Opinion by Sudip Ranjan Basu, Sanjay Srivastava (bangkok, thailand)
Inter Press Service
BANGKOK, Thailand, Mar 10 (IPS) – Two destructive Category 4 tropical cyclones, Judy and Kevin, and an earthquake of 6.5 magnitude impacted over 80 per cent of the Vanuatu population from 1 to 3 March 2023. To address this emergency situation, the UN, along with Pacific member States have deployed personnel on the ground to coordinate humanitarian assistance and prepare post-disaster damage assessment.
Sitting in the Pacific âRing of Fire,â Vanuatu experiences frequent volcanic and seismic activity. And along with the other Pacific small island developing States (SIDS), Vanuatu faces existential threats due to rising sea level, ocean acidification and the increased frequency and severity of natural disasters and is on the front line of climate crisis.
The twin cyclones and an earthquake in just 48 hours remind the world that seismic and climate risks are converging and intensifying â no community feels this stronger than those of the Blue Pacific Continent.
On macro-economic impact, in fact, Pacific SIDS face Average Annual Losses from multiple hazards totaling to US$ 1.1 billion in the current scenario. This figure is set to increase to US$ 1.3 billion under moderate and US$1.4 billion under worst-case climate warming scenarios. As a percentage of GDP, Vanuatu, Tonga and Palau are projected to face highest losses – Vanuatu is projected to lose a staggering 20 per cent GDP annually due to disasters.
Figure 1: Tropical cyclones Judy and Kevin track with wind speed zones (UNITAR-UNOSAT)
Intensifying and expanding climate crisis
In ESCAPâs recent report, the analysis shows that at 1.5 to 2.0 °C warming, there are likely intensifying annual wind speeds of tropical cyclones and that the risk of tropical cyclones is expected to expand and include newer areas beyond the historical tracks (Figure 2). Vanuatu in particular, will experience higher risk of tropical cyclone both in terms of the intensification as well as geographic expansion of the riskscape.
As cyclone hazards are intensifying and deviating from their traditional tracks, their greater complexity results in deeper uncertainties in the ability to predict. Our Blue Pacific Continent is not sufficiently prepared.
Figure 2: Intensifying and expanding cyclone risks under new climate change scenarios
Formulating transformative actions
As the climate changes, the riskscape is transforming. These disaster risks compound and cascade to amplify the great hardship experienced by the Pacific SIDS in terms of population and critical infrastructure exposure. The argument for transformative action to mitigate and adapt to intensifying and expanding disaster risks in the Blue Pacific Continent has never been more compelling.
First, early warning for all is an imperative, needs to capture compounding risks.
Relative to other countries in the subregion, Vanuatuâs Target G scores are high, reporting substantial to comprehensive coverage of multi-hazard early warning systems across all indicators. WMOâs Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre in Nadi, Fiji was providing early warnings in the face of power outages and surmounting uncertainties â as a result, there have been no reported fatalities.
Figure 3: Sendai Framework for DRR Target G scores for countries in the Pacific region
Second, transformative adaptation solutions are needed.
To minimize and prevent systemic and cascading risk, we need to make new infrastructure and water resource management more resilient. Improving dryland crop production and using nature-based solutions such as increasing mangroves protection are also priority adaptation solutions.
1.5 per cent of GDP for adaptation investment is estimated to be needed in Pacific SIDS – three times less than the average losses projected. These adaptation investments must be risk-informed and strategically directed towards policy actions that yield high cost-benefits. Where there are multi-hazard risk hotspots across the region, risk-informed policy and transformative actions should capitalize on inter-sectoral synergies and co-benefits.
Third, the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent provides a clear pathway
With the adoption of the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent in July 2022, Pacific SIDS have developed a clear pathway to synergize regional priorities with accelerated implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the SAMOA Pathway.
Next generation risk analytics, advances in climate science, geo-spatial modeling, Artificial Intelligence and machine learning must be at the heart of people-centered and evidence-based decision-making. And, the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific is an ideal platform to take forward some of the policy decisions.
Strengthening subregional and regional cooperation platform
Tropical cyclones, often transboundary in nature, require an architecture of regional co-operation mechanisms to effectively manage the shared risks. In this instance, local capacities and regional support mechanisms should be commended. To further strengthen this work, the lesson from Vanuatuâs back-to-back cyclones and earthquake is to have effective, impact-based and risk informed early warning systems that can capture the complexity and dynamisms of a compounding risk.
The Asia-Pacific Risk and Resilience Portal was developed by ESCAP with the goal of creating a user-friendly one stop platform for policymakers to access a vast array of scientific information and decision support tools to promote risk informed policy decisions.
Furthermore, the Vanuatu incidents underscores the need for conducting a rapid post-disaster needs assessment that can support formulation of a long-term recovery strategy and plan for its reconstruction by applying a standardized approach with innovative methodology and framework.
The overlapping and transboundary nature of risks experienced by countries of the Blue Pacific Continent cannot be addressed without solidarity and collective action towards strengthening regional cooperation platform.
Sanjay Srivastava is Chief, Disaster Risk Reduction, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP);
Sudip Ranjan Basu is Deputy Head, ESCAP Subregional Office for the Pacific
The 67th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (6-17 March) gets underway at UN headquarters in New York . Credit: UN Photo/Manuel ElĂas
Opinion by Dana Abed (beirut)
Inter Press Service
The writer is Global Campaigns Strategist for Gender Rights and Justice at Oxfam International.
BEIRUT, Mar 10 (IPS) – This month, government and civil society organization representatives gathered in New York for the United Nationsâ 67th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) to discuss technology as a tool to facilitate access to education for women and girls.
But what should have been discussed were the basic issues of gender equality in education. As more than 85% of the world is living under austerity, and with 70% of countries cutting funding to education services, access to education for women and girls is being devastated by the lack of public funding.
The gap between boys and girls when it comes to school enrolment continues to be major, and quite concerning. Data consistently shows â particularly in low- and middle- income countries â that girls from poor families are the children most likely to be, and remain, out of school.
And the cost of education is one of the main barriers for access â which raises the question of affordability when it comes to technological integration.
While technological innovation has the potential to support instruction and education governance, we cannot turn a blind eye to the reality of digital inequality, the possibility of increased fees, and the privatization of education.
That is on top of the existing risks that are associated with the use of technology, including online violence and abuse and the lack of digital protection for girls, further locking girls out of their rights to education.
Austerity measures, public funding cuts, and privatization severely limit the goal of universal education. In a report published last November, Oxfam found that austerity is a form of gender-based violence.
And during CSW67, we emphasized that access to public and quality education is fundamental to gender equality and the realization of the rights of women and girls.
Oxfam does not claim that austerity measures are designed to hurt women and girls, but as policy makers design those policies, they tend to ignore the specific needs of women and girls and turn a blind eye to the disproportionate impact that those policies have on our communities.
Weâve reached this conclusion by gathering evidence from around the world, which showed that governments do not prioritize the needs to women and girls. For instance, more than 54% of the countries planning to cut their social protection budget in 2023 have minimal or no maternity and child support.
In their misguided attempts to balance their books against a looming global economic crisis, governments are treating women and girls as expendable. Women, particularly those from marginalized racial, ethnic, caste, and age groups, are inherently discriminated against when it comes to economic and social opportunities and accessing available public resources. Additional cuts to inequality-combatting public services mean these groups are the hardest hit.
Cuts to both the public wage bill and public health and social protection services â measures that women and their families rely on for survival â mean that women and girls bear the brunt of this austerity because health, education, feeding the family, paying the bills, caring for children and elderly all fall most heavily onto them.
For example, cutting wages in the public work force â especially in sectors like health where women represent 90% of the workforce or education where they represent 64% of the workforce â will directly impact job security.
We must resist austerity and should instead be taxing the wealthiest corporations and people properly. A progressive tax on the worldâs millionaires and billionaires could raise $1.1 trillion more than the savings that governments are currently planning to make through their austerity cuts.
With such funding, governments could adopt feminist budgeting across all sectors that put women and girls in all their diversity at the heart of policy making, including ensuring access to quality, and public education.
Feminist movements have for years pushed for bold alternatives to our neo-liberal, capital-oriented economies, and Oxfam raises its voice with them. The integration of technology in education must be looked at from an intersectional lens, taking into consideration barriers to access for girls and low- and middle-income countries, and should not come with an additional cost to the education bill.
We need to stand in solidarity with the womenâs rights and feminist movements in demanding that our leaders stop peddling the gender-based violence of austerity as the solution and support more feminist progressive representation beyond identity politics.
We must resist creating societies that prioritize the needs of the most privileged at the expense of everyone else â and instead work to create communities and policies that reflect our diverse backgrounds and identities.
BRIGHTON, UK, Mar 09 (IPS) – This year marks the halfway pointâ eight years in and eight years outâ of the UN Sustainable Development Goals to end poverty and reduce inequalities.
Yet we are a long way off from these commitments, and multiple crises – now known as âpolycrisisâ â such as conflict, disaster and extreme poverty are converging on low income and lower-middle income countries, necessitating systemic change in our poverty eradication efforts.
The scale of the challenge before us is undeniable. Poverty has long been concentrated in certain low- and lower middle-income countries that continue to experience conflict and a high number of conflict related fatalities, and high numbers of people affected by disasters from earthquakes, to floods, fires or drought.
These are just two causes of impoverishment and chronic poverty, which often combine with other crises and shocks including ill health.
This isn’t just a concern, however, at the country level. The challenge we are increasingly facing because of polycrisis in many parts of the world is that inequalities within countries are also worsening. The complex and often multi-layered nature of todayâs crises means that policymakers need to develop longer term solutions, instead of firefighting crises as they emerge.
Our work at the Chronic Poverty Advisory Network (CPAN) in Afghanistan saw that the pandemic, layered with the transition in power, drought, and heightened economic crises, all combined to drive poverty and a dramatic increase in hunger.
Its consequences were especially worrying for certain groups, not least women and girls, and with intergenerational consequences.
In Nigeria, research points to a confluence of hardships over the years experienced by the poorest populations due to sequenced, interdependent crises. The poorest households pre-pandemic were more likely to experience hunger and sell agricultural and non-agricultural assets to cope during COVID-19 in 2020.
As time went on they were also more likely to pay more than the official price for petrol in 2022 during rampant economic crisis, and to expect drought and delayed rains to negatively affect them financially into 2023.
Yet despite interconnected crises, most governments and international agencies respond to each disaster individually as it arises. This could limit the effectiveness of poverty eradication interventions or create additional sources of risk and vulnerability amidst polycrisis.
For example, the singular focus of many countries responding to COVID-19 often diverted resources from other interventions including peacebuilding operations, thereby allowing new conflict risks to arise.
Working âinâ and âonâ polycrisis: centring equity and risk
To reach the goal of poverty eradication and reducing extreme inequities, it is critical to respond in a way is sensitive to working in places experiencing polycrisis. This requires at a minimum upholding principles of âdo no harmâ and being sensitive to local conditions and contexts.
At the same time, we need to find ways of proactively working on polycrisis, by responding to multiple crises simultaneously rather than one at a time. In other words, building on learning from conflict contexts, we need to be working in and on polycrisis in the road to zero poverty.
Many countries worked âinâ polycrisis when responding to climate-related disasters during COVID-19. For example, the Bangladesh government adapted its Cyclone Preparedness Plan through various actions including modifying dissemination of messaging through public announcements and digital modalities, and combining early warning messaging with COVID-19 prevention and protection messaging.
Afghanistan disaggregates needs by sector, severity, location, and population groups in its humanitarian needs overview, which when considered holistically can help ensure responses that prioritise benefiting people in poverty.
There are equally important lessons from working âonâ polycrisis. The World Food Programmeâs operational plan in response to COVID-19 was regularly updated to consider evolving layered crises and support pre-emptive action, scale-up direct food assistance, and reinforce safety nets.
There are also examples we can draw on for reducing poverty from around localised decision making, relying on the knowledge that local communities, womenâs rights organisations, and local disaster risk management agencies have about populations in the areas in which they operate.
Flexibility in funding is important in this process to be able to respond to rapidly changing contexts and needs.
Working âinâ and âonâ polycrisis together necessitates matrix thinking, rebooting and recasting what we know of complexity of intersectionality. While we previously recognised intersecting inequalities primarily by identity markers, such as gender, caste, and socio-economic status, we need to increasingly be aware of how inequalities of people and place converge over time, and how we might centre equity in risk-informed responses.
This requires a fundamental shift from single-issue technocratic approaches to crisis management. For example, though social protection – direct financial assistance for people – was heralded as a key mitigation measure during COVID-19 and in response to recent food and energy price inflation, most cash transfer programmes averaged just four to five months during the pandemic.
Social protection could be adjusted to increasingly target the vulnerable as well as people in poverty, and within those categories the people who have arguably been most disadvantaged by these crises. Recovery programmes by governments and international agencies also need to go on for longer than they typically do to build people’s resilience in times of uncertainty.
Disaster-risk management agencies within government could also consistently integrate conflict considerations in their activities. There are examples of anticipatory action such as early warning systems that draw on local, customary knowledge that could be built on in this process.
Investments in coordination between disaster risk, social protection, and peacebuilding agencies, as well as multilateralism between governments, civil society, and international organisations more broadly are needed to anticipate and adapt to systemic risk.
But this risk-informed development will only get us so far, if equity is not centred alongside risk management. Just as crises are increasingly layered and interdependent, we need to similarly integrate our responses to break the link between polycrisis and poverty.
Opinion by Giulia Ribeiro Barao, Bosen Lily Liu (paris)
Inter Press Service
The following opinion piece is part of series to mark International Womenâs Day, March 8.
PARIS, Mar 08 (IPS) – In September 2020, the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action for womenâs rights celebrated its 25th anniversary. It was, however, a bittersweet commemoration, mixing joy for the progress in gender equality achieved since 1995, and the stark realization about the multidimensional gaps awaiting tackling and the new divides brought by the social consequences of COVID-19.
In 2021, UNESCO projected that 11 million girls were at risk of not returning to school after the education interruptions caused by the pandemic. Even though the educational disruption accelerated the way into innovative learning practices, including distance and online education, it was not an equal reality for all social groups, since those already marginalized were also overrepresented in the offline population, including girls and women, and especially those living in poverty and rural communities (ECOSOC, 2021).
In 2020, worldwide, 57 percent of women used the Internet, compared with 62 per cent of men (ECOSOC, 2021). In the least developed countries (LDCs), landlocked developing countries (LLDCs), Africa, and the Arab States, the gender gap in internet use remains more significant.
For instance, in LDCs, only 19 per cent of women are using the internet, which is 12 percentage points lower than men. Similarly, in Africa, 24 per cent of women use the internet compared to 35 per cent of men, while in the Arab States, the Internet usage rate is 56 per cent, compared to 68 per cent of men.
Girls and women who are kept without access to Internet and digital literacy will not benefit from the technological revolution that is currently transforming all areas of life, most centrally the educational sector and the job markets.
Even though innovation and technology for girls and womenâs education is undoubtedly a critical topic in the contemporary scenario, we should notice that innovation itself extends beyond the boundaries of the digital world.
To further explore the field of innovation in education, the UNESCO Young People on Transforming Education Project (YPTEP) focuses on innovative learning practices â technological or non-technological tools and techniques â initiated and led by learners themselves for meaningful and transformative engagement in their own educational journeys.
One highlight of the project is on understanding the gender-responsive practices from girls and women.
Girls and women worldwide have long been innovative in fighting gender barriers and creating self-initiative and community strategies to accessing learning even when excluded from Internet access and other forms of innovation.
A female leader who creates a finance course for mothers, while providing turns of collective care for their children, is innovating in education. A girl who creates a book club with her friends to read and debate publications on feminism is innovating in education.
Women in STEM, taking part in research and development groups, although still underrepresented, are innovating in education.
So, here we are â right at the crossroad where education, innovation and gender inequalities meet. Not paying attention to those issues will only aggravate previous gaps, hampering the advancement of all 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
To contribute to this debate and pathways for solutions, the UNESCO team of Young People on Transforming Education Project (YPTEP) at UNESCO IESALC hosted a Fireside Chat on âWomen and girls, innovation, and higher educationâ on 6 March 2023 to reunite women and girls from different countries and regions and celebrate their success not only to overcome challenges, but also to become changemakers in the field.
During the chat, we had the opportunity to engage with ten female storytellers who shared their stories on innovative learning and expand our understanding of innovation, creativity, and transformation in education.
Stories approached, in a broader sense, innovative paths in getting access to higher education; innovative learning practices to get through education and achieve learning goals; innovative tools and techniques that have enhanced their experiences as learners both inside and outside the classroom; and studying and working initiatives to design new technology and broader forms of innovation for education.
Participation in the Fireside Chat is also open and expected from all those who wish to share their experiences on innovative learning and higher education. We have organized interactive activities and will have âopen chatboxâ and âopen micâ for anyone who are willing to present yourselves typing and tell your stories live.
References
Global Education Monitoring Report Team & UNESCO. (2021). #HerEducationOurFuture: keeping girls in the picture during and after the COVID-19 crisis; the latest facts on gender equality in education . UNESCO.
In our region, women and girls continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV, accounting for 63% of the regionâs new HIV infections in 2021, write the authors. Credit: Shutterstock
Opinion by Anne Githuku-Shongwe, Eva Kiwango (johannesburg)
Inter Press Service
Anne Githuku-Shongwe is the UNAIDS Regional Support Team for Eastern and Southern Africa Director and Eva Kiwango is the Country Director of UNAIDS South Africa
JOHANNESBURG, Mar 07 (IPS) – Recent crises have pushed the gender inequality gap even wider and new technology has brought new threats to womenâs autonomy and safety. This yearâs International Women’s Day celebrated under the theme âDigitALL: Innovation and technology for gender equalityâ is an opportunity to strengthen efforts to uplift and empower women and girlsâ digital participation to ultimately improve their lives.
Sima Bahous, UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director of UN Women has described it as âdigital povertyâ: the digital divide which âdisproportionately affects women and girls with low literacy or low income, those living in rural or remote areas, migrants, women with disabilities, and older womenâ.
On a continent that contributes only 13% towards global internet users, nearly 45% fewer women than men have access to the internet in sub-Saharan Africa.
That means alarmingly high numbers of African women and girls are left out of digitally-enhanced opportunities such as employment, mobile money transactions and banking.
From a health perspective, excluding women and girls from digital participation restricts their access to life-saving information. That can have dire consequences in a region such as eastern and southern Africa where young women and girls carry the burden of HIV.
In our region, women and girls continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV, accounting for 63% of the regionâs new HIV infections in 2021. HIV infections are three times higher among adolescent girls and young women (aged 15 to 24 years) than among males of the same age.
The factors fueling this reality are power, deep-set inequalities and limited access to information among other factors.
Our report Dangerous Inequalities highlights that sexual reproductive health rights (SRHR) barriers, lack of quality comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) and restrictive and contradictory policy frameworks make it difficult, if not impossible, for adolescent girls and young women to access essential SRHR and HIV prevention and treatment services.
Furthermore, sociocultural norms, stigmas, discrimination, perceptions and age of consent laws impede young women and girls from accessing HIV testing and SRHR services.
Such barriers discourage young women and adolescent girls from approaching healthcare centres for their sexual reproductive needs.
This leaves girls with insufficient knowledge and skills to protect themselves from unsafe and unhealthy sexual practices, leading to HIV infection and sexually transmitted infections, teenage pregnancies, unsafe abortions and sexual violence.
The UNFPA âSeeing The Unseenâ report highlights that 13% of all young women in developing countries begin childbearing while still being children themselves. In eastern and southern Africa, the overall weighted pregnancy prevalence among adolescent girls and young women (10-24 years of age) is alarmingly high at 25%.
We have completely normalised the abnormal. That is a crisis in itself. However, closing the gender equality gap will give us the opportunity to change the inequality trajectory for women and girls.
Technology and the digital space should be made more inclusive and accessible in our region and beyond. Virtual medical consultations, SRHR apps and searchable information should be options our young women and girls should be able to explore in a shame-free, destigmatised environment.
We applaud African developers who have created multiple free apps such as In Her Hands developed by the Southern African Development Community with the support of UNAIDS. Such apps work to empower young women and girls with SRHR information as well as expand HIV prevention outreach.
However, all our efforts to make the digital world accessible and inclusive should also be safe. Unfettered access to information and unscrupulous persons leave women vulnerable to misinformation on the very health issues they would seek to treat.
Furthermore, while the virtual world gives us a space to create boundaries and interact at a seemingly safe level for school, work and socialization, online violence against women is proving to be pervasive.
A UN brief shares physical threats, sexual harassment, stalking, zoombombing and sex trolling as examples of some of the attacks women face online.
It is therefore important to accelerate internet literacy for women and girls and equip them with precautionary and reactionary measures to ensure their digital safety before online violence permeates the physical world leading to serious challenges such as physical stalking, abduction and trafficking.
In spite of the challenges and safety concerns, the digital world can be an empowering space when harnessed correctly. Safe digital spaces hold the potential to disseminate life-saving, evidence-based information on SRHR, HIV prevention, treatment, GBV reporting and related support mechanisms at the click of a button.
Initiatives addressing SRHR and HIV ought to be framed with an inclusive digital lens at the fore. Multi-stakeholder collaboration is key, particularly with the private sector, internet service providers and data hubs.
At UNAIDS, we have partnered with UNESCO, UNICEF, UNFPA and UN Women to launch the âEducation Plusâ Initiative. The initiative accelerates actions and investments to prevent HIV by ensuring adolescent girls and young women in Africa have equal opportunities to access quality secondary education, alongside key education and health services and support for their economic autonomy and empowerment.
Furthermore, the Transforming Education Summit is a key initiative of Our Common Agenda launched by UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, in September 2021. It works to recover pandemic-related learning losses and sow the seeds to transform education in a rapidly changing world.
If harnessed effectively, connectivity and openly accessible digital teaching and learning resources can contribute to the transformation and democratization of education.
As we work to end AIDS by 2030, access to new prevention technologies such as long-acting PrEP to be rolled out in Botswana, Uganda and Zimbabwe should be expanded to the entire region. That should be rolled out without disparity between rich and poorer countries.
Emerging technologies such as the vaginal ring, an important feminist option, need to be supported to increase efficacy and accessibility. Furthermore, the preventive benefits of antiretroviral treatment need to be promoted and understood. Platforms such as social media should be considered powerful and accessible tools to raise awareness of HIV prevention and care in our region.
Technology is a game changer in access to health information and enabling young people to break taboos around sexual health and HIV and feel empowered in their bodies.
We need to urgently level the digital space, use it to end gender inequalities and safeguard our women and girls from the scourge of HIV. There is no price on human life: Ending AIDS is a promise that can and must be kept.
Opinion by Mercy Erhi Makpor (guimarĂÂŁes, portugal)
Inter Press Service
GuimarĂÂŁes, Portugal, Mar 07 (IPS) – The following opinion piece is part of series to mark International Womenâs Day, March 8. The accelerating pace of digitalization has ushered humanity into a whole different era of information and communication. Today, digitalization permeates every aspect of our lives, socio-economically and politically.
Pakistani women peacekeepers in the audience at the National University of Science and Technology in Islamabad, where Secretary-General AntĂłnio Guterres delivered an address on the topic of peacekeeping. Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten
Opinion by Simone Galimberti (kathmandu, nepal)
Inter Press Service
The following opinion piece is part of series to mark International Womenâs Day, March 8
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Mar 06 (IPS) – If you want to have a good reading on women and young girlsâ activism, there is a high chance that you have missed an incredibly interesting report.
On the one hand, the special procedures under UN Human Rights focused on women should be re-organized and on the other hand, country level programs supporting women should become more unified. Meanwhile, a new global platform, building on the Generation Equality Forum, could bring these two complementary but vastly different realm of works, together to engage the global public and the leaders.
The blueprint offers a real and practical guidance on about how the direct involvement and engagement of women and young girls is essential if governments are serious about achieving gender equality and ends, once for all, any type of gender-based discriminations.
The Working Group is composed by five experts, mostly academician but also practitioners, on womenâs rights and despite the low profile, it maintains a real busy annual schedule that makes its work incredibly relevant and valuable.
It does not only meet three times a year for planning and coordination and but also holds a dialogue at the Human Rights Council in June in addition to reporting to the General Assembly in October/November and also participates at the annual March meeting of the Commission on the Status of the Women.
On the top of all these tasks and consider that their commitment with the Working Group proceeds along their official and equally demanding full-time jobs, the members also conduct annual visits to member states to monitor and assess their work to protect women and girls against discrimination.
The problem is that its work does get neither visibility nor recognition.
One of the reasons is that the UN human rights architecture promoting and defending the rights of women is too complex and fragmented and requires a drastic overhaul.
There are too many mechanisms often with an almost overlapping mandates tasked to protect womenâs rights, perhaps also a reflection on the inevitable rivalries at the UN and the consequent compromises that are always struck by the member states.
Her mandate is stronger and certainly more visible than those of the members of the Working Group even though she operates within UN Human Rights.
Though the former mechanism is focused on fighting discrimination and the latter is instead exclusively aimed at assessing cases of violence against women, you might wonder if it could be more effective and value for money to devise a more united approach, a more effective modality to monitor and defend the rights of women around the world.
Certainly, we cannot discount the fact that we are talking about special procedures mechanisms within the Human Rights Council, an intergovernmental body within the UN that is actually the only forum where the member states of the UN discuss, share and peer reviews their human rights.
The special procedures are important because they uniquely involve top experts in matters of human rights and their contributions provide even more legitimacy to the important work that the UN System is doing to uphold the rights of vulnerable persons around the world.
A possibility to strengthen their work could be to imagine a different âgovernanceâ that maximizes their opinions and reviews, even with the possibility to provide full time tenures and adequate resources to support their work and give it the visibility it deserves.
It is composed by twenty-three experts and one of its main tasks is to âassist States parties in the preparation of initial and subsequent periodic reportsâ and holding constructive dialogue with them and issue the so called âconcluding observationsâ on what the member states present to show their commitment to CEDAW.
Officially started in 2017, the platform aims to âpromote thematic and institutional cooperation between the UN and regional expert mechanisms on the elimination of discrimination and violence against women and girls with the view of accelerating domestication of international and regional standards, achieving gender equality and empowering women and girlsâ.
The reality is that this mechanism never got traction nor got the mandate to truly coordinate among UN and external, autonomous regional mechanisms outside of the purview of the UN system.
Mentioned earlier, the Commission on the Status of the Women is the oldest of all these mechanisms that, while proved to be indispensable over the last decades to mainstream women rights within the universal human rights agenda, is now outdated.
Till now we have been only focusing on mechanisms to uphold, monitor and protect the rights of women.
We have not yet discussed the âprogramâ side of the equation, the work to prevent violence and discrimination against women and promote their empowerment being done by UN agencies and programs, including UN Women the agency that provides the secretariat of the Commission on the Status of Women.
In this respect, there is also, always within the UN System, the Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality or IANWGE, bringing together all the main women focal points of all UN agencies and programs.
Under responsibility of UN Women, the Network appears weak and just a formality though we should assume that at country level, all the work related to womenâs empowerment is coordinated under the United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (formerly named United Nations Development Assistance Framework).
This is a process that itself could require a further upgrade to truly maximize cooperation and avoidance of overlaps between and among agencies and programs.
It is evident that in both domains, on the one hand, the human rights accountability mechanisms and on the other hand, the actions and programs on the ground to change the status quo, there is need of a much stronger synergy and coordination, something that might be objected by several members of the UN that are unlikely to support anything akin to strengthen mechanisms upholding human rights.
Even the Commission on the Status of Women itself, whose upcoming session will be held between the 6 and17 March, should be re-thought.
With a multiyear thematic plan, the Commission, is a toothless and unnoticed advocacy and knowledge creation institution that each year comes up with a topic up for analysis and discussion.
This year, for example, the focus will be on âInnovation and technological change, and education in the digital age for achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girlsâ while last yearâs theme was centered around climate change, environment and disaster prevention.
There are no doubts that it is important to have a global convening forum that brings together the top experts on issues that are so relevant to achieve SDG 5. Yet it is not hard to imagine how a stronger, more coordinated women centered architecture in the UN could achieve and produce more while spending less.
Letâs remind ourselves that the Agenda 2030 and the SDGs brought some institutional innovations in the way the UN operates, primarily the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, that is the major SDGs focused platform promoted by the UN.
Besides its usual gathering in July, this year the Forum will also host another SDG Summit in September, the biggest format to discuss about and review the SDGs at the highest levels of political leadership worldwide.
Yet, while we are referring to a strong advocacy and review mechanism with a considerable amount of convening power, the High-Level Political Forum is simply what it is, a review mechanism of countriesâ performances towards accomplishing the SDGs and important vehicle for debating them.
A reform of a stronger UN System that is better positioned to truly achieve SDG 5, should acknowledge an existing deep gulf between promotion and defense of human rights focusing on women (as well other human rights issues) and, on the other end, actions on ground at legislative, judiciary and economic and social levels to change the status quo.
For example, UN Human Rights has no formal role in hosting the High-Level Political Forum that is instead organized by ECOSOC and has a very limited presence at countries level.
A better chance at ensuring that the rights of women are defended while their living conditions improve, could be based on two complementary internal reforms within the UN System: an improvement on how Human Rights operates and a drastic rethinking of how the women focused service, advocacy and delivery-oriented agencies of the UN work.
On the former, the UN Human Rights could undertake, with the aim of giving them more voice and authority, a major reform of its âaccountabilityâ mechanisms that rely on the professionalism, integrity and expertise of world class activists, advocates and legal scholars.
The role of the Commission on the Status of the Women should also be reviewed. As per now, its outreach and voice are limited within the development sector and it has become almost irrelevant and unknown to the global public opinion.
On the latter, in terms of programs and initiatives supporting women and their rights around the world, only a true One United Nations approach at country level could do the job with ultimately a much better coordination and one unified âdeliveryâ channel.
Both processes of change and their respective spheres of work, accountability and program, could then be promoted through a united âGlobal Womenâ platform that could end up with the same visibility that COP process gained for climate action.
A recently created multi partnership forum could, potentially, become such main vehicle to achieve SDG 5. I am talking of Generation Equality Forum, a joint initiative of Mexico and France that has been facilitated by UN Women.
It holds a great potential to facilitate new collaborations that so far has been convened twice in 2021, first in Mexico City and then in Paris, paving the way for an ambitious global program of action, the Global Acceleration Plan.
The interesting part of it is that the Forum is truly action oriented with its members committing to take action through six sub areas groups, branded as Generation Equality Action Coalitions that include the entire spectrum of areas that would ensure achieving SDG 5.
From gender violence to economic justice, to bodily autonomy and sexual reproductive rights, to climate justice to technology and innovation, to leadership, the coalitions, made up by hundreds of civil society organizations, global foundations and private corporations, can really facilitate partnerships with private sector and civil society, a capacity that the UN System has never mastered.
Can this new and bold attempt to catalyze efforts and investments for the rights of women and girls around the world become the epicenter of a new women focused development architecture?
Can a hybrid vehicle to rally global investments and actions for women help galvanize global attention on their rights and at same time do the job of meeting the targets of SDG 5?
Finally, would a new women focused âgovernanceâ of development assistance also force the UN System to change for good its working modalities?
Even if the accountability mechanisms under UN Human Rights would remain formally separated by this process of renewal for women ârights, nevertheless the banner of the Generation Equality Forum transformed into a âGlobal Womenâ platform could be used to highlight and âempowerâ their work.
The fact that this year there will be another gathering of the Generation Equality Forum could offer additional new momentum to the initiative though last year only a very low key event celebrated its 1st year anniversary.
Yet it was still an important gathering because it was where the Forumâs first accountability report was unveiled.
In few days from now the Forum will actively participate in the upcoming session of Commission on the Status of Women but with some insights, perhaps, the opposite process should occur.
The Commission and all other women focused mechanisms and programs, at minimum, could become part of a much larger and more institutionalized institution that should also be fully aligned to and possibly become the central pillar for SDG 5 of The High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development.
Rather they should be truly embraced head-on. Meanwhile another great publication on women and young girlsâ activism will be read by too few people.
Simone Galimberti is the Co-Founder of ENGAGE and co-initiator of the Good Leadership, Good for You & Good for the Society, both active in Nepal. He writes on volunteerism, social inclusion, youth development and regional integration as an engine to improve people’s lives
Opinion by Magdalena Sepulveda (geneva, switzerland)
Inter Press Service
GENEVA, Switzerland, Mar 06 (IPS) – The following opinion piece is part of series to mark International Womenâs Day, March 8. She will be called Aya. This is the name that nurses gave to the infant baby pulled from the rubble of a five-story building in Jinderis, northern Syria. A miracle. Beside her, the rescuers found her mother, dead.
She had given birth within hours of the 7.8-magnitude earthquake that struck Turkey and Syria on the night of February 6, 2023. Like her, more than 50,000 people died in the earthquake. As tragic as it is hopeful, this story has moved the international media.
It also reminds us that over 350,000 pregnant women who survived the earthquake now urgently need access to health care, according to the United Nations. And this is only one aspect of women’s vulnerability to natural disasters.
Floods, droughts, earthquakes, and other extreme events are not gender-neutral, especially in developing countries. Evidence shows that women and girls die in greater numbers and have different and uneven levels of resilience and capacity to recover.
Of the 230,000 people killed in the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, for example, 70% were women. Because of gender barriers, they often have fewer survival skills: boys are taught to swim or read first. This makes it difficult for them to access early warnings or identify safe shelters.
In addition, it is more difficult for women to escape from danger, since they are most often responsible for children, the elderly, and the sick. Heightened tensions and fear, as well as the loss of income provoked by disasters, drive increased domestic violence against women and girls.
They are also the first victims of sexual violence and exploitation when entire populations are displaced – this was one of the first concerns in Pakistan when more than 8 million people had to leave their homes because of the terrible floods in June-August 2022.
Natural catastrophes negatively impact everyone economically, but women and girls are disproportionately affected. World Bank data show that female farmers suffer much more than male ones in rural areas.
Assigned to domestic tasks, they are more dependent than men on access to natural resources and are, therefore, the first to suffer when these become scarce. In every region, food insecurity is higher among women than men.
In 2020, it was estimated that nearly 60% of the people who go hungry are women and girls, and the gender gap has only increased since then. Their lack of access to bank accounts also means that women’s assets are less protected than men’s.
And, of course, recovery from any crisis builds on societal expectations related to gender roles. Consequently, women bear the brunt of the increased domestic burden after a disaster at the cost of missing out on other income-generating activities.
We know that women spend, on average, 3.2 times more time than men on unpaid care work, and the COVID-19 pandemic â another human-induced natural catastrophe â made evident how unequally unpaid care and domestic work is shared, and how undervalued and underrecognized it is.
This is a major constraint on women’s access to education, an obstacle to their entry into and advancement in the paid labor market, and to their political participation, with serious consequences in terms of social protection, income, and pensions.
Gender inequality exacerbates the impact of natural disasters, and the consequences of natural disasters exacerbate gender inequality. An unacceptable vicious cycle. With the world already facing a growing number of climate-related tragedies, governments must take immediate and long-term action to invest in universal access to health care, water and sanitation, education, social protection, and infrastructure for gender equality and the full enjoyment of women’s human rights.
Even in times of crisis, when state coffers are nearly empty, there are equitable solutions to raise revenues to fund the investments needed to strengthen women’s resilience: to make those who profit from the crises ravaging the planet, including from those natural disasters, pay, as recommended by the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation (ICRICT), of which I am a member alongside, among others, Joseph Stiglitz, Jayati Ghosh, and Thomas Piketty. Instead of implementing austerity programs that devastate the most disadvantaged, states can increase their fiscal space by taxing companies and the super-rich more.
It starts with taxing the super profits made by multinationals, and several countries in Europe and Latin America have already begun to do so. This is particularly true for the pharmaceutical giants that have made a fortune selling vaccines against Covid-19, which they were able to develop due to public subsidies. This is also the case for multinationals in the energy or food sector.
Oxfam estimates that their profits increased by more than two and a half times (256%) in 2022 compared with the 2018â2021 average. For the same reasons, it is urgent to tax the richest, who get away with paying hardly any taxes these days.
One cannot accept that, as Oxfam reminds us, a man like Elon Musk, one of the wealthiest men in history, is taxed at 3.3%, while Aber Christine, a market trader in Uganda who sells rice, is taxed at 40%.
Progressive taxation – making the richest people and multinationals pay their fair share – is one of the most powerful tools for reducing inequality of all kinds. As the world celebrates International Women’s Day, let’s keep in mind that it is impossible to build more resilient societies without fighting for gender equality.
Continuing to ignore it is a political choice, and an even more perilous threat to development than natural disasters themselves.
Magdalena SepĂșlveda is the Executive Director of the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and a member of the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation (ICRICT). From 2008-2014 she was the UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights @Magda_Sepul
Opinion by Noura Hamladji, Samuel Rizk (united nations)
Inter Press Service
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 03 (IPS) – There is no better environment for the expansion of violent extremist groups than a vacuum in state authority. It provides ideal conditions for these groups to prey on existing and historical grievances, fill the void with promises of financial support, access to services and attention for marginalized, neglected communities.
But, at what cost?
In sub-Saharan Africa, we are witnessing the toll. In the past decade, violence linked to the influence of global violent extremist groups like Al Qaeda and Daesh has spread swiftly across the region. In 2022, new global epicentres of terrorism were found in sub-Saharan Africa.
With thousands killed and millions displaced, this violence threatens the stability of the entire region and hinders development gains on the continent.
To better understand how violent extremist groups proliferate, and how they impact development and social cohesion, UNDP commissioned unique research to find out what gives violent extremists a foothold in particular contexts.
We looked at the Sahel, the Lake Chad Basin, DR Congo, Somalia and Northern Mozambique. What we found is that while every country – and district – has its own story, there are clear common denominators that help design relevant, coherent responses.
This new study, Dynamics of Violent Extremism in Africa: Conflict Ecosystems, Political Ecology, and the Spread of the Proto-State complements the research we have done into how and why individuals join violent extremist groups in the Journey to Extremism series.
Filling the void
As they expand in size and resources, buttressed by a link to a global ideological orientation, some violent extremist groups organize in ways akin to local government structures. They begin to compete with the state not only by monopolizing the threat/use of violence â in this case, instilling terror â but also by promising some of the most essential local services that people are aspiring to, such as a relative sense of security, sources of income and swift adjudication of disputes.
They may do so cruelly and oppressively, but even that may initially be attractive to communities weary of years of lawlessness, corruption and chaos. Indeed, the more deeply structured local violent extremist groups have evolved from raiding bands and now show many of the characteristics of a âproto-stateâ, typified by Daesh in Syria.
As the study findings suggest, the modus operandi of these local violent extremist groups is not centred mainly around persuading people to adopt their ideology. Instead â and often coming from the locality itself â they are grievance entrepreneurs, exploiting local development deficits, and forging alliances of convenience with other violent groups and criminal networks, like smugglers or local militias.
Even so, this does not make them one-dimensional opportunists. Their link to global networks helps to give them direction, binds them together and adds to their appeal. They are both global and local, both ideological and economic alternatives that can be appealing to people living in perceived or de facto state vacuum.
One common finding in this study is that violent extremist groups rarely appear in places well served by stable, predictable governments and governance systems. Instead, they operate where there is already poverty and instability, away from capital cities, in marginalized places where public services are thin or non-existent â all of which are often the product of local power-brokersâ interests.
The lack of trust between communities in these remote and crisis-hit areas and their government is also a common factor highlighted in the research. All too often communities suffer acute insecurity, feeling let down, targeted, and abused by the very state that should be protecting them. Violent extremist groups then plug in to fear or anger among communities and local leaders.
The first step to addressing this growing trend is to understand the political economy of violent extremist groups, and the sources of their power, with a view to halt and reverse their stranglehold on society.
The next step requires collaboration by the international community, supporting national partners not only to address the visible manifestations of the problem, but also to reverse years or decades of state fragility, exclusion and insecurity that emboldened these groups over time.
To this end, UNDPâs work on sub-national and local governance and institutions is critical â resilient, responsive, accountable, transparent, linked to national-level reforms that will have the biggest impact on violent extremist groupsâ âbusiness models.â
UNDP also works to empower local communities and local leaders towards positive and inclusive governance and improving access to basic services in under-served areas. This is the way to avoid recreating the same conditions that enabled the governance void to exist in first instance.
Gaining a foothold
It is clear that many of the conflicts which give these groups a foothold are over land and water. Desertification, climate change and poor land management have made traditional ways of life difficult in many places where land has degraded and pastures no longer support herds, nor do farms support crops.
But this need not be irreversible. With careful attention to local power politics, social relationships and trust-building, we can help communities to regenerate land and revive livelihoods â and to capture carbon in the soil in the process, offering local solutions to global problems and giving communities agency in shaping their present and future.
We call it âpolitical ecologyâ, and with this approach we can simultaneously improve lives and undercut the appeal of violent extremist groups.
Also crucial to this approach is understanding how illicit funds flow around an economy, both inside a country and across borders; how power-brokers depend on and manipulate instability and corruption for greater influence; and which actors have a real interest in reform. This knowledge can help identify and interdict income sources of violent extremist groups while sustainably rebuilding local economies.
A human-centred approach
While there is a common thread of misogyny in the narrative and behaviour of violent extremist groups, womenâs roles are not homogenous or predestined to victimhood. On one hand, Boko Haram has used women as suicide bombers and al Shabaab as intelligence sources, but on the other hand women form the backbone of many peacebuilding and victim support efforts, and are the engine of cross-border trade in many areas.
This very diversity makes it more important to ensure that both women and men are fully involved in our efforts, from analysis to implementation to evaluation. In the end, where does the study address our collective approach to human security, to people-centred development, justice and peace?
These conflicts, and all the horrors committed by these groups, leave deep scars, and the trauma is long-lasting. Even in contexts that are not impacted by war, political conflict or pervasive violent extremism, we are starting to understand the cost of recent lockdowns and isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic, in mental health and alienation.
In conflict zones, the depth of trauma needs much more research, but we know it is severe. And people cope with it in ways that can lead to further violence, at a personal, family and community level. Sadly, that often helps to perpetuate cycles of conflict.
So, if we are to address these historical, multigenerational grievances which violent extremists can prey on, while working to heal their ongoing grief, we need to expand our capacity to provide the mental health and psycho-social support that individuals and communities need.
And if we can do so, we can demonstrate in action the positive alternatives to hatred and violence that these groups peddle.
Development first
A new approach is needed â one that first invests in understanding and complex ways in which these violent extremist groups win hearts and minds in different communities, acting as alternatives to state authority.
With this knowledge, we can work together with national and local governments to ensure a developmental, preventive, inclusive approach where people have access to the rights, goods and services they need to live prosperous lives, thus removing the power that these groups wield. Rather than helping people to get by; getting ahead, with hope and dignity, should be the goal.
Through this approach, we can improve the lives of citizens and communities across the region and turn back the tide of violence and despair. The challenge remains complex and urgent, and our collective responses must overcome by being more informed, adaptive, innovative and inclusive to promote and sustain development and peace.
Noura Hamladji is Deputy Regional Director, Regional Bureau for Africa; Samuel Rizk is Head of Conflict Prevention, Peacebuilding and Responsive Institutions, UNDP
Note: The research study was prepared in a process co-led by the UNDP Regional Bureau for Africa (RBA) and the Crisis Bureau (CB) Conflict Prevention, Peacebuilding and Responsive Institutions (CPPRI)/Prevention of Violent Extremism (PVE) Team. The study paper was developed by lead researcher Peter Rundell and supporting researchers Olivia Lazard and Emad Badi, under the editorial direction of Noura Hamladji and Samuel Rizk, and coordination by Nika Saeedi and Nirina Kiplagat.
Mangroves in Tai O, Hong Kong. Coastal wetland protection and restoration is an example of the kind of multifunctional solution that is needed to address multiple global crises together. Credit: Chunyip Wong / iStock
Opinion by Paula Harrison – Pamela McElwee – David Obura (bonn)
Inter Press Service
BONN, Mar 02 (IPS) – When global crises are interlinked, they overlap and compound each other. In such cases, the most effective solutions are those that work at the nexus of all these challenges.
In September, almost every Government on Earth will gather at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York to take stock at the halfway mark of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of what has been achieved and what remains to be done.
Despite some progress, global development efforts have been hamstrung by unprecedented environmental, social and economic crises, in particular biodiversity loss and climate change, compounded of course by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Tackling these interlinked challenges separately risks creating situations even more damaging to people and communities around the world, and exacerbates the already high risk of not meeting the goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
This is especially true because the myriad drivers of risk and damage affect many different sectors at once, across scales from local to global, and can result in negative impacts being compounded. For example, when demands for food and timber combine with the effects of pollution and climate change, they can decimate already degraded ecosystems, driving species to extinction and severely reducing natureâs contributions to people.
The global food system offers another example of this negative spiral of interlocking crises â where food that is produced unsustainably leads to water overconsumption and waste, pollution, increased health risks and loss of biodiversity. It also leads to excessive greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate change.
Yet policies often treat each of these global threats in isolation, resulting in separate, uncoordinated actions that typically address only one of the root causes and fail to take advantage of the many potential solution synergies. In the worst cases, actions taken on one challenge directly undermine those needed to tackle another because they fail to account for trade-offs, resulting in unintended consequences, or the impacts being externalised, as someone elseâs problem.
This is why almost 140 Governments turned to the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) â requesting IPBES to undertake a major multiyear assessment of the interlinkages among biodiversity, water, food and health in the context of the rapidly-changing climate. This âNexus Assessmentâ is among the most complex and important expert assessments ever undertaken â crossing key biophysical domains of climate and biodiversity and elements central to human wellbeing like food, water and health. It will also address how interactions are affected by energy, pollution, conflict and other socio-political challenges.
To fully address this ânexusâ, the assessment is considering interactions across scales, geographic regions and ecosystems. It also covers past, present and future trends in these interlinkages. And, most importantly, it will offer concrete options for responses to the crises that address the interactions of risk and damage jointly and equitably â providing a vital set of possible solutions for the more sustainable future we want for people and our planet.
One example of the mutifunctional solutions that will be explored is nature-based solutions â such as coastal wetland protection and restoration. When coastal wetland ecosystems are healthy â whether conserved or where necessary, restored â they are a refuge and habitat for biodiversity, improving fish stocks for greater food security and contributing to improve human health and wellbeing. They can also sequester carbon, helping to mitigate climate change, and protect adjacent communities and settlements from flooding and sea level rise.
To develop and implement these kinds of multi-functional solutions, responses for dealing with the major global crises need to be better coordinated, integrated, and made more synergistic across sectors, both public and private. Decision-makers at all levels need better evidence and knowledge to implement such solutions.
Work on the nexus assessment began in 2021 â with the final report expected to be considered and adopted by IPBES member States in 2024. A majority of the 170 expert authors and review editors from around the world are meeting in March in the Kruger National Park in South Africa to further strengthen the draft report, responding to the many thousands of comments received during a first external review period.
The assessment will also include evidence and expertise contributed by indigenous peoples and local communities â whose rich and varied direct experiences and knowledge systems that consider humans and nature as an interconnected whole have embodied a nexus approach for generations.
The Paris Agreement on Climate Change and the recently-agreed Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework provide the roadmaps for tackling the climate and biodiversity crises. The IPBES nexus assessment will offer policymakers a practical guide to bridge the vital interlinkages across the two challenges, to other relevant frameworks, and link to the sustainable development agenda.
For more information about IPBES or about the ongoing progress on the nexus assessment, go to www.ipbes.net or follow @ipbes on social media.
Prof. Paula Harrison is a Principal Natural Capital Scientist and Professor of Land and Water Modelling at the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, United Kingdom.
Prof. Pamela McElwee is a Professor in the Department of Human Ecology in the School of Environmental and Biological Sciences at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, USA.
Dr. David Obura is a Founding Director of CORDIO (Coastal Oceans Research and Development â Indian Ocean) East Africa, Kenya.
Israel’s separation barrier as seen from Al Ram.. Credit: Jillian Kestler-D’Amours/IPS
Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
Inter Press Service
PORTLAND, USA, Mar 02 (IPS) – Israel of today as a Jewish and democratic state is a contradiction of terms and as such may possibly become transformed into a genuinely democratic Israel tomorrow with justice and equality for all.
In Israel today, citizens who are not Jewish are treated differently than those who are Jewish, who benefit from certain rights and privileges. In a national opinion poll, most Jewish Israelis, about 80 percent, say Jews should get preferential treatment in Israel. Also, nearly half of Jewish Israelis say that Arab Israelis should be expelled or transferred from Israel.
In addition, several years ago Israel passed the ânation-state lawâ, which among other things, states that the right to exercise national self-determination in Israel is unique to the Jewish people and also established Jewish settlement as a national value. While embraced by many Jewish Israelis, the nation-state law was considered apartheid by the countryâs non-Jewish population, ostensibly making them second-class citizens.
In a democratic Israel, in contrast, all Israelis irrespective of their religious affiliation would have the same rights and privileges. In such a state, justice and equality would prevail across the entire countryâs population, not just for a single dominant religious group.
A democratic Israel would be similar in many respects to Western liberal democracies such as the United States. In that democracy, all religious groups, including Jewish Americans, have the same rights, privileges and equality under the law.
Most Jewish Israelis, some 75 percent across the religious spectrum, continue to believe that Israel can be a Jewish state and a democracy. In contrast, non-Jewish Israelis, including the majorities of Muslims, Christians and Druze, generally do not believe Israel can be a Jewish state and a democracy at the same time; itâs simply viewed as inconsistent.
Further complicating political, legal and human rights matters for Israelis as well as Palestinians are the new governmentâs recent proposals for judicial reform, which would impact the independence of the Israeli Supreme Court.
Many Israelis have gone to the streets to protest the proposed reform. Objections to the reforms are being raised by former government officials, military officers, business investors and others. Foreign allies, especially officials, Jewish leaders and journalists in America, have also expressed concerns over the proposals. In addition, the majority of Israelis, about two-thirds, oppose the proposed judicial reform.
Turning to demographics, Israelâs population stood at 9.656 million at the end of 2022. The composition of the population was 74 percent Jewish, 21 percent Arab (largely Christian and Muslims) and 5 percent others (Figure 1).
Source: Israel, Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS).
In 1948 when Israel was established, the countryâs proportion Jewish was 82 percent of its population of 806 thousand. By the 1960s the proportion Jewish reached a record high of nearly 90 percent. Since that high, the proportion Jewish in Israel has been steadily declining to its current level of 74 percent.
In addition to Israelâs changing demographics, the Jewish Israeli population has not been confined to its 1948 borders. Large numbers have expanded to settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Israelâs Jewish settler population in the West Bank, for example, is now estimated at more than half a million. Many of the estimated 700 thousand Jewish Israelis now living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are motivated by their religious mission to restore historic Israel to the Jewish people.
The Jewish settler population is continuing to increase rapidly in the West Bank, which is a top priority of ultranationalist parties who oppose Palestinian statehood.
The Israeli government has also pledged to legalize wildcat outposts and increase the approval and construction of settler homes in the West Bank.
In contrast, the United Nations Security Council and much of the international community of nations, including the United States, the European Union and the United Nations, continue to support the idea of an independent Palestinian state. However, the changing demographics in the West Bank have virtually eliminated the possibility of the two-state solution.
Without the two-state solution, Jewish Israelis face a major challenge affecting their majority status, namely the possibility of the one-state solution.
The one-state solution would involve the entire Israeli and Palestinian populations now living between the Mediterranean Sea and Jordan River. In such a population numbering approximately 15 million inhabitants, the Jewish population would become a ruling minority of approximately 47 percent, a fundamental change from the sizable Jewish majority of 74 percent in Israel today (Figure 2).
Source: Times of Israel.
Even today the Israeli government is confronting human rights issues with its expansion throughout the occupied Palestinian territories. International, Israeli and Palestinian human rights organizations as well as independent observers have found Israeli authorities practicing apartheid and persecution in the occupied Palestinian territories.
According to those human rights organizations, Israeli government policy is to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis over Palestinians as well as the abuses and discriminatory policies against Palestinians living in the occupied territories.
Israel rejects those accusations, saying it is a democracy and committed to international law and open to scrutiny. The government cites security concerns and protecting the lives of Israelis for its imposition of travel and related restrictions on Palestinians, whose violence in the past included suicide bombings of Israeli cities and deadly attacks against Israelis.
Many have come to the conclusion that given the policies of the current Israeli government, a political path for Israel and an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully is simply wishful thinking. For some the two-state solution is effectively dead and it is simply waiting for its formal funeral.
In addition, the human cost of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been high and is rising. So far in 2023, the conflict has resulted in the deaths of an estimated 63 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.
From 2008 to 2020 the numbers of killed and injured from the conflict among Israelis and Palestinian documented by the UN were 251 and 5,590 deaths, respectively, and 5,600 and 115,000 injuries, respectively. In brief, over that time period approximately 95 percent of those killed and injured due to the conflict were Palestinians (Figure 3).
Source: UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
It is evident that the Israeli government and many Israelis would like to continue the Jewish settler expansion in the West Bank. That expansion clearly has serious consequences for the resident Palestinian population and the Israelis as well as the prospects of an independent Palestinian state.
The demise of the two-state solution and the possible one-state solution also creates a major foreign and domestic dilemma for the United States, Israelâs major political, military and economic supporter and biggest ally.
Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, estimated at more than 3 billion dollars annually and more than 150 dollars cumulatively. Also, America has vetoed scores of United Nations Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, including at least 53 since 1973.
Given Americaâs commitment to democratic values, freedom of religious beliefs and equality of citizenship, the White House, U.S. Senators, Congressional Representatives as well as the nationâs citizens will be faced with how to respond to the absence of a possible Palestinian state and Israelâs treatment of the Palestinians.
In the absence of the two-state solution, it will become increasingly difficult for the United States to continue its unwavering commitment and unequivocal support in light of Israeli policies and treatment of the Palestinians. Perhaps, consistent with its values and laws, America will decide to support the one-state solution with equality of all inhabitants, regardless of religious identities.
More importantly, in the absence of a truly independent Palestinian state, Israel may slowly come to embrace the one-state solution. Eventually then, especially given the unavoidable demographic realities strikingly visible on the ground, Israel may possibly come to realize that itâs time to transform the Israel of today into a truly democratic Israel of tomorrow with justice and equality for all.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division and author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.
Opinion by Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana (bangkok, thailand)
Inter Press Service
BANGKOK, Thailand, Mar 01 (IPS) – The writer is Under-Secretary-General of the UN and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)
Â
The following opinion piece is part of series to mark International Womenâs Day, March 8. New technologies and innovations are reshaping our world and its future, often at a dizzying pace. Yet women and girls continue to be left behind in this burgeoning digital universe. How, then, can we harness these developments to create a better future for all of us?
This yearâs International Womenâs Day theme, âDigitALL: Innovation and technology for gender equality,â seeks to answer exactly that question.
We know that women and girls are less likely than men and boys to use the internet or own a smartphone. In fact, only 54 per cent of women in Asia and the Pacific have digital access, cut off from opportunities to move any digital needles forward.
The root causes are many and varied: deep-rooted discriminatory social norms, increased gender-based violence (including online violence), and the unequal distribution of unpaid care and domestic work. Addressing these impediments to women realizing their full potential requires our joint and immediate attention and response.
One child, one teacher, one pen
When and where women and girls are discouraged from studying and working in science, technology, engineering or math (STEM) fields, we let them down. And we have left a whole generation of women and girls behind. We need the talents and voices of women and girls brought to the boardrooms and coding rooms.
Today many innovations in AI, medicine, entertainment, transportation, work and other fields treat men as the standard and ignore womenâs physical and social differences â to the detriment of half of the worldâs population.
Getting more women into careers in technology starts with breaking down the gender stereotypes that prevent girls from studying STEM subjects. Comprehensive changes to the way STEM subjects are taught and targeted programs to support girlsâ learning are needed.
In Viet Nam, the Ministry of Education and Training has updated the countryâs National Early Childhood Education curriculum on âde-stereotypingâ women and girls and has included gender-sensitive budgeting into the Education Sector Plan. Through changes such as these, governments can foster girlsâ enthusiasm for technology, expanding the future digital workforce.
Harnessing technology to support women entrepreneurs
Women entrepreneurs play a key role in developing economies. Supporting them to start and grow businesses through technology will lead to more sustainable and inclusive economic growth. Women have historically struggled to access capital because they are less aware of funding options.
They are less likely to own land or have large savings to offer as collateral and have not been included in traditional financial networks. Technological innovations provide an opportunity to connect women entrepreneurs across the region with new financing models that cater to their particular needs.
The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) Catalyzing Womenâs Entrepreneurship project has unlocked almost USD 65 million in capital to support women entrepreneurs in several countries.
Through identifying and backing a number of experimental technology-driven business models, the project has supported women-led micro, small and medium enterprises through a range of technology solutions such as payment platforms, online marketplaces, bookkeeping and inventory management.
Enabling women to become drivers of inclusive innovation
If we pair the untapped potential of women and girls to contribute to our common future together with the potential of the innovations of digitalization, science and technologies, we may well have cracked the code to rectifying many of the inequalities and injustices created by generations past.
Women have the know-how to harness technology and innovation. Given equal opportunities, they will flourish and contribute to creative solutions to tackle the worldâs multi-faceted challenges.
Women leaders in Asia and the Pacific are already using technology to address inequalities and gender-based violence. Founded by Virginia Tan, Rhea See, and Leanne Robers, She Loves Tech, headquartered in Singapore, runs the worldâs largest start-up competition for women and technology and aims to unlock over USD 1 billion in capital by 2030 for women-led businesses.
Safecity is a crowd-mapping platform for people to share experiences of sexual harassment in public spaces and allows communities to identify problems and work towards solutions. The platform was launched by three women, including current leader Elsa Marie DâSilva, in response to incidents of gender-based violence in the region.
âWe can all do our part to unleash our worldâs enormous untapped talent â starting with filling classrooms, laboratories, and boardrooms with women scientists,â said United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres recently. Indeed, we need women in leadership roles in all science and technology spaces to accelerate inclusive innovation.
Letâs work together towards our dream of achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls. What better way to do so than to use innovations and new technologies to overcome inequalities in the digital age?
Shahd, a 12-year-old girl with a hearing disability, stands in front of a window facing her father, in the house her family live in, Azaz, Aleppo, Syria. Credit: Human Rights Watch.
Opinion by Emina Cerimovic (new york)
Inter Press Service
NEW YORK, Feb 28 (IPS) – Emina Cerimovic is a senior disability rights researcher at Human Rights Swatch.A few days ago, I saw a photo shared to Twitter of Sham, a young Syrian girl rescued from under the rubble in northwest Syria, sitting upright in her hospital bed, According to the Syrian Civil Defense, a volunteer humanitarian group also known as the White Helmets, Sham will lose both her legs because of injuries from the quake.
Looking at her photo, I couldnât help but think of the additional human rights abuses Sham will experience on the basis of her disability. She will join the ranks of all the children with disabilities who are surviving the 12-year-conflict in Syria without equal access to humanitarian aid.
And so will others who experienced traumatic physical and psychological injuries in the wake of the earthquakes: a girl who had spent 30 hours under the rubble in the heavily affected town of Jindires in northwest Syria and who had lost both her legs; a 3-year-old boy in Jinderis who was trapped for 42 hours and whose left leg was amputated; a young Syrian man living in Gaziantep, Turkey, whose right hand was amputated.
As issues of humanitarian aid access to various affected parts of Syria dominatethe news, relief efforts should not overlook the short and long-term needs of people with disabilities and the thousands of earthquake survivors who have sustained physical and psychological injuries that could lead to permanent disabilities.
As two more powerful earthquakes struck the region on February 20, panic and fear spread among earthquake survivors in both Syria and Turkey, bringing into sharp focus the psychological trauma caused by the natural hazard and, for Syrians, by over 12 years of war.
In Syria, approximately 28 percent of the current population â nearly double the global average â are estimated to have a disability, and their rights and needs are largely unmet. As I found in my September report on the greater risk of harm and lack of access to basic rights for children with disabilities caught up in the Syrian war, the design and delivery of humanitarian programs in Syria are not taking into account the particular needs of children with disabilities. In some cases, such programs explicitly exclude them.
As an example, some educational activities and child-friendly spaces excluded children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Children with disabilities are growing up without safety, basic necessities, education, assistive devices, or psychosocial support, in ways that put their lives and rights at risk.
They experience stigma, psychological harm, and higher levels of poverty. The situation is no better for adults with disabilities who also face systematic challenges in accessing humanitarian services on an equal basis with others.
This crisis should serve as a wake-up call for UN agencies, donor states, humanitarian organizations, and charities to properly respond to all childrenâs rights by ensuring the rights and needs of children with disabilities are also met.
They should develop and implement their response and recovery action plans with people with disabilities at their core. The attention and investment in children – like Sham – and adults with disabilities will enhance human rights for everyone.
Credit: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
Opinion by Gadir Lavadenz, Pablo Fajardo Mendoza (quito, ecuador / la paz, bolivia)
Inter Press Service
QUITO, Ecuador / LA PAZ, Bolivia, Feb 27 (IPS) – The Chief Executive of the twelfth largest oil producer – Sultan Al Jaber of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) – has been appointed as president of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Changeâs (UNFCCC) COP28, the biggest climate change conference that will take place in November, 2023 in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
In brief, the leadership of a Climate Conference that should deliver on ways to create a fossil-free future is in the hands of the representative of one of the top 15 corporations most responsible for carbon emissions globally. Like any other oil company, ADNOCâs very reason for existence is to profit off of the very product that has sent global greenhouse gas emissions soaring and spurred a global climate emergency.
In fact, ADNOC Drilling under ADNOC Groups reported a rise of 33 percent in 2022 net profit with a projection of record net profit in 2023 fueled by further oil and gas expansion plans. And now at least 12 employees of ADNOC have been given organizing roles for COP28. That means this year the global climate negotiations will literally be run by the fossil fuel industry.
Fierce criticism has arisen from all over the world and in particular from climate activists that have been long fighting for a fossil fuel free climate COP. In reaction to this appointment, more than 450 climate and human rights organizations wrote a letter to UN Secretary General AntĂłnio Guterres and Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC condemning the appointment of Al Jaber as COP28 President.
The thin argument presented for the appointment of Al Jaber is his involvement in renewables as chairman of Masdar, a âclean-energy innovatorâ investing in renewables. But that alone does not compare to the evidence on the negative role and powerful influence of the fossil fuel industry in the climate talks.
The fossil fuel industry has completely co-opted climate policy from the inside out. The most offensive illustration of this co-option and corporate capture of climate talks is the current reality that someone like Al Jaber will preside over a crucial session of climate negotiations at such a time when complete and equitable phase out of fossil fuels is a critical and immediate action needed to protect the planet.
And this is not happening for the first time!
More than 630 fossil fuel industry lobbyists participated in COP27 last year at Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt and 18 out of 20 COP27 sponsors were either directly partnered with or are linked to the fossil fuel industry.
This ongoing 30-year experiment of allowing the largest polluters, their financiers, and polluter governments to undermine a meaningful global response to climate change has delivered predictably poor and unacceptable results.
Several reports last year including this report by the UN Environmental Programme showed that the world will miss the target set in the Paris Agreement by world leaders to limit global warming below 1.5?.
So, whatâs the solution?
Itâs time for international climate policy to finally be protected from polluting interests, and this is the reason many are proposing a concrete drawing from other UN precedents to systematically weed out this undue interference.
The UN Secretary General has recently equated the fossil fuel industryâs modus operandi as âinconsistent with human survival,â also agreeing that âthose responsible must be held to account.â
A concrete Accountability Framework should be implemented by the UNFCCC drawing from other UN precedents to systematically weed out this undue interference.
Parties to the UNFCCC have to change the course of how climate talks are moving and provide immediate and clear signs of deep structural changes that can lead to just transition. Governments across the world should be actively protecting climate action from being written, bankrolled, and weakened by polluting interests.
Rather, itâs (past) time to implement real, proven, and people-centered solutions and hold polluting corporations liable for their decades-long deception and deceit. These are not new ideas. These are not even radical ideas. They are necessary ones.
The indigenous peoples, peasants, women and frontline communities who face and suffer the serious consequences of the impacts of climate change, together with the social groups of the world that have a real interest in curbing the emissions of greenhouse gasses, demand that the decision makers implement the necessary changes in order to ensure that appropriate measures are adopted by the world and governments at COP28 to prevent the collapse of the planet.
If these necessary measures are not rectified and implemented immediately, it is world leaders and the decision makers who would be mainly responsible for the collapse of our planet. For us it is clear, Sultan Al Jaber does not have the moral or ethical rectitude to lead and deliver on a COP28 that is for the peoples.
Pablo Fajardo Mendoza is with the Union of People Affected by Chevron-Texaco (UDAPT); and Gadir Lavadenz is Global Coordinator, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice
LONDON, Feb 24 (IPS) – Over the year since the start of Russiaâs war on Ukraine, on one side of the border civil society has shown itself to be a vital part of the effort to save lives and protect rights â but on the other, itâs been repressed more ruthlessly than ever.
Ukraineâs civil society is doing things it never imagined it would. An immense voluntary effort has seen people step forward to provide help.
Overnight, relief programmes and online platforms to raise funds and coordinate aid sprang up. Numerous initiatives are evacuating people from occupied areas, rehabilitating wounded civilians and soldiers and repairing damaged buildings. Support Ukraine Now is coordinating support, mobilising a community of activists in Ukraine and abroad and providing information on how to donate, volunteer and help Ukrainian refugees in host countries.
In a war in which truth is a casualty, many responses are trying to offer an accurate picture of the situation. Among these are the 2402 Fund, providing safety equipment and training to journalists so they can report on the war, and the Freefilmers initiative, which has built a solidarity network of independent filmmakers to tell independent stories of the struggle in Ukraine.
Alongside these have come efforts to gather evidence of human rights violations, such as the Ukraine 5am Coalition, bringing together human rights networks to document war crimes and crimes against humanity, and OSINT for Ukraine, where students and other young people collect evidence of atrocities.
The hope is to one day hold Putin and his circle to account for their crimes. The evidence collected by civil society could be vital for the work of United Nations monitoring mechanisms and the International Criminal Court investigation launched last March.
As is so often the case in times of crisis, women are playing a huge role: overwhelmingly itâs men whoâve taken up arms, leaving women taking responsibility for pretty much everything else. Existing civil society organisations (CSOs) have been vital too, quickly repurposing their resources towards the humanitarian and human rights response.
Ukraine is showing that an investment in civil society, as part of the essential social fabric, is an investment in resilience. It can quite literally mean the difference between life and death. Continued support is needed so civil society can maintain its energy and be ready to play its full part in rebuilding the country and democracy once the war is over.
Russiaâs crackdown
Vladimir Putin also knows what a difference an enabled and active civil society can make, which is why heâs moved to further shut down Russiaâs already severely restricted civic space.
One of the latest victims is Meduza, one of the few remaining independent media outlets. In January it was declared an âundesirable organisationâ. This in effect bans the company from operating in Russia and criminalises anyone who even shares a link to its content.
Independent broadcaster TV Rain and radio station Echo of Moscow were earlier victims, both blocked last March. They continue broadcasting online, as Meduza will keep working from its base in Latvia, but their reach across Russia and ability to provide independent news to a public otherwise fed a diet of Kremlin disinformation and propaganda is sharply diminished.
It’s all part of Putinâs attempt to control the narrative. Last March a law was passed imposing long jail sentences for spreading what the state calls âfalse informationâ about the war. Even calling it a war is a criminal act.
The dangers were made clear when journalist Maria Ponomarenko was sentenced to six years in jail over a Telegram post criticising the Russian armyâs bombing of a theatre where people were sheltering in Mariupol last March. Sheâs one of a reported 141 people so far prosecuted for spreading supposedly âfakeâ information about the Russian army.
CSOs are in the firing line too. The latest targeted is the Moscow Helsinki Group, Russiaâs oldest human rights organisation. In January, a court ordered its shutdown. Several other CSOs have been forced out of existence.
In December an enhanced law on âforeign agentsâ came into force, giving the state virtually unlimited power to brand any person or organisation who expresses dissent as a âforeign agentâ, a label that stigmatises them.
The state outrageously mischaracterises its imperial war as a fight against the imposition of âwestern valuesâ, making LGBTQI+ people another convenient target. In November a law was passed widening the stateâs restriction of what it calls âLGBT propagandaâ. Already the impacts are being felt with heavy censorship and the disappearance of LGBTQI+ people from public life.
The chilling effect of all these repressive measures and systematic disinformation have helped damp down protest pressure.
But despite expectation of detention and violence, people have protested. Thousands took to the streets across Russia to call for peace as the war began. Further protests came on Russiaâs Independence Day in June and in September, following the introduction of a partial mobilisation of reservists.
Criminalisation has been the predictable response: over 19,500 people have so far been detained at anti-war protests. People have been arrested even for holding up blank signs in solo protests.
Itâs clear there are many Russians Putin doesnât speak for. One day his time will end and thereâll be a need to rebuild Russiaâs democracy. The reconstruction will need to come from the ground up, with investment in civil society. Those speaking out, whether in Russia or in exile, need to be supported as the future builders of Russian democracy.
ABUJA, Feb 24 (IPS) – Mr. Mohamed Yahya is Resident Representative UNDP NigeriaOn the morning of 24 September 1998, General Abdulsalam A. Abubakar, the then Military Head of State of Nigeria, took the stage at the United Nations Headquarters and informed the leaders assembled for the United Nations General Assembly debates and the world at large of his intention to return Nigeria to a democratically elected civilian government on 29 May 1999.
Nigerians, however hopeful, had reason to be skeptical due to previous unfulfilled promises of this nature. As promised, on 29 May 1999, General Abdulsalam A. Abubakar handed over the reins of government to a democratically elected president in the person of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. This marked the transition to civilian rule by the most populace country on the African continent. This single move rekindled the hopes, dreams, and aspirations of millions of black and African youths, not only in Nigeria, but around the world.
Unfortunately, in recent times, many Nigerians have become cynical about democracy and its ability to deliver on its promises of development, peace, and economic prosperity.
This cynicism that has driven participation in general elections to record lows, and migration out of Nigeria to record highs. As Nigeria prepares for the 2023 national elections, it is worth remembering that the ability to participate in the election of leaders at every level, while not a magic bullet, is one of the most powerful tools in the quest for self-determination. One that is far more powerful than cynicism.
In the 1999 General Elections that pitted Olusegun Obasanjo the former military ruler against Banker and former Finance Minister Olu Falae, the election turnout was 52.3% of the eligible voters according to data from the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC.
That number went up to an all-time high of almost 70% in the 2003 elections that saw then President Obasanjo win re-election. By 2019 elections, it plummeted to a participation rate of 35%. The steady and dramatic decline in participation in the last few election cycles is troubling for a country with so much at stake. The decline in voter participation is well attributed and, on the surface, appears to be driven by cynicism in the democratic process.
However, the beauty of a multiethnic pluralist democracy like Nigeria, lies in its citizenâs ability to criticize, admonish and ultimately replace elected officials.
Consequently, peaceful dissent is one of the most beautiful features of democracy. On the flip side, when dissent evolves into cynicism and ultimately disengagement from the political process, it significantly weakens democracy and its intended benefits.
A London School of Economics study in 2008 suggested that cynicism can affect the health of democracy, blurring the line between legitimate distaste for an administration with distaste for government altogether. The implications can be far reaching in breaking down the cohesiveness of society.
Dissuading people from participating in politics, encouraging them to turn away from credible sources of information, inciting people to join pressure groups or, in more extreme cases, resorting to violence against fellow citizens and/or the state.
As the largest black democracy in the world, and largest economy on the African continent, Nigeria wields an incredible political and cultural influence. A stable, secure, and successful Nigeria not only shows the rest of Africa what cooperation, resilience, and commitment to good governance, democratic principles, the amicable resolution of differences, and the rule of law looks like, it also demonstrates that democracy can work in complex and developing nations.
When I arrived in Nigeria in 2019, what I found most fascinating was that the people across the country were not obsessed with barriers, they were âdoersâ, creators, and problem solvers.
In the 3.5 years since, the country has faced unprecedented challenges; the sharp decline in oil prices, followed by a global pandemic COVID-19 that disrupted the global economy, currency volatility and rising insecurity which has been exacerbated by violent insurgency in parts of the country.
Despite the challenges, and they are deep and plenty, several indicators highlight that Nigeria is on the path to progress and democratic maturity. What it needs now is a more engaged, active, and constructive citizenry, especially from the 59 million Nigerian youth (18-35) who make up 53% of the total voting age population.
Although young Nigerians between the ages of 18 and 34 make up about 40% of registered voters, only 46% of these voters turned out to vote in the 2019 presidential elections.
During UNDP Nigeriaâs and Yiaga Africaâs #SixtyPercentOfUs campaign, youths were mobilized and encouraged to actively participate in the upcoming elections contributing to millions new registered voters. According to data recently released by Nigeriaâs Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), there are 93,469,008 registered voters and total number of collected Permanent Voter Cards (PVC) 87,209, 007 with a 93.3% record collection rate of PVCs, compared to the past elections.
Despite the number of people being cynical with democracy, the opportunity to convert cynicism into a positive factor that helps to reignite the sense of nationhood and belief in democracy as the bedrock of prosperity for all is undeniable. The coming elections present a renewed opportunity to steer the country, and by extension the continent, in the direction of democratic consolidation and economic progress.
In my time as the Resident Representative of UNDP in Nigeria, I have been privileged to visit at least two-thirds of the states in Nigeria and had the honor of interacting and engaging with Nigerians across the various sectors of the society; from ordinary citizens to the government and the private sector and even the burgeoning creative industry.
Despite the challenges that Nigeria must grapple with, Nigeriaâs promise is brightly lit across the diverse and colorful Naija kaleidoscope. At UNDP, we remain committed to providing Nigeria with support it needs to ensure that the promise of a prosperous, a more equal and peaceful Nigeria becomes a reality for all its citizens.
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Feb 24 (IPS) – While its origins may be rooted in the discrimination faced by people living with HIV, Zero Discrimination Day has evolved to celebrate commitments to the fundamental human right of being treated equally in law and in practice.
Within the context of global health, the day is an opportunity to examine discrimination from the perspective of health and care workers, who face barriers based on their race, gender, and other socio-economic and cultural factors.
In the context of a global health workforce under siege from the threat of the great resignation in health, it is especially important to examine the impact of discrimination on health systems at global, national and local levels.
In recent times, recognition of the gender pay gap in health of 24% and its impact on national and regional economy has spurred greater research into the unequal treatment of women, taking into account their specific contexts and locations. Despite efforts to address these issues, progress has been uneven.
Mounting evidence around gender inequities in the health workforce, specifically at the leadership level underscores the problem of gender bias in health decision-making. Women who make up 70% of the overall health workforce and 90% of frontline staff continue to be marginalised in leadership, occupying just one-quarter of the decision-making roles in health.
Furthermore, occupational segregation and the clustering of women into low-earning professions and settings further limit their career advancement. Their experiences in the health workforce are further compounded by various forms of discrimination, such as harassment, violence, assault and discrimination at several levels.
Gender is not the only factor at play. As health workers migrate from rural and remote areas to well-resourced urban centres, or from developing to developed countries, new forms of barriers and biases emerge in a global context where high-income nations wield most of the socio-economic power.
These include the need to undergo resource-intensive accreditation and licensing exams, encountering anti-immigrant hostility and changing patient-provider dynamics, limited options from smaller job pools, and being affected by global events and geopolitical shifts.
This âbrain drainâ of health workers also has negative implications for the understaffed health systems that they leave behind.
In addition to gender and migrant status, healthcare workers may also face discrimination based on their race, ethnicity, language and dialect, marital status and sexual orientation, amidst other factors. These experiences affect the health workforce in different ways, resulting in inefficiencies, demotivation and burnout at the local, national and regional levels.
Healthcare systems that fail to acknowledge and address latent discriminatory actions may unintentionally perpetuate these inequalities, further exacerbating the biased experiences of healthcare workers, despite the need for a diverse health workforce to better serve their diverse populations.
While we talk about zero discrimination, dignity, decent work, fair pay, and the importance of endorsing diversity and practising inclusion at the macro level of health systems, are we also âseeingâ and âacknowledgingâ where this discrimination exists and understanding the negative consequences on health workers and populationâs health? Are we collecting and analysing the data that give us the full picture?
More importantly, discrimination in healthcare settings not only violates the fundamental human right to be treated with respect and equality, but also severely limits the chances of achieving the SDGs by 2030. The 2017 UN statement succinctly framed this understanding in their call to end discrimination in healthcare settings.
Equal opportunities and experiences for health and care workers must be ensured at every stage of their career, including recruitment, promotion, growth and advancement, particularly in the post-COVID era of globalisation.
Gender and race are the primary drivers of inequality, around which most of the structural discrimination in health revolves. Therefore, policies and practices must be devised to study and address this discrimination and their underlying drivers, to fully exploit the available talent and potential of the health workforce and to ensure equitable opportunities for growth and leadership and strategically achieve UHC.
Now more than ever, it is urgent that leaders in global health take bold action by committing to a new social contract that prioritises the rights of health and care workers. This step will not only ensure a more equitable and just health workforce, but also provide better health outcomes for communities worldwide.
Roomi Aziz is Technical Lead of the Pakistan Chapter, Women in Global Health
LONDON, Feb 23 (IPS) – Itâs been 25 years since the 1997 Asian financial crisis led to the creation of the G20 forum for finance ministers; and 15 years since this became a leader-level meeting following the global financial crisis. During this period, there has been significant shift in the global finance and economic landscape.
The ascent of several emerging economies has seen their contributions to the multilateral finance system that supports development rise significantly. Our new report collates those contributions over the last decade for the first time. It charts how Chinaâs annual contributions to the UN and multilateral development banks rose twenty-fold from $0.1bn to $2.2bn.
But it also looks collectively at a group of 13 rising economies whose developmental contributions to multilateral finance institutions have risen five-fold to over $6bn over the last decade.
These contributions now make up an eighth of the total; and have seen the creation of two new multilateral finance institutions.
In this piece, we draw out key findings from our analysis, including the balance between funding existing and new institutions like the New Development Bank.
We consider whether continued growth in the 13 emerging actors could generate enough new funding for development over the next quarter century, and even create an institution as large at the World Bankâs fund for low-income countries (IDA).
Despite recent rhetoric around the return to a bipolar world order, this report is evidence that a wide group of countries are already playing major role in the global economic and development system, and will continue to do so in years to come
The transformational effect of economic growth on the multilateral system
In 1990 most people in the world lived in low-income countries; by 2020, this share had fallen dramatically to just seven percent of people. Meanwhile, the share of the global population living in middle-income countries swelled from 30 percent in 1990 to 73 percent in 2020.
Such a transformation implies a greater number of countries with the economic output to contribute internationally: widening and deepening participation in the multilateral system.
And this is just what weâve seen. Over the decade to 2019, we find a group of emerging actors have significantly increased their contributions of development finance to multilateral organisations.
These include thirteen major economies outside the group of more established providers within the Development Assistance Committee (DAC), which tend to receive more attention.
Ten of these emerging actors are G20 members, including the BRICSâBrazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africaâbut others have grown quickly too: Argentina, Chile, Indonesia, Israel, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. Collectively, we refer to these thirteen emerging actors as the âE13.â
Over the decade, the E13âs annual contributions of development finance to multilateral organisations (both core and funding earmarked for particular purposes) have increased almost five-fold, from $1.3bn in 2010 to $6.3bn in 2019 (up 377 percent). And their unrestricted core contributions have risen even more: increasing from $1.0bn to $5.2bn (up 410 percent).
Of these core contributions, we see that those to UN agencies more than quadrupled over the decade, steadily rising from $0.3bn to $1.2bn (up 330 percent). But by far the most striking development in E13 core contributions has come from the creation and capitalisation of two new multilateral organisations: the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the New Development Bank (NDB).
The role of China
Although China has recently stepped back its bilateral finance efforts, its multilateral contributions increased steadily to 2019; and provided a third (34 percent) of the E13 total over the decade. Our colleagues have examined this in detail, including how China has the second highest aggregate voting share after the US in international finance institutions it supports.
Still, our analysis also highlights the importance of Russia, Brazil and India who each contributed over $3bn over the period and collectively contributed a further third of the total. While Chinaâs multilateral contributions have been concentrated (59 percent) in new institutions it co-founded (see below), other providers have concentrated funding in traditional institutions: for example, Argentina, Chile and Mexico did not support the new institutions while for Saudi Arabia and UAE they were 17 percent and 21 percent respectively.
Creating new multilateral finance organisations
Over the ten-year period we examine, almost half of the E13âs core multilateral contributions were to the two new institutions (AIIB and NDB). After 2016, funding provided to these institutions made up over two-thirds of their contributions. Indeed, in 2016 the first financial contributions to AIIB and NDB causedE13 multilateral development finance to triple in a single year.
The E13 provided an additional $6.0bn of core funds for AIIB and NDB in 2016, without reducing their multilateral contributions through other channels.
Though annual contributions reduced to $3.1bn in 2019, AIIB and NDB still accounted for half of the E13âs multilateral development finance in that year, leaving their contributions at the end of the decade far ahead of the beginning.
Figure 1. E13 core and earmarked contributions of development finance to multilateral organisations (nominal USD billions)Source: Authorsâ analysis
Emerging actors fund a sixth of the UN system
As well as higher absolute contributions (Figure 1), the E13âs role in the multilateral system has also grown in relative terms (Figure 2). As a share of the level of finance provided by the 29 high-income countries in the OECD DAC, the E13âs core multilateral contributions rose from 5 percent in 2010 to 12 percent in 2019âmore than doubling their relative significance.
This was largely due to the effect of AIIB and NDB (clearly seen by the 2016 peak), but we also see that E13 core contributions to the UN system steadily and quickly rose as a share of the DAC level across the decade: from 5 percent in 2010 to 17 percent in 2019.
Figure 2. E13 core contributions of development finance to multilateral organisations as a share of contributions from DAC countriesSource: Authorsâ analysis
A look to 2050âwhat role might the emerging economies play?
As the economies of the E13 continue to grow, what might this mean for their multilateral contributions in the future? Figure 3 shows how the share of economic output provided as development finance to multilateral organisations (either core or earmarked) tends to increase with higher levels of income per capita.
Though the relationship is steeper for the DAC than the E13, even the E13âs current trajectory implies a significant increase in future multilateral development finance from this group.
Ian Mitchell is Co-Director, Development Cooperation in Europe and Senior Policy Fellow at the Center for Global Development. Sam Hughes is a Research Assistant at the Center for Global Development.
Opinion by Ines M Pousadela (montevideo, uruguay)
Inter Press Service
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Feb 22 (IPS) – On 9 February, Nicaraguaâs dictator, Daniel Ortega, unexpectedly ordered the release of 222 political prisoners, including several former presidential candidates, opposition party leaders, journalists, priests, diplomats, businesspeople and former government supporters branded as enemies for expressing mild public criticism.
Also released were several members and leaders of civil society organisations (CSOs) and social movements, including student activists and environmental, peasant and Indigenous rights defenders. Some had been arrested on trumped-up charges for taking part in mass protests in 2018 and stuck in prison for more than four years.
But the Ortega regime didnât simply let them go â it put them on a charter flight to the USA and before their plane had even landed permanently stripped them of their Nicaraguan nationality and their civil and political rights. The government made clear it wasnât recognising their innocence; it was only commuting their sentences.
The rise of a police state
Ever since being re-elected in a blatantly fraudulent election in November 2021, Ortega has sought to make up for his lack of democratic legitimacy by establishing a police state. The regime effectively outlawed all civil society and independent media, closing more than 3,000 CSOs and 55 media outlets. It subverted the judicial system to falsely accuse, convict and imprison hundreds of critics and intimidate everyone else into compliance.
Political prisoners have been treated with purposeful cruelty, as though theyâre enemy hostages â kept in isolation, either in the dark or under permanent bright lighting, given insufficient food and refused medical care, subjected to constant interrogations, denied legal counsel and allowed only irregular visits by family members, if at all. Psychological torture has been a constant, and many have been also subjected to physical torture.
The release of some prisoners hasnât signalled any improvement in conditions or move towards democracy, as made clear by the treatment experienced by one political prisoner, Catholic bishop Rolando Ălvarez, who refused to board the plane to the USA.
In retaliation for his refusal to leave the country, his trial date was brought forward and held immediately, in the absence of any procedural safeguards. It predictably resulted in a 26-year sentence. Ălvarez was immediately sent to prison, where he remains alongside dozens of others.
Stripped of citizenship
The constitutional amendment stripping the 222 released political prisoners of their citizenship states that âtraitors to the homeland shall lose the status of Nicaraguan nationalsâ â even though the constitution establishes that no national can be deprived of their nationality.
It was an illegal act on top of another illegal act. No one can be deported from their own country: what the regime called a deportation was a banishment, something against both domestic law and international human rights standards.
On 15 February, the regime doubled down: it stripped 94 more people of their nationality. Those newly declared stateless included prominent political dissidents, civil society activists, journalists and the writers Gioconda Belli and Sergio RamĂrez, both of whom had held government positions in the 1980s. Most of the 94 were already living in exile. They were declared âfugitives from justiceâ.
Mixed reactions
By rendering 326 people stateless, the Nicaraguan dictatorship fuelled instant international solidarity. On 10 February, the Spanish government offered the 222 just-released prisoners Spanish citizenship â an offer many are bound to accept. On 17 February, more than 500 writers around the world rallied around Belli and RamĂrez and denounced the closure of civic space in Nicaragua.
But Argentina, alongside most of Latin America, has looked the other way. Its silence suggests that democratic consensus across the region is more fragile and superficial than might be hoped, with willingness to condemn rights violations depending on the ideological leanings of those who carry them out.
Currently all the regionâs big democracies â Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Mexico â have governments that define themselves as left-wing. But only one of their presidents, Chileâs Gabriel Boric, has consistently criticised Nicaraguaâs authoritarian turn. In response to the latest developments he tweeted a personal message of solidarity with those affected, calling Ortega a dictator. The rest have either issued mild official statements or simply remained silent.
Now what?
The Nicaraguan government insisted that releasing the prisoners was its own decision. The fact it was accompanied by further violations of released prisonersâ rights was meant as a demonstration of power.
But the move looks like it was made in the expectation of receiving something in return. The Nicaraguan government has long demanded that US sanctions be lifted; at a time when one of its closest ideological allies, Russia, is unable to provide any significant support, Nicaragua needs the USA more than ever. But the US government has always said the release of political prisoners must be the first step towards negotiations.
Given this, the unilateral surrender of people it considers dangerous conspirators to the state it proclaims is its worst enemy doesnât seem much like a show of force. And if it isnât, then itâs a valuable advocacy opportunity. The international community must push for the restoration of civic space and the return of free, fair and competitive elections. The first step should be to support the hundreds whoâve been expelled from their own country, as the future builders of democracy in Nicaragua.
Arusha, Tanzania: Maasai children taking their cows to a river. The government plans to displace about 150,000 pastoralists. Credit: Shutterstock.
Opinion by Juliana Nnoko-Mewanu, Oryem Nyeko (nairobi)
Inter Press Service
NAIROBI, Feb 21 (IPS) – Juliana Nnoko-Mewanu is a senior researcher on women and land and Oryem Nyeko is the Tanzania researcher at Human Rights WatchTanzaniaâs policies on conservation and its ongoing impacts on Maasai people in Ngorongoro district highlight how communities historically marginalized by oppression still wrestle with colonial policies.
When colonial authorities declared the Serengeti area a national park in 1951, communities within its borders were relocated to Ngorongoro district for permanent settlement. But for the past half-century, these communities have continued to face numerous evictions even from these regions, while new regulations have curtailed their rights to graze cattle and cultivate subsistence gardens.
Currently, the government plans to displace about 150,000 pastoralists for its conservation initiatives in two areas in Ngorongoro district, Loliondo Game Controlled Area and Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA).
In June 2022, security forces and Maasai violently clashed in Loliondo during a land demarcation exercise, which restricts the peopleâs access to grazing sites, water sources, and in some places cuts across their homes. The government had decided without consultation with affected communities to convert the area to a game reserve.
What happened in Loliondo in June is a continuation of the governmentâs forcible displacement of these communities. Loliondo is the tip of the iceberg, and Ngorongoro Conservation Area illustrates the governmentâs pervasive efforts to forcibly relocate Maasai people by reducing basic services and restricting movement into the area.
South of Loliondo, the Ngorongoro Conservation Area, a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site since 1979, spans vast areas of highland plains, savanna, savanna woodlands, forests, and includes the spectacular Ngorongoro Crater.
It adjoins the Serengeti National Park and is part of the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem in functioning as wildlife corridors essential to protecting animal migrations. Colonial authorities established the conservation area in 1959 as a multiple land use area, with wildlife coexisting with Maasai traditional pastoralists. It is managed by the NCA Authority, supervised by the Natural Resources and Tourism Ministry.
Semi-nomadic Maasai pastoralists have lived, used, and managed the area alongside other native communities for over 200 years. They grow corn, beans, pumpkins, and sweet potatoes, and graze cows, sheep, and goats, requiring large areas of rangeland as pasture for their animals.
The Maasai strive to live harmoniously with wildlife and their customs, such as taboos on consuming wildlife meat instead of beef and cutting down a live tree instead of using its branches, and traditional rules on managing grazing areas, promote conservation of their natural resources. Their cultural and spiritual practices are interwoven with the land, with sacred areas for assemblies to teach young Maasai about their culture and how they live with the ecosystem around them.
The Ngorongoro Conservation Areaâs most recent plan from 1996 has primary objectives to conserve natural resources, protect the interests of the Maasai pastoralists, and to promote tourism. However, since the creation of the conservation area, the Maasai population has increased through natural population growth, resulting in an increased need for land and resources.
The government has used this to justify a new land-use model that expands the conservation area to include parts of Loliondo Game Controlled Areas, an adjacent park, and to relocate about 82,000 residents by 2027.
The governmentâs resettlement plan will forcibly displace people in these herder communities from Ngorongoro district, Arusha region, to Handeni district, Tanga region, about 600 kilometers away, with little or no consultation. Media have reported that up to 500 residents and 2,000 livestock have been moved to Msomera village in Handeni district since the relocation began on June 16.
Residents told us that the government downsized important health and education services beginning in February. Services in these areas were already less developed than in other areas, with lower health and education outcomes than national figures.
In February, the government grounded Flying Medical Services, a medical outreach service provider, and in October, announced that it would downgrade Endulen Hospital, the areaâs main hospital, to a dispensary, reducing staff from 64 to 2. The government has also moved funding to schools to Handeni.
The governmentâs downsizing directly interferes with the communitiesâ ability to continue living in the area. It could have particularly devastating results in emergencies, including for pregnant women, and violates residentsâ right to health and education.
UNESCO has pointed out that it did not recommend displacing the Maasai. Instead, a UNESCO committee recommended that âthere is the need for an equitably governed consultative process to identify long term sustainable interdisciplinary solutions ⊠with participation of all rightsholders and stakeholders, consistent with international norms.â
United Nations experts have also said the government should halt forced evictions and relocation. They urged the government to work with affected communities to evaluate challenges to conservation in the area, and design a plan that meets the needs of the local communities as well as conservation.
The displacement of Maasai in northern Tanzania needs to stop. The government should consult affected communities and ensure that they and their representatives have access to relevant information prior to consultation to obtain their free, prior, and informed consent, consistent with international standards, to any changes to conservation management plans.
Human Rights Watchâs written request to the government for further information did not get a response.
