Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

The protestors’ main rallying slogan is ‘GotaGoHome’

By Neville de Silva
LONDON, May 4 2022 (IPS)

When I ended last month’s column hoping that April would not prove to be hapless Sri Lanka’s ‘cruellest month’ (in the words TS Eliot), I hardly anticipated the current turn of events.

In April, the country was to celebrate several ethno-religious festivals. The biggest among them was the Sinhala and Tamil New Year, celebrated by Sri Lanka’s majority community and its main minority. It was also the Muslim month of Ramadan and Easter, commemorated by the Christians.

For over one-and-a-half years Sri Lanka had been grappling with a fast-failing economy. The dwindling of foreign reserves and the consequent shortages of food, medicines, fuel, gas and kerosene for cooking were more recently compounded by power cuts, at times as long as 12hoursper day, bringing manufacturing industries to a standstill and forcing businesses to close down early.

With the country struggling to avert bankruptcy and an unprecedented rise in inflation and spiralling commodity prices, many working-class families, daily wage earners and farmers were facing penury and starvation.

Against this dire background Sri Lanka’s 22 million people were anxiously preparing for the April festivities, wondering whether there would be anything to celebrate.

Then it happened.

On March 31 the residents of Mirihana, a middle- class town on the outskirts of Colombo, held a candle-light protest to highlight the daily power cuts that disrupted their family activities. The protest, initially by women, attracted passers-by and huge crowds from neighbourhood towns and residential areas as President Gotabaya Rajapaksa lived in Mirihana in his private residence.

Swelling crowds shouting slogans later clashed with police firing tear gas and water cannons to break up the demonstration, but many of the protestors held their ground till the next day.

The Mirihana protest has sparked the island-wide conflagration that now has the once all-powerful Rajapaksa family-run government teetering on the wall like Humpty Dumpty awaiting a splintering fall. It will remain an important landmark in this uprising, which some have called, rather erroneously, Sri Lanka’s ‘Arab Spring’.

Mirihana began the assault against the Rajapaksa fiefdom that once seemed impregnable. Gotabaya Rajapaksa is president. Brother Mahinda, who served two terms as president, is currently prime minister. Another brother, Basil, a dual citizen with US citizenship and a home in Los Angeles, was until last month finance minister, and the eldest brother Chamal holds the post ofirrigation minister and state minister of security. Mahinda’s eldest son Namal, whom his father sees as heir apparent, was sports and youth affairs minister, among other portfolios.

It appears that the prime minister suspects he is going to be sacrificed on the altar of expediency

Together, the family reportedly controlled 72 per cent of government resources, free to use as they deemed fit, even to farm off to their acolytes and business friends in the way of government contracts and import monopolies, even during the Covid pandemic.

Today, however, that fortress of power and privilege appears as exposed as France’s Maginot Line, set to crumble against a German Blitzkrieg.

All the Rajapaksas, except Prime Minister Mahinda, lost their positions last month when President Gotabaya suddenly dissolved the cabinet in a desperate attempt to quell the mounting outrage against him. It seemed a weak moral sidestep, for the protesters’ cry was not only against the president but against the entire Rajapaksa family, which they claimed had dipped their hands into the country’s assets for personal gain.

Mirihana lit the fuse for the enormous protest that flared up at Colombo’s beach-front Galle Face Green, right opposite the Presidential Secretariat from where political power radiated. It was this that breached the Rajapaksa citadel.

Economists urged the government seek IMF assistance

At the time of writing, this protest – which shows signs of unifying the country’s multiracial, multi-religious society and has drawn crowds of all ages and a wide cross-section of the Sri Lankan community, including the professional classes – has entered its 17thcontinuous day, with hundreds of protesters camped there day and night despite the heat and rain.

Yet it is no Arab Spring. It is an orderly, non-violent protest, mainly of youth of all shades, with an inventive genius to keep themselves and their cause alive.

Never in Sri Lanka’s 74 years of post-independence history has the country seen anything like this, even though anti-government protests are nothing new to the country, which has seen Leftist political parties and associated trade unions functioning even under British colonial rule.

The main rallying slogan is ‘GotaGoHome’, telling Gotabaya to return to his home – also in Los Angeles –though he relinquished his US citizenship to be eligible to contest the presidential election in November 2019.

Built round that slogan are a myriad other satirical comments in song, verse, caricatures, cartoons and videos, the creative work of the protesters deriding the Rajapaksas, some demanding they return the country’s supposedly stolen assets and otherwise accumulated wealth in tax havens.

Although the protesters are now demanding that the whole Rajapaksa family pack their bags and quit, the main target quite rightly is President Gotabaya. It was his military arrogance – having played a role in the defeat of the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam(LTTE) in 2009, under the leadership of his president brother Mahinda – and his ignorance of politics and governance, and over-reliance on incompetent advisers that started the economic rot.

With a group of retired and serving military men appointed to key civilian positions and a coterie of so-called intellectuals and businessmen as advisers, he plunged head-first into economic policy decisions.

Within a few days of assuming office, he had slashed VAT from 15 per cent to 8per cent and abolished some other taxes that cost the state a whopping 28 per cent in revenue. It led the Central Bank to print money feverishly to meet budgetary commitments, causing inflation.

Also disastrous was the overnight decision to ban chemical fertilisers that drove farmers to burn effigies of ministers and demonstrate on the streets, demanding restitution of their fertiliser needs or face food insecurity in the months ahead, forcing a once adamant president to retract.

While economists had foreseen the impending danger in depleting foreign reserves and international debt repayments this year, and hence urged the government seek IMF assistance, the president clung steadfastly to the advice of the Central Bank Governor and the Treasury Secretary, among others, who dismissed the idea for more than one year even ignoring cabinet support for IMF help.

In a belated gesture, President Gotabaya sacked the two officials immediately after replacing his cabinet with younger, untested MPs. He sent his new finance minister to Washington to plead with the IMF for immediate relief.

The president is hoping for political concessions he has agreed to – including returning to parliament and the prime minister powers that he usurped on coming to office through the 20thconstitutional amendment. He has now agreed to form an interim All Party government.

But one sees a growing rift in the once close-knit family. Names proposed by Prime Minister Mahinda for the new cabinet were ignored by his brother, causing the prime minister to boycott the swearing-in of the new ministers.

If the president opts for an interim government, it means he has decided to stay put but call for the prime minister’s resignation. It would appear that the prime minister suspects he is going to be sacrificed on the altar of expediency.

In an interview the other day, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa insisted that he will not resign and any reconstituted government must be under his leadership. In the meantime, he has been trying to whip up support against his ouster by canvassing MPs to muster the required 113 votes.

How the protesting public will react to all these political manipulations will depend on what is on offer. Right now, they are determined to continue until President Gotabaya surrenders, which seems unlikely.

Source: Asian Affairs, London

Neville de Silva is a veteran Sri Lankan journalist who held senior roles in Hong Kong at The Standard and worked in London for Gemini News Service. He has been a correspondent for foreign media including the New York Times and Le Monde. More recently he was Sri Lanka’s Deputy High Commissioner in London.

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');  

Credit: United Nations

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, May 4 2022 (IPS)

The Russian Federation, which invaded Ukraine last February killing scores of civilians and destroying entire cities, has been condemned, vilified and ostracized by the international community.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was emphatic last month when he remarked: “The use of force by one country against another is the repudiation of the principles that every country has committed to uphold. This applies to the present military offensive. It is wrong. It is against the Charter. It is unacceptable”.

And while the US and Western European nations have cut off all commercial and financial ties with Russia— treating Moscow as an international pariah– the UN Secretariat is continuing its multi-million-dollar contracts with a blacklisted Russia.

Metaphorically speaking, it triggers the question: does the UN’s right hand know what its left foot is up to?

The goods and services from Russia are primarily air transportation, mostly helicopters, including maintenance and servicing; information and communication technologies (ICT); and food catering, largely for the UN’s 12 peacekeeping missions.

Asked if the UN had received a letter from the Ukrainian Mission urging the Secretariat to end its procurements from Russia, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters last month: “We did receive, earlier in March, a petition by the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to us, to quote, “immediately suspend all non essential procurement cooperation of the UN with the Russian Federation.”

“We responded to the Permanent Mission of Ukraine a few days later that the procuring of goods and services and works by the UN Secretariat, is in accordance with the mandate given to us by the General Assembly and in [conformity] with the Financial Regulations of the UN, which requires such procurement actions to be done on the basis of best value for money, fairness, integrity and transparency, and effective international competition.”

He also pointed out that “it’s no secret that a lot of our aviation procurement for peacekeeping and just logistics comes from the Russian Federation, with also quite a bit from Ukraine.”

“The rules are set by the General Assembly, and we follow those rules. So, our position is set by the rules… the financial rules that we have… that we follow… The rules say procurement actions are done on the basis of best value for money, fairness, integrity and transparency, and effective international competition”.

But the 193-member General Assembly, the UN’s highest policy-making body, is missing in action (MIA) — or perhaps planning to pass the buck to the UN’s Administrative and Budgetary Committee.

Asked for a response to comments from the UN Spokesperson‘s office, Christian Saunders, Assistant Secretary General for Supply Chain Management at the Department of Operational Support, told IPS: “The information provided during the briefing by the UN spokesperson remains valid.”

According to the latest available figures, the UN’s purchases from Russia amounted to about $115.6 million in 2021, with Moscow listed as the 5th largest supplier behind the US, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kenya and Switzerland.

The breakdown is as follows: US ($456.2 million), UAE ($329.3 million), Kenya ($192.4 million), Switzerland ($182.3 million) and Russia ($115.6 million).

The UN also has trade links with Russia’s largest helicopter operator, UTair – Helicopter Services, described as a leading provider of aviation services to companies in the fuel and energy industries, plus the United Nations.

Last year, the UN Procurement Division (UNPD) called for tenders for the following contracts in aviation procurement, where Russia has remained a front-runner.

One Medium Fixed Wing Turboprop Passenger Aircraft Support of UNISFA for a period of one year Plus two optional extension periods of one year each.

An Air Ambulance Aircraft Service with Guaranteed Availability based in Europe in support of UN Operations, for a period of three months, plus three optional extension periods of three months each.

A second Air Ambulance Aircraft Service with Guaranteed Availability based in Accra, Ghana in support of UN Operations, for a period of three months plus three optional extension periods of three months each.

Meanwhile, the approved budget for UN Peacekeeping operations for the fiscal year 1 July 2021 – 30 June 2022 is a staggering $6.38 billion. (A/C.5/75/25)—and payments to Russian contractors will flow largely from this budget.

But one question cries out for an answer: how will the UN pay for these purchases and services when Russians have been barred from most of the international banking system?

Speaking of Russia’s isolation at the UN, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told reporters May 3: “We have been successful in isolating Russia in the Security Council, and that’s a significant success. We have been successful in unifying the voices condemning Russia in the General Assembly, but it came about because there was so much support for it in the Security Council. And getting 141 votes to support that effort was a significant success for all of us””.

“And we have been successful in unifying the UN in suspending Russia from the Human Rights Council. Russia is isolated in the Security Council, and every time we have a discussion in the Security Council as it relates to Russia, they are on the defensive and we will continue to keep them on the defensive until they end their brutal attack on the Ukrainian people”.

Last week Russia was suspended from the UN World Tourism Organization (UNETO), shortly after Moscow announced it had decided to quit in anticipation of the suspension.

Ian Williams, President of the Foreign Press Association, told IPS it is difficult within the rule, but the UN can be notoriously slow in paying its bills which might be appropriate in this case.

“But they do need an official body to bar contracts for Russian companies to protect staff involved and to ward off breach of contract. It is hard to leave it to the courage, or caprice, of UN bureaucrats”.

The UN had no compunction in hiring a CIA founded company to run UN missions along the Iraq-Kuwait border despite Iraqi protests at the UN, said Williams, author of ‘Untold: The Real Story of the United Nations in Peace and War.’

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');  

By Andrew Firmin
May 3 2022 (IPS-Partners)

Economic crisis has provoked a great wave of protests in Sri Lanka. People are demanding the resignation of the president, blamed for high-handed and unaccountable decision making, exemplified by his introduction of an agricultural fertiliser ban in 2021 that has resulted in a food crisis. People don’t just want the president’s removal: they want a change in the political balance of power so that future presidents are subjected to proper checks and balances. Hope comes from the wide-reaching and diverse protest movement that has put aside past differences to demand change.

Recent weeks in Sri Lanka have seen anger and protests alongside struggles to secure the basics of life – but also hope that change is coming. An economic meltdown has brought normal life to a halt. People are living with lengthy power cuts, almost no access to fuel and soaring prices that have made essential foods unaffordable, forcing many to cut down on their daily meals.

There’s no doubt that Sri Lanka’s economy has been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic, which largely put a halt to tourism and slashed remittances from Sri Lankans abroad, and most recently by Russia’s war on Ukraine, which has pushed up global fuel prices. But people are also pointing the finger at strong-arm president Gotabaya Rajapaksa and his centralised and unaccountable brand of decision making.

A disastrous decision on farming

High global prices are affecting every economy, but Sri Lanka is doing notably worse than most, indicating that problems have been building up for some time. Sri Lanka has the region’s highest inflation, the value of its currency has collapsed and it has almost completely depleted its foreign currency reserves. This is all making it even harder and more costly to import the food and fuel it needs. The country has defaulted on billions of dollars of foreign debt repayments and is now in what could be lengthy negotiations with the International Monetary Fund. It’s a long way from the ‘Vistas of Prosperity and Splendour’ Rajapaksa promised in his 2019 election manifesto.

On coming to power, Rajapaksa cut taxes, including corporate tax, and reversed the policy of the outgoing government that would have made the central bank independent and stop the government printing more money as a short-term economic fix. The government, including the administration headed by Rajapaksa’s brother Mahinda from 2005 to 2015, was accused of running up debt on grandiose infrastructure projects.

Meanwhile Sri Lanka’s home-grown food supplies have been depleted as a direct result of a presidential decision. In April 2021, President Rajapaksa introduced a ban on chemical fertilisers and pesticides. The move, which came into effect straight away rather than being phased in over time, gave farmers no time to change the practices they had used for decades. The result was a swift decline in yields of rice, the key crop that feeds the nation, and export crops that earn essential foreign currency, notably tea.

Following protests in response to falling harvests, the government reversed its policy for some key crops and agreed to pay compensation, but it was already too late: Sri Lanka’s economic woes have been compounded by the need to import rice, on which it was long self-sufficient. Earlier this month, Mahinda Yapa Abeywardana, speaker of parliament, voiced his fear that many face the threat of starvation. A medical workers’ union has similarly warned of a national health emergency as the country struggles to import essential medicines.

For many farmers, who make up 27 per cent of Sri Lanka’s workforce, the fertiliser ban and its fallout epitomised an unaccountable president able to make unchecked decisions. Farmers, many of whom had previously backed the ruling party, felt taken for granted; some wondered if the scheme was a ploy to force small farmers off their land to enable large-scale commercialisation of farms.

An out-of-control ruling family

At the heart of the crisis is one powerful political family. When former army leader Gotabaya Rajapaksa became president in 2019, he was just the tip of the iceberg. He appointed his brother Mahinda, former president and one of five members of the family to win seats in the 2020 parliamentary election, as prime minister. He also placed two other Rajapaksa brothers and a nephew in the cabinet, making governing a private family business.

Presidential power was extended by constitutional changes in October 2020: the president gained additional powers to dissolve parliament, appoint and dismiss ministers and choose judges and the heads of key commissions, including the election commission. Unaccountable presidential taskforces were created, removing key issues from parliamentary scrutiny, and a slew of current and former army officers were given government roles previously held by civilians.

Unsurprisingly this consolidation of Rajapaksa family power was accompanied by a crackdown on civic space, with protest bans, the detention of activists and the harassment and criminalisation of government critics and independent media.

It was no shock that the government’s response to protests was to fall back on its machinery of repression. When protesters camped outside the president’s residence on 31 March to demand his resignation, teargas and water cannon were used and at least 50 protesters and several journalists were injured. Dozens of protesters were arrested, with some ill-treated in detention.

The following day the government introduced a state of emergency, imposing a curfew and giving itself the power to arrest and detain people without warrants. The military was deployed onto the streets. Internet and social media access were restricted.

Despite the curfew, there were thousands who came to the streets to protest peacefully. This was a large-scale civil disobedience from citizens, unprecedented in Sri Lanka.


BHAVANI FONSEKA

However, the pressure did not let up as people kept protesting despite the curfew. In response the government had to give some ground. On 2 April the cabinet resigned and President Rajapaksa offered to form a unity government, an invitation opposition parties rejected, since both the president and his brother showed no indication of stepping down. The next day 41 members of parliament quit the ruling coalition, leaving the Rajapaksas heading a minority government and potentially facing a future vote of confidence. The state of emergency, clearly untenable, was quickly withdrawn.

The protest movement continues, demanding that both President and Prime Minister Rajapaksa quit. More than that, protesters are insisting they don’t want another all-powerful president: they want a form of government where presidential power is subject to checks and balances and policies like the disastrous agricultural reforms can’t simply be pushed through. Protesters have also started to call for accountability over recent human rights violations, including those committed during Sri Lanka’s bloody civil war.

Voices from the frontline

Bhavani Fonseka is from the Centre for Policy Alternatives, an organisation that advocates for non-violent conflict resolution and democratic governance to facilitate post-war recovery in Sri Lanka:

The protests are spontaneous and come as a direct result of the current economic crisis, which is imposing a heavy burden on the people. They have been suffering from severe hardships due to a lack of essential items, including medicines, long power cuts and skyrocketing prices. In response, people have taken to the streets in peaceful protests across the country for more than a month.

It is important to state that the widespread protests are not linked to any political party. The opposition held their own protests weeks ago and continue to protest currently. But the ongoing protests are largely driven by angry citizens who oppose the involvement of politicians and members of parliament in their peaceful protests. There is frustration with existing political parties, including the opposition; people denounce them for not doing enough as representatives of the people.

In line with that, the thousands of people who have continued to protest in recent weeks demand a radical change. They call for the president and government to step down, a peaceful transition of power, and for structural reforms including the abolishing of the executive presidency. There is also a loud call to address immediate needs such as shortages of essential items, livelihoods and rising cost of living, among the many other calls from the protesters.

Sri Lanka has not seen this scale of protests in recent years – none that I can remember. Even the older generations are saying they have not seen a similar movement. As most of these protests are peaceful, they are making a difference by raising the profile of our domestic issues across the region and internationally. As a result, there is a recognition that the situation is quite bad in Sir Lanka.

Despite the curfew on the first weekend of April, there were thousands who came to the streets that Sunday to protest peacefully. This was a large-scale civil disobedience from citizens, unprecedented in Sri Lanka because it is the first time we have seen such large numbers of people coming to peacefully protest during a curfew.

Overall, the mobilisation of lawyers and of civil society to offer solidarity and support are quite high. Over 500 lawyers turned up to support those who were arrested on 31 March, and many other instances have seen lawyers appearing to protect the rights of citizens.

I believe that it is amazing how people are stepping out, creating ways of protesting despite the challenges and hardships.

 
Ruki Fernando is a human rights activist, writer and consultant to the Centre for Society and Religion:

This protest movement is the biggest and most diverse I have ever experienced in Sri Lanka. The protests are largely driven by angry, frustrated, disappointed citizens. Mainly the protests have been triggered by the ramification of the economic crisis that reached its peak with shortages of fuel, electricity, gas and medicines among many essential items that either disappeared from the market or had their prices hiked.

Protesters are also now demanding the truth about people who disappeared during Sri Lanka’s civil war and even before. Their demands have expanded beyond the severe financial crisis to call for those in power to be held accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity, disappearances and killings, disappearances and assaults on journalists.

The protesters are demanding long-term legal and institutional changes to the current governance system that must start with the resignation of the President Rajapaksa and the Rajapaksa family. Others call for the abolition of the 20th amendment to the constitution, which expanded the president’s executive powers.

Protest slogans calling on the president to ‘Go Home’ are now evolving into ‘Go to Jail’ and ‘Return Stolen Money’.

Repressive measures did not last in the face of the ongoing protests. The authorities had to release arrested protesters and revoke the declaration of emergency, the curfew was not extended and the social media shutdown was withdrawn.

I believe that when President Rajapaksa revoked the declaration of a state of emergency on 5 April, it was because he realised he was not able to sustain the necessary parliamentary majority that was needed for its continuation.

Most importantly, these protests, which are largely being led by young and students, represent a political awakening of various groups of our nation. Many women, older people, LGBTQI+ people, lawyers, religious clergy, artists and well-known people such as former cricketers have been part of the protests. They have enriched the spirit of defiance, resistance, courage and creativity unleashed by youth, on an unprecedented scale.

Aside from that, there is fear and uncertainty about what the future may hold for our country. There are many concerns about a potential military–police crackdown, especially after the shooting at protesters in Rambukkana that led to at least one death and several others injured.

There are also worries about sustaining the protests and a lack of clear political alternatives. But it has been an inspiring, heartening moment to see so many people, especially young people, standing up, creatively and courageously.

These are edited extracts of our conversations with Bhavani and Ruki. Read the full interviews here.

 
Diverse movement points the way forward

Pressure continues to mount. Some senior ruling-party politicians have said they back the protesters and called on the prime minister to quit. Influential Buddhist leaders have done likewise. It seems increasingly clear that if the president and prime minister had national unity and the best interests of the country at heart, they would stop clinging onto power.

Concern comes over the president’s close military links, which could help keep the Rajapaksas in power. Sri Lanka could be at a significant fork in the road: it could potentially become more democratic and pluralist, but alternatively it could transition into de facto military rule. Worryingly, the protests experienced their first fatality on 19 April when police opened fire on protesters blocking railway lines and roads in the town of Rambukkana, killing bystander Chaminda Lakshan and injuring several others. Violence towards protesters may increase if the Rajapaksas try to stay in power.

But hope comes in the unity across diversity of the protest movement. The political power of the Rajapaksas has rested on a stridently religious-nationalist appeal to a key segment of the country’s majority Sinhala Buddhist population, based on the exclusion of Tamil people and other minorities. But protesters are coming from all groups and mobilising outside party structures. Young people are denying their reputation for apathy by protesting in numbers. LGBTQI+ people, previously made invisible, are being embraced as part of the protest community.

People are no longer either intimidated or impressed by President Rajapaksa’s strongman posturing, and they no longer want such a leader. The protest movement is showing instead what Sri Lanka could look like, and making clear that the best way for the country to respond to its economic crisis is to listen to the voices of its people.

OUR CALLS FOR ACTION

– President and Prime Minister Rajapaksa should step aside in favour of a government of national unity to develop a consensus-based response to the economic crisis.
– The government should amend the constitution to restore checks and balances on presidential power.
– Sri Lanka’s protest movement must stay unified, respect the diversity of its members and resist factionalism.

The author is CIVICUS’s Editor in Chief

This story was originally published by CIVICUS Lens.

Excerpt:

Protest movement demands an end to unaccountable presidential power

Pacific Community health experts conduct laboratory training for COVID-19 testing with their healthcare colleagues in Nuku'alofa, Tonga. Credit: Pacific Community (SPC)

By Catherine Wilson
CANBERRA, Australia , May 3 2022 (IPS)

Before the pandemic emerged in 2020, health services in many Pacific Island countries were under-resourced, under-funded and under-staffed. Now following recent outbreaks of COVID-19, advancing the capacity and development of health and medical services in vulnerable nations, such as Tonga and Kiribati, is increasingly urgent.

In the central Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati, virus cases have skyrocketed from zero to more than 3,000 since the beginning of the year. Meanwhile, the Polynesian kingdom of Tonga was hit early this year by a devastating submarine volcanic eruption and then a spike in COVID-19 cases.

“Ashfall and a tsunami from the volcanic eruption affected an estimated 84 percent of the population covering the whole of Tonga,” Tongan Prime Minister Siaosi Sovaleni’s office announced in late January.

In Kiribati, Margaret Leong, SPC’s Infection Prevention and Control Adviser, conducted training in the use of PPE with local healthcare staff. Credit: Pacific Community (SPC)

The deployment of health and medical experts to Tonga and Kiribati in February by the regional development organization, Pacific Community, have proven to be crucial support missions.

“Tonga is in a unique and unprecedented scenario. It is contending with a triple event: the volcanic eruption, the tsunami and COVID-19 outbreak. They are all related to one another. We are in Tonga in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, helping to ensure the quality of COVID-19 testing is maintained, aspiring to zero contamination, to support infection prevention and control,” Dr Sunia Soakai, Deputy Director of the Pacific Community’s Public Health Division told IPS from Tonga.

Tonga, an archipelago nation of 104,494 people in the southern Pacific Ocean, managed, for a long time, to stave off the pandemic, recording its first COVID-19 case only in October last year. Then on the 15 January, the Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha’apai underwater volcano, located 65 kilometres northeast of the country’s main island of Tongatapu, erupted violently, propelling massive amounts of volcanic ash into the atmosphere and triggering far-reaching tsunami waves. Many islanders were affected, either by health problems, such as breathing and cardiovascular difficulties, the loss of food sources or forced displacement.

But, as the world reached out to help, disaster recovery efforts were complicated by a spike in the pandemic. As of 20 April, Tonga recorded 9,220 cases of COVID-19 and 11 related deaths.

While Tongans receive free public healthcare, the island nation has limited health infrastructure and human resources. “We are providing support to three hospitals located on Tonga’s outer islands to boost their capacities for COVID-19 testing. That involves assisting them to collect samples and, if needed, transporting them to locations where equipment for testing is available…We’ve also been asked to conduct a thorough review of the country’s health protocols and procedures, such as handling of the deceased, quarantine requirements and procedures related to health care workers returning to work after positive diagnosis of COVID-19,” Dr Soakai described. “And we are working to ensure that other health services continue to be available to non-COVID patients.”

Local nurses dedicated to working in COVID-19 patient hospital wards in the Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati. Credit: Pacific Community (SPC)

SPC is a member of the World Health Organisation (WHO)-led multi-agency Joint Incident Management Team and provides a wide spectrum of support services, including building the capacities of health systems, improving training and qualifications of healthcare workers across the region and commissioning new medical research.

“The team that was recently deployed to Tonga was very timely. They came when there was a lot of demand in our laboratory to do tests. This was before Rapid Antigen Tests were widely used for testing. We were sending up to 500 swabs per day and this was a challenge to our laboratory,” Dr Ana Akau’ola, Medical Superintendent of the main Vaiola Hospital in Tonga’s capital, Nuku’alofa, told IPS.

Earlier in the year, Elisiva Na’ati, a dietitian from the Pacific Community arrived in the country to aid recovery efforts following the volcanic disaster. “She came when there was a need to develop nutritional proposals for the islanders who had been displaced after the tsunami,” Dr Akau’ola added.

Across the vast Pacific Ocean, containing 22 island nations and territories with a total population of about 11.9 million, the role of the Pacific Community during the pandemic is, for many islanders, the difference between life and death. Many national governments work with constrained budgets and, therefore, funding and resources for health, with specialist and full hospital services often only available in main urban centres.

Only 12 of 21 Pacific Island countries have met the global goal of 4.5 healthcare workers per 1,000 people and national health expenditure per capita in 10 Pacific nations is US$500 or less, compared to the world average of US$1,000, WHO reports. It is not just islanders suffering from the virus, but also those afflicted with other serious illnesses, such as Tuberculosis, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, who are experiencing over-burdened health clinics and hospitals.

Since the pandemic emerged, the Pacific Community has provided countries with laboratories, medical technology and skills for the testing of COVID-19, assisted vaccination initiatives, upskilled the capabilities of nurses for greater responsibility and strengthened national capabilities to monitor emerging public health threats.

In the atolls of Kiribati, home to about 119,940 people, SPC’s medical and health professionals worked alongside local health staff, patients and international partners, such as UNICEF, WHO and Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which provided funding.

The country managed to keep COVID-19 from crossing its borders until January when its first case was identified in an incoming traveller. By April 20, 2022, Kiribati had diagnosed 3,076 virus cases in the country with 13 fatalities.

“We went into the country at the peak. We came to assist with preparing the wards, to support the training of PPE use. We set up isolation centres for patients in the community because the hospital beds were all full. We also worked with airport and border control staff, helping them to use practical and effective PPE, such as disposable gowns,” Margaret Leong, the Pacific Community’s Infection Prevention and Control Adviser, who was deployed to Kiribati in February, told IPS.

“Some of the issues and challenges they had were healthcare worker fatigue and psychological stress. Staff were getting sick, so there were insufficient numbers of healthcare workers at the peak. This put stress on the remaining healthcare workers,” Leong continued.

Laboratory training conducted by the Pacific Community-led health and medical mission in February and March boosted the capacity of Kiribati health services to cope with the pressures of a surge in COVID-19 cases. Credit: Pacific Community (SPC)

At the same time, Dr Lamour Hansell led the SPC’s Clinical Care Services part of the mission, helping to manage COVID patients in intensive care. “We started up a new hospital for COVID patients, supplying new infrastructure. An old hotel was found [in Nuku’alofa] and turned into a critical care facility. The Intensive Care Unit was located in the main hotel lobby and it was one of the best I have worked in,” Dr Hansell told IPS.

The work was relentless, round the clock and demanding, but Dr Hansell had only praise for his local colleagues, who, he said, were flexible and adaptable in the face of enormous professional and personal pressures. He witnessed many moments of courage and strength in his co-workers, remembering “one of the clinicians who had to treat and manage her own grandmother who had COVID-19. It was a very humbling thing to see, very humbling and inspiring,” he emphasised.

The number of new virus cases has slowed in both countries since the beginning of April, but internal lockdown restrictions remain in place. While the Pacific Community’s in-country missions responded to the peak of the crisis, the organization is accessible throughout the year to provide virtual, logistical support and mentoring to Pacific Island nations whenever it’s needed.

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

• Pacific Islanders: Failure to Commit to 1.5 Degrees at COP27 will Imperil the World’s Oceans
• Atoll Nation of Tuvalu Adopts ‘Cubes’ to Step Up Nutritious Food Production
• Pacific Community Warns of Threat to Education Retention in the Wake of COVID-19

Credit: United Nations

By Riya Shah and Arjun Kumar
NEW DELHI, May 3 2022 (IPS)

When the Covid- 19 pandemic first broke out in Wuhan in 2020, no one imagined that it would wreak havoc on such a large scale. With over 6.2 million lives lost, countless infected and new variants emerging, the pandemic is still raging all around the world.

Governments all over the world have moved away from the lockdown method to one living with Covid. However, even after two years of the Wuhan outbreak, China has continued with its stringent Zero Covid policy.

Initially, the strategy was successful in reducing transmission to near zero but as highly transmissible variants like Omicron are surfacing, this policy seems to be faltering beneath its own weight. The resurgence of cases in 2022 and the month-long Shanghai lockdown has again put to test the effectiveness of the ‘zero tolerance’ Covid policy.

The nightmare returns

In early April, as the highly transmissible Omicron virus rummaged around China, it forced the 25 million-strong-city of Shanghai into complete lockdown. China’s most populous city and economic hub turned into a ghost town almost overnight.

With a massive resurgence in the number of active cases, a four-day lockdown was implemented on March 28, but due to increasing cases and its Zero Covid policy, the lockdown has continued indefinitely.

Shanghai reported over 29,300 cases on April 1, this spurred mandatory mass screening, community control, rapid contact tracing and other prevention measures to tackle the outbreak and prevent it from spilling over to other provinces.

With around half of the above 80-year age group unvaccinated, and less than one-fifth being given booster doses, the Chinese government has adopted strict measures to curb the spread of Omicron, which has triggered the worst outbreak since 2020.

During a State Council meeting, the co-ordinator of China’s Covid-19 response, Sun Chunluan declared that China will continue with the zero- Covid policy ‘without hesitation’. Many party officials from Changchun, Jilin and Shandong have also been sacked due to ‘ineffective performance’ in controlling the outbreak in Shanghai.

With cases surging, the local government in Beijing is also bracing for another Shanghai-style lockdown. The resurgence of cases can be attributed to the highly contagious nature of the Omicron variant, shortage of mRNA vaccines and the lack of hybrid immunity due to non-exposure to earlier strains.

Moreover, there has been a massive public outroar against the inhumane implementation of the policy in Shanghai. When people protested on their balconies against the lack of essential supplies, government drones blared, “Please comply with COVID restrictions. Control your soul’s desire for freedom. Do not open the window or sing.”

Apart from taking a toll on the life of regular Chinese citizens, the mass lockdowns have also had serious economic impacts. As provinces accounting for up to 25% of China’s national GDP are under complete or partial lockdown, the faultlines of China’s one-size-fits-all Covid policy are becoming apparent.

With businesses shut down and people confined to their homes, unemployment rose to an all-time high since May 2020, at 5.8% and retail sales fell 3.5%, the first decline since July 2020.

Way Forward

Two years ago, China was lauded by the WHO for the most ‘ambitious, agile and aggressive’ disease containment strategy. While many countries were waiting for vaccines and developing herd immunity, 1.4 billion-strong China proved that elimination was possible solely through strict isolation measures and quarantine.

Moreover, drawing lessons from the previous SARS outbreak, China’s robust public health response proved effective in saving millions of lives.

Initially, there was a unanimous global outcry to blame China for leashing out the Wuhan virus. While China brought down transmission rates to almost zero by May 2020 and began hosting water park parties by August 2020, the situation elsewhere was quite bleak.

Today after almost two years as other countries are returning to normalcy, we see China returning back to lockdowns. Ironically, the chain of events seems to come to a full circle as China braces to curb its worst-ever Covid- outbreak since 2020.

Though adherence to the zero Covid policy comes with its own human and economic costs, the present leadership will likely continue with its tried and tested policy till the spread is contained. A hasty reversal of the policy would not only put into question the merit of the Chinese leadership but would also negatively impact public health and safety.

There is an urgent need to address the shortcomings of the zero Covid policy and craft a balanced exit strategy to pivot away from zero-tolerance and move towards cohabitating with the virus.

Riya Shah is a researcher with IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute, New Delhi and a Bachelor’s candidate in Chinese Language at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

Dr Arjun Kumar is Director, IMPRI and China India Visiting Scholar (CIVS) Fellow 2020-21 at Ashoka University and Asian Century Foundation.

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');  

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, May 3 2022 (IPS)

Capital flight from the global South is immense, with widespread adverse effects. A new book proposes measures to curb, even reverse capital flight from Africa. It also offers pragmatic lessons for many developing countries.

Out of Africa
On the trail of capital flight from Africa extends pioneering work begun much earlier. The editors – Leonce Ndikumana and James Boyce – estimate Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has lost more than US$2 trillion to capital flight in the last half century!

Leonce Ndikumana

SSA currently loses US$65 billion annually – more than yearly official development assistance (ODA) inflows. The book’s studies carefully investigate natural resource exploitation – of South African minerals, Ivorian cocoa, and Angolan oil and diamonds.

Such forensic country analyses are crucial to more effectively check capital flight. Outflows since the 1980s from the three countries have been massive: US$103 billion from Angola, US$55 billion from Cote d’Ivoire, and US$329 billion from South Africa in 2018 dollars.

Capital flight has been much more than cumulative external debt. Annual outflows were between 3.3% and 5.3% of national income. Nigeria, South Africa and Angola account for the most capital outflows from SSA, with Cote d’Ivoire seventh.

Resource booms
As governments get more revenue from natural resources, the fiscal ‘social contract’ is eroded. When people pay taxes, they expect state spending to benefit the public. But with more revenue from resources – via state monopolies, royalties and taxes – governments become less accountable to their own citizens.

Gaining and maintaining access to foreign credit has similar effects. Developing country governments then focus on ingratiating themselves with friendly foreign donor governments to get ODA, and on enhancing their credit ratings.

Hence, such regimes have less political need to provide ‘public goods’, including services, let alone accelerate social progress. Thus, erosion of the fiscal ‘social contract’ undermines not only public wellbeing, but also state legitimacy.

James K. Boyce

To secure power, ruling cliques often rely on ‘clientelism’ – patronage or patron-client relations – typically on regional, ethnic, tribal, religious or sectarian lines. Their regimes inevitably provoke dissent – including oppositional ethno-populism and civil unrest, even armed insurgencies.

Unsurprisingly, such regimes believe their choices are limited. Another option is repression – which typically rises as the status quo is threatened. The resulting sense of insecurity spreads from the public to the elite, worsening capital flight.

Exploiting valuable natural resources not only generates export earnings, but also attracts foreign investments. One result is ‘Dutch disease’ as the national currency rises in value – reducing other exports and jobs, inevitably hurting development prospects.

Thus, vast private fortunes have been made and illicitly transferred abroad. Ruling elites and their allies rarely only rely on either state or market to become richer. The book shows how both state and market strengthen private and personal power and influence.

Plundering Africa
The book’s case studies show how resource extraction has been central to capital flight. In all three countries, the efficacy of fiscal policy tools – especially to foster investments for development – has been undermined.

Outflows have increased with economic liberalization, as unrecorded financial outflows – via the current account – grow with freer trade. Thus, trade-related financial transactions enable corruption and capital flight.

In Côte d’Ivoire – the world’s top cocoa producer – rents initially came from supply chains connecting farmers to consumers. Corrupt partnerships – connecting domestic elites to foreign businesses – have been crucial to such arrangements.

Thus, natural resource primary commodity exports have enabled illicit capital flows. Ivorian cocoa exports have been consistently under-reported – with trade statistics of major importers showing massive under-invoicing by exporters.

Post-colonial political settlements have given a few privileged access to resource rents. With capital flight thus enabled, successive Ivorian regimes have been less obliged to spend more on development or public wellbeing.

Due to the cocoa boom, the post-colonial ‘Ivorian miracle’ ended when prices fell. The bust triggered a political crisis, culminating in civil war. But the crunch also meant the country could no longer service its foreign debt.

In Angola too, natural resources worsened its protracted civil wars. After these ruinous conflicts, oil rents enriched the triumphant nepotistic regime. This enabled the control to gain control of more, even as most Angolans continued to live in destitution.

Angola’s massive oil exports mainly benefited the small elite of cronies around the president. They failed to develop the economy or improve most lives. All this has been enabled by ‘helpful’ professionals who have enriched themselves doing so.

While benefiting its elite and foreign transnationals, Angola’s ‘oil curse’ has blocked balanced and sustainable development of its economy. Despite rapidly depleting its oil reserves, Angola and most Angolans have benefited little.

South Africa – SSA’s second largest economy after Nigeria – seems less reliant on natural resources. Post-apartheid economic liberalization has enabled capital flight as private corporate interests – especially the influential minerals-energy complex – quickly took advantage of the new dispensation.

By under-invoicing their exports, mineral interests have been engaged in massive capital flight and tax evasion. Meanwhile, business cronies have enriched themselves in new ways, e.g., in the state’s electric power sector. Such abuses were exposed by the Gupta family scandal, leading to then President Jacob Zuma’s downfall.

Stemming capital flight
‘State capture’ by politically influential nationals have undermined government regulatory capacities with help from transnational enablers. Ostensible ‘good governance’ reforms have enabled capital flight and tax evasion – by undermining ‘developmental governance’, including prudential regulation.

Institutional environments, mechanisms and enablers facilitate capital flight, tax evasion and wealth accumulation offshore. With often complex, varied and changing facilitation, capital flight has shifted massive wealth abroad for elites.

Transnational financial networks have eased capital outflows – at the expense of productive investments, good jobs and social wellbeing. Capital flight has worsened financing, including budgetary gaps – aggravating related social deprivations.

Wealth creation enhances the economic pie, but distribution depends on who appropriates it. Improved understanding of such varied and ever-changing relations of appropriation is crucial to effectively curb this haemorrhage.

Greater awareness should inspire and inform better measures to check capital flight from the global South. Instead of the Washington Consensus ‘good governance’ mantra, a developmental governance agenda is needed.

Hence, curbing capital flight is crucial for financing sustainable development. Checking capital flight and related abuses – such as trade mis-invoicing, money laundering, tax evasion and public asset acquisition by elites – requires well-coordinated efforts at both national and international levels.

All researchers, policymakers and regulators will gain from the book’s forensic analyses of financial, fiscal and other such abuses. International financial institutions now have little excuse for continuing to enable the capital flight and tax evasion still bleeding the global South.

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');   Related Articles

• Thandika Mkandawire, Pan-Africanist Par Excellence
• Coping With World Bank-Led Financialization
• Coping with Foreign Direct Investment
• No Aid, No Tax, No Development
• Sub-Saharan Africa, Addis and Paris

By Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury
SINGAPORE, May 2 2022 (IPS-Partners)

 

 

“O, Captain! My Captain! Our fearful trip is done,
The ship has weather’d every rack, the prize we sought is won,
The port is near, the bells I hear, the people all exulting,
While follow eyes the steady keel, the vessel grim and daring….”
Walt Whitman

These days there is nary a dull moment in Pakistani politics. It is a cauldron where the mix from the globe, the region and the country boil in a deadly blend. Any unwanted spillage could do much harm at both home and abroad. For one thing it is a very large country with a population of over 220 million, the world’s fifth largest. For another it is one that hosts over a hundred nuclear war heads with potentials for horrendous destruction. Also, apart from these, importantly, it is a Muslim -majority polity and a practising democracy where stability or the lack of it would have ramifications for many societies of comparable milieu in the region, and beyond.

Dr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury

Some weeks ago, its Prime Minister, the cricketing-star turned politician Imran Khan, captured media headlines around the world. His adoring supporters, millions of them, called him their “Kaptan“ or Captain, as if the nation was a cricket team that Khan skippered. If glory gives herself to only those who dream of her, Khan possessed her and rose to the pinnacle of power in his own adoring nation. But then, lady luck seemed to let go of him. His enemies combined and successfully brought him down, and his party the Pakistan Tehreek-e Insaaf (PTI) down from government in a startlingly nerve-wrenching and nail-biting series of parliamentary manoeuvres in a ‘no-trust’ motion by only two votes, thus engulfing Khan in his toughest political crisis.

The opposition comprised three major parties the largely Sindh- based Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) led by former President Asif Zardari and his son Bilawal Bhutto, the largely Punjab-based Pakistan Muslim League (N) led by Shahbaz Sharif, younger brother of ex-Premier Nawaz Sharif, the party supremo residing in London and technically a fugitive from law, and the largely Khyber Pakhtunkhwa based Jamiat-e Ulema led by Mowlana Fazlur Rahman, a worldly cleric. Ideologically and personally, they were strange bedfellows, evidently brought together only for the purpose of toppling Khan! Immediately afterwards for a while it seemed they would fragment again, bickering over the pickings of gains, mainly distribution of ministerial positions. But wiser counsels prevailed, and they succeeded in papering over their differences, at least for now!

Khan initially demurred on resignation, and instead proposed dissolution of Parliament by the President and elections in three months’ time. But his decisions were reversed by the Supreme Court and he was narrowly voted out of office in Parliament, nudged it now seems, by what in Pakistan is called the ‘establishment , another name for the military. The army is currently led by General Qamar Bajwa, who sought to distance itself from Khan’s anti-American rhetoric obviously due to the Army’s strategic dependence on America. Khan, culturally more westernized than most Pakistanis, was trenchantly critical of the perceived ‘interference’ pf the US in Pakistan’s domestic affairs. He attributed his removal to a “foreign” “conspiracy supposedly hatched abroad and revealed in a cypher despatch from Pakistani Ambassador to Washington.

Obviously not one to mince his words Khan called the new cabinet a “bunch of thieves”, claiming vindication in the fact that nearly two-thirds were out on bail from charges of corruption, a malady wrecking the society like malignant cancer! He accused them of “Chhanga Manga politics” (in 1990 Nawaz Sharif’s Muslim league forcibly confined their legislators in a forest rest house at a place called “Chhanga Manga” near Lahore, in other words “roped in their horses and stabled them” till they could be let out for a parliamentary voting. Khan addressed massive rallies, or ‘Jalsas’ as they are called in Pakistan, in Peshawar in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, in Karachi in Sindh and in Lahore in Punjab. In each of these rallies, hundreds of thousands gathered to chant his name, wave his banners, and cheer him on! In each he projected his PTI Party as an all-Pakistan organization without the provincial bias that mark the others. In each he asked if the new government was acceptable and in each the crowd roared back a resounding negative response! He frequently cited the historic example of Mir Jafar the army general who betrayed the last Muslim Nawab of Bengal Sirajuddoula to the English ion 1776 as the supreme act of treachery, which some could have related to his perception of the “establishment’s” perfidy! In all his rallies, he lustily asked of the crowds: “‘Imported hakumat’ manzoor hai”? (Is the imported government acceptable? Deafeningly, the crowds roared back: “Naa manzoor! Naa manzoor!” (Not acceptable! Not acceptable!)

The army was now caught between a rock and a hard place. While at a stated level the army claims to be apolitical, it has always been the most significant political component of the community. A very well -regarded strategic scholar and former Chief of army Staff General Jehangir Karamat has argued, with that the army in Pakistan is a mirror image of the society. There is logic in that claim in that, unlike the leadership of political parties, the army sociologically comprises non-feudal professionals. It includes some of the best engineers and doctors, disciplined, dedicated and representative of the urges of rural Pakistan. The strong military tradition, particularly in Punjab and the old North- West Frontiers, date back to the British Raj, and is more pronounced than anywhere in the South Asian subcontinent. Unsurprisingly, realpolitik analysts acknowledge its role in the nation’s body politic.

However, as a political entity, the army has evolved. It no longer, both by choice and capacity, seeks to control the government machinery directly, as it did under such military leaders like Generals Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia ul Huq and Pervez Musharraf. Instead, they work to exert influence covertly from behind the scenes under the cognomen of the ‘establishment’, or sometimes also overtly through such players as the Director General of Inter-Services Intelligence (DGFI), an office created by the British generals immediately after Partition, liaising directly with the Prime Minister, certainly more active and powerful now than then. The army’s challenge is that it needs to function as a political influencer without its participation in such political processes as elections. Because its power is sourced in public support and it cannot afford to be unpopular, it needs to pick and choose its allies in civilian politics with utmost circumspection. If for nothing else, it is for the fact that tacit public acquiescence is politically necessary to secure its large budgetary requirements.

Indeed, it was the Army which was said to help ease in Khan in 2018. But Khan, given his personality and a mind of his own, chose to strike-out on his own, which miffed the generals who may have eventually, with a nudge and a wink at least, helped to bring about his fall. But truth be told, the army quickly deduced unnatural partners in their new political masters, given, among other things, the latter’s perceived laxity about financial ethics. A change of heart was therefore not much beyond the rim of the saucer. But it did not depend on the army alone. For instance, the army would prefer Khan to rein- in his anti-western rhetoric. That may be contrary to Khan’s personal predilections, more so now because that anti-western stance in Pakistan has an electoral dividend, though at a political and economic cost. Even the mercurial Khan would probably judge that balancing would be key.

When after his triumphant ‘jalsas’, Khan, like Achilles in the Iliad, still smarting from his losses, retired to his tent, or rather his home at Bani Gala near Pindi for a brief hiatus before his next move, Bajwa had a huddle with his senior but retired peers in Lahore. Perhaps as an upshot the general declared that he would neither seek nor accept an extension of service when his retirement is due come November. Thereafter the army, albeit in a small way, sought to influence some key new appointments which were against the grain of its perceived interests or at any event, tastes. Also, with the contents of the dreaded “Exit Control List”, a key political tool in Pakistan; but, in both cases, not necessarily with absolute success vis-a-vis the current government, which would have exacerbated their peeve. Still, it’s too early to say if Khan and the army can hug and make up before the next general election.

And it is indeed on the next election that Khan is laser focused. He wants it now. He has directed all senior PTI leaders to spread out throughout the country to muster political support. As his next move, he has declared that unless a date for the election is announced in four weeks’ time, he will organize a ‘Tsunami’ march to the capital Islamabad with such a massive crowd drawn from all over the country as never seen before. He has urged all Pakistanis, irrespective of political affiliations, to join. He further threatened that the gathering will offer a ‘dharna’ (‘sit-in’) to continue till such time the election schedule is announced, with a change in the Election Commission leadership. The current government is obviously taking it seriously as authorities have been seen collecting for possible use shipping ‘containers’, a favoured item in Pakistan for its alternative use in creating roadblocks, this time for in-coming demonstrators.

One evidence of a change of wind in national politics, since Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif assumed office, could be the recent ruling of the Courts, a fair bellwether in this regard, to widen the catchment area for investigation into the ‘foreign funds case’ to include other parties besides the PTI. Also, the Lahore High Court has just turned down a prayer from Maryam Sharif, one of the most powerful leaders of the ruling Coalition parties, for the return of her passport legally impounded to enable her to accompany the Prime Minister on a trip to Saudi Arabia. So, what implications will any change in the position of the ‘wider establishment ‘ (the military plus the Courts) have for the future of Pakistan’s turbulent politics?

The answer, as with many critical queries that come to our minds may also just be, as the Bob Dylan song famously states, “‘blowin’ in the wind!”

This story was originally published by Dhaka Courier.

By Paul Teng and Genevieve Donnellon-May
SINGAPORE, May 2 2022 (IPS)

Amidst a backdrop of rising food insecurity worldwide and a global food supply chain crisis, many countries are attempting to increase the level of food self-production. One improved input for farming which is receiving renewed attention is improved seed. The two most populous countries in the world, China and India, have recently made ground-breaking moves to improve their competitive position by developing new seeds which will improve their food production and increase resilience to climate change. So far, in 2022, new regulations on using biotechnology (genetic modification and gene editing) have been put in place by both countries to ultimately allow smallholder farmers to benefit from these new seeds.

Paul Teng

The COVID pandemic and, more recently, the Ukraine-Russia war have significantly disrupted food production and supply chains for food and farm inputs. Fears are growing about reduced crop planting by farmers in developing countries and reduced yields due to the lesser use of high-priced fertilizers. Apart from fertilizers, supply chain disruptions affect all inputs needed for farming, including seeds. The seed is the first link in the food chain. The availability and access to seeds are essential to farmers, particularly in developing countries or areas affected by droughts and other disasters, giving rise to the concept of “seed security, which the UN FAO defines as the “ready access by rural households, particularly farmers and farming communities, to adequate quantities of quality seed and planting materials of crop varieties, adapted to their agro-ecological conditions and socioeconomic needs, at planting time, under normal and abnormal weather conditions.” In many developing countries, quality seed is commonly produced by companies operating under public scrutiny.

The importance of having reliable supplies of improved seeds for farmers has been particularly highlighted in the world’s most populous country, China, where seeds are high on the policy agenda.

In early April 2022, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for working toward food self-sufficiency and developing the country’s seed industry during a visit to a seed laboratory in Hainan Province, southern China. He noted that China’s food security could only be safeguarded when seed resources are firmly held in its own hands. President Xi’s comments come at a time when many countries aim to increase their self-production of food in anticipation of disruptions in supply chains such as those caused by the Ukraine-Russia crisis and the COVID pandemic.

Genevieve Donnellon-May

President Xi’s comments fit in the broader context of seed and food, issues that will only continue to grow in importance. They come at a time when there is rising food insecurity worldwide and a looming global food crisis brought on by the Ukraine-Russia War, a worsening geopolitical environment and growing vulnerability of the global food supply chains due to accelerated climate change impacts and Covid-19-related disruptions.

All the above background factors have led China and India to make important moves to tap a proven tool for developing new crop varieties, namely biotechnology.

In April 2022, China’s agriculture ministry announced plans for the first time after many years of deliberations to approve two new genetically modified corn varieties developed by the Syngenta Group. Earlier, In January 2022, China published new guidelines for the approval of gene-edited plants, paving the way for faster improvements to important food security crops. And this came amid a raft of measures to overhaul China’s seed industry, seen as a weak link in efforts to ensure it can feed the world’s biggest population. China’s Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Tang Renjian, had likened seeds to the “computer chips” of agriculture.

In an unrelated parallel development, India approved a key change in rules at the end of March 2022 to allow genome-edited plants or organisms without any “foreign” genes to be subjected to a different regulatory process than the one applied to genetically engineered products. As in China, this is anticipated to lead to faster development of new crop varieties that can meet the challenges of climate change and higher yields.

However, not all interested parties support the use of biotechnology to develop new seeds or patenting new crop varieties. Although the evidence is strong that multinational and domestic seed companies have played a major role in lifting crop production through their improved seeds, this has also led to concerns about the control that the private sector may have over this important input for food production. And related to this issue of control of seeds is the patenting of new seeds.

There has been a rise in ‘seed activism‘ and interest in seed sovereignty as part of the pushback against the modern agricultural system that is supported by patented seeds such as hybrids. This pushback has been helmed by groups which exploit the fear (often speculative) that by having control over seeds, a handful of multinational companies, rather than farmers or countries, have control over the global food supply. This omits the reality that farmers have the right to choose whatever seeds to plant and even keep their own seeds if desired. These groups have also failed to recognize that investments to innovate and produce new seeds would not have been possible without adequate protection of seeds as intellectual property. Countries like China and India realise the importance of promoting innovations in the seed industry.

China, in particular, has announced that it aims to revitalize the seed sector, encourage germplasm collection, and strengthen intellectual property protection in the sector. In China, views on the importance of seeds in food security are reflected in various domestic policies such as in 2022’s “No 1 Central Policy Document”, the country’s agricultural blueprint. A top policy priority is the development of the seed industry in China.

The issues of seed sovereignty based on farmer-saved seed, when balanced against the track record of improved seeds from companies which give high yields, are complex. But in the final analysis, farmers will choose the seeds that give them the most assured yields under risky conditions, even if they have to pay for such seeds. This has been the case with almost all the developed and developing countries with food surpluses for export, such as the U.S.A., Canada, Brazil and Argentina. And consumers, as well as food importers are those who benefit by there being more food at affordable prices.

The first “Green Revolution” in Asia which took off in the 1970s was based on improved seeds of wheat and rice, bred using technologies which were novel at that time. However, towards the latter part of the last millennium, the need for more novel technologies to improve crops became obvious as yield gains were stagnating in many crops. The challenges facing all smallholder farmers arising from changes in climate, pests and natural resource depletion are becoming more intense and frequent. And unless new seeds are developed and made available to farmers in shorter timeframes, it is the consuming public that will suffer the consequences of reduced, unreliable food supply and higher prices.

The conundrum is how to balance local ownership of seed sources which are commonly unimproved and low-yielding with improved high-yielding seeds developed by seed companies (either domestic or multinational) using modern science. Ultimately, smallholder farmers worldwide deserve new “seeds of hope”.

Paul Teng is Adjunct Senior Fellow, Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies at Nanyang Technological University Singapore. He has worked in the Asia Pacific region on agri-food issues for over thirty years, with international organizations, academia and the private sector.

Genevieve Donnellon-May is a master’s student in Water Science, Policy and Management at the University of Oxford. Genevieve’s research interests include China, Africa, transboundary governance, and the food-energy-water nexus.

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');  

Castle, Comfort Dominica. Dominica is the latest Caribbean country to sign on to the UN Multi-Country Sustainable Development Framework, to accelerate progress with sustainable development goals and recover from COVID-19 Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

By Alison Kentish
DOMINICA, May 2 2022 (IPS)

When Dominica signed on to the United Nations Multicountry Sustainable Development Framework for the English and Dutch Speaking Caribbean (MSDCF) in March, the country joined others like Saint Lucia, St. Vincent, and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Aruba as part of a 5-year framework to plan and implement UN development initiatives.

Support for the 2022 to 2026 agreement has continued to grow since December 2021, when Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, and Guyana signed the cooperation framework, which hopes to help nations achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

For countries in the Caribbean, one of the most vulnerable regions globally, the framework is a critical instrument, based on building climate and economic resilience, the promotion of equality, and enhancing peace, safety, and the rule of law.

It is also crucial for a country like Dominica which in 2017 lost US$1.4 billion, or 226% of its GDP to Hurricane Maria. The small island state has been on a mission to build resilience across sectors through initiatives like its Climate Resilience and Recovery Plan, while grappling with the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economy.

The country’s representatives have used platforms like the United Nations General Assembly to urge development partners to consider the unique vulnerabilities of small island states in their support packages.

The country’s Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit says the UN framework will help Caribbean governments to implement programs that strengthen health, education, and social services while contributing to economic growth.

“We are operating in a tumultuous period defined by huge environmental and climate-related challenges, conflict, and economic uncertainty. The agreement proposes to help our small territories confront the trials of our time and achieve economic resilience and prosperity. It is cause for optimism as we devise ways to tackle our common problems together,” he said.

The agreement builds on a 2017-2022 framework which was signed by 18 Caribbean countries. Initiatives under that framework focused on areas such as building Caribbean resilience and the implementation of low-emission, climate-resilient technology in agriculture.

UN officials say that the new agreement, referred to as ‘the second-generation framework,’ considers lessons learned. Developed during the pandemic, it also acknowledges that COVID-19 has compounded structural vulnerabilities for Caribbean countries, which must now ‘build back better.’

“This new agreement opens a new era of cooperation to drive collaboration and mutual commitment for the people of Dominica,” UN Resident Coordinator for Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean Didier Trebucq said at the Dominica signing.

For months, leaders across the Caribbean have been speaking of being at risk of not meeting the Sustainable Development Goals, as they redirect scarce resources to cope with the protracted pandemic.

According to preliminary data from the UN, Goals 1 to 6, known as the ‘people-centered goals,’ have been severely impacted by COVID-19.

The Prime Minister of Barbados, the first leader in the Barbados and OECS grouping to sign the MSDCF, said the pandemic slowed progress towards meeting SDG targets.

“We’re going to have problems in the battle with poverty, we’re going to have problems in making sure that people don’t go hungry, we’re going to have problems in making sure that people have access to good health and well-being, as we know, is already happening in the pandemic. We’re going to have problems in delivering quality education and who have been the greatest victims of this pandemic if not our children across the world, many of who have been denied access to education because they don’t have access to things like electricity and online tools in order to be able to receive it,” Prime Minister Mia Mottley said, referencing Goals 1 to 4.

She said Goal 5 and 6 – Gender Equality and Clean Water and Sanitation are also at risk, noting that women have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19, while countries like Barbados continue to be concerned with access to groundwater in the face of the climate crisis.

The MSDCF was developed by the six UN Country Teams, after rounds of consultation with government agencies, the private sector, development partners, and civil society organizations.

It will function at two levels; regionally by adopting joint approaches to common challenges and nationally to tackle country and territory-specific issues and vulnerabilities while helping governments to prepare for future external shocks.

According to the MSDCF, the vision is for the region to become more resilient, “possess greater capacity to achieve all the SDGs, and become a place where people choose to live and can reach their full potential.”

It promises to provide more effective support to signatory countries, through streamlined use of UN resources and in keeping with the goals of the recently approved UN Development system reform.

It hopes to accelerate progress towards achieving the SDGs and facilitate faster recovery from the socio-economic and health impact of COVID-19, with one regional voice on a shared development path.

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

• Landmark UN Report Issues Stark call for Sustainable Land Management to Save Human Health
• Enhancing Climate Ambition Amidst Global Challenges
• Poor Water Distribution Infrastructure Gives Jamaica a ‘Water Scarce’ Label

Excerpt:

Caribbean countries are signing on to the 2022-2026 agreement, hoping for increased development support to improve health, education and social services, while tackling climate-related challenges.

A Tomahawk cruise missile launches from the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Shoup (DDG 86) during a live-fire exercise, during Valiant Shield 2018 in the Philippine Sea September 18, 2018. Credit: U.S. Navy

By Daryl G. Kimball
WASHINGTON DC, May 2 2022 (IPS)

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s brutal war on Ukraine, along with his implied threats of nuclear weapons use against any who would interfere, has raised the specter of nuclear conflict.

Last month, CIA Director William Burns said that although there is no sign that Russia is preparing to do so, “none of us can take lightly the threat posed by a potential resort to tactical nuclear weapons or low-yield nuclear weapons.”

As the war drags on, it is vital that Russian, NATO, and U.S. leaders maintain lines of communication to prevent direct conflict and avoid rhetoric and actions that increase the risk of nuclear escalation.

Provocations could include deploying tactical nuclear weapons or developing new types of nuclear weapons designed for fighting and “winning” a regional nuclear war.

For these and other reasons, U.S. President Joe Biden was smart to announce in March that he will cancel a proposal by the Trump administration for a new nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM), a weapon last deployed in 1991.

Before President Donald Trump, two Democratic and two Republican administrations had agreed that nuclear-armed cruise missiles on Navy ships were redundant and destabilizing and detract from higher-priority conventional missions.

Moreover, re-nuclearizing the fleet would create serious operational burdens. In 2019, Biden called this weapon a “bad idea” and said there is no need for new nuclear weapons. He was right then and is right to cancel the system now.

Nevertheless, some in Congress are pushing to restore funding for a nuclear SLCM to fill what they say is a “deterrence gap” against Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons arsenal and to provide a future president with “more credible” nuclear options in a future war with Russia in Europe or with China over Taiwan. A fight over the project, which would cost at least $9 billion through the end of the decade, is all but certain.

The arguments for reviving the nuclear SLCM program are as flimsy as they are dangerous. Serious policymakers all agree that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. But deploying nuclear-armed cruise missiles at sea would undoubtedly increase the possibility of nuclear war through miscalculation.

By deploying both conventional and nuclear-armed cruise missiles at sea, any launch of a conventional cruise missile inherently would send a nuclear signal and increase the potential for unintended nuclear use in a conflict with a nuclear-armed adversary because the adversary would have no way of knowing if the missile was nuclear or conventional.

Furthermore, even if Russia’s stockpile of 1,000 to 2,000 short-range nuclear warheads is larger in number than the U.S. stockpile of 320, there is no meaningful gap in capabilities. Superficial numerical comparisons ignore the fact that both sides already possess excess tactical nuclear destructive capacity, including multiple options for air and missile delivery of lower-yield nuclear warheads.

Both also store their tactical warheads separately from the delivery systems, meaning preparations for potential use would be detectable in advance.

If one president authorized the use of these weapons under “extreme” circumstances in a conventional war, as the policies of both countries allow, neither side would need or want to use more than a handful of these highly destructive weapons.

Although tactical nuclear bombs may produce relatively smaller explosive yields, from less than 1 kiloton TNT equivalent to 20 kilotons or more, their blast, heat, and radiation effects would be unlike anything seen in warfare since the 21-kiloton-yield atomic bomb that destroyed Nagasaki.

Proponents of the nuclear SLCM claim that if Putin used a tactical nuclear weapon to try to gain a military advantage or simply to intimidate, the U.S. president must have additional options to strike back with tactical nuclear weapons. They further argue that he should strike back even if that results in nuclear devastation within NATO and Russian territory.

Theories that nuclear war can be “limited” are extremely dangerous and ignore the unimaginable human suffering nuclear detonations would produce. In practice, once nuclear weapons are used by nuclear-armed adversaries, there is no guarantee the conflict would not quickly escalate to a catastrophic exchange involving the thousands of long-range strategic nuclear weapons in the U.S. and Russian arsenals.

As Gen. John Hyten, head of U.S. Strategic Command, said in 2018 after the annual Global Thunder wargame, “It ends bad. And the bad, meaning, it ends with global nuclear war.” As the supercomputer in the 1983 movie War Games ultimately calculated, “The only winning move is not to play.”

Adding a new type of tactical nuclear weapon to the U.S. arsenal will not enhance deterrence so much as it would increase the risk of nuclear war, mimic irresponsible Russian nuclear signaling, and prompt Russia and China to build their own sea- or land-based nuclear cruise missile systems. Biden made the right decision to cancel Trump’s proposed nuclear SLCM, and now Congress needs to back the president up.

The Arms Control Association (ACA), founded in 1971, is a national nonpartisan membership organization dedicated to promoting public understanding of and support for effective arms control policies. Through public education and media programs and its flagship journal, Arms Control Today, the ACA provides policymakers, the press, and the interested public with authoritative information, analysis, and commentary on arms control proposals, negotiations and agreements, and related national security issues.

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:

The writer is Executive Director, Arms Control Association, Washington DC.

By External Source
May 1 2022 (IPS-Partners)

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) issues an annual report evaluating press freedom globally.

This year’s index focused on 180 countries across the world.

It found that journalism is totally blocked or seriously impeded in 73 countries.

Press freedom is constrained in 59 others.

This represents 73% of the countries evaluated.

The World Press Freedom Index has declined by 12% since first issued in 2013.

RSF has reported “a dramatic deterioration in people’s access to information and an increase in obstacles to news coverage”.

Furthermore, Edelman’s 2021 Trust barometer reveals a disturbing level of public mistrust of journalists.

59% of respondents in 28 countries believe journalists deliberately try to mislead the public by reporting information they know to be false.

Autocrats, Criminal Cartels and Extremists have now harnessed this sense of fear for their own gains.

Some 200 Russian journalists and dozens of foreign reporters left Russia after it passed a media law criminalising “deliberately false” information.

According to Amnesty International, the “Russian authorities’ crackdown on independent media is escalating at breakneck speed”.

China, the “world’s biggest jailer of press freedom defenders,” now ranks 177 out of 180 countries on RSF’s Press Freedom Index.

Free media in Hong Kong has been almost completely dismantled, according to Hong Kong Watch, a UK-based advocacy group.

Russia and China are deploying “lawfare” against independent journalists and big companies in developed countries.

The absence of the state, however, is now killing journalists in Mexico, among others.

In Bangladesh narco-traffickers are suspected of killing Bangladeshi journalist Mohiuddin Sarker Nayeem.

The Committee to Protect Journalists publishes an annual Global Impunity Index.

According to their findings, no one has been held to account in 81% of journalist murders worldwide over the past 10 years.

This year’s World Press Freedom Day centers on Journalism Under Digital Siege.

“Journalism is the best vaccine against disinformation.” – RSF Secretary-General Christophe Deloire

 

To date, 19 countries have already ratified the treaty. However, this number remains far short of the 55 AU member states and excludes some of the region’s power houses such as South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Senegal. Credit: Charles Mpaka/IPS

By Johnpaul Omollo and Taonga Chilalika
NAIROBI/JOHANNESBURG, Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

Across Africa, local manufacturing and pharmaceutical companies are responding to the urgent need for locally produced medical products and technologies despite the existing regulatory challenges. We can support manufacturing capacity by expediting the establishment and operationalisation of the African Medicines Agency (AMA).

In November 2021, after 15 countries signed and ratified the AMA treaty, the AMA became a specialised agency of the African Union (AU). To date, 19 countries — Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, Mauritius, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe — have ratified the treaty.

However, this number remains far short of the 55 AU member states and excludes some of the region’s power houses such as South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Senegal.

We need to move swiftly to ensure the entire continent is on board. By now, every AU member state should have approved and ratified the AMA by signing, ratifying, and depositing its instruments at the AU commission

Over the next five years, Africa’s health care sector, especially local pharmaceutical production, will be a key economic driver for the region—predicted to be about two percent of the global pharmaceutical market in 2022.

Harmonising health product regulations will make Africa a more attractive market for the pharmaceutical sector, for both research and development, as well as introduction of innovations.

These harmonisation efforts will further improve trade in support of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), by deepening African integration and enabling the development of markets for health commodities and technologies? Of most importance, the agency will coordinate joint assessments and inspections for a select group of products, and coordinate capacity building.

The next two years will be critical in setting up the agency, including selecting a host country, appointing the director general, recruiting staff, and setting up offices for AMA. Countries that have not yet ratified will not have an input into these key decisions which will bolster the medicines regulatory environment in the region.

This has been a long journey. The agency is derived from the African Medicines Regulatory Harmonisation (AMRH) initiative launched in 2012, led by African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD) to address challenges faced in medicines regulation in Africa.

These challenges include weak legislative frameworks, duplicative and slow medicine registration processes, and subsequent prolonged approval decisions, limited technical capacity, and weak supply chain control. As COVID-19 has shown, these challenges pose both a public health and economic risk to the continent.

To improve the fragmented regulatory system for medical product registration in Africa, the vision is to gradually move from a country-focused approach, with 55 countries acting independently to a collaborative regional one, with five Regional Economic Communities supporting one Agency.

AMA will review regional policies and identify new sources of funding to enhance national capacity to regulate medicines, as well as try to simplify the complex requirements from regional and global level standards and guidelines.

Member states also need to be cognizant of the extensive operationalization process required to set up the agency’s administrative and technical workstreams. For instance, as part of the administrative workstream, they need to select a host country, appoint a Director General, recruit staff, set up office space, and register the treaty with the UN Secretary General.

We need to move swiftly to ensure the entire continent is on board. By now, every AU member state should have approved and ratified the AMA by signing, ratifying, and depositing its instruments at the AU commission.

Member states need to commit resources to co-finance the operations of the agency as top priority, building on the already existing commitment of more than €100 million by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the European Union.

With the vision of preparing Africa to facilitate the production of 60 percent of vaccines needed on the continent by 2040, the establishment of AMA is a clarion call to countries and regulators. We must urgently put in place the tools needed to realise the optimal operationalisation of the Agency by the end of 2022.

We applaud the 19 member states that have ratified the AMA. We urge these states to be champions by promoting the benefits of the agency all over the continent to encourage and motivate the rest to come on board and ratify the Africa Medicines Agency.

Johnpaul Omollo is a Senior Advocacy and Policy Officer at PATH in Kenya. Follow him on Twitter @JPmcOmollo

Taonga Chilalika is a Senior Advocacy and Policy Associate at PATH in South Africa. Follow her on Twitter @TaongaChilalika.

 

Migrant labourers wait in queues in Kashmir in order to travel back to their homes. The second wave of COVID-19 in India has seen masses of people leave cities and towns to return to their rural homes. Credit: Umer Asif/IPS

By Ranjit Devraj
NEW DELHI, Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

Public health specialists say that an ongoing wrangle between the Indian government and the World Health Organization (WHO) over the COVID-19 death toll in this country is symptomatic of a long-ailing public health delivery system.

India has consistently challenged estimates published by leading scientific journals such as the Lancet, which placed the number of excess deaths in the country at four million from 1 Jan 2020 to 31 Dec 2021.

“You can argue till the cows come home but the figures are going to be in the range of four to five million deaths as shown in several studies and any contestation would require robust data rather than bland denials.”

On 16 April an official note from the Press Information Bureau in response to a New York Times article said, “India’s basic objection has not been with the results (whatever they might have been) but rather the methodology adopted for the same.”

India’s concern was that the projected estimates in the article, titled “India Is Stalling the WHO’s Efforts to Make Global COVID Death Toll Public,” for a country of its geographical size and population could not be done in the same way as for smaller countries. “Such one size fit all approach and models which are true for smaller countries like Tunisia may not be applicable to India with a population of 1.3 billion,” the official note said.

But independent public health specialists said that the concern was that India’s spat with the WHO was detracting from the more serious issue of the country’s tottering health delivery system failing to deal with the pandemic.

“Forget about the actual number of people who died of COVID-19 or because of comorbidities like diabetes, hypertension or cardiovascular disease — the fact remains that an unusually large number of people died during the pandemic because the health delivery system was overwhelmed,” said Mira Shiva, founder-member of the international Peoples Health Movement.

“One could say that the pandemic worked like a stress test of how good healthcare services were, and they were found seriously wanting,” said Shiva. ”Unsurprisingly, it was the poor and marginalised groups that took the brunt of it all — many more died of undocumented causes than usual as reflected in the several calculations based on excess deaths.”

Shiva said that, at the best of times, a cause of death is not properly registered in India. “We can only guess from the very large number of bodies seen floating down the main Ganges and Yamuna rivers during the second wave of the pandemic in 2021. There were also widely-circulated images of bodies laid out in rows on the river banks — these were obviously of people whose relatives could not afford to buy the firewood for cremations.”

Says Satya Mohanty, former secretary in the government and currently adjunct professor of economics at Jamia Milia Islamia University, New Delhi: “You can argue till the cows come home but the figures are going to be in the range of four to five million deaths as shown in several studies and any contestation would require robust data rather than bland denials.”

“If the crude death rate on average is one per thousand per month, anything above that average over a period of two years can be safely taken as deaths due to a differentiator – in this case the COVID and post-COVID effects,” says Mohanty. “There cannot be any other reason unless other differentiators were at play and to the best of our information there were no other differentiators.”

Sandhya Mahapatro, assistant professor at the A.N. Sinha Institute of Social Studies (ANSISS) in Patna, Bihar state, says “while India has made great strides in reducing inequalities in healthcare, large access gaps by socioeconomic status remain. Our studies show that 38 percent of outpatients in Bihar, a state with a population of 128 million, had no access to public healthcare.”

“There is growing concern about the distributive consequences of welfare initiatives on different socioeconomic groups,” Mahapatro added. “The historical disadvantages of healthcare access experienced by women and marginalised groups continue, with factors like caste, class and gender intersecting at various levels to create advantage for some sections and disadvantages for others,” she said.

A paper published by Mahapatro and her colleagues in the peer-reviewed journal Health Policy Open in December 2021 showed that social status clearly determined whether a person could access healthcare or not, despite pledges to ensure equity in healthcare provision and commitment to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Goal 3 — providing quality health services to all at an affordable cost.

“The issue of inequity played out during the COVID-19 pandemic affecting the poor and marginalised disproportionately,” said Mahapatro. “Internal migrants were greatly affected by the lockdowns with a staggering economic burden befalling them. The pre-existing inequality has widened and is expected to further widen as a result of the pandemic.”

Mahapatro said a study conducted at ANSISS during the post lockdown period found a familiar pattern of deprivation in healthcare services as in earlier studies. “The burden of unmet healthcare needs was substantially higher among the poor, women and people of low caste,” Mahapatro said. “Unmet healthcare needs were found to be particularly high among women of lower caste groups.”

“Importantly, our studies show that the pattern of health spending has remain unchanged over the decades and that the household remains the main source of financing healthcare before and during the pandemic,” she added.

 

A local priest and relative of a family member who died from Covid watching a pyre burn at the Garh Ganga Ghat in Mukteshwar, in Uttar Pradesh on 4 May, 2021. (Mukteshwar, Hapur/ File-Amit Sharma)

 

“The ongoing economic crisis due to the pandemic and inadequate healthcare capacity would obviously constrain healthcare utilisation by the marginalised sections of society, with internal migrants being the worst impacted as a result of the lockdowns,” Mahapatro said.

A staggering 450 million Indians are internal migrants according to the 2011 census, 37 percent of the total population. A national lockdown imposed with a four-hour notice on 24 March 2020 left most of these domestic migrants with no option but to undertake long treks back home with little money or food.

The national lockdown, considered among the tightest globally, went into three more phases with increasingly relaxed restrictions on economic and human activity until 7 June.

“Almost 80 percent of the migrant workers we surveyed had lost their jobs during the lockdowns,” said Mahapatro. This naturally affected their ability to access healthcare, with huge nutritional implications for them as well as their women and children.”

“If the unmet needs of such large and deprived social groups are not catered to then equity in healthcare and the UN SDGs on health will remain a distant dream,” Mahapatro added.

 

Rural women are often targeted by human traffickers and taken across borders in Africa and forced to become sex workers. Credit: Aimable Twahirwa/IPS

By Aimable Twahirwa
KIGALI, Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

Desperate to escape the rural area where she was engaged in the informal economy in Kayonza, a district in Eastern Rwanda, Sharon* made a long and arduous journey to Kenya in the hope of a well-paid job.

An unidentified individual contacted her, paid for her ticket, and gave her a modest amount of pocket money to travel to Kenya by road. The person told the 19-year-old she was traveling to take up an “employment opportunity”.

However, Sharon found herself in sexual servitude at a karaoke bar on the outskirts of the Kenyan capital Nairobi.

Sharon’s job was to bow elegantly to all customers at the door and usher them inside the bar.

“I was also hired as a nightclub dancer and sometimes forced by my employer to engage in sexual intercourse with clients to earn a living,” the high school graduate told IPS in an interview.

Like Sharon, activists say the number of young women from rural areas trafficked into the sex trade across many East African countries is growing. The young women are lured with the promise of good jobs or marriage. Instead, they are sold into prostitution in cities such as Nairobi (Kenya) and Kampala (Uganda).

Both activists and lawmakers warn that people with hidden agendas could target young women from Rwanda.

The process of trafficking most of these young women into neighboring countries is complex. It involves false promises to their families and victims in which they are promised a “better life”, activists say.

In many cases, traffickers lure young women from rural villages to neighboring countries with the promise of well-paid work. Then, victims are transferred to people who become their enslavers – especially in dubious hotels and karaoke bars.

While Rwanda has tried to combat human trafficking, law enforcement agencies stress that the main challenge revolves around the financial and other assistance for repatriated victims. Limited budgets of the institutions in charge of investigation and rehabilitation of the victims have meant that these programmes are not working optimally.

The chairperson of the East African Legislative Assembly’s Committee on Regional Affairs and Conflict Resolution, Fatuma Ndangiza, warned that if no urgent measures are undertaken, the problem is likely to worsen.

“Most of these young women without employment were victims of a well-established human trafficking ring operating under the guise of employment agencies in the region,” Ndangiza told IPS.

The latest figures by Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB) indicate that 119 cases of human trafficking, illegal migration, and smuggling of migrants in the region were investigated in the last three years.

These involved 215 victims, among whom 165 were females and 59 males.

Driven by the demand for cheap labor and commercial sex, trafficking rings across the East African region capitalize primarily on economic and social vulnerabilities to exploit their victims, experts said.

But estimates by the UN International Organization for Migration (IOM)  show that the lack of relevant legislation and needed administrative institutions across the East African region have continued to give traffickers and smugglers an undue advantage to carry on their activities.

To prevent human trafficking, Rwanda has adopted several measures, including passing a new law in 2018.

Under the current legislation, offenders face up to 15 years of imprisonment, but activists say this measure is not enough deterrent.

Although law enforcement officers were trained in combatting human trafficking, Evariste Murwanashyaka, a  fervent defender of human rights who is based in Kigali, told  IPS that enforcing laws is a challenge, mainly because it is hard to detect women who are engaged in sex work or other forms of sexual exploitation in neighboring countries.

Murwanashyaka is the Program Manager of Rwandan based Umbrella of Human Rights Organization known as ‘Collectif des Ligues et Associations de Défense des Droits de l’Homme’ (CLADHO)

“Young women are still more likely to become targets of trafficking due to the growing demand for sexual slavery across the region, ” he said.

Now with the COVID-19 pandemic, activists say there is not only a lack of awareness but people, especially youth, who are unaware they are victims of a human trafficking offense.

“Most informal job offers from abroad for these young people [from Rwanda] are  associated with illicit businesses, such as human trafficking, mainly of women, and their sexual and labor exploitation,” Murwanashyaka told IPS

According to the Africa Centre for Strategic Studies, the increasing unemployment rates, malnourishment, and school closures have increased human trafficking.

Meanwhile, RIB spokesperson, Dr Thierry Murangira is convinced that human trafficking is a transnational organized crime.

“Transnational organized crimes require the involvement of more than one jurisdiction and regional cooperation to investigate and prosecute the crime,” he said.

This article is part of a series of features from across the globe on human trafficking. IPS coverage is supported by the Airways Aviation Group.
The Global Sustainability Network ( GSN ) is pursuing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal number 8 with a special emphasis on Goal 8.7, which “takes immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labor, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labor in all its forms”.
The origins of the GSN come from the endeavors of the Joint Declaration of Religious Leaders signed on 2 December 2014. Religious leaders of various faiths gathered to work together “to defend the dignity and freedom of the human being against the extreme forms of the globalization of indifference, such as exploitation, forced labor, prostitution, human trafficking”.

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

• Women, Children Fleeing Ukraine Vulnerable to Human Trafficking
• Road to European Dream Paved by Extortion and Exploitation
• Kenya’s Ticking Bomb as Unemployed Youth Lured into Traffickers’ Dens

Credit: Michael Duff/UNFPA

By Stephanie Musho
Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

The Ministry of Health in Kenya recently reported there were 45,754 cases of adolescent pregnancies between January and February this year – that translates to 700 cases a day. Of the total number, at least 2000 of these cases resulted from sexual and gender based violence (SGBV), a figure which is likely lower than the reality.

What is more is that every week, 98 girls were reported to have contracted HIV in the study period.

Having been a teenage mother myself and now a sexual and reproductive health advocate, the worrisome statistics hit close to home. As Kenyans, we have cultivated and normalized a culture of public outcry on issues of concern and shortly thereafter, swiftly moving on.

This must change. We must pay attention to this crisis and address it. The price to pay if current trends continue is too high, as this directly touches on the lives of the future of our great Republic.

Stephanie Musho

The effects of teenage pregnancy are often deleterious affecting that affect the social and, economic aspects of young mothers. Consider that often, teenage mothers drop out of school due to the stigma, and are inadequately supported postpartum to return to school in their new status of motherhood.

Disruptions in education ultimately perpetuate a vicious economic dependency cycle, often on people who abuse their vulnerability. There are also health risks involved like infections and obstetric fistula among others – as well as mental health challenges including anxiety and depression.  Additionally, babies born to adolescents are more likely to have low birth weight and severe neonatal conditions.

The startling figures from earlier this year point to two scenarios. On the one hand is that adolescents are engaging in consensual sex amongst themselves. This could be attributed to curiosity and the raging hormonal changes that come flooding in at puberty.

On the other hand, incidents could point to a sexual and gender based violence crisis that is perpetuating the teenage pregnancy crisis in the country. For both scenarios, Kenya has a robust legal and policy framework to prevent these crises that must be better employed.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, explicitly guarantees the right to reproductive health in Article 43. This is working in tandem with the National Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health Policy (2015) that employs a preventive approach to teenage pregnancy through, among others, the access to correct sexual and reproductive health information.

Additionally, is the Return to School Policy that provides guidelines on the reintegration of adolescent mothers to school, postpartum. Additionally, the Children’s Act, the Sexual Offences Act and the Penal Code all prescribe strict punishment for sexual and gender based violence.

These are complemented by the Kenya School Health Policy which ideally safeguards learners from the same.

So, there are laws, but the problem lies in the implementation – or lack thereof, of these solid frameworks.

Implementation is additionally hindered when duty bearers misinterpret or are unaware of their own policies. Just recently, a senior Ministry of Health official publicly stated that giving contraceptives to minors is a criminal offense punishable by a jail term of up to 20 years.

This is however not a true representation of the existing legal and policy framework. In his erroneous statement that pointed to a draft policy that is yet to be passed, the ministry official misled millions of Kenyans.

The crisis at hand shows how critical it is for adolescents to receive correct information on sexual and reproductive health, products and services to make wise decisions.  Opponents argue that this would increase promiscuity among adolescents.

However, that perspective remains an inadequate rejoinder because the fact of the matter is that whether we like it or not, teenagers are having sex – a lot of it too.  They therefore need to freely make informed decisions that protect their health and their future.

As we move into the month of May which is dedicated to preventing and ending teenage pregnancies worldwide, the Kenyan government must intentionally work on ending the scourge that has persisted over the years.

The Ministry of Health must provide products and services for prevention and mitigation in accordance with the law. The Ministry of Education must work to standardize and deliver comprehensive sexuality education across the country.

To galvanize this, Kenya must reaffirm the regional Ministerial Commitment on Comprehensive Sexuality Education and Sexual and Reproductive Health Services for Adolescents and Young People in Eastern and Southern Africa which it signed in 2013 but shied away from recommitting to in December 2021.

The Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government under which security falls, must work to investigate and provide evidence for the prosecution of perpetrators.

The Ministry of Culture must also fight against harmful traditional practices that feed into the crises. This should all be in collaboration with the relevant ministries that house the youth affairs and gender affairs dockets respectively.  Until then, the health, life and future of Kenyan girls hang in the balance.

Stephanie Musho is a human rights lawyer and a Senior New Voices Fellow at the Aspen Institute

An ethnic matriarch in India’s Sikkim State in the Himalayan foothills. Credit: Manipadma Jena/IPS

By Baher Kamal
MADRID, Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

Every now and then, experts remind that the Indigenous Peoples are the best (and last?) custodians of the essential web of life: biodiversity.

There are more than 370 million self-identified peoples in some 70 countries around the world. In Latin America alone there are over 400 groups, each with a distinct language and culture, though the biggest concentration is in Asia and the Pacific– with an estimated 70 per cent.

And their traditional lands guard over 80% of the planet’s biodiversity.

Although they comprise less than 5% of the world population, Indigenous peoples protect 80% of the Earth’s biodiversity in the forests, deserts, grasslands, and marine environments in which they have lived for centuries
Indigenous Peoples have rich and ancient cultures and view their social, economic, environmental and spiritual systems as interdependent. And they make valuable contributions to the world’s heritage thanks to their traditional knowledge and their understanding of ecosystem management

 

They know how to connect with Nature

No wonder they play such an essential role: over the millennia, indigenous peoples around the world have developed practices that safeguard their environments and honour the interconnectedness of people and nature.

Their food systems are rooted in their environment. Living deeply intertwined with their ecosystems, imdigenous peoples have learned how to harvest and produce what they need sustainably, reminds, once more, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

The Fund, which delivers grants and loans to the poor farmers and rural population worldwide, with nearly zero interest and the facility of repayment in long periods of time, also provides the following information.

For example, we’ve seen time and again that, when forests are governed by indigenous peoples, there’s less deforestation and biodiversity loss. It’s no wonder that their role as responsible environmental stewards has been documented on every inhabited continent.

 

Yet, they are more and more vulnerable

Yet indigenous peoples disproportionately struggle with poverty. In the 23 countries where most of the world’s indigenous peoples live, they make up 9.3% of the population, but over 18% of those in extreme poverty.

Meanwhile, IFAD explained on 22 April 2022, that their contributions are frequently ‘overlooked and devalued.’ All too often, indigenous peoples’ communities aren’t able to participate in economic and food systems without giving up their traditions and knowledge.

“They’re left out of decision-making about the lands and resources they know better than anyone. They don’t have the agency, financial resources or capacity to take charge.”

 

Does anybody care?

And today, with climate change affecting every part of the globe, their knowledge and practices are more important than ever.

The Fund works with indigenous peoples to support them in overcoming poverty and showing the way to meeting global challenges through building on their identities and cultures.

But even when there is a plan: Policy on Engagement with Indigenous Peoples, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development converts its commitment into action through the Indigenous Peoples’ Forum, the key role of indigenous people in safeguarding biodiversity is too often neglected, if ever taken seriously into account.

In fact, for the last 15 years, the Indigenous Peoples Assistance Facility (IPAF) has served as IFAD’s flagship funding instrument for indigenous peoples, putting the power to find and implement solutions directly into their hands.

The IPAF aims at empowering indigenous peoples’ organisations. It helps them access climate finance so they can direct funds where they see the greatest need, and promotes the implementation of indigenous peoples’ rights frameworks, in line with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

 

Indigenous Peoples fight for the Planet

For its part, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has reiterated that by fighting for their lands, Indigenous peoples are fighting to save the planet.

Although they comprise less than 5% of the world population, Indigenous peoples protect 80% of the Earth’s biodiversity in the forests, deserts, grasslands, and marine environments in which they have lived for centuries, WWF goes on.

“However, despite their critical role in ensuring a resilient and healthy planet for people and nature, there is very little acknowledgment of, or support for, their efforts, especially in Africa.”

Our planet is facing a deep crisis rooted in a number of interconnected, global challenges that include infectious diseases like COVID-19, but also climate change, biodiversity loss, and financial collapse, according to WWF, one of the world’s leading conservation organisations, working in nearly 100 countries.

“These challenges do not observe national or physical borders and primarily result from human activities such as deforestation, the burning of fossil fuels, the expansion of agricultural land, and the increased hunting and trading of wildlife.”

 

Brazilian Indigenous people during one of their regular protests in Rio de Janeiro demanding the demarcation of their lands and to be taken into account in environmental and climate measures. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

Continuous non-recognition, abuse

Most of these activities are undertaken, habitually, in Indigenous peoples’ territories without their free, prior, and informed consent, it explains.

“The continued non-recognition and abuse of Indigenous peoples’ land rights, and consequently the dismissal of 80% of global biodiversity, should be placed at the centre of present and future global challenges.”

Now, scientists, specialists and experts from all over the world are working to prepare for the UN Biodiversity Conference (COP 15), which is scheduled to take place later this year in Kunming, China.

Indedigenous Peoples will surely be present and their voice will be heard, but will it be ‘listened to’?

A rescued boat woman and her two children eat some welcome food at a centre in Kuala Cangkoi, Indonesia. The UN urges 'people-centred' approach to migrants and refugees in Southeast Asia. Credit: UNHCR

By Simone Galimberti
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

The recently disseminated Zero Draft Ministerial Declaration of the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF)– the main UN event to track the member states’ progress to achieve the Agenda 2030 slated to be held in the first half of July– is a disappointment.

For all its comprehensiveness, the document neglected to mention one of the most significant elements that could help the world navigate the next pandemic while successfully tackling climate change and biodiversity loss and excruciating levels of inequalities.

It was in July 2020 when the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres delivered the 18th Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture, an important speech focusing on eliminating inequalities and injustices.

It is also where the idea of a New Social Contract emerged strongly.

Seen as an indispensable antidote against raising inequalities and injustices that the pandemic both exposed and further expanded, the Secretary General was not only remarkable for recalling the sins of colonialism perpetuated by Europeans like him in the past.

He was also bold for proposing a “New Social Contract, between Governments, people, civil society, business and more, must integrate employment, sustainable development and social protection, based on equal rights and opportunities for all”.

The concept of reinventing the social contract wasn’t’ particularly new in truth.

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Oslo Governance Centre (OGC), the Friedrich-Ebert- Stiftung (FES) in Berlin and New York, the Julian J. Studley Fund of the Graduate Program of International Affairs at The New School had been working on a global research study on resilient social contracts.

The outcome of this research was “Forging Resilient Social Contracts: Preventing Violent Conflict and Sustaining Peace, an11-country research and policy dialogue” that looked at the drivers that can either lead to stability and shared prosperity or the opposite, more insecurity and a continued state of violence.

The OECD has been also looking at the issue of state’s legitimacy with a groundbreaking report in 2010, The State’s Legitimacy in Fragile Situations unpacking complexity, a document that highlighted the risks of thinking from a western only perspective while supporting the extremely complex process of nation building.

Hybridity forms of governance that rely on local contexts and traditions, were highlighted as promising, though certainly not perfect, spaces of decision making, able to effectively hold together elements of bottom up decision making.

With the idea of top down nation building projects disintegrating following the Afghan’s debacle, strengthening local legitimacy is turning again to the fore.

Without it, it is impossible to shape and deliver effective and inclusive institutions that are so important now more than ever and, as to speak, not only in traditionally fragile political systems.

That’s why Guterres’s lecture in 2020 was so transformational because he was able to shift the focus on the social contract from a narrow peace building frame related to developing nations emerging from conflicts to a much broader context that significantly affects also more established democracies.

The stress and tensions that democratic systems have been experiencing in the last decade are supporting dynamics that risk to tear apart the fabric of many prosperous nations founded on a liberal political system.

Yet the Zero Draft Ministerial Declaration seems to totally forget the day-to-day relevance of establishing a new social contract, a new model based on civic engagement and people’s participation where citizens co-own the process of policy making.

Is this happening because the matter in discussion is so sensitive that some members of the United Nations might feel uneasy about getting engaged in a serious discussion about people’s involvement in shaping the public good?

For example the draft just mentions the role of Voluntary Local Review, the central process around which the SDGs can be localized, a dynamic that has been recognized as central to advance the overall Agenda 2030 and instrumental to build a new civic rapport between the citizenry and the state.

On the positive side, at least there is a mention of the UN Youth 2030, the global youth blue print that is supposed to play a big role in advancing a UN system that is more youth centered.

It is not that there is not enough discussions on partnerships, an essential element if we are serious about rethinking the process of decision making from the ground up.

For example, The Mexico Partnership Forum held in Merida on 17-18 March 2022, served as a “platform to strengthen engagement and relationships across all relevant stakeholders and sectors, while building back better from COVID-19, leading to more transformational whole-of-society approach to partnerships for advancing SDGs in Mexico”.

In another instance, the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the International Development Law Organization, and the Government of Italy are organizing the SDG 16 Conference 2022, People-Centered Governance in Post Pandemic World that was held from 21 to 22 April.

In addition, we should not forget that the UN Habitat promoted New Urban Agenda is based on stronger level of collaborations and partnerships to redefine, through the lens of shared prosperity and equity, our existence in cities across the world.

Perhaps it is just easy to talk about partnerships and collaborations among different stakeholders but ultimately the SDG16 that embraces partnerships at its core, should be seen in a much broader and progressive way.

In Pathways for Peace Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict, a joint publication between the World Bank and the United Nations released in 2018, it is remarkably clear the fundamental role of inclusive decision making.

First, “societies that offer more opportunities for youth participation in the political and economic realms and provide routes for social mobility for youth tend to experience less violence”.

Second “Inclusive decision making is fundamental to sustaining peace at all levels, as are long-term policies to address economic, social, and political aspirations”.

The reports continues: “Fostering the participation of young people as well as of the organizations, movements, and networks that represent them is crucial”.

Good governance does not happen with a stroke of raise in international aid to fragile nations.

International aid could enable and support certain dynamics especially if resources reach out effective non state actors but it is a very tricky business that could also result in more corruption and lack of accountability and perpetuation of exclusive power generation.

Genuine localized good governance instead is all about a local leadership able to nurturing through a self-strengthening loop, resilience and inclusion on the ground, though, in many cases such loop is too weakened to bear fruits.

Social protection policies, difficult to design and hard to deliver and certainly very expensive, are the key ingredient capable of enabling a sense of agency for those who have been the most neglected in the society.

Yet intervening in the economic space, as difficult as it is, along won’t suffice.

We need to offer real and meaningful opportunities for people to participate regardless of the political systems in place.

If one party nations do hesitate to foster this new sense of participation, then their entire foundations upon which their legitimacy is based, could crumble while dealing with any future crises and by now, we know well that we will experience more and more of them.

That’s why that speech of Antonio Guterres in 2020 was so important and should not be left forgotten.

It is also not enough to talk about the New Social Contract from a perspective of volunteerism as valuably done by UNV with the State of the World Volunteering Report 2022.

We need to deeper into discussing effective ways to empower the citizenry, starting from those left behind.

Hopefully this challenge, one of the biggest of those we face as humanity, would be adequately discussed by the United Nations.

The upcoming conference on Power, Politics and Peace, scheduled for May 31 by the UNDP Oslo Governance Centre, could offer an opportunity to do so.

Power, politics and peace, are, after all, the defining treats of the New Social Contract and if we forget it, it would be at a very high cost for all of us.

Simone Galimberti is the Co-Founder of ENGAGE, an NGO partnering with youths living with disabilities. He writes on civic engagement, development and regional integration and politics. Opinions expressed are personal.

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');  

The UN will be commemorating World Press Freedom Day on May 3. The following article is part of a series of IPS features and opinion pieces focused on media freedom globally.

By Farhana Haque Rahman
TORONTO, Canada, Apr 29 2022 (IPS)

Empowered by a global pandemic and the drum beats of war, the strongest despots are growing more despotic, and criminal cartels even more brazen in their violence. Extremists of various hues are also stepping out of the shadows.

Just when the world most needs press freedom to thrive, the liberties that societies only really treasure when they are emasculated are coming under more pressure from different directions, old and new.

Farhana Haque Rahman

The 2021 World Press Freedom Index measured by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) declined last year, and is 12% down since first issued in 2013. RSF reported “a dramatic deterioration in people’s access to information and an increase in obstacles to news coverage”. The coronavirus pandemic was cited as widely used to block journalists’ access to information.

Lest you think that this deterioration is the preserve of less developed countries under autocratic rule, RSF noted an increase in attacks against journalists and arbitrary arrests in Germany, France, Italy and several other European states.

This year –as we approach World Press Freedom Day on May 3 — is measurably worse already, notably in Russia and China, but also in Mexico with an escalation of targeted killings of journalists by suspected drug traffickers.

Some 200 Russian journalists and several dozen foreign reporters have left Russia since the passing of a draconian media law on March 4 which criminalises “deliberately false” information. It outlaws calling the invasion of Ukraine a “war”. In addition Russia is still applying its “foreign agents” legislation to punish and intimidate critical media outlets, including PASMI dedicated exclusively to fighting corruption.

“The Russian authorities’ crackdown on independent media is escalating at breakneck speed. Evidently unsatisfied with merely blocking critical news sites or forcing reporters into exile, the Kremlin now seeks to incarcerate journalists who report on anti-war protests or Russian soldiers who refuse to fight in Ukraine,” Amnesty International said on April 14 commenting on the arrests of two journalists in the Russian republics of Altay and Khakassia.

“Apart from state propaganda, there is no media landscape in Russia,” Journalist Alexey Kovalyov, now based in Riga, told Al Jazeera. The power of that propaganda must not be underestimated. Accounts are widespread of people living in Ukraine telling relatives in Russia that they are being bombed by the Russian army but their own family members refuse to believe them.

The “world’s biggest jailer of press freedom defenders”, reports RSF, is however China, with 115 men and women currently incarcerated. China ranks 177 out of the 180 countries and territories surveyed. “Media freedom in China is declining at breakneck speed,” the Foreign Correspondents Club (FCC) stated in January. China has labelled the FCC an “illegal organisation” and appears in its rhetoric to be encouraging an exodus of foreign journalists.

Free media in Hong Kong, once among the freest in Asia, has been almost completely dismantled, according to Hong Kong Watch, a UK-based advocacy group. Its recent report followed the HK FCC’s announcement it would suspend its Human Rights Press Awards as it risked violating the city’s national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020.

Whereas Russia and China are deploying “lawfare” against independent journalists and big companies in developed countries are stifling the press with “vexatious” lawsuits, it is more a legal wasteland or absence of the state that is killing journalists in Mexico, among others.

A wave of murders has targeted at least eight journalists so far this year, with seven killed in all of 2021, making Mexico under populist President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador one of the most dangerous countries for the press. Journalists, in the words of Adela Navarro Bello, director of the Tijuana weekly Zeta, are “caught in the crossfire between the threats and bullets of narco-traffickers and organised crime and the threats and verbal attacks and attempts to morally annihilate us from the federal and state governments”.

International human rights organisation Article 19 says the Mexican government’s denial of what is happening “results in no urgent measures being taken to stop this brutal spiral of violence”.

A similar pattern is seen in Bangladesh where suspected narco-traffickers killed Bangladeshi journalist Mohiuddin Sarker Nayeem on April 13.

The Committee to Protect Journalists publishes an annual Global Impunity Index and notes that no one has been held to account in 81% of journalist murders worldwide over the past 10 years. Somalia tops the list, with Mexico ranked 6th and Bangladesh 11th.

State-sponsored or tolerated violence and political persecution aside, world press freedom is also being eroded in an insidious way in places where such freedoms are commonly understood to be vital in sustaining well-functioning democracies. Coupled with the apparently unstoppable rise of social media as a source of information – some surveys suggest 50% of adults in the US and UK get their news from social media – the state of much of the traditional press, digital or not, is far from healthy.

The annual Digital News Report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism found the US ranked last in media trust, at 29%, among 92,000 news consumers polled in 46 countries. (Finland came top).

Governments must not be passive while the same powerful corporate lobbies that have spent fortunes over decades spreading climate dis/misinformation in traditional media now feed on the rapacity of Big Tech social media, which are failing to disclose comprehensive policies to combat this. Climate disinformation as a threat to climate action is highlighted in the latest UN Climate Reports.

Press offices of international organisations, particularly the UN and large INGOs, also have a particular responsibility to uphold media freedom by eschewing the corporate dark arts of delay, denial and obfuscation.

A new proposal by the EU executive to protect journalists and campaigners from so-called vexatious lawsuits is highly welcome. The move would target “strategic lawsuits against public participation” known as Slapps, where the rich misuse legal means to silence troublesome investigative reporters and NGOs.

No press freedom, no democracy. Just like freedom of speech, that does not mean a free press can publish whatever it wants. Both need to be defined and, in these very dark times, defended.

Farhana Haque Rahman is Senior Vice President of IPS Inter Press Service and Executive Director IPS North America, including it’s UN Bureau; she served as the elected Director General of IPS from 2015-2019. A journalist and communications expert, she is a former senior official of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and the International Fund for Agricultural Development.

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:

The UN will be commemorating World Press Freedom Day on May 3. The following article is part of a series of IPS features and opinion pieces focused on media freedom globally.

Asian Americans affected by anti-Asian sentiment and hate crimes have provided support to each other. Left to right from top: Dr Boyung Lee, Dr Russell Jeung, Cynthia Choi, and Dr Bryant Lin. Credit: Myleen Hollero

By SeiMi Chu
California, Apr 28 2022 (IPS)

Dr Boyung Lee, a widow and the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty at Iliff School of Theology, would use a short break in her working day to walk around her neighborhood. The fresh air helped her deal with her grief and work-related stress.

In May 2020, however, this small but significant daily ritual ended abruptly.

Lee was walking when she noticed a dirty white truck but did not think much of it. She carried on walking, then heard something. The noise continued, and when she looked back, she noticed the driver inside the truck was shouting at her.

Listening carefully, Lee realized that he was jeering at her – including using one of the common taunts directed at the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) community: “Go back to your country.”

Slightly shaken by this hostile confrontation, Lee continued walking. However, the driver followed her. Thankfully, Lee acted swiftly and ran into the opening of her neighbor’s apartment building, so the driver could not follow her.

The incident made her feel unsafe. She was even nervous about grocery shopping. The verbal attack turned a Korean American independent feminist into a dependent person.

Dr Boyung Lee was targeted by a truck driver on this street on S Elati Street near W Bates Avenue in Englewood, Colorado.

Lee now covered herself with masks and hats to prevent others from noticing that she was an Asian.

She started to feel safe when her peers offered to go with her on her walks. However, outside of that, Lee was afraid. It took Lee over a year to feel comfortable going out to work by herself.

Angered because her experience had turned her into a dependent person, Lee thought about how she could educate the public about the beauty of Asian culture.

By teaming up with a few Asian colleagues, she brought in Asian American artists. She hosted lectures and workshops to educate the community about the intersection of Asian culture and art. Through this experience, Lee felt empowered and returned to being the independent feminist she once was.

Lee is not alone in her experiences of Asian hate abuse. Many in the AAPI community faced harassment, discrimination, and abuse.

When a Pacific Islander spoke Chamorro at a mall in Dallas, Texas, a passerby coughed on her and jeered: “You and your people are the reason why we have corona. Go sail a boat back to your island.”

A mother tried to enroll her daughter in a gymnastics class in Tustin, California. However, the owner refused because the mother’s name was ‘Asian’. These were two of the numerous incidents reported by Stop AAPI Hate, a support group that works to end racism.

Dr Boyung Lee ran into the opening of this apartment building when the truck driver followed her. Targeted because she is an Asian American, the incident resulted in a loss of independence until she became involved in hosting lectures and workshops about Asian culture and art. Credit: Supplied

From March 19, 2020, when the pandemic emerged, until December 31, 2021, there were over 10,000 incidents reported to Stop AAPI Hate, of which 4,632 happened in 2020 and 6,273 in 2021. Based on the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism’s data, there was a 339% increase in anti-Asian hate crimes in 2021 compared with the previous year.

The increase in hate crimes against Asian Americans stems from the virus’s origin. COVID-19 was first identified in Wuhan province, China. Due to its origin, hostile rhetoric was used to connote the coronavirus, such as “Kung Flu”, “Chinese virus”, and the “Wuhan virus.” Racializing the virus led to an uptick in anti-Asian racism, prejudice, discrimination, and hate crimes. Common verbal harassment included: “Go back to China” and “Take your virus, you Chinks!”

The most recent report released by Stop AAPI Hate found that 63% of the hate incidents involved verbal harassment, 16.2% involved physical assault, 11.5% involved civil rights violations, and 8.6% involved online harassment. Most occurred in public spaces, such as public streets and public transits.

Asian Americans were blamed for “bringing the virus” to America.

Russell Jeung, professor of Asian American Studies at San Francisco State University, worked with Cynthia Choi, Co-Executive Director of Chinese Affirmative Action, with other leaders, spearheaded the mission to fight anti-Asian racism. Jeung wanted to provide Asian American communities with resources, so this harassment would not happen again.

Along with Choi and Manjusha Kulkarni, Director of the AAPI Equity Alliance, Jeung founded Stop AAPI Hate to find solutions to the underlying causes of discrimination and hate. He formed a research team of San Francisco State University students to collect data to create the reports published on the Stop AAPI website. Jeung and his students discovered that hate crimes against Asian Americans occurred most frequently in California.

Jeung also noticed Asian Americans were taking a stance against racism.

Asian Americans used their social media platforms and utilized hashtags, such as #Racismisavirus, to ensure their posts would go viral. Another trend Jeung witnessed was that Asian Americans elected officials who would speak up against xenophobia.

As a result, Asian Americans turned out in their numbers to vote in 2020. As Jeung explained, Asian Americans voted for candidates who would support their beliefs and promised to fight against xenophobia.

Chinese Affirmative Action, a support community-based civil rights organization to protect the rights of Chinese and Asian Americans, and Stop AAPI Hate, collected first-hand accounts of people who self-reported what was happening and what was said to them.

The two organizations have been working on advancing racial equity by dealing with racial tensions between the Asian communities and other communities. These reports helped them understand the nature of the violent attacks. So far, over 3,700 cases have been reported to these organizations. They also work with the media to share the information.

“Certainly, in my lifetime, we have not witnessed this level of hate directed at our communities,” Choi lamented.

Bryant Lin, a Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine at Stanford University School of Medicine and Co-Director and Co-Founder of the Center for Asian Health Research and Education, led a project that researched people’s perception of the relationship between COVID-19 and discrimination. They surveyed nearly 2,000 people across the country.

Lin explained the results of his study. “Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, and other Asian Pacific Islanders showed up to 3.9 times increased odds of self-reported racial discrimination due to COVID-19 and experienced nearly up to 5.4 times increased odds of concern for physical assault due to COVID-19.”

Although Asians are very diverse and heterogeneous – there are six major subgroups in the United States – they are treated as a monolithic group. Lin revealed that East Asians tended to experience more discrimination than South and Southeast Asians. The highest rates of self-reported discrimination were from Chinese Americans.

“Our study also found that people were very concerned about physical attacks, and people were also considering buying firearms,” Lin said. He added they were likely to do a further study on how perceptions changed.

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

• Human Rights Violations and Culture of Impunity in South Asia
• Black Women, the Most Oppressed and Exploited in Brazil
• Road to European Dream Paved by Extortion and Exploitation

Credit: United Nations

By Tara Carey
LONDON, Apr 28 2022 (IPS)

Women journalists around the world are experiencing an exponential increase in misogynistic online abuse, which poses a grave risk to women’s media participation in the digital age.

This is a grievous form of censorship that seeks to silence women, stifle free expression, and close down critical journalism by undermining their ability to engage freely in public debate, report on issues, and address discrimination.

Online communication has been weaponized to stigmatize and intimidate female journalists and force them from open discussion. Becoming more prevalent and coordinated, abuse directed at women often differs from harassment that male journalists experience because comments frequently focus specifically on a woman’s gender.

A 2021 report by UNESCO surveyed 901 journalists from 125 countries and found 73% had experienced online hostility, with one in four being threatened with death and almost a fifth threatened with sexual violence.

Abuse in the digital sphere manifests in various ways, entailing vitriolic sexist attacks, inappropriate sexual comments, and sending of unsolicited pornographic or other offensive content. Demeaning comments may focus on a person’s professionalism, intellect, or physical appearance, or can entail threats such as death, torture, and rape.

Digital privacy violations and security breaches also pose major perils. Hacking and exposing private content, non-consensual dissemination of intimate images, and “doxing” in which personal information such as home address is published with malicious intent, are being used to defame women and can compromise their safety offline.

Attacks are often exacerbated when sexism and misogyny intersect with other forms of discrimination such as racism, classism, homophobia, and religious bigotry. This can increase a person’s exposure to offenses on and offline and worsen the scope and hostility.

Sexist and violent language is rooted in patriarchy and is used by preparators to insult and belittle women journalists. Wielded as a weapon to denigrate, demean and marginalize, such abuse can be deeply distressing for recipients and sends a toxic message that women are not safe in the digital world.

Worryingly, there is mounting evidence that online violence is linked to physical attacks and other forms of offline abuse, including legal harassment involving the application of defamation laws which are being weaponized in courts to intimidate, muzzle, and retaliate against women journalists.

Many women journalists experience disinformation-based attacks that smear their reputations. This can be particularly dangerous in more conservative societies where repressive gender norms make reverberations even more harmful and potentially devastating.

Vulnerability and repercussions are compounded in countries where deep-rooted patriarchal attitudes already require women to seek permission from their families to work in journalism; where they have to fight in newsrooms to receive the same opportunities and pay as male colleagues; and where unchecked sexual harassment in the workplace remains rife.

All this thrives alongside weak laws, poor implementation of protections, and impunity for perpetrators. In many instances, it involves unequal power dynamics between individuals targeted by governments or state-linked disinformation networks working to undermine press freedom and suppress critical journalism.

It is common for groups of trolls to participate in orchestrated, targeted personal attacks that form part of coordinated disinformation campaigns harnessing misogyny and other forms of hate speech, often interwoven with populist politics.

This damages not only women working in news but is part of the wider demonization of the press, coupled with the rise of viral disinformation and concerted efforts to undermine public trust in credible journalism.

Women disclose how gender-based abuse pressures them to self-censor, withdraw from frontline reporting and social media, and even abandon journalism completely. Livelihoods are undermined, equity thwarted, and the wellbeing and career prospects of victims are put in jeopardy.

The psychological impacts can be severe and it can require great strength and courage to continue working under such circumstances.

This needs urgent addressing as women journalists have a crucial role to play in enhancing public understanding of issues, shaping public discourse, and influencing policy-makers. A drop in female representation erodes gender diversity in public discourse and risks sidelining gender-sensitive coverage on matters impacting women and girls.

The National Union of Journalists has called for a coordinated effort to tackle the problem, stating, “For too long, the emphasis has been on making women journalists responsible for their own defense and protection, rather than making the perpetrators and instigators, the platform enablers, and law enforcement and media employers accountable.”

A 2022 survey by the International Federation of Journalists found initiatives by media organizations to address online abuse were inadequate. Two-thirds of women journalists surveyed said online harassment was not a priority for their media company, and 44% disclosed the topic was not even discussed.

This reflects UNESCO’s findings that many media companies appear reluctant to take online violence seriously, and in some instances, outlets make things worse by amplifying harassment when reporting allegations and prompting so-called ‘pile-ons’ that escalate online assaults.

Dealing with online abuse mustn’t fall on the shoulders of those being victimized. News organizations need to do more to assist, including developing and implementing gender-specific guidelines and training that incorporate anti-harassment policies and responses.

Women journalists should feel comfortable voicing concerns, and newsrooms must ensure employees are safe and supported.

Huge responsibility also lies with social media providers, which UNESCO describes as the “main enablers.” Attempts by journalists to get offensive content or accounts deleted are “frequently ignored or rejected,“ and central to this “is an attempt to use ‘free speech’ as a shield against accountability, and a continuing reluctance to assume responsibility for the content on their sites.”

Anonymity and uneven regulation of social media platforms across different jurisdictions enable exploiters to easily contact targets. Research by international women’s rights organization Equality Now found in the absence of laws that act to prevent and address online abuse, digital service providers and platforms are adopting voluntary measures.

Consequently, this is resulting in opaque practices and limited redress that puts women journalists and others at risk.

Digital service providers are being called on to protect users from harm. Laws need to be updated and implemented, and better understanding is required amongst law enforcement agencies.

Criminal justice systems should provide support and redress to victims and punish perpetrators as this acts as a deterrent. Online abuse of women journalists is a crisis that must no longer be ignored.

About Equality Now:

Equality Now is an international non-governmental human rights organization that works to protect and promote the rights of women and girls around the world by combining grassroots activism with international, regional, and national legal advocacy. Our international network of lawyers, activists and supporters achieve legal and systemic change by holding governments responsible for enacting and enforcing laws and policies that end legal inequality, sex trafficking, online sexual exploitation, sexual violence, and harmful practices such as female genital mutilation and child marriage.

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:

The writer is Head of Media at the international women’s rights organisation Equality Now
 
The UN will be commemorating World Press Freedom Day on May 3. The following article is part of a series of IPS features and opinion pieces focused on media freedom globally.