Africa

Souleymane Cissé has died aged 84 after a career that spanned more than 50 years.

The United Nations’ 2024 Summit of the Future Interactive Dialogue on Strengthening Inclusive Innovation and Bridging Digital Divides. Credit: UN Photo/Laura Jarriel

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 20 2025 (IPS)

In the western world, numerous studies over the past two decades have shown that the rise of social media in popularity has been linked to negative mental health symptoms, especially among young people. Platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, X (formerly known as Twitter), and TikTok have been criticized for fostering competitive and toxic environments, which contribute to higher rates of anxiety, cyber-bullying, depression, disordered eating, and low self-esteem. While the use of social media in the Global South has skyrocketed in the late 2010s, the ramifications on people in those regions has received much less coverage in mainstream media.

As of 2024, approximately 5.2 billion people around the world use social media, which is over 63 percent of the global population. This marks a significant increase from the number of global social media users in 2015, with just over 2 billion people.

The rise in popularity of social media in the Global South has been attributed to relatively rapid growths in development, particularly in Asian and African countries. Technological advancements and socio-economic progress has facilitated the rise of social media platforms and increased connectivity.

It is estimated that roughly 60 percent of the world’s social media users are in the Global South. However, studies on trends in psychological well-being in these areas in relation to social media usage is extremely limited as the vast majority of research focuses on the Global North.

Pew Research Center conducted a study in 2024 in which populations from eight countries in the Global South were surveyed on their social media habits. Around 73 percent of the sample population use WhatsApp and 62 percent use Facebook, with fewer people using TikTok (36 percent) and Instagram (29 percent). Additionally, there were higher rates of social media usage among younger people, more educated people, and those with higher incomes.

According to a 2021 report written by Zahra Takhshid and published by Vanderbilt University, titled Regulating Social Media in the Global South, policy makers in the Global South have found it difficult to establish regulations due to social media platforms being hubs for connection, commerce, self-expression, business, and political discourse. Additionally, social media platforms accumulate vast amounts of private data on a daily basis, which is an issue that the Global North has been fighting for the past two decades. However, much of the Global South lacks the proper infrastructures to protect users and regulate harmful content.

Many countries have responded to these concerns by restricting or banning the use of certain platforms, which has further blurred analytics on the psychological impact of digital technologies. In 2024, Access Now, a digital rights organization, reported internet or social media shutdowns in Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, Mauritius and Equatorial Guinea. These shutdowns usually coincided with pivotal events such as elections, when digital privacy is crucial.

According to Access Now, a nation that has issued restrictions on internet usage or certain platforms are more than likely to do it again. These shutdowns have dangerous implications for the citizens in these countries.

Felicia Anthonio, Access Now’s campaign manager, informed reporters that unfettered access to information, especially in times of crisis, are crucial. “It not only disrupts the flow of information, it also makes it impossible for people to access information in a timely manner. When we are talking about crisis situations, information can be like a lifeline, and disrupting access could be about life and death in conflict situations,” said Anthonio.

Additionally, blocking social media has extensive implications surrounding commerce. In Iran around 73.6 percent of adults use social media, with Meta-owned platforms like Facebook and Instagram having a large presence there, even as U.S. sanctions do not allow the platforms to run legally.

Instagram has fostered a budding online economy in Iran, with many small businesses having built successful brands due to the popularity of the platform. However, U.S. sanctions prevent Iranian users from seeing advertisements. Influencers replace advertisements in Iran, which has led to rampant misinformation being spread to consumers.

In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) mandates that all social media influencers must indicate if they were paid by a brand for online promotions. A similar mandate exists in the United Kingdom, known as the Advertising Standard Authority (ASA). However Iran, and several other countries in the Global South, lacks the legal frameworks to protect consumers from misinformation and brand manipulation from influencers. The lack of regulations has also exacerbated Iran’s gambling crisis.

There have also been reports of online misinformation in advertisements in Iran. According to the Vanderbilt University report, Instagram advertisements have contributed to higher rates of mental health issues surrounding body image as well as an overall increase in the nationwide desire for cosmetic procedures.

The Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME) in Iran stated that certain advertisements that promote the efficacy of certain cosmetic treatments are prohibited and must be approved by the Iranian Medical Council. However, these posts remain frequent due to a lack of oversight from social media platforms and the governments in many countries in the Global South.

“There is increasing evidence that shows that increased exposure to social media is related to mental health problems, eating disorders and many other issues that condition and distract social media users, and particularly girls, from education which affects their academic achievement,” said senior policy analyst from the Global Education Monitor (GEM) report team Anna D’Addio.

Despite these conditions not being widely reported on in the Global South, it can be deduced that adolescents in these areas face similar challenges. Due to limited protections, young people in these regions are confronted with a vast array of harmful content that can promote unhealthy behaviors and stunt their personal progress.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

The Arab League meeting room in Cairo. (Alyssa Bernstein/Flickr/CC BY-NC 2.0) Source: Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs.

By Alon Ben-Meir
NEW YORK, Feb 20 2025 (IPS)

When the Arab states convene an emergency session in Egypt to address Trump’s/Netanyahu’s plans to take over Gaza and exile the Palestinians, they must warn Trump that acting on this plan will usher in a catastrophic conflagration that could engulf the entire Middle East.

Regardless of how geo-strategically important the relationship is between the Arab states and the US, the former must demonstrate unanimous resolve to oppose Trump’s and Netanyahu’s disastrous plans to take over Gaza and exile the Indigenous Palestinians.

Given Egypt’s desire to convey the urgency and the far-reaching implications of the Arab summit on March 4 in Cairo, it’s possible that both heads of state and foreign ministers will be in attendance.

They should make it clear that their countries will spare no effort or resources to prevent the US and Israel from acting in defiance of international laws, norms, and conduct, and that such violations will precipitate ominous geostrategic harm to both Israel and the US.

The partnership between the US and the Arab states has endured for many decades because it has mutually served their strategic, economic, and security interests. The Gulf states, Jordan, and Egypt in particular have provided strategic intelligence and air, naval, and ground military bases and ensured energy security.

Moreover, the US-Arab partnerships have been crucial over many years in coordinating and combating terrorism and violent extremism, stemming the spread of weapons of mass destruction, and promoting regional stability. All this led to maintaining American influence in the region and countering the growing presence of rival powers, especially Russia and China.

To be sure, the relationship has never been a one-way street. But leave it to Trump to throw his weight around as if the Arab states survive only at the mercy of the US’ charitable contributions. He ignores the fact that the regional geostrategic environment has dramatically changed over the past two decades.

The Arab states have choices, and the perception that they depend solely on the US for economic and military aid is mistaken. They can resist being pushed around should they choose to because they know their strength and indispensable role and importance to the US.

Moreover, the Arab states should understand Trump’s character: he is a bully and always tests the outer limits of his power. He bluffs, lies, and connives but is deterred only when sternly confronted and realizes that what he might lose outweighs any potential benefits.

Although he knows how implausible his brazen idea is to take over Gaza, he still tests the water on the remote chance that his opponents would cave in. At the first sign of Egypt and Jordan’s firm resistance to his barefaced idea, he walked back on his threat to withhold foreign aid if they didn’t agree to take in substantial numbers of Palestinians.

The fact that he ventured such an absurd idea –to take Arab land as if it were his property and to hell with its inhabitants – is extremely troubling. The Arab states should disabuse him of the notion that he can now or at any time in the future take any unilateral actions that have such a devastating effect on their national security interests.

The Arab League’s decision to convene an emergency session in Cairo is critical in and of itself in that it conveys an urgency to stop Trump in his tracks, unequivocally adopt actionable measures, demonstrate unanimity and resolve, and issue a stern warning.

Replace US aid to Jordan and Egypt

Although Trump previously floated the idea of cutting foreign aid to Egypt and Jordan if they refused to absorb Palestinians en masse, in his meeting last week with Jordan’s King Abdullah, Trump reversed his position, stating that “we contribute a lot of money to Jordan and Egypt by the way—a lot to both. But I don’t have to threaten that, I think we’re above that.”

Nevertheless, in the summit’s final communique, Arab states should announce that they are ready to make up for any aid lost should Trump act on his threat. The total annual aid the US provides to Egypt and Jordan is $3.2 billion, a drop in the bucket compared to the Gulf states’ foreign reserve funds, which is over $700 billion.

This will send a clear message to Trump that Egypt and Jordan do not exist at the mercy of the US, and his tactics of coercion are shameless and will not work.

Disrupting global oil supplies

The Gulf states have served US economic interests by ensuring stable oil supplies. Saudi Arabia, the largest oil producer, has been crucial in maintaining the free flow of oil to global markets and controlling oil production, which directly impacts the gasoline prices Americans pay at the pump.

Saudi Arabia can threaten to substantially reduce oil production, which would almost immediately raise gasoline prices. This would aggravate the inflationary trend in the US, which Trump wants badly to arrest.

Threaten to reconsider major arms deals

Although the Gulf states, Egypt, and Jordan are equipped with US military hardware, they can readily suspend further procurement of US weapons, which would translate to financial losses to US arms manufacturers.

Between 2018 and 2022, the US facilitated arms sales in the region to the tune of $35 billion, including $18 billion to Saudi Arabia, $6 billion to the UAE, $5 billion to Egypt, $3 billion to Kuwait, and $2 billion to Jordan. None of these countries are currently involved in military conflicts and can hold off on further procurements to make their position clear to Trump.

Sanctioning Israel

The first to salivate over Trump’s sickening idea of a Palestinian expulsion was Netanyahu and his fascist government. It is a dream come true. They praised Trump for his “ingenious” idea. For them, exiling Gaza’s population would not only allow Israel to resettle Gaza, but it would also open the door for annexing most of the West Bank and forcing countless Palestinians to leave, thereby realizing their dream of greater Israel.

The signatories to the Abraham Accords—the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco—should warn Israel that they will rescind the normalization of relations with Israel if they make any attempt to exile the Palestinians. Egypt and Jordan should recall their ambassadors from Israel and Saudi Arabia should reiterate that under no circumstances would it normalize relations with Israel.

Introducing UN Resolutions

Algeria, which is currently on the UNSC, should introduce a resolution to the UNSC to prohibit the US from removing the Palestinians from Gaza. Although the US will certainly veto it, the debate over Trump’s insane idea will further intensify international outrage.

From there, the Arab League should call on the UNGA to convene a vote on a similar resolution condemning Trump’s proposal. It is certain that, with the exceptions of the US and Israel, nearly every country will vote for it. Although UNGA resolutions are not binding, the message will not be lost, even on Trump.

In conjunction with the above measures, the Arab states must also advance their own plans for Gaza in the context of a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By offering valid plans to reconstruct Gaza, they deprive Trump and Netanyahu of proceeding with their perilous plan.

Offer a comprehensive Arab-led reconstruction plan

Given the widespread destruction, the Arab states should agree to allocate an initial $20 billion for Gaza reconstruction, of the estimated $50-80 billion needed. The US, which aided Netanyahu in destroying Gaza, must also provide a substantial amount. The donor countries should invite other countries to bid for various projects, including the dire need for schools, healthcare clinics, and hospitals.

Establishing a Palestinian unity government

The Arab states must take whatever steps necessary to help establish a unity government between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority: one that accepts Israel’s right to exist, renounces violence, and is ready to negotiate peace based on a two-state solution. Although Israel vehemently rejects negotiating with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas, there will be no peace unless Hamas is an integral part of any new Palestinian government.

Netanyahu’s insistence that Hamas can be eradicated is an illusion. After 15 months of horrific losses and destruction, Hamas is still standing. Israel is negotiating with Hamas, albeit indirectly, and if it could not eradicate it in 15 months, it will not be able to eradicate it in 15 years. Hamas’s willingness to relinquish administrative responsibilities but remain a military force outside of the government will not be accepted by the Arab states and Israel.

Whether Hamas chooses to play a relevant role in a new government or not, it must disarm. Having successfully changed the dynamic of the conflict, however, and forced the Arab states to insist on a two-state solution, there is a good chance that Hamas will accept being a partner in any future Palestinian government and take credit for their historic achievement.

Participate in a Multinational Force

The Arab states should be prepared to participate in a multinational force to maintain security and ensure the complete demilitarization of Gaza. Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, which have a vested interest in finding a permanent solution, should lead a force that will include foreign countries, to be agreed upon by the US and these Arab states.

In conclusion, it is worth reminding ourselves that Hamas’ savagery and Israel’s retaliatory war have dramatically changed the very nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. All recent developments have demonstrated that it will be impossible to return to the conditions that existed before October 7, 2023.

Regardless of how insurmountable the difficulties that lay ahead, the Arab states have a unique historic opportunity to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict first by initiating and participating in a process of reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinians, culminating with a two-state solution with airtight security arrangements, involving Israel, the Palestinians, Jordan, and the US.

The world will be watching. Will the Arab states muster the courage and rise to the historic occasion when they convene on March 4 in Cairo, take charge, stop Trump and Netanyahu’s deadly and morally bankrupt idea of exiling the Palestinians from Gaza, reach a historic breakthrough, and avoid a looming catastrophe?

These are not ordinary times. Let this serve as a warning. If Trump and Netanyahu have it their way, they will destroy Israel as we know it and set the Middle East ablaze on an unprecedented scale.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Excerpt:

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

Prime Minister of Barbados, CARICOM Chair Mia Mottley at the opening ceremony of the 48th Regular Meeting of the Conference of CARICOM Heads of Government. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

By Alison Kentish
BRIDGETOWN, Barbados , Feb 20 2025 (IPS)

Leaders of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) are meeting in Bridgetown from Feb. 19-21, as the world grapples with multiple crises, including escalating geopolitical conflicts, climate change and rising food insecurity.

“The only way that we will make it through these difficult times is if we are prepared to be more unified and bolder than ever,” Barbadian Prime Minister and CARICOM Chair Mia Mottley said at the opening of the CARICOM 48th Heads of Government Meeting in Bridgetown, Barbados, on Feb. 19.

“We don’t need anyone to tell us about the climate crisis,” she said, adding that “we know what it is each summer to have to hold our breath and to wait and to hope that this is not going to be our turn.”

Mottley urged heads of government of the 15 member nations to agree on a common platform on critical issues, a common vision and to work for what the people of the Caribbean need. The climate crisis is a critical agenda issue, with CARICOM leaders seeking partnership in protecting the lives, livelihoods, and cultures of those most vulnerable to climate change.

“We are in Barbados and if you don’t think that Barbados is worth fighting for, or the Bahamas is worth fighting for, or Dominica is worth fighting for, then I don’t know what is worth fighting for,” said Outgoing CARICOM Chairman, Grenada Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres addressed the multiple crises of geopolitical tensions, the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19, soaring debt, the rising cost of living and climate disasters.

He stated that the solution requires a global approach.

“International solutions are essential to create a better today and a brighter tomorrow for this wonderful region and for the world. We have progress on which to build—hard-won global commitments to address the immense challenges we face. But we need the world to deliver.”

“The irrepressible strength of a unified Caribbean and commitment to multilateralism—which have done so much to advance global progress—are vital to achieving that aim,” he said.

European Union President Ursula von der Leyen, a special guest at the meeting, stated that the days of ‘might is right,’ where large nations drown out the voices of smaller ones, are over and that Europe is ready to listen and engage. She said, “Europe understands how the fight against climate change is paramount to the Caribbean states because it is intrinsically linked to your very existence.”

“We understand how fundamental it is for small islands to have a front seat at the table, where you can be the strong voice you deserve to be for this cause. And let’s be very clear—all continents will have to speed up the transition to climate neutrality as we all have to deal with the growing burden of climate change. Its impact is impossible to ignore.”

The 48th regular meeting of the Heads of Government of CARICOM is being held under the theme “Strength in Unity: Forging Caribbean Resilience, Inclusive Growth and Sustainable Development.”

The themes for discussion by the leaders are Food and Nutrition Security, CARICOM Single Market and Economy, Climate Change and Sustainable Development, Foreign Policy, Air and Maritime Transport and Regional Digital Resilience.

A closing media conference is scheduled for Feb. 21 to discuss key decisions and the way forward.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• Show Me the Money’—Grenada PM Calls for Climate Justice
• Survival at Stake: Caribbean Calls For Just, Fair Financing For Small Island States at COP
• Saint Kitts and Nevis: Leading the Charge for Climate Justice, Renewable Energy

Graves in the Tanzanian city of Morogoro are being targeted as people steal metal crosses to sell on.

Graves in the Tanzanian city of Morogoro are being targeted as people steal metal crosses to sell on.

Graves in the Tanzanian city of Morogoro are being targeted as people steal metal crosses to sell on.

It is the first royal tomb to be found since King Tutankhaman's over a century ago.

The health minister says the patients have recovered, and should not be stigmatised.

Coalition partners object to a hike in VAT, forcing Enoch Godongwana to postpone his budget speech.

Atalanta's Ademola Lookman says comments by his coach Gian Piero Gasperini describing him as "one of the worst penalty takers" were "deeply disrespectful".

The Dutch Minister of Culture says he hopes this move will address the "historical injustice".

Abdullahi Abdi said the achievement had made all his "difficulties and sacrifices" worthwhile.

In a powerful appeal to the world’s largest economies during the G20 Summit, November 2024, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for urgent climate action and reform of international institutions, warning that current systems are failing to meet global challenges. Credit: UN Photo/Gustavo Stephan

By Danny Bradlow
PRETORIA, South Africa, Feb 19 2025 (IPS)

US president Donald Trump’s recent actions seem designed to reassert American power and demonstrate that it is still the dominant global power and is capable of bullying weaker nations into following America’s lead.

He has shown contempt for international collaboration by withdrawing from the UN climate negotiations and the World Health Organization. His officials have also indicated that they will not participate in upcoming G20 meetings because he does not like the policies of South Africa, the G20 president for 2025.

In addition, he’s shown a lack of concern for international solidarity by halting US aid programmes and by undermining efforts to keep businesses honest. He has demonstrated his contempt for allies by imposing tariffs on their exports.

These actions demand a response from the rest of the international community that mitigates the risk to the well-being of people and planet and the effective management of global affairs.
My research on global economic governance suggests that history can offer some guidance on how to shape an effective response.

Such a response should be based on a realistic assessment of the configuration of global forces. It should seek to build tactical coalitions between state and non-state actors in both the global south and the global north who can agree on clear and limited objectives.

The following three historical lessons help explain this point.

Cautionary lessons

The first lesson is about the dangers of being overoptimistic in assessing the potential for change. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the US was confronting defeat in the war in Vietnam, high inflation and domestic unrest, including the assassination of leading politicians and the murder of protesting students.

The US was also losing confidence in its ability to sustain the international monetary order it had established at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944.

In addition, the countries of the global south were calling for a new international economic order that was more responsive to their needs. Given the concerns about the political and economic situation in the US and the relative strength of the Soviet bloc at the time, this seemed a realistic demand.

In August 1971, President Richard Nixon, without any international consultations, launched what became known as the Nixon Shock. He broke the link between gold and the US dollar, thereby ending the international monetary system established in 1944. He also imposed a 10% surcharge on all imports into the US.

When America’s European allies protested and sought to create a reformed version of the old monetary order, US treasury secretary John Connolly informed them that the dollar was our currency but your problem.

Over the course of the 1970s, US allies in western Europe, Asia and all countries that participated in the old Bretton Woods system were forced to accept what the US preferred: a market-based international monetary system in which the US dollar became the dominant currency.

The US, along with its allies in the global north, also defeated the calls for a new international economic order and imposed their neo-liberal economic order on the world.

The second cautionary lesson highlights the importance of building robust tactical coalitions. In 1969, the International Monetary Fund member states agreed to authorise the IMF to create special drawing rights, the IMF’s unique reserve asset.

At the time, many IMF developing country member states advocated establishing a link between development and the special drawing rights. This would enable those countries most in need of additional resources to access more than their proportionate share of special drawing rights to fund their development.

All developing countries supported this demand. But they couldn’t agree on how to do it. The rich countries were able to exploit these differences and defeat the proposed link between the special drawing rights and development.

As a result, the special drawing rights are now distributed to all IMF member states according to their quotas in the IMF. This means that most allocations go to the rich countries who do not need them and have no obligation to share them with developing countries.

A third lesson arises from the successful Jubilee 2000 campaign to forgive the debts of low-income developing countries experiencing debt crises. This campaign, supported by a secretariat in the United Kingdom, eventually involved: civil society organisations and activists in 40 countries a petition signed by 21 million people and governments in both creditor and debtor countries.

These efforts resulted in the cancellation of the debts of 35 developing countries. These debts, totalling about US$100 billion, were owed primarily to bilateral and multilateral official creditors.

They were also a demonstration of the political power that can be generated by the combined actions of civil society organisations and governments in both rich and poor countries.

They can force the most powerful and wealthy institutions and individuals in the world to accept actions that, while requiring them to make affordable sacrifices, benefit low-income countries and potentially poor communities within those states.

What conclusions should be drawn?

We shouldn’t under-estimate the power of the US or the determination of the MAGA movement to use that power. However, their power is not absolute. It is constrained by the relative decline in US power as countries such as China and India gain economic and political strength.

In addition, there are now mechanisms for international cooperation, such as the G20, where states can coordinate their actions and gain tactical victories that are meaningful to people and planet.

But gaining such victories will require the following:

Firstly, the formation of tactical coalitions that include states from both the global south and the global north. If these states cooperate around limited and shared objectives they can counter the vested interests around the world that support Trump’s objectives.

Secondly, a special kind of public-private partnership in which states and non-state actors set aside their differences and agree to cooperate to achieve limited shared objectives. Neither states alone nor civil society groups alone were able to defeat the vested interests that opposed debt relief in the late 1990s. Working together they were able to defeat powerful creditor interests and gain debt relief for the poorest states.

Thirdly, this special partnership will only be possible if there’s general agreement on both the diagnosis of the problem and on the general contours of the solution. This was the case with the debt issue in the 1990s.

There are good candidates for such collaborative actions. For example, many states and non-state actors agree that international financial institutions need to be reformed and made more responsive to the needs of those member states that actually use their services but lack voice and vote in their governance.

The institutions also need to be more accountable to those affected by their policies and practices. They also agree that large corporations and financial institutions should pay their fair share of taxes and should be environmentally and socially responsible.

The urgency of the challenges facing the global community demands that the world begin countering Trump as soon as possible. South Africa as the current chair of the G20 has a special responsibility to ensure that this year the G20, together with its engagement groups, acts creatively and responsibly in relation to people and planet.

Source: Conversation Africa

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Excerpt:

Daniel D. Bradlow is Professor/Senior Research Fellow, Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship, University of Pretoria, South Africa.

Children in Gaza stand on debris from a destroyed building. February 2025. Credit: UN News

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 19 2025 (IPS)

President Trump—whose rash and ill-conceived proposals continue unabated—has threatened to “seize Gaza,” turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East,” and move Palestinians to Egypt and Jordan, two longstanding American allies who depend heavily on US support for their survival.

The US President has also hinted that both countries would suffer either cutbacks or elimination of billions of dollars in economic and military aid —if they refuse to cooperate with him.

Is this for real or just an empty threat?

The proposed seizure of Gaza has been condemned by virtually all Arab leaders who have long advocated a full-fledged Palestinian homeland in the Gaza Strip

In an interview with Christiane Amanpour, Chief International Anchor for Cable News Network (CNN), Prince Turki Al-Faisal, a former Saudi ambassador to the US and UK, was quoted as saying Trump’s Gaza strategy is a “mad ethnic cleansing plan.”

Dr Ramzy Baroud, a journalist and Editor of The Palestine Chronicle, told IPS Arabs cannot accept Trump’s ethnic cleansing plan simply because doing so will destabilize the entire region and all of their regimes.

The repercussions of the original ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948 are still felt throughout the Middle East to this day, he said.

At that time, the majority of the native population of the Palestinian homeland was displaced, around 800,000, most of whom remained displaced within historic Palestine.

Displacing a population of 2.2 million, following a genocide that has ignited rage across the Middle East and around the world, he argued, is a suicidal move for Arab regimes that are already struggling in a desperate search for legitimacy.

“I believe Trump already knows this, but is using the threats to put pressure on Arab regimes to come up with an ‘alternative’ plan aimed at disarming the Palestinian resistance, thus meeting Israel halfway. But in essence, the Arabs have no control over the outcome of the war in Gaza”.

If Israel has failed to disarm Gaza after 15 months of a war of extermination, the Arabs won’t be able to do so, said Dr Baroud, author of six books and a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA).

In an interview with FRANCE 24, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said Trump’s plan at “ethnic cleansing is not acceptable in our world”.

“In the search for solutions, we must not make the problem worse. It is vital to stay true to the bedrock of international law. It is essential to avoid any form of ethnic cleansing,” Guterres told the U.N. Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.

Addressing members of the Committee last week, Guterres said: “At its essence, the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people is about the right of Palestinians to simply live as human beings in their own land.”

However, he said, “we have seen the realization of those rights steadily slip farther out of reach” as well as “a chilling, systematic dehumanization and demonization of an entire people.”

Dr Baroud said Prince Turki Al-Faisal is correct to call it “a mad ethnic cleansing plan”. It is.

But it will fail if the Arabs understand American intentions and focus their energies on supporting Palestinian steadfastness in Gaza

Israel is in its weakest position in decades, and aside from empty threats and rhetoric, it has very few cards left. Arab unity is now key, and I believe that a collective response could positively influence inner Arab relations and re-center Palestine as the driving cause for all Arab nations.

In fact, this could be the chance for the Arab League to matter once more, after decades of marginalization and irrelevance, declared Dr Baroud.

Meanwhile, when US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was in the Middle East last week, he was able to gauge the widespread Arab opposition to Trump’s plan, but apparently downplayed the proposal.

The New York Times quoted Rubio as saying Trump was merely trying to “get a reaction” and “stir” other nations into providing more assistance to post-war Gaza.

King Abdullah II of Jordan, leading a country which is already home to about 700,00 Palestinian, Syrian and Iraqi refugees, told Trump during a White House meeting last week that he is ready to offer a home to about 2,000 Palestinian children in need of medical care.

And perhaps nothing more.

Incidentally, the wife of the Jordanian King is Queen Rania, who is of Palestinian descent.

The proposed takeover of Gaza –and the forcible transfer of Palestinians—are considered both a war crime and a crime against humanity, according to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Janina Dill, co-director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict, was quoted in the New York Times, as saying: “Trump is just casually making major international crimes into policy proposals. He just normalizes violating, or proposing to violate, the absolute bedrock principles of international law”.

Meanwhile, Reuter’s reported that Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi will not travel to Washington for talks at the White House, if the agenda includes Trump’s plan to expel Palestinians from Gaza, according to two Egyptian security sources.

In a call with al-Sisi on 1 February, the US president extended an open invitation to the Egyptian President to visit the White House. No date has been set for any such visit, a US official said.

The Gaza takeover will also be the primary topic on the agenda of an emergency Arab Summit meeting scheduled to take place in Cairo March 4.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Peers and scholars reflect on the role Muhsin Hendricks played in the LGBTQ+ and Islamic communities.

Peers and scholars reflect on the role Muhsin Hendricks played in the LGBTQ+ and Islamic communities.

Peers and scholars reflected on the role Hendricks played within the LGBTQ+ and Islamic communities.

The U.S. efforts to pressure Ukraine to accept significant territorial losses to Russia in exchange for ending the war are expected to increase. Photo: Oleksandr Ratushniak / UNDP Ukraine

By Vyacheslav Likhachev
KYIV, Feb 18 2025 (IPS)

U.S. President Donald Trump and his special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, have recently expressed confidence and optimism about the prospect of “ending” the war in Ukraine. No details have been made public; however, according to the new administration’s vision, both sides must make concessions to achieve peace. Yet it remains unclear not only what the proposed concessions are but also how exactly the US intends to persuade the parties to compromise.

President Trump has so far limited himself to vague threats to impose tariffs on non-existent Russian imports to the U.S. General Kellogg, for his part, has transparently hinted that Ukraine should abandon its unrealistic desire to liberate its territory occupied by Russia.

It is more likely that the plan is designed to satisfy the ambitions of Russian leader Vladimir Putin, albeit not to the maximalist extent. So, with a Trump administration, he may be closer than ever to getting his way in Ukraine

The U.S. efforts to pressure Ukraine to accept significant territorial losses to Russia in exchange for ending the war are expected to increase. In contrast to the various options discussed at the expert level last year, the new Trump administration has avoided making any commitments to future security guarantees for Ukraine.

Of course, it is still possible that a significant part of the U.S. proposal remains non-public. However, it is more likely that the plan is designed to satisfy the ambitions of Russian leader Vladimir Putin, albeit not to the maximalist extent. So, with a Trump administration, he may be closer than ever to getting his way in Ukraine.

In fact, this proposed deal appears indistinguishable from the Chinese-Brazilian peace plan discussed at various international venues last year. Both approaches would “freeze” the conflict, giving at least implicit recognition of Russia’s occupation of swathes of Ukrainian territory, as well as a permanent foothold from which Russia can launch future aggressions.

It is obvious why China and Russia’s other authoritarian allies would favor this plan. But why has it found support in the White House?

The general logic is as follows: Ukraine is not in a position to liberate all of its territories in the foreseeable future (especially not without very costly and politically fraught U.S. assistance); continuing hostilities only bring further suffering; and military activities, therefore, should stop as soon as possible.

This framework is deeply flawed and far from a fair resolution. However, other options in the current global political configuration are beginning to look simply unrealistic.

If somehow it is possible to add guarantees against further Russian aggression to the “Trump—Kellogg plan,” it will at least look workable. Proponents of this model cite the experience of post-war Germany and North Korea.

Persuading Ukraine to renounce territorial integrity would not be easy, but it is possible. It is hard to imagine what could make the Kremlin stop its troops.

It was only last summer that Vladimir Putin demanded that territories that Russia does not de facto control be handed over to him as a condition for a ceasefire. In its own perverse way, this is logical – like dealing with any common gangster, peace always comes at a cost.

Also, it is more difficult to imagine, however, what security commitments could be strong enough to prevent further Russian aggression and war crimes. More precisely, what guarantees would Western leaders, who are so afraid of escalation and any hint of a direct clash with Russia, agree to accept? But even if we assume that a solution to these dilemmas could be found, we would be required to accept the occupation as irreversible.

Attention should, therefore, be paid to the following aspect, which is usually omitted from the analysis: What is happening in Ukraine’s occupied territories is fundamentally different from the German situation half a century ago.

The Soviet Union did not deny post-war Germany’s right to statehood (no matter how much of a puppet the East German regime was), and Moscow did not deny the German people’s right to exist.

In the case of Ukraine, however, Russia is not simply trying to undermine Ukrainian statehood – it is trying to destroy Ukraine as a nation and as a people. Ukrainians, from the point of view of official Kremlin ideology, are Russians who have forgotten that they are Russian, and Russia must remind them of this fact.

This is playing out in the occupied territories, where Russian forces are implementing a regime of forced passportization, Russification of education, and the systemic persecution of any religious communities except those who were forcibly annexed to the Russian Orthodox Church under the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate.

The practice of “Filtration Camps,” through which a significant part of the population of the occupied territories passed, is not without reason so reminiscent of Chinese methods of suppressing, or some would say, destroying the Uyghur minority.

What we are seeing in occupied Ukraine is a general pattern of social re-education on an Orwellian level.

The effectiveness of Russian methods should not be underestimated. Violence, propaganda, and bribery of those ready to imitate loyalty do their job. Ukrainians in the occupied territories are being turned into Russians. Those who think that this can be resolved once peace has been negotiated are either playing dumb or are truly naive.

Governments that are supporting Ukraine should instead focus on military aid as well as on accountability for Russia’s crime of aggression and the atrocities taking place against civilians.

The self-soothing illusion that the China-Brazil plan (or should I say “the Trump-Kellogg” one now?) will bring peace to Ukraine is a destructive one, and those in the West — including the U.S. administration —tempted to support this idea must wake up to the consequences of appeasing Putin.

Should the conflict in Ukraine be “frozen” by such an accord, all it will do is show dictators and autocrats that national sovereignty and the right to self-determination are negotiable. Ultimately, this won’t provide any of us any peace or comfort, but especially not those Ukrainians forced to remain under Russia’s yoke.

Excerpt:

Vyacheslav Likhachev, based in Kyiv, is an expert at the Center for Civil Liberties, a human rights organization that won the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize 

Lydia Mugambe told police her alleged victim had been "acting funny", Oxford Crown Court hears.