidly growing neighborhood, a city within a city as some demographers call it, where a large number of people make a living in the informal economy.
The growth of gangs in Ecuador took hold gradually, in poor areas such as Monte Sinai, and their presence and control boomed during the last two years. Bomb threats, sporadic detonations, leaflets in which gangs threaten individuals or groups such as immigrants, and an increase in robberies are reflections of the violent control exercised by these groups.
The activity of the gangs has spread throughout the country, in an escalation that has reached the point of total chaos at times, such as on Jan. 9.
That day, a television station was taken over by a gang in Guayaquil, there were bomb threats in several cities and shootings near judicial entities, which led the government to declare a state of emergency.
The state of emergency allowed for joint military and police action in the streets and prisons, under the premise that the State is in conflict with armed criminal groups.
Lorenzo and his teenage son Carlos are photographed on one of the unpaved streets of Monte Sinai, a low-income neighborhood in northwest Guayaquil, which they had to flee because of threats and extortion by criminal gangs in the area. CREDIT: Carolina Loza León / IPS
Rivera-Rhon stressed that on Jan. 9, the alliances and ties between criminal gangs were demonstrated by the scope and coordination of the chaos in the country and the fear provoked among the public.
He said that “if you look at things from the point of view of someone in the capital, law enforcement has a monopoly of force, but this is not the case in rural areas, where there is total abandonment by the State.”
The expert on crime mentioned how in localities on the border with Colombia, there was already a social order imposed by armed groups that “generated a contagion to other areas of the country” and wondered whether the State had control over the exercise of force in other parts of the country and neighborhoods in cities such as Guayaquil.
Carlos Carrión, secretary of the Fundación Desaparecidos en Ecuador (Foundation for Missing People), said abandonment by the State has been going on for decades. A resident of Jaramijó, a fishing village near the port city of Manta, for years he has led petitions for the repatriation of fishermen imprisoned in the United States for transporting drugs.
Carrión pointed to the lack of response at the State level and the growing control of drug trafficking networks that recruit fishermen, without any control by the armed forces. “Nobody seems to have cared for years, and look where we’ve ended up,” Carrión told IPS by telephone from Jaramijó, some 190 kilometers north of Guayaquil.
Lorenzo, 46, said the Jan. 9 violence was nothing new. In 2023 he had to move from Guayaquil to the port of Posorja, after he became the victim of robberies and closed down his small business.
“Outside the store there were four guys on a motorcycle. From far away, one of them pulled a gun on me and I didn’t know how to get away. I had a backpack, where I carried my phone. I also had my watch and money that I always carry, about 20 or 40 dollars. They took everything,” said Lorenzo, who had worked hard to open a small store selling food and other products in Monte Sinai.
He told IPS that “they said to me: ‘get out of here.’ They left quickly, after going around the same street twice.” It was the last episode of violence and extortion he put up with in Guayaquil and the one that led him to decide to close his shop and look for work in Posorja, a small fishing port 113 kilometers away.
“I used to live here, but now we’re doing better. I had my monthly income from the store, but I had to leave the house in Monte Sinai to rent in Posorja,” he said during one of his last Sunday visits to the neighborhood to see friends and check on his now empty house.
One of his sons, teenager Carlos, was with him on the Sunday he was interviewed by IPS in Monte Sinai. His two older sons have also moved out of the neighborhood.
Businesses are closed in a small shopping center on Delta Avenue, near the main university in the Ecuadorian city of Guayaquil, due to people’s fear of going out in certain areas of the port city. CREDIT: Carolina Loza León / IPS
Lorenzo’s biggest fear before leaving Monte Sinai was that something would happen to his children. He even considered emigrating in 2022, crossing the Darien Gap, after hearing about people who had made it through that dangerous stretch of Panamanian jungle to the United States.
Both José and Lorenzo lived in fear of the impact that the violence and increased insecurity could have on their families.
According to José, violence during 2023 in the area “increased by 70 percent.” And so far, according to his former neighbors, the armed forces have not yet arrived in Monte Sinaí, despite the fact that a state of emergency has been declared and that the area is notorious for the violence suffered by local residents.
José stays in contact with his former neighbors, a community that welcomed him with solidarity and to which he will always be grateful.
“I love Ecuador, I was welcomed here, but the situation had become unlivable,” he said from Quito, the capital, where he now sells candy at stop lights. At the end of January, José decided to move to Quito and check out the possibility of settling in this city, where he feels safer.
With most of Monte Sinai’s schools closed due to the violence, José had no alternative when he was left without a source of income and became subject to constant threats, he told IPS during a second meeting in Quito, 430 kilometers from his old life.
His eldest son sold the supplies for his fast food business and returned to Venezuela, while his two teenagers are still in Guayaquil, waiting for their father to get everything ready in Quito.
Lorenzo is no longer returning to Monte Sinai, he told IPS by telephone from Pasorj a few days after the interview there, because both he and his son Carlos received new threats. He is looking for alternatives to move to the coastal province of Manabí, which is also affected by violence, although to a lesser degree than Guayas province, of which Guayaquil is the capital.
José finds some consolation in living in Quito and being able to go out on the street with a little more peace of mind. He quotes a friend who stayed in Guayaquil: “Back there, the only thing they don’t charge us for is breathing.”
