Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

By Simi Mehta
NEW DELHI, Jan 27 2020 (IPS)

The unease in the relations between the US and Iran have been in the international news for around a month now. Both sides have not shied away from using outright methods of warfare like the use of ballistic missiles and assassinations, along with attempts at economic and diplomatic sanctions.

There have been voices that have mentioned a possibility of a full-blown war in the Middle-East accentuated by US-Iran tensions. Given this background, this article attempts to connect the dots of the prevailing wariness with the historical antagonism between the two countries. It also reflects on the possible implications this might have on India.

Background
It all began in August 1953, when by the covert actions of the Secret Information Service (SIS) of the United Kingdom (UK) and the Central Investigation Agency (CIA) of the United States (US) connived a military coup- Operation Ajax, to topple the then Iran’s elected Prime Minister (PM) Mohammed Mossadegh, an ardent nationalist- who had plans to nationalize Iran’s oil industry and turn oil profits into investments for the Iranian people. The reasons for this coup d’état was that the US feared disruption in the global oil supply and worried about Iran joining the Soviet sphere of influence and the UK feared the loss of cheap Iranian oil.

In January 1963, the last Shah of Iran-Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi- who had close ties with the West, introduced the ‘White Revolution’ and was the harbinger of a series of reforms- for example: allowing women to vote, urban and rural modernization, reduction of religious estates in the name of land redistribution and free and compulsory education among others.

Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists, Shi’ite clergy and the landlords led by Ayatollah Khomeini, were enraged with Shah’s initiatives based on liberal ideals of western thought. They were successful in toppling the latter’s rule in 1979 after years of protests and bloodshed. This came to be known as the Iranian Revolution.

The Iranian revolutionaries took to hostage 52 staff of the US embassy in Tehran for 444 days, following which the US severed all diplomatic relations with Iran, banned American exports to the country and expelled Iranian diplomats. Iran was added to the list of state sponsors of terrorism after an attack by the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah in Beirut in 1983 that killed 241 US Marines in Beirut.

On July 3, 1988, the American cruiser USS Vincennes fired a surface-to-air missile and shot down an Iran Air Flight 655- a passenger flight scheduled from Tehran to Dubai, over the Persian Gulf and killed all 290 aboard. The cruiser commander displayed an ‘error in identification’ and termed the commercial aircraft as a fighter aircraft.

The 9/11 attacks on the US soil led the then George W. Bush administration to designate Iran as part of the “Axis of Evil” for supporting terrorism and pursuing weapons of mass destruction. This was fueled by a 2002 controversy that erupted over Iran’s clandestine nuclear program, when the National Council of Resistance on Iran (NCRI), an Iranian exile group, revealed information that Iran had built nuclear-related facilities at Natanz and Arak that it had not revealed to the IAEA. The US government then began pushing for UN sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

Obama’s election as the US President saw a rise of optimism from the Ahmadinejad’s government for developing understanding with the US. This continued with the election of Hassan Rouhani as the Iranian President in 2013.

Obama-Rouhani administrations witnessed attempts at rapprochements between the US and Iran. The historic Iran nuclear deal between P5+1 (US, China, France, Russia and UK + Germany) and Iran was signed and was known as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which freed over 100 billion dollars in frozen assets overseas for Iran and increased foreign access to the Iranian economy.

It severely limited Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium and mandated that international inspectors monitor and enforce Iran’s compliance with the agreement. In return, Iran was granted relief from international and US economic sanctions.

Trump and Escalation of Tensions with Iran

Though the inspectors regularly certified that Iran was abiding by the agreement’s terms, in May 2018 President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the agreement and by November all the sanctions against Iran were reinstated. Iran’s economy began to be strangled to pressure it from stopping the ballistic missiles program and to force it to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

Incidentally, this move by the US was regretted by the EU, UK, France, China and Germany. Iran rejected US’ unilateral decision and vowed to defy the sanctions against it. Trump continued with his sanctions-strategy and imposed them on Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, and other top officials of Iran including Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IGRC) of Iran. IGRC was designated as a terrorist organization.

Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah attacked an air base in Iraq on December 27, 2019 where American and Iraqi forces were stationed. It killed a US civilian contractor and wounded several US and Iraqi service members. Airstrikes against the Kataib Hezbollah fighters in Iraq and Syria were ordered within two days.

Revenge and retaliation did not stop as the Iranian-backed militia groups chanting ‘death to America’ stormed the US Embassy in Baghdad on December 31, 2019, and burnt and defaced property.

On January 3, 2020, Iran received a massive jolt of the new decade when on the orders of President Trump, an American drone fired a missile that killed Major General Qassem Soleimani, leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force, as he prepared to leave the Baghdad airport. Soleimani was considered to be second most powerful man in Iran after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

The situation became further heated up when Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases housing American military personnel. While no casualties were reported, Trump announced new harsher economic sanctions on Tehran1 .

As Iran entered a heightened state of alert, preparing for a possible US retaliation, out of “human error”, it accidentally shot down a commercial Ukrainian airliner departing Tehran for Kyiv, killing all 176 people aboard. With the Iranian forces demonstrating “highest level of readiness” at the time, the aircraft was mistaken for a “hostile target”.

Implications for India

India has a veteran diplomat S. Jaishankar as its Minister of External Affairs, and hence the position taken by India amid the US-Iran tussle is likely to avoid taking sides, either of the US or of Iran, in favour or against, since, it shares exceptionally good relations with both. India would continue to expand its economic and cultural ties with Iran and its Global Strategic Partnership with the US.

The US has understood the significance of Iran-India relations, imminent from the waivers provided to India in the recently legislated Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), allowing it to continue importing Iranian oil. Further, Iran’s strategic location provides the route through which India, blockaded by Pakistan, can fulfill its Eurasian ambitions.

The balanced, mature and status-quoist approach of India towards Iran was echoed by the Iranian Deputy Minister for Culture and Guidance of Iran Mohsin Jawadi, when he remarked that India-Iran relations were independent of the ongoing crisis Iran was facing back home. Javad Zarif acknowledged India as a dear friend, which also has good relations with the US. He exhorted the Indian leadership to encourage the US to come back to the negotiating table on the nuclear deal. The Chabahar project provides a route to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Because India and Iran are ‘complementary economies’, Iran has highlighted the need to ‘remove the dollar’ from their bilateral trade and instead concentrate on a ‘rupee-rial’ mechanism, which could ease the difficulties faced by them in bilateral trade due to financial sanctions posed on Iran by the US.

Jaishankar seems to have handled the US-Iran standoff over the last one year quite professionally, and accorded Prime Minister Narendra Modi the diplomatic agility to make calculated and successful visits to oil-rich kingdoms of United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. In fact, Iran has been responsive in negotiating with these countries without any preconditions, and that it ‘would welcome India’s positive role’.

Analysis:

The US has been seeking to contain Iran’s nuclear program, had in the first place, itself helped create in 1957 under the Atoms for Peace Program. It provided Iran its first nuclear reactor and nuclear fuel, and after 1967 by providing Iran with weapons grade enriched uranium and continued it until the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

The downing of the Ukrainian airliner has an eerie similarity with the downing of the Iran Air in 1988 by the US. The reasons cited for both incidents were ‘human error’, and ‘miscalculation’. The fact that Iran used the 1988 incident as an instance for a revenge cannot be overruled.

Further, the US may advise Ukraine to file a case for compensation with the ICJ soon, alike the Iranian claims in 1989. While an all-out war between the US and Iran has been averted as of now, the crisis has important consequences for longer-term regional stability.

1 Blake, A. 2020. Transcript of Trump’s Iran speech, annotated, The Washington Post, January 8, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/08/transcript-trumps-iran-speech/

*Simi Mehta also serves as the CEO and Editorial Director of Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI), New Delhi., and can be reached at simi@impriindia.org.

The post US-Iran Confrontation & Implications for India appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Simi Mehta holds a PhD in American Studies from School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. She was a Fulbright Fellow at the Ohio State University

The post US-Iran Confrontation & Implications for India appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Credit: SIPRI

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 27 2020 (IPS)

Donald Trump, the vociferously unpredictable US president, has long chastised China for seeking “unfair” advantage over trade and tariffs, violating intellectual property rights and “manipulating” the country’s currency to its advantage.

But while this blatant political rhetoric has continued ever since Trump assumed office in 2017, the Chinese have steadily built a massive military arsenal — and joined the world’s major players in arms production and arms exports.

In a new report, released January 27, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), said that China is now the world’s second-largest arms producer, ranking behind the United States and ahead of Russia.

And in 2014-18, the five largest arms exporters were the United States, Russia, France, Germany and China—in that order.

At the United Nations, China is a veto-wielding permanent member of the Security Council, along with the US, UK, France and Russia.

According to SIPRI, China has invested considerably in the modernization of its arm industry since the 1960s, and particularly since 1999.

One of its primary aims is to be self-reliant in the production of advanced weapons and technologies for its armed forces.

However, due to lack of transparency, the value of Chinese arms sales has been either unknown or based on unreliable estimates – until now.

Based on estimated arms sales in 2015–17, SIPRI has identified four major Chinese arms companies as the front-runners.

In 2017, of the 20 largest companies in the SIPRI Top 100, 11 were based in the US, six in Western Europe and three in Russia.

If the four Chinese arms companies, investigated in the study, were included in the top 100, they would all rank among the top 20, with combined estimated arms sales totalling $54.1 billion. Three of the companies would be ranked in the top 10, said SIPRI.

The four have been identified as Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), China North Industries Corporation (NORINCO), China Electronics Technology Group Corporation CETC) and China South Industries Group Corporation (CSGC).

These companies are ranked behind the world’s four biggest arms producers: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon—all based in the US.

Asked whether the quality of Chinese weapons was on par with Western military equipment, Dr Nan Tian, Researcher, Arms and Military Expenditure Programme at SIPRI, told IPS generally there is the opinion that some of the Chinese weapons are still a bit behind in quality as compared to those made by Western countries.

“But we have seen massive improvements in the quality of Chinese weapons,” he added.

“This is also one of the factors why Chinese weapons are considered less expensive than Western alternatives,” he added.

The large buyers of Chinese weapons include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Algeria. “Most of these countries are considered friendly or are allies of China”, he pointed out.

Asked if these sales were tied to Chinese foreign policy and meant to advance political causes, he said: “Yes, indeed it has foreign policy ties, but so is the case with Russia, US and other countries as well.”

Meanwhile, according to the China Power Project at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), China is also an arms supplier to two other Asian countries, namely Indonesia and Thailand.

In Africa, its arms markets include Algeria, Egypt and Morocco while Chinese weapons have also been used in several military conflicts in the region, including in Sudan, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Dr Nan said that China, like most other arms suppliers, often provides exports through loans or economic partnerships (i.e. 1st access to certain mineral fields).

On loans, it is common that over the course of the repayment, China will write-off the loan as a form of aid, and thus there will be no need for the buyer to pay back the loan, he explained.

According to SIPRI, the largest of the Chinese companies is Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), with arms sales totalling $20.1 billion would be sixth largest in the world.

China North Industries Group Corporation (NORINCO), which would be placed eighth in the Top 100, with sales of $17.2 billion, is in fact the world’s largest producer of land systems.

Contrary to most other major global arms producers, SIPRI said, Chinese arms companies specialize primarily in one arms production sector. For example AVIC produces mostly aircraft and avionics.

And most of the large non-Chinese arms companies produce a wider range of military products across different sectors—covering aerospace, land systems and shipbuilding within one company.

According to SIPRI, these new estimates are most likely still an underestimate. A lack of transparency in the arms sales figures of Chinese arms companies continues to hinder a complete understanding of China’s arms industry. This new research, however, acts as an important scoping study that opens the possibility for further research and prepares the ground for a fuller estimate of Chinese arms sales.

*The authors of the report are Dr Nan Tian, Researcher, Arms and Military Expenditure Programme at SIPRI and Fei Su, a Researcher with SIPRI’s China and Asia Security Programme.

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@ips.org

The post China Ranked World’s Second Largest Arms Producer Trailing Behind US appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By External Source
Jan 24 2020 (IPS-Partners)

As the world marks the second International Day of Education on 24 January 2020, Education Cannot Wait’s Director, Yasmine Sherif, interviewed one of today’s most prominent and passionate advocates for the global movement to ensure education for all. In his role as UN Special Envoy for Global Education and as Chair of the ECW High-Level Steering Group, Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown has successfully galvanized financial and political support globally with the hope and opportunity of quality education for every child in this world.

1. You are the leading global advocate for education worldwide. What inspired you to take on the cause of education out of so many issues facing our world?

I’m just one of many who realized that – as the Education Commission concluded – education unlocks not only individual opportunities, but also unlocks gender equality, better health, better qualities of life and a better environment. The Education Commission’s report illustrates how education is the very foundation for unlocking all other Sustainable Development Goals. For example, I am struck by the fact that infant and maternal mortality can be as much as twice as high among uneducated women compared to those who are educated, and I continue to be shocked by several brutal facts:

• 260 million school-age children are not in school
• 400 million children are completely out of education for good at age 11 or 12
• 800 million children are leaving the education system without any qualifications worth their name

In fact, it’s even worse than that: In 2030, we could be as far away from meeting SDG4 as we currently are, unless we act decisively together, now. One reason why the situation is so grave is that today there are 75 million children and youth in need of urgent education support in crisis-affected countries, of whom 20 million are internally displaced children and 12 million are child refugees. Indeed, only a fraction – 1 to 3 per cent – of refugees go on to higher education, whereas, for example, in pre-conflict Syria it used to be 20%. That is why Education Cannot Wait (ECW) is so crucial to meeting SDG4. We need action now. It simply cannot wait if we are to meet the target by 2030.

2. As the UN Special Envoy for Global Education, what is your vision for some of the key multilateral actions, such the UN, EU and the World Bank to achieve SDG4 by 2030?

We need a renewed focus on education and we need resources, response and reform. We set up the Global Education Forum, working with UNESCO, to ensure that we have maximum coordination of our efforts between the UN, EU and the World Bank and we will soon outline plans for raising the profile of global education in countries across the world.

As humanitarian crises and refugee flows are multiplying at an unprecedented speed, it is critically important to fund ECW’s investments delivering quality education to children and youth impacted by armed conflicts, forced displacement and natural disasters. Furthermore, and in partnership with these actors, we have set up the International Finance Facility for Education (IFFEd). Through IFFEd, we are aiming for $10 billion in extra funds for educational investment. Currently, we are now around $2-2.5 billion. To achieve our goal, we have to secure the support of more countries.

3. What do you see as the biggest challenges in ensuring that every child and young person has continued access to a quality education and what are the priorities to meet those challenges?

Quality education is crucial. As I said, we need resources, speed in the response during crisis and long-term reform to succeed.

Children and youth affected by emergencies and crisis cannot be out of school or wait for a decent education for years simply because a crisis has erupted in their country. As a matter of fact, education is their only hope and opportunity to be able to sustain conflicts and disasters. By the same token, every crisis-affected country needs human capital to rebuild and recover.

We need to train and properly remunerate teachers. Teachers are so important – no one ever forgets their teachers and teachers are the key to improved school standards. We also need the best school leaders serving as head teachers. We need a more relevant curriculum. We need to use technology more effectively, especially in outlying areas – to ensure children are not denied the input and the resources they need for a good education. We need to use technology effectively not just for school education, but for higher educational opportunities that could be both on-line and tutor-led.

4. You are also the Chair of the High-Level Steering Group of the Education Cannot Wait Global Fund, which was created during the World Humanitarian Summit largely thanks to your leadership. Education Cannot Wait is a rather unique name. How did you come up with such name and why did you think this fund was necessary?

I saw the urgency and the need for speed in situations of crisis and forced displacement. Education in countries affected by conflicts and disasters was falling between two stools – humanitarian aid, which prioritized health, food and shelter, with hardly any resources allocated for education – and development aid, which is more long-term and often is slow to react to a crisis. Millions of children and young people were left behind with no education, no hope and no means of bouncing back and plan for their future.

Education Cannot Wait was established at the World Humanitarian Summit to inspire political support and mobilize the resources that we lacked. It was also established to bring together both humanitarian and development actors to jointly provide the crucial flow of educational support for children and youth impacted by crises. And so far it has worked! It is a fast moving fund that is focused on bringing education to the most difficult humanitarian contexts. We now have investments in over 30 countries.

One example is the comprehensive Uganda Education Response Plan for Refugees to give support to South Sudanese and other refugees – where all organizations have come together and where we are providing support to the government in mainstreaming refugee education. This is important because the common impression people have of refugees is that they are only out of their country for a short time. But in fact, the average humanitarian crisis now lasts more than nine years, and families caught up in conflicts spend an average of 17 years as refugees. For far too many children, this mean being a refugee throughout their entire school age years. So, they need help with education now. It cannot wait until a conflict or crisis has ended and they can return home.

5. How do you see the Education Cannot Wait Global Fund progressing in advancing UN reform, the New Way of Working and making a real difference for children and youth in conflicts, disasters and forced displacement?

I think we are learning all the time. We now see that education in emergencies and protracted crises requires joint programming where governments, UN agencies, civil society organizations, and private sector organizations work cooperatively together to bridge the gap between humanitarian and development systems. Education Cannot Wait brings all these actors together through one joint programme whereby humanitarian and development activities are coordinated and complementary towards collective outcomes. This in turn accelerates delivery and strengthens the collective capacity to produce real learning outcomes.

Since Education Cannot Wait is situated in the UN, it is well placed to translate the New Way of Working, the Grand Bargain and Humanitarian-Development coherence into very tangible action in-country. It is encouraging to see how education in emergencies and protracted crises is now playing such an instrumental role in setting an example. In Uganda, for instance, the Education Response Plan for Refugees is now modeling response plans and joint programming in other sectors, such as health. Education Cannot Wait has developed a crisis-sensitive formula that is not only aligned with, but also has the potential of supporting the New Way of Working across the SDG Agenda.

6. What are the three most important value-adds of the Education Cannot Wait Global Fund?

Education Cannot Wait was born in an era when we couldn’t provide for Syrian refugees an education without new ideas and coordination. One of them was double-shift schools. With refugees dispersed across Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan, the idea was conceived to share existing schools, so that in Lebanon 300,000 or so Syrian refugee children are educated in their native Arabic in the afternoons in the same classrooms that Lebanese children are taught French and English in the mornings. We were creating the wheel in developing plans like the RACE plan in Lebanon with all of the donors and partners, and were determined to create a system that could provide rapid education delivery and medium term planning and financing in emergencies.

Education Cannot Wait works with governments, while supporting vulnerable populations, such as refugees, internally displaced, war-affected, marginalized groups, girls and children with disabilities. As a global fund, ECW was designed to reduce bureaucracy and strengthen accountability towards these children and youth. Hosted by UNICEF, the fund is able to operate with speed and quickly access those left furthest behind in crisis areas thanks to a business model and support mechanisms designed for crisis-contexts. A major added value is the way in which ECW serves as a catalyst for humanitarian-development coherence in the education sector. This is quite unique.

7. You also conceived of the International Financing Facility for Education (IFFEd). How did it come about and how can it become a game-changer? What makes it different and how can it be optimized in cooperation with partners?

There are 200 million children in low income countries and what the World Bank has done by enhancing IDA is make more resources available from the international community. In theory, IDA could raise educational aid from $1.6 billion to $3.5 billion over the next few years and we’ve advocated that education in low incomes countries should be 15 per cent of all IDA spent.

But there’s a gap that hurts the 700 million children in lower middle-income countries where we have the most out-of-school children and the largest number of refugees. Here, the World Bank provides not 10 or 15 per cent of its resources for education but around 4 per cent, and sadly, the recapitalization of the World Bank – while successful – has also created a ceiling limiting the future availability of new resources.

Therefore, with World Bank support, we are creating a new fund for education that will focus resources and financing help for the 700 million children in lower middle-income countries, on similar terms that the World Bank offers, but with far more resources.

We aim to raise $10 billion, which would require $2 billion in guarantees and perhaps $2 billion in grants to create four to five times as many resources for investment in education. This will be of special help to countries where there are large numbers of forcibly displaced persons, including refugees.

8. How do you see the complementarity between the International Financing Facility for Education, the Education Cannot Wait Global Fund and the Global Partnership for Education?

Each of us have complementary jobs to do in a synchronized way. The chair of GPE, Julia Gillard, was a member of our Education Commission, which recommended the new facility. GPE does important work – thankfully with increased resources after their recent replenishment – and this work, mainly in low-income countries, is complemented by what is offered through IFFEd.

Education Cannot Wait provides a different business model. It is grounded in the UN system’s ability to move with speed in crises, while also applying a crisis-sensitive development response, which is so important to reach SDG4 for those left furthest behind. It is no longer a start-up fund, but is growing rapidly in outreach and influence. So funding needs to continue to increase to complement other funds, such as GPE and IffEd.

9. In your view, where will we be in 2030? Will we still be in a global education crisis or will we have resolved it?

One of the tragedies is that while the numbers of qualified young people have risen, still less than 25 per cent will have any recognizable qualifications by 2030. More than 27 per cent will have left school by the age of 11 or 12 years, or have ever been at school. This educational divide between the ‘education-poor’ and the ‘education-rich’ will only grow and what worries me most in this regard is Africa. I’ve already shared earlier on in this interview the shocking figures for 2030, but worse still, Africa will see a rise in ‘out-of-school’ and in ‘unqualified school-leavers’, unless we act now. To inspire such action, we must share the data, show how challenging the situation is and propose the solutions that are so desperately need now and which all funds can help provide.

10. Any final thoughts as we enter the Decade for Action? How do we best translate the vision of SDG4 into action in the coming 10 years?

We must become the first generation in history where every child goes to school.

Instead of just developing some of the talents of some of the young people in some of the countries, we must develop all the talents of all young people in all countries. I am very conscious that universal education cannot be achieved unless we include the 75 million crises-affected children and youth whose education cannot wait. Their needs must be met if we are to meet SDG4 and achieve the noble objective that no one is left behind.

I am a great believer in the power of young people. We have seen this in the global march against child labor, by girls getting together to prevent child marriages, and through the work of global youth ambassadors in UNICEF, UNHCR and Their World who are an effective pressure group for change.

We must enlist students and parents and we must put pressure on both national governments and international institutions to achieve change. Politicians say that adjudicating is their top priority, but the current state of financing for education does not yet recognize this; some countries spend only 2 per cent of their national income on education.

We must have a coalition of education advocates that ensures that governments and international institutions take action when they say education is a priority. This must start by acknowledging how far behind we have been in securing education for crisis-affected children, including refugee and displaced children. Their needs and aspirations must be at the forefront of our thoughts.

We know that hope dies when a food convoy does not get through to refugees or a boat carrying them is lost at sea – but hope also dies when education is denied to children who desperately want and need it, and who cannot prepare for, nor plan for, their future. We must restore that sense of hope in the future for every child and young person living in abject poverty, on the margins of their societies or in countries of war, as refugees or affected by sudden disasters. We cannot leave any child or young person behind.

###

The interview is also available here.

About Education Cannot Wait

Education Cannot Wait (ECW) is the first global, multi-lateral fund dedicated to education in emergencies. It was launched by international humanitarian and development aid actors, along with public and private donors, to address the urgent education needs of 75 million children and youth in conflict and crisis settings.

Follow us on Twitter: @EduCannotWait
Additional information is available at www.educationcannotwait.org

For press inquiries:
Kent Page, kpage@unicef.org, +1-917-302-1735
Anouk Desgroseilliers, adesgroseilliers@un-ecw-org, +1-917-640-6820

For any other inquiries: info@un-ecw.org

This story was originally published by Education Cannot Wait

The post Education Cannot Wait Interview with Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Star Online Report
Jan 24 2020 (IPS-Partners)

Amnesty International released a music video today on the occasion of the International Day of Education to encourage people of Bangladesh and around the world to support education for Rohingya children and those of host communities in Bangladesh.

Bangladeshi hip-hop lyricist and musician Mahmud Hasan Tabib and child artist Rana Mridha, who became popular on YouTube for their songs promoting education of underprivileged children in the country, lent their voices to the track, according to an Amnesty International media release.

“As humanity is not limited to the confines of any one race or border, supporting education of the oppressed Rohingya children is all of our responsibility. This song for Rohingya children’s education is driven by that belief. I felt inspired to work with Amnesty International after learning about their work to promote education of the oppressed Rohingya children,” said Tabib.

The Bangla song, with English subtitles, contains the lyrics: “If all children today are enlightened with education, the future of the world will be bright. Otherwise, it will be a mistake, injustice will increase. They will be silenced by the rage of the sinners.”

Thousands of Rohingya children and youth are denied access to education in villages and towns in Myanmar as well as in places where they have sought refuge. Raising these children without access to education exposes them to poverty and exploitation, which in some cases include serious criminal activity such as drug smuggling, child trafficking or recruitment into violent armed groups.

“Education is not at odds with repatriation. Instead, a quality education in appropriate language and accredited curriculum can empower the Rohingya children to claim their rights, contribute to the society and economy they live in,” said Saad Hammadi, South Asia campaigner at Amnesty International.

Nearly a million Rohingya refugees have fled to Bangladesh from their homes in Myanmar because of action by the military in the country, many of which amount to crimes against humanity. Almost half a million are children below 18 years living in threadbare camps in Cox’s Bazar, which has the lowest primary school enrolment rate in the country at 71 percent and the second highest drop-out rate at 31 percent.

Amnesty International launched a petition in major countries calling on governments to support Bangladesh in educating the children of Rohingya refugees and those of the host community.

A global petition also calls on Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to ensure quality education in appropriate language and accredited curriculum to protect the social, cultural and linguistic identities of both communities.

“As we encourage the international community to share responsibility for the crisis that has hit Bangladesh as a result of the refugee influx, using this moment to improve access to education for all children in Cox’s Bazar will be a step in a positive direction for the government of Bangladesh,” said Saad Hammadi.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

The post Amnesty’s musical appeal for education of Rohingya and host community children appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Inequality out in the open. Credit: A.D. McKenzie/IPS

By Yilmaz Akyüz
GENEVA, Jan 24 2020 (IPS)

The failure of large-scale bailout operations, historically low interest rates and rapid injection of liquidity to bring about a strong recovery from the 2008-2009 financial crisis and recession created a widespread concern that advanced economies suffered from a chronic demand gap and faced the spectre of stagnation.

The subsequent growth experience has reinforced these concerns.  Since the crisis the US has sustained the longest economic expansion in history, but it is also one of the slowest in terms of income, investment and job creation, lagging other post-war recoveries despite exceptionally favourable monetary policy.

Recovery has been slower and more erratic in Europe. Recently advanced economies have slowed further and global growth in 2019 was the lowest since the financial crisis, intensifying the fear of another recession.

Sluggish investment and growth, rising inequality, low inflation and interest rates, and rapid debt accumulation have become common features of major advanced economies and indeed much of the global economy at large.

These are all interrelated. At the centre of this state of affairs lies inequality ‒ wage suppression and concentration of wealth. It is the main reason for the chronic demand gap, exceptionally low inflation and interest rates, and rapid build-up of debt.

In sharp contrast with a long-standing belief that income shares stay relatively stable in the course of economic growth, there has been a secular downward trend in wage shares in all major advanced economies with real wages falling or lagging behind productivity growth.

In sharp contrast with a long-standing belief that income shares stay relatively stable in the course of economic growth, there has been a secular downward trend in wage shares in all major advanced economies with real wages falling or lagging behind productivity growth

In most countries this started in the 1980s, and continued unabated in the new millennium, both before and after the 2008-2009 crisis.  In China too the wage share started to decline in the 1990s.

Although this was reversed after 2010 as a result of efforts to establish a buoyant domestic consumer market, the wage share in China remains significantly lower than that in major advanced economies.  Wage suppression has been accompanied almost everywhere by growing concentration of wealth, resulting also in greater inequality in the distribution of incomes from assets.

Three factors have played an important role in growing inequality.

First, liberal policies have led to the erosion of labour market institutions, weakening labour while consolidating the power of large corporations.

Second the increased size, scope and influence of finance (financialization) has widened inequality and the demand gap as well as reducing growth potential by diverting resources to unproductive uses.

Finally, globalization has shifted the balance between labour and capital with the integration of China, India and the countries that constituted the Soviet Union into the global economy.

The erosion of labour market institutions and financialization have gone further in the Anglo-American world, and this explains why inequality is greater in the US and the UK than in other major economies.

The growing gap between labour productivity and wages means declines of the purchasing power of workers over the goods and services they produce.  This, together with the increasing concentration of wealth and asset incomes, results in underconsumption.

Although sustained declines in wages would reduce the cost of production and increase the surplus in the hands of the capitalist class, they would also limit the extent of the market since wages are the most important component of aggregate demand.

Wage suppression thus creates the classical-Marxian problem of monetary realization of the surplus ‒ a reason why Keynes also rejected declines in wages as a recipe for unemployment. It adversely affects demand and profits expectations and hinders investment regardless of how low the cost of borrowing is.

Exports can provide a way out.   Until the 2008-2009 crisis, China, Germany and Japan all relied on foreign markets in different degrees to fill the demand gap, using macroeconomic, labour market and exchange rate policies.

GDP grew faster than domestic demand in all three economies thanks to a strong growth in exports. After the crisis China’s exports plummeted and the country first moved to a debt-driven investment bubble and then sought to boost consumption to close the demand gap while moving to a significantly lower growth path.  Germany replaced China as a major surplus country and Japan also increased its reliance on exports to address the demand gap.

However, this solution is not feasible for major underconsumption economies taken together ‒ it faces fallacy of composition and breeds trade conflicts.  The Global South outside China is not big enough to provide an adequate market for the US, Europe, Japan and China.

They would need to run trade deficits in the order of several percentage points of their GDP for each percentage point trade surplus needed to avoid stagnation in the underconsumption economies.  They cannot rely on international capital flows to sustain such deficits.

The alternative is debt-driven expansion.  Sluggish wages reduce price pressures and allow and encourage central banks to create credit and asset bubbles to overcome stagnation without fear of inflation. 

There is indeed a remarkable correlation between the declining wage share and declining interest rates.  In the US over the past three cycles the Fed has been quite restrained in raising policy rates at times of expansion while cutting them drastically during contractions, creating a downward bias in interest rates.

This policy stance creates destabilizing interfaces between debt and interest rates.  Lower wages and subdued inflation lead to lower interest rates which, together with financial deregulation, encourage debt accumulation and asset bubbles.

This, in turn, makes it difficult for central banks to raise policy interest rates without causing disruptions in financial markets, thereby making low interest rates self-reinforcing.  Indeed, the downward bias in interest rates in G7 countries has been associated with a strong upward bias in debt since the mid-1980s, suggesting that ultra-easy monetary policies made possible by wage suppression and low inflation have led to a debt trap.

Financial boom-bust cycles generated by attempts to reignite growth by monetary easing and financial deregulation exacerbate the stagnation problem by creating waste and distortions on the supply side and reducing potential growth.

During booms, the financial sector crowds out real economic activity and cheap credit entails massive capital misallocation, diverting resources to low-productivity sectors such as construction and real estate.

Misallocations created by the booms are exposed during the ensuing crises when the economy would have to make a shift back to viable sectors and companies, but this is often impeded by credit crunch and deflation.

Second, boom-bust cycles also aggravate the demand gap by increasing inequality.  In the US, for instance, the crisis impoverished the poor, particularly those subject to foreclosures, while policy interventions benefitted the rich.  In the recovery, the top one per cent captured almost 60 per cent of total growth.

From 2008 onwards real hourly wages stayed behind hourly labour productivity and the share of wages fell both during the contraction and the subsequent recovery.  Two-thirds of households in 25 advanced economies were in income segments whose market incomes did not advance or were lower in 2014 than they had been in 2005.

These imply that when credit and asset bubbles burst and the economy contracts, even a bigger bubble may be needed for recovery and growth.  In the US the bursting of the Savings and Loans bubble of the 1980s was followed by a bigger technology (dot-com) bubble in the 1990s which ended at the turn of the century, followed by an even bigger subprime bubble and bust, leading to more aggressive interest rate cuts and liquidity expansion.

The past ten years have been relatively calm and stable.  Several instances of heightened market volatility including during the “taper tantrum” of May 2013 and on the eve of the first rise in US policy rates in December 2015 did not lead to a lasting turbulence.

However, this period of tranquillity has encouraged excessive risk taking and a rapid build-up of debt, thereby sowing the seeds of future instability, very much as during the so-called Great Moderation preceding the Great Recession.

Permanently low interest rates and massive injection of liquidity have led to a search for yield in high-risk, high-return assets globally.  Starting with the US, major stock markets have reached record highs and global debt has shot up to exceed $255 trillion or 320 per cent of world GDP in 2019.

Emerging economies, in particular, have seen a rapid build-up of private debt in reserve currencies and increased penetration of their markets by international capital and firms, heightening their external vulnerabilities and entailing large transfer of resources to advanced economies through financial channels.

As recognized by the World Bank, despite exceptionally low interest rates, this wave of debt accumulation could follow the historical pattern and eventually end in financial crises.

In the next global economic downturn, an important part of the debt accumulated in the past ten years could become unpayable, leading to debt deflation and asset price declines.  The central banks would no doubt try to respond in the same way as they did during the 2008-2009 crisis.

But the scope for cuts in interest rates are now limited because they are at very low levels and there is already plenty of cheap money in the system.  These may severely compromise their ability to stabilize the economy.

A countercyclical Keynesian fiscal reflation may save the day, but much more would be needed to address the structural demand gap and its underlying causes: a permanently bigger government financed by progressive income and wealth taxes and money printing; greater state ownership of productive assets and control over economic activity; income redistribution through the budget; a level playing field between labour and capital; a shift to wage-led growth; and taming financial capital.

 

The post Inequality, Stagnation and Instability ‒ the New Normal for Finance Capitalism appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Yilmaz Akyüz is former Director, UNCTAD, and former Chief Economist, South Centre, Geneva

The post Inequality, Stagnation and Instability ‒ the New Normal for Finance Capitalism appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Small-scale slash-and-burn agriculture is one of the deforestation problems in Brazil’s Amazon jungle. Credit: Mario Osava/IPS.

By External Source
Jan 24 2020 (IPS)

More than half of worldwide GDP is moderately or highly dependent on nature, putting biodiversity loss among the top five risks to the global economy, according to a report presented at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland.

The report, compiled by WEF in collaboration with accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), finds that some of the fastest-growing economies in the world are particularly exposed to nature loss, and calls for “a radical reset of humanity’s relationship with nature”.

Around one-third of the GDP of India and Indonesia comes from sectors that are highly dependent on nature, such as agriculture, construction and food and drink, according to the analysis. Africa generates 23 per cent of its GDP in such sectors while in Latin America, the figure is 55 per cent.

These industries rely on extraction of resources from forests and oceans, or rely on nature to provide things like healthy soils, clean water, pollination and a stable climate, the document explains.

“Given their significant nature dependencies, it is critical that these economies with significant exposure to nature loss assess, prioritise and invest in nature,” said the Nature Risk Rising report, presented at the global gathering of business and political leaders on 19 January.

Failure to do so could result in heavy losses for nature-dependent sectors, authors warn. The report says 60 per cent of coffee varieties are in danger of extinction due to climate change, disease and deforestation. If these varieties became extinct, the global coffee market—with retail sales of $83 billion in 2017—would be “significantly destabilized, affecting the livelihoods of many smallholder farmers”, it says.

 

Risk to life and livelihoods

The report also highlights the pharmaceutical industry’s dependence on tropical forest biodiversity, such as in the Amazon, for new drug discoveries, with 25 per cent of drugs used in modern medicine derived from rainforest plants.

“As tropical forests face threats from felling and wildfires, pharmaceutical companies face losing a vast repository of undiscovered genetic materials that could lead to the next medical – and commercial – breakthrough,” it warns.

It says that 75 per cent of approved anti-tumour pharmaceuticals in the last 70 years have been non-synthetic, with 49 per cent derived entirely from natural products.

Amazon deforestation – which has resulted in the loss of 17 per cent of forest cover since 1970 – could also lead to huge agricultural production losses and longer periods of drought, affecting water availability across the region, the report forecasts.

Akanksha Khatri, head of WEF’s nature and biodiversity initiative, who worked on the report, told SciDev.Net: “Latin American economies are especially dependent on nature. Two of the main economic sectors in Latin America are mining and agriculture which currently are in the top five industries driving nature loss.

“As the impact from nature loss intensifies, soon the economies and people’s livelihoods associated with these sectors will be put at risk,” said Khatri, who believes that countries must treat their diverse resources as valuable knowledge-banks.

“Models suggest that if 20-25 per cent of the Amazon forest is lost, this would lead to increased duration of droughts in the region and annual agricultural production losses of $422 million in Brazil alone.”

Amazon forest losses due to fires in 2019 – many of them started intentionally – are related to cattle rearing and agricultural exports such as soy, said Hernán Giardini, coordinator of forest campaigns at Greenpeace Argentina, Chile and Colombia.

 

Trade deal impacts

Amazon deforestation linked to cattle rearing also threatens to derail the not-yet-ratified EU-Mercosur trade agreement after 20 years of negotiations, the WEF warns.

Trade between the two blocs is worth 122 billion Euros and the deal is expected to generate significant new market opportunities through the reduction or elimination of tariffs. However, some EU countries reject products coming from regions with a high environmental footprint.

“Brazil is the leading meat exporter worldwide, but at the same time the deforestation generates conflicts in Europe, where sectors ask their governments not to import products from South America with such low environmental standards,” explained Giardini.

“This is the reason why Amazon fires are jeopardizing the deal, which is also tied to the Paris Agreement and other climate accords.”

Luciana Ghiotto, researcher at Argentina’s scientific and technical research council, CONICET, and the National University of San Martin, Argentina, is the co-author of a broad analysis of the EU-Mercosur deal.

She said: “For Mercosur countries, the agreement implies a deepening of extractivist industries, in particular cows and soy, but it raises criticisms over the consequences for the Amazon and over the need to use more pesticides for agricultural production.”

“Curiously, it’s European companies that ship their chemical products to South America after they are forbidden in European countries,” she added.

 

Business case for action

For the reasons above, biodiversity loss is one of the five human threats for the next decade, according to another report on Global Risk presented 15 January at the WEF.

The reports are part of the New Nature Economy series, being published by WEF this year, making a business case for action on what it calls the “nature crisis”. It comes ahead of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity COP15 to be held in Kunming, China, in October.

The reports seek to identify “priority socioeconomic systems for transformation” and “scope the market and investment opportunities for nature-based solutions to environmental challenges”, the WEF says.

 

This story was originally published by SciDev.Net

The post Nature Losses Threaten Emerging Economies appeared first on Inter Press Service.

A meeting of the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Credit: UN / Jean-Marc Ferré

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 24 2020 (IPS)

The UN’s ongoing cash crisis, which has virtually destabilized the Organization’s day-to-day operations, has also undermined the human rights mandate of the Geneva-based Human Rights Council (HRC).

The HRC’s programme of work has been hindered by dwindling resources resulting in shorter working hours, cancellation of meetings, reduction in staff and leaving some of the UN Special Envoys investigating human rights violations worldwide — grounded.

The new austerity measures, prompted by a shortfall in assessed contributions from member states, came into force last October. But so far there are no signs of any significant improvement.

Kyle Ward, Director, a.i., Human Rights Council & Treaty Mechanisms Division, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), told IPS that the human rights treaty bodies, established under the international human rights conventions, have been struggling with reductions in their overall regular budget resources, including a 25% reduction in travel resources for members (applied by the General Assembly in the last biennium), as well as reduced staffing, which has had already a serious impact on their ability to meet.

“Last year, with the financial crisis, it appeared that they would not be able to complete all of their sessions, until the UN Controller intervened and agreed to ensure we would have access to sufficient funds to enable them to meet”.

It was a bit touch-and-go, said Ward, “but for the most part we managed.”

But some of the work of the treaty bodies, he pointed out, was nevertheless blocked because of the shortfall in resources.

“The situation has unfortunately not improved this year, as the main budgetary constraints remain – while the potential impact of a continuing liquidity crisis for the Organization also remains a serious concern,” he warned.

Secretary-General António Guterres (right) meets with Mary Robinson, Chair of The Elders and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (1997–2002). 08 January 2020. Credit: UN / Mark Garten

Dr. Simon Adams, Executive Director of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, told IPS the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms and the Geneva treaty bodies form an essential early warning system with regard to potential atrocity crimes.

“Starving the system of funds, and undermining its effectiveness, will only benefit those who prefer silence and inaction when it comes to human rights abuses and violations in the world today”, he added.

Moreover, he pointed out, “weakening the Human Rights Council only benefits torturers, atrocity perpetrators and those who consider universal human rights to be an affront to the unrestrained exercise of state power.”

Meanwhile, the Human Rights Council has been looking at efficiency measures for some time and had some success there, rearranging its schedule to be able to reduce the number of its annual meetings.

But this is now being threatened by the Department of General Assembly and Conference Management (DGACM) due to the “special measures” arising from the cash flow crisis, with the refusal to provide interpretation for any lunchtime meetings (which are essential – even in the reduced format – to enable the Council to cover its agenda in its ten allotted weeks per year).

The President of the Council, Ambassador Elisabeth Tichy-Fisslberger of Austria, has written to the Secretary-General to request that this be allowed notwithstanding – still waiting for an outcome, with the main annual session just a few weeks away.

Similarly, the restrictions have also led DGACM to restrict the interpretation services to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) meetings beyond the two standard three-hour meetings per day, in order to save money.

The UPR has since the beginning allocated 3.5 hours to each State under review . . . so this will shave at minimum 15 minutes from each (given a 15-minute “courtesy” extension by the interpreters).

As this comes in the midst of the UPR Third cycle, there is some concern about equity in treatment to all States . . . but in reality, the statistics show that only 20% of the total have actually gone over 3h15 for their reviews, so the impact is not *that* extreme.

As it stands, in an effort to better manage cash flow, the Controller has decided (presumably in consultation with the SG) to allocate resources only on a quarterly basis (rather than the usual full allotment at the beginning of the year).

Although fully understandable, says one staffer, it also difficult to manage as the work is not simply linear . . . “so for a number of important mandates we cannot manage on just 25% right now.”

The Commission of Inquiry on Syria is a case in point, as the current mandate is only through March – so they need 100% of their considerable 2020 resource requirements now.

Once again, the OHCHR will have to juggle resources and move allocations around in order to make this work as best it can, which is extremely inefficient and time-consuming.

“A more tailored approach to the situation would be unwieldy for the colleagues at UNHQ to manage across the entire Organization, but it certainly feels like those of us at the operational end are being made to bear the brunt of all the various “emergency” measures, making everything we are trying to accomplish even more difficult,” said another staffer.

In her letter to Guterres last month, Ambassador Tichy-Fisslberger said “the United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG) has informed me that due to the special emergency measures you instituted last October to address the United Nations’ liquidity crisis, the meetings of intergovernmental bodies cannot be serviced outside of normal official hours”

It is furthermore of great concern that according to UNOG, they will be unable to service meetings of the upcoming 35th session of the Universal Periodic Review in accordance with Human Rights Council Decision 17/119 of 19 July 2011.

“When it established the Human Rights Council through resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006, the General Assembly decided that the Human Rights Council should schedule no fewer than three sessions per year, for a total duration of no less than ten weeks,” the letter said.

As its programme of work has grown over the past 13 years, the Human Rights Council has often been obliged to schedule more than two meetings per working day in order to complete its programme of work.

Consequently, a considerable number of lunchtime meetings have been required in recent years in order to deal with numerous thematic and country human rights crises.

“In 2016, the Director-General of UNOG and the Under-Secretary-General for General Assembly and Conference Management drew the attention of my predecessor to the growing dichotomy between the workload entailed in servicing the Council and the resources allocated to UNOG”, the letter adds.

In her letter, Ambassador Tichy-Fisslberger also said: “In your address to the Human Rights Council on 25 February 2019, you emphasized that “the Human Rights Council is the epicentre for international dialogue and cooperation on the protection of all human rights.”

In order for the Council to fulfil its responsibilities vis-àvis the international community and carry out all of its mandated activities, some lunchtime meetings are necessary.

Should the Human Rights Council not be afforded the opportunity to meet, as is required by its programme of work, it would be prevented from fulfilling its responsibilities under General Assembly Resolution 60/251, and the work of the United Nations in the area of human rights, and the human rights cause as a whole, would suffer as a result.

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@ips.org

The post When UN’s Cash Crisis Undermines Human Rights, Are the World’s Torturers the Key Beneficiaries? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

President of Djibouti Ismail Omar Guelleh and President of ERF Manssour Bin Mussallam

By Anna Shen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 24 2020 (IPS)

In an increasingly unequal and divided world, what role can education play to achieve sustainable development globally?

How do we unite to achieve inclusive and quality education systems? Can we transform education so that it fosters local solutions, taking into account existing cultural contexts?

These are just some of the questions being addressed January 27-29 during the International Summit on Balanced and Inclusive Education, being held in Djibouti. The summit, sponsored by the Geneva-based Educational Relief Foundation, will bring together some of the world’s most profound thinkers and world leaders on education globally; 300 participants from 35 countries — Heads of State, Ministers of Education, NGOs, academics and civil society representatives.

A few on the list include the President of Djibouti; as well as Ministers of Education from Djibouti, Yemen, Ethiopia, Guyana, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Maldives and Palau, to name a few.

A major theme of the summit is how the global South will take the lead in developing education systems for the future. In a world of global standardization of education, and a “one-size fits all” approach, many are left behind.

Those present at the conference would say that education systems that must adapt to the contexts of their students, and not the other way around.

What strategies can be implemented to achieve the United Nations’ fourth Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of quality education, the most fundamental human right that is critical to ending extreme poverty? What are the best practices, experiences and collaborations to share?

The summit takes place in a context where the world is facing greater, more urgent global challenges: climate change, geopolitical fragility, and increases of forced mass migrations.

The population of climate refugees is on the rise. Many of the displaced — children — are the world’s most vulnerable and fragile. The issue of refugee education, as well as how to provide it in increasingly multicultural classrooms, is urgent.

The challenges of diversity are great, especially in a world where there are ever greater technological, digital and scientific divides. Transforming education systems — and ensuring they are equitable and inclusive — requires large-scale mobilization of human, technical and financial resources.

Participants at the Summit will take away best practices and lessons learned on successful approaches: how to create inclusive education that considers diverse needs: physical, cognitive, academic, social, cultural, and emotional?

The question is how to design effective systems that consider the local communities (rural, peri-urban areas, conflict zone) and country-specific situations with regard to levels of development, religions, history, and culture.

Sustainable Development Goal 4 : Education Critical to Winding Global Poverty. Credit: Maged Srour / IPS

The event will culminate with the signing of the Universal Declaration of Balanced and Inclusive Education which addresses the urgent need to enact educational reform globally. It calls for the establishment of new multilateral instruments of technical and financial cooperation, as well as support for education systems around the world.

Specifically, the declaration calls for the technical and financial resources to develop relevant curricula and train teachers.

About the Education Relief Foundation:

The Education Relief Foundation (ERF) is a Geneva-based not-for-profit and non-governmental organisation which serves to develop, promote and embed a balanced and inclusive education through policy development, capacity building and civil society engagement, amongst other activities.

For more information:
https://www.multivu.com/players/uk/8649551-education-relief-foundation-system-future/
https://educationrelief.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ERF-GlobalGuide.pdf

The post At the International Summit on Balanced & Inclusive Education: A Call to Transform Globally appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The International Court of Justice instructed Thursday that Myanmar halt all measures that contribute to the genocide of the Rohingya community. More than 910,000 Rohingya refugees have fled to and settled in neighbouring Bangladesh. Pictured here are Rohingya children at Cox’s Bazar, a refugee camp in Bangladesh. Credit: Farid Ahmed/IPS

By Samira Sadeque
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 24 2020 (IPS)

In a groundbreaking and much anticipated ruling delivered on Thursday, the International Court of Justice demanded that Myanmar halt all measures that contribute to the genocide of the Rohingya community. 

The order was lauded by international bodies and organisations who have been involved with and/or closely following the case since the Gambia filed a lawsuit against Myanmar for human rights violations against the Rohingya community. 

The United Nations Secretary General has said he “welcomes” the order and “will promptly transmit the notice of the provisional measures ordered by the Court to the Security Council,” according to a statement from the the Spokesman for the Secretary-General. 

The order states Myanmar “take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts” of genocide or harming the Rohingya; that its military not be involved in committing or being complicit in genocide of the community; and that Myanmar “shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts”. 

Following the order, Adam Combs, Regional Director of the Norwegian Refugee Council, told IPS that this measure “marks an important turning point for the Rohingya people as it means there is now the prospect for their rights to be recognised after years of discrimination, segregation, citizenship barriers and movement restrictions”.

While more than 910,000 Rohingya refugees have fled to and settled in neighbouring Bangladesh, hundreds of thousands of the persecuted community still remain in Myanmar; they remain in grave threat of discrimination and violence and it is for them that the provisional measures remain crucial. 

As Combs points out, upwards of 100,000 internally displaced Rohingya remain in camps with poor living conditions and with a lack of access to proper services and healthcare. 

“They remain reliant on humanitarian aid, year after year,” he told IPS. “In Northern Rakhine, we are still lacking access to parts of Northern Rakhine where the conditions for the Rohingya communities are likely to be dire and where there will be high levels of humanitarian need.”

“This ruling, especially in its unanimity, is a huge victory for the Rohingya, international justice, and The Gambia,” L. Grant Shubin, Deputy Legal Director at the Global Justice Center (GJC), told IPS on Thursday. 

“Especially after Myanmar threw the weight of its Nobel laureate leader behind a spurious defence, its heartening that the Court could unanimously acknowledge the genocidal danger facing the Rohingya still in Rakhine state,” he added. 

One of the key asks in the lawsuit was the “provisional measures” that would require, with “extreme urgency”, the halt of any conduct and activities by Myanmar that was perpetuating harm over the Rohingya community. 

As Shubin of GJC points out, the ruling was unanimous, which implies that these obligations were supported even by “the ad hoc Judge appointed by Myanmar.”

“The measure requiring Myanmar to report on the measures its taken to comply with the order is an extremely important opportunity for the international community, and the U.N. Security Council specifically, to fulfil their own obligations to prevent genocide,” he added. 

“This is the first step on a path to justice for the Rohingya,” said Dr. Simon Adams, Executive Director of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, according to a statement from GJC. 

Combs of NRC reiterated the need for “a concerted effort and renewed engagement by the Myanmar Government” that would ensure a safe livelihood for Rohingyas in Myanmar, and for them to receive their basic rights “in line with the principle of non-discrimination.” 

The ruling requires Myanmar to submit a report on all the measures it takes in four months.

Related Articles

• The Story Behind The Gambia’s Lawsuit against Myanmar over the Rohingya Genocide
• Little Hope of Justice for Rohingya, Two Years after Exodus
• With Poor Human Rights Record, Repatriation Not Possible
• Damning U.N. Report Outlines Crimes Against Rohingya As Children Suffer from Trauma One Year Later

The post Experts laud International Court of Justice Order on Myanmar to Halt all Genocidal Conduct appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Fairuz Ahmed
NEW YORK, Jan 24 2020 (IPS)

Every year hundreds of immigrants leave their homes and trail to a land of dream and hope where they aspire to find peace, happiness and sometimes a little bit of safety compared to what they leave behind.

Migrations can be for asylum-seeking, for work, study, visa lottery, investing, etc. Another widely popular way to migrate is by marriage and by family-based immigration. People from developing countries strive to get their children married to someone who is from developed countries such as Australia, Canada, The United Kingdom, The United States and so on, in hope of someday making their way into these countries by forming family ties.

On the flip side, many families with Asian origin prefer to get their children wed to someone from home in hope of keeping with traditions and upholding the cultural traits of the land they left behind. The number of migrants is rising day by day.

The International Migration Report published by the United Nations in 2017 shows that the largest number of international migrants resided in the United States of America: 50 million, equal to 19 percent of the world’s total.

When addressing domestic abuse among the immigrant community, especially for the Asian demographics there remains a lack of understanding about the dynamics of how a relationship is formed, especially through marriage across cultures.

Apart from liking someone and choosing to be a partner many times a girl or boy is chosen and the family holds the ultimate say on whom a person will marry. Personal choices, age, and preferences of the person being married off are sidelined and dictated by whoever the family or guardians decide. This rate is alarmingly high in low-income families.

Of the married/formerly married women who reported physical and/or sexual abuse, 47.8% were married to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. When abusers controlled the immigration status of a victim spouse 72.3% never filed immigration papers on behalf of the immigrant victim spouse

It is also prevalent in affluent families who hold on to their cultural roots and customs. While selecting a spouse various factors come into account as a profession, financial stability, family, education, job, age, etc. Apart from these, surprisingly: location, citizenship status or residency permit plays an even aggressive role.

It is a common practice and a mindset that anyone living abroad, especially belonging to a developed country is an eligible candidate for an arranged marriage by default. For online dating, long-distance relationships and mutually consented marriages these again play a vital role in the selection process. No matter what the person does or what background they come from: their position stays superior compared to a candidate based at home.

A boy or a girl who never traveled or cannot speak a word of English or any other language widely spoken language internationally is often married to a person who was born or raised in a completely different or opposite culture.

Everything will fall into place and through compromise and adjustment the marriage will work are repeatedly spelled out, again and again, to give this practice a validation.

This mindset and cultural practices are handed down from one generation to another and has been proven malicious to many, despite having good intention as a backdrop. This widely accepted practice has given birth to a unique population of dependent and abused spouses and alien humans who live their lives in misery without a voice.

Their voices and free will gets swapped at the very moment they sign to marry a stranger in a strange land in the hope to get hold of the mirage of happiness and prosperity. The spouses of the second generation, and sometimes even of the first generations who migrate to the United States and other developed countries are a unique segment of people who in most cases remain solely dependent on their partner to enter the country and also for their livelihood after migration.

They are trusted and handed over by their family to uphold rituals and to make the family proud, where extreme pressure is set on them to make the new family happy. The expectation is set for establishing bonds and finally to get the rest of the family migrated.

The new family they come into expect them to be perfect wives, mothers, and daughters-in-law, catering to daily needs, cooking, cleaning, many times working and earning and childbearing. According to the 2018 report by the U.N. it has been found that: Violence against women is almost universally underreported to authorities.

Reluctance to come forward is also multifaceted. Research suggests it can be attributed to a “fear of reprisals, economic and psychological dependence, the anticipation that the police will not take the charges seriously and viewing the assault as a private matter.

Newly arrived immigrant women whose immigration status has not been permanently established, or are undocumented, conditional residents or whose visas have special needs, somewhat live at the mercy of their partners.

Their passports, social security cards, certificates or any other important documents are held by the partner or by the families they come into. They are constantly harassed and intimidated by threats of abandonment, emotionally and mentally tortured, their children are threatened to be separated and harmed if they communicate with others, and their entire financial situation is monitored and handled by the abusers.

They are many times isolated and barred from working, humiliated for their lack of communication skills and are treated as slaves or housemaids in their own homes.

It is often assumed that battered immigrant women are subjected to violence by partners who are themselves immigrants and that these men were in no position to facilitate her access to legal immigration status.

It has been found that of the married/formerly married women who reported physical and/or sexual abuse, 47.8% were married to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. When abusers controlled the immigration status of a victim spouse 72.3% never filed immigration papers on behalf of the immigrant victim spouse.

Those who filed immigration papers on behalf of the spouse had an average delay of almost 4 years (Dutton, Orloff, & Hass, 2000). This was a key finding that motivated Congress to include immigration relief in the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (H.R. Rep. No. 103-395 p. 26).

The data further suggests that when U.S. citizens are married to foreign women the abuse rate is approximately three times higher than the abuse rate in the general population in the United States.

Domestic abuse and violence are the willful intimidation, physical assault, battery, sexual assault, and/or other abusive behavior as part of a systematic pattern of power and control perpetrated by one intimate partner against another.

It includes physical violence, sexual violence, psychological violence, and emotional abuse. The frequency and severity of domestic violence can vary dramatically; however, the one constant component of domestic violence is one partner’s consistent efforts to maintain power and control over the other.

Sometimes in the early stages of a relationship, it cannot be determined if one person will become abusive and to what extent that might lead to. Domestic violence intensified overtime. Outwardly an abuser seems like a wonderful person, liked by his colleagues and friends but gradually may become aggressive and controlling.

In a study conducted by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime about gender-related killing of women and girl in 2018, it was reported that: the largest number (20,000) of all women killed worldwide by intimate partners or family members in 2017 was in Asia, followed by Africa (19,000), the Americas (8,000) Europe (3,000) and Oceania (300).

After talking to many domestic abuse survivors in nonprofit organizations like SAKHI for South Asian Women, Safe Horizon and from my personal experience as working with battered Bengali speaking women one factor always comes up is the lag in the detection and identifying abuse.

According to The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence here are some examples provided of abusive tendencies. To anyone reading or knowing anyone who might be affected by domestic abuse, these can work as a means of detection.

• Telling the victim that they can never do anything right
• Showing jealousy of the victim’s family and friends and time spent away
• Accusing the victim of cheating
• Keeping or discouraging the victim from seeing friends or family members
• Embarrassing or shaming the victim with put-downs
• Controlling every penny spent in the household
• Taking the victim’s money or refusing to give them money for expenses
• Looking at or acting in ways that scare the person they are abusing
• Controlling who the victim sees, where they go, or what they do
• Dictating how the victim dresses, wears their hair, etc.
• Stalking the victim or monitoring their victim’s every move (in person or also via the internet and/or other devices such as GPS tracking or the victim’s phone)
• Preventing the victim from making their own decisions
• Telling the victim that they are a bad parent or threatening to hurt, kill, or take away their children
• Threatening to hurt or kill the victim’s friends, loved ones, or pets
• Intimidating the victim with guns, knives, or other weapons
• Pressuring the victim to have sex when they don’t want to or to do things sexually they are not comfortable with
• Forcing sex with others
• Refusing to use protection when having sex or sabotaging birth control
• Pressuring or forcing the victim to use drugs or alcohol
• Preventing the victim from working or attending school, harassing the victim at either, keeping their victim up all night so they perform badly at their job or in school
• Destroying the victim’s property

 

Is Domestic Violence Always Physical Abuse?

It is important to note that domestic violence does not always manifest as physical abuse. Emotional and psychological abuse can often be just as extreme as physical violence.

Lack of physical violence does not mean the abuser is any less dangerous to the victim, nor does it mean the victim is any less trapped by the abuse.

Most women fail to identify abuse and think of it as an irrational behavior of the partner only. In most cases, women keep their mouth shut and try to cope as much as possible. The name and reputation of the family become important than personal safety and wellbeing.

Opening up about abuse, let alone reporting it or seeking assistance is stigmatized in the community. I have seen women reply with similar answers over and over again when asked about the hesitation for reporting abuses: “What will people say, what will I do without a family, how can I survive on my own and with my children, I cannot let me family fall into shame, I cannot speak English well and have no friends or family to go to, family back at home will be affected if I walk out of the marriage, my husband handles my money and I do not have access to any financial institutions or funds, my important documents are with him, this behavior will change and will get better with time, emotional abuse and financial abuses are not abuse, etc.”

The post Am I Abused or Am I a Failure to Adjust? – A Migrant’s Story appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Judges at the International Court of Justice in The Hague consider the case against Myanmar. Credit: ICJ-CIJ/Wendy van Bree

By External Source
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 23 2020 (IPS)

Myanmar must take steps to protect its minority Rohingya population, the top UN court unanimously ruled on Thursday.

The International  Court of Justice  (ICJ) also ordered authorities to prevent the destruction of evidence related to genocide allegations.

The case against Myanmar was brought to the ICJ in November by The Gambia, on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), arguing that the mainly-Muslim Rohingya had been subjected to genocide.

The Rohingya primarily reside in Rakhine state in northern Myanmar, a majority Buddhist country.

"The Secretary-General strongly supports the use of peaceful means to settle international disputes.  He further recalls that, pursuant to the  (UN) Charter and to the Statute of the Court, decisions of the Court are binding and trusts that Myanmar will duly comply with the Order from the Court"

More than 700,000 members fled to neighbouring Bangladesh following a reported military crackdown in August 2017 during which numerous alleged human rights abuses were committed.

According to news reports, around 600,000 Rohingya remain inside the country, and remain extremely vulnerable to attacks and persecution, said the court.

In its ruling, the ICJ imposed “provisional measures” against Myanmar, ordering the country to comply with obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Myanmar is urged to “take all measures within its power” to prevent the killing of Rohingya, or causing bodily or mental harm to members of the group, including by the military or “any irregular armed units”.

The country also has to submit a report to the ICJ within four months, with additional reports due every six months “until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court.”

 

Aung San Suu Kyi testimony

Last December, Myanmar’s de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, testified at the start of court proceedings on behalf of her country and described the case as “an incomplete and misleading factual picture” of events in Rakhine state.

She told the court military leaders would be put on trial if found guilty, stressing that “if war crimes have been committed, they will be prosecuted within our own military justice system.”

Thursday’s ruling amounts to a rejection of those arguments, and the ICJ’s orders are binding on Myanmar, despite being provisional.

The court’s orders are subject to assessment by the UN Security Council., although a final judgement in the case is expected to take years, according to news reports.

 

Court decision is binding: UN Secretary-General

UN chief António Guterres has welcomed the court decision, his spokesman said in a statement.

“The Secretary-General strongly supports the use of peaceful means to settle international disputes.  He further recalls that, pursuant to the  (UN) Charter and to the Statute of the Court, decisions of the Court are binding and trusts that Myanmar will duly comply with the Order from the Court,” it said.

The Secretary-General will transmit the notice about the provisional measures to the UN Security Council.

 

Role of the Court

The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations and is commonly known as the world court.

It settles legal disputes submitted by States and gives advisory opinions on legal questions referred by UN entities.

The Court is composed of 15 judges, elected to nine-year terms, and is based in The Hague, in the Netherlands.

 

Myanmar rights expert concludes mission

Relatedly, an independent human rights expert on Thursday concluding her final mission as the UN Special Rapporteur on Myanmar.

Yanghee Lee’s last request to enter the country was denied by the Government, and she visited Thailand and Bangladesh to gather information about the situation in Myanmar from both sides of the border.

“Myanmar’s denial of access has not dissuaded me from doing everything I can to impartially report to the international community accurate first-hand information that has been provided to me during my visits to the region,” she said.

“My mission and the end of my tenure come at a critical time for human rights in Myanmar and I will continue to strive to do my utmost to improve the situation.”

Ms. Lee was appointed by the UN Human Rights Council in 2014 and conducted biannual visits to Myanmar until she was denied entry from December 2017.

She will deliver her final report to the Geneva-based Council in Geneva in March.

This story was originally published by UN News

The post Top UN Court Orders Myanmar to Protect Rohingya from Genocide appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Patricia Scotland
Jan 23 2020 (IPS)

With 95 per cent of the ocean still unexplored by humans, we are only just beginning to understand its profound influence on life on earth, including its effect on global climate and ecosystems.

As we do so, more and more countries are exploring the immense potential of the ‘blue economy’ to build wealth, create jobs and improve lives, and how this can be done in ways which protect ocean health and promote sustainability.

The value of ocean assets (including natural capital) is conservatively estimated at US$24 trillion, and the worldwide ocean economy is worth around US$2.5 trillion per year. Yet all this is at risk with ocean systems increasingly vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change, habitat destruction, pollution and overfishing.

Diversification of traditional sectors such as shipping, commercial fishing and ports to make them more sustainable can unlock further opportunities for innovation which, alongside emerging sectors such as offshore renewable energy, offer attractive prospects for impact investors.

The nations of the Commonwealth are particularly rich in such promising opportunities for innovation and investment. Of our 53 Commonwealth countries, 46 have a coastline, 24 are small island developing states, and three border great lakes. More than a third of the world’s national coastal waters and 42 per cent of all coral reefs lie within Commonwealth jurisdictions.

The governments of these countries have come together and adopted the Commonwealth Blue Charter, through which they commit to active cooperation on tackling ocean-related challenges and on fulfilling pledges on sustainable ocean development. Through its Action Group on Sustainable Blue Economy, championed by Kenya, the Commonwealth family of nations is working together to identify good practices, and to connect countries with partners that can help accelerate and scale up such initiatives to make them more attractive to investors.

Examples of innovative developments unfolding in Commonwealth countries are:

• Blue fashion: The garment and accessory industries are among the most polluting and wasteful in the world. There has been a surge of interest in how their negative impact can be reduced through the use of marine materials to develop bio-alternatives that are more sustainable and which also add value.

In Kenya, for example, designers and manufacturers are excelling in the US$50 billion African fashion industry, producing high quality fish leather items made from discarded fish skin. To showcase this, the Commonwealth recently worked with partners to stage a ‘blue fashion show’ in Nairobi, and similar international initiatives are being considered.



 
• Blue bonds and debt swaps: Seychelles has pioneered a number of innovative financing mechanisms, including a ‘debt swap’ programme, supported by the Nature Conservancy. The project has seen US$30 million of Seychelles’ foreign debt exchanged for commitments to ocean conservation programmes.

Seychelles also launched the world’s first sovereign ‘blue bond’ last year, raising US$15 million from international investors. Of this, US$3 million is earmarked for grants to support blue economy development and climate change adaptation projects, disbursed through the Seychelles Conservation and Climate Adaptation Trust. The remaining US$12 million provides loans for blue economy projects through the Seychelles Development Bank.

The Commonwealth Fund for Technical Cooperation supported Seychelles in developing its strategic policy framework on the blue economy for the period 2018 to 2030, termed the ‘Blue Economy Roadmap’ and Commonwealth advisers continue to assist with implementation.



 
• Alternatives to plastics: A growing number of countries, including the UK and Vanuatu as co-champions of the Commonwealth Blue Charter Action Group on Marine Plastic Pollution, have banned or are planning to ban various forms of single-use plastics. Investment and research towards developing more affordable and readily available sustainable alternatives will help such initiatives to succeed and become adopted more widely.

Recognising this, the Association of Commonwealth Universities, through the Blue Charter Fellowship programme, is sponsoring research by a scientist in Bangladesh on coconut husk cutlery as a substitute for plastic knives and forks. The project includes market analysis and development of policy options by which the government could encourage adoption of the product.

Already, 48 emerging scientists have been awarded Blue Charter fellowships at top Commonwealth universities to explore innovative ways of tackling marine plastic pollution.

Such examples demonstrate how promising and practical opportunities are already being developed. Substantial technical support and financial backing within robust regulatory environments are essential if there is to be the kind of far-reaching impact that is really needed. To achieve this, it will be necessary for countries to adopt ‘whole-of-government’ approaches to the blue economy, embedding the concept in national development strategies, and engaging all sectors rather than a single agency.

The Commonwealth and UNCTAD toolkit on youth entrepreneurship in the blue and green economy offers guidance for policymakers in formulating comprehensive national strategies, with a focus on optimising the regulatory environment and improving business skills.

Transition from traditional maritime economies to sustainable blue economies takes time to achieve, but important groundwork is already being laid. By working together in mutual support and cooperation, Commonwealth countries are helping to accelerate progress towards economic growth and prosperity which, through imaginative and innovative approaches, is harmonised with sustainable use and good stewardship of our ocean and its resources.

To find out more about the Commonwealth Blue Charter, visit: https://bluecharter.thecommonwealth.org/

This piece was first published on www.17globalgoals.com

The post Blue Innovation in the Commonwealth appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Patricia Scotland, is Secretary-General of the Commonwealth

 
New opportunities to invest in the ocean economy

The post Blue Innovation in the Commonwealth appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Sattamma, a daily labourer in the Rangareddy district of southern India’s Telangana state, says that even though she no longer has Hansen’s Disease, she remains discriminated against because of it. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

By Stella Paul
HYDERABAD, India , Jan 23 2020 (IPS)

Fifteen years ago, Sattamma – a daily labourer in the Rangareddy district of southern India’s Telangana state – was abandoned by her husband after she was diagnosed with Hansen’s Disease.

Last October, while her neighbours were celebrating Diwali, Sattamma was homeless again as her landlord threw her out of the house after he discovered her past disease.

“My husband said I was a danger to him. But it was so many years ago (I had leprosy). I have been cured and living without any scar or pain. Why would anyone still treat me like this?” asks a visibly-perplexed Sattamma who says finding work has become harder since her eviction.

Discrimination against leprosy, however, isn’t experienced by a scattered few: the world over, men and women affected by leprosy are increasingly being subjected to stigma and bias regardless of their current health status.

In Nigeria, Lilibeth Nwakaego runs a non-profit organisation called Leprosy Disability Initiative, which provides legal and emotional support to the leprosy-affected people who have been stigmatised by society. According to her, the roots of stigma are so deep, it often frustrates even the most determined.

“As a lawyer and a woman, I can tell you this: leprosy-affected people like me are sent straight to hell once the community discovers about our sickness. It is meaningless and cruel but it exists and it is continuously increasing,” she tells IPS.

“The discrimination towards leprosy-affected is like leprosy itself: you fight it in one place and end it, but it surfaces in another.”

Re-emergence of an “eliminated” challenge

In 1993, multi-drug therapy (MDT) was introduced worldwide which has since reduced the prevalence of Hansen’s Disease by more than 99 percent. As a result, most countries announced they had eliminated the disease – this is a target of less than one case per 10,000 people as set by the World Health Organisation.

However, almost a decade later, new cases are continually surfacing globally, including in India, Brazil and Indonesia – the world’s three-most affected countries. 

• One person is diagnosed with leprosy roughly every four minutes in India, accounting for 60 percent of all new leprosy cases annually.
• Brazil, which has the second-highest burden of leprosy, has reported over 28,000 new cases annually.
• Indonesia with 16,826 new cases being reported each year, is third on the list.

However, each of these countries has reported high levels of stigma and discrimination – experienced by leprosy-affected people.

Legal and constitutional discrimination

In the last decade, India has also seen a rise in several potentially deadly diseases, including tuberculosis, heart disease, diabetes and diarrhoea. Compared to this, the number of leprosy cases is truly minuscule. Yet the social stigma and bias against the leprosy-affected is extremely high, courtesy of a large number of laws which allow and aid such acts, says Vagavathalli Narsappa – head of Association for Leprosy-Affected (APAL) – a pan-Indian organisation based in Hyderabad.

“The irony is that when it comes to stigma, the law is truly equal for all. For example, a leprosy-affected person cannot contest a local election, or, can be forcibly removed from office even after winning. It is as if you have committed a violent crime…This is even more ridiculous because such a person can contest state/national elections,” Narsappa tells IPS.

The government seems to be well-aware of  the discriminatory laws as well. In August 2019, India’s health minister Harsh Vardhan wrote to his colleagues in the law and justice, and social justice and empowerment ministries seeking the amendment of 108 laws that discriminate against persons affected by Hansen’s Disease.

“Even though the disease is now fully curable, it is disturbing to learn that there still exist 108 discriminatory laws against persons affected by leprosy, including three Union and 105 state laws. The National Leprosy Eradication Programme (NLEP) has achieved enormous success in leprosy control, particularly in the last four decades,” the health minister said in a letter shared with the media.

In July 2018, the Supreme Court of India had also directed the government to end 119 laws that it considered discriminatory. The court also directed the government to run a countrywide awareness drive on Hansen’s Disease.

However, little has been done since then, says Narsappa.

“The only big step that we saw is repealing the law which allowed divorce on the ground of leprosy,” he tells IPS, referring to the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons Affected by Leprosy (EDPAL) Bill – commonly known as the Divorce Bill — which was passed by India’s parliament in February 2019.

• In Brazil, similar demands have been raised to provide equal rights and treatment of leprosy-affected people especially of children who are often denied schooling.
• However, the country has no discriminatory laws as of now, according to Alicia Cruz – a United Nations expert who visited the country in 2019.

In Indonesia, the social discrimination has been discouraging the leprosy-affected from seeking treatment, says Al Qadri, deputy head of the Leprosy Association (Permata), an NGO that works for the welfare of leprosy patients.

“Because of embarrassment and  fear of stigma, those who are suffering from the disease do not go to the health clinics in time. They hide until its too late and the disease has taken an advanced form,” Qadri says.

There is hope in hopelessness

In India, a portion of government jobs are reserved for persons with disabilities. However, leprosy-affected people who have disabilities are often denied the benefits of this policy. Narsappa of APAL recalls how he was denied a job with the local government.

“After being rejected three times, I visited the District Collector (a senior government official) whose office had announced a vacancy. But instead of hearing my plea, he told me, ‘you can still walk and move, why do you think you deserve this job?’ From his tone, I could sense that my past (disease) was the real issue,” says Narsappa who is now actively advocating for leprosy-affected people’s right to employment and old age pension – another government program which often fails to reach the leprosy-affected.

A strong ground movement is also in the making for calling for the land rights of the leprosy-affected.

Maya Ranvare, an executive member of APAL who is leading the movement in Maharashtra state of western India, says that though there are over 70 colonies across India, few of the residents have an individual ownership.

“Our cities are expanding so fast! We worry that tomorrow, our land will be grabbed by illegal real estate developers and we will not be able to do anything,” Ranavare tells IPS.

Activists like Ranavare are now approaching the state human rights commission to instruct the government to give land ownership certificates to leprosy colony residents. Last month, in Ratnagiri – a neighbouring district, the government started the process after being instructed by the commission, she reveals.

“Our fight today is the fight for our basic rights to equality, employment and land. But we also need a set of common, fair laws that makes all of these possible,” says Ranavare.

Related Articles

• AUDIO: “We Cannot Achieve Zero-Leprosy by 2030 Without a Vaccine” – WHO Team Leader
• ‘Conference Emphasises Need for Partnerships to Create a World Without Leprosy’
• Litigation, a Mechanism to Ensure Justice and End Stigma for Hansen’s Disease

The post Leprosy Re-emerges as a Global Health Challenge appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Sunday, Jan. 26, is World Leprosy Day, which is observed to raise awareness about the disease and those affected by it. IPS Senior Correspondent Stella Paul looks at how the disease is re-emerging as a global health challenge, particularly in countries like India, Brazil and Indonesia.

The post Leprosy Re-emerges as a Global Health Challenge appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Credit: NYAYA HEALTH NEPAL

By Marty Logan
KATHMANDU, Jan 23 2020 (IPS)

It is easy to be cynical about recent reports of actions taken to end chhaupadi, the traditional practice in parts of western Nepal of segregating menstruating women.

Since December, hundreds of the chhau sheds where women live during their periods have been demolished after the Home Ministry ordered district officials to strictly enforce laws that bar the practice. Local officials have warned they will withhold social security payments to anyone found to be involved in the practice of menstrual banishment.

Hundreds of the chhau sheds where women live during their periods have been demolished after the Home Ministry ordered district officials to strictly enforce laws that bar the practice. Local officials have warned they will withhold social security payments to anyone found to be involved in the practice of menstrual banishment

We have heard such threats from officialdom before, and many of the recently dismantled sheds were likely previously broken and rebuilt. But something does feel different now about the campaign to end the practice that has killed more than a dozen women and girls in the past decade, most of them from exposure to cold, a snakebite or suffocation from fires to warm the windowless sheds in winter.

Is this a tipping point? Could be. More positive news comes from Nyaya Health Nepal, the NGO that runs Bayalpata Hospital in Achham. It has 58 community health workers (CHWs), who are the hospital’s link to residents in the facility’s catchment area. Of them, 29 have not practised chhaupadi since working with Bayalpata and, according to the hospital, of the remaining 29, 25 have given up the practice since they started working there.

Initial interventions were done as sporadic informal discussions with CHWS, says Aradhana Thapa, healthcare design director at the hospital. They were followed by regular discussions in 2017, and then by interventions in 2018-19.

“We started with baby steps, to understand the issue and help provide a safe platform for CHWs to openly discuss and support each other. Last year we added a few more interventions, including social mapping and reaching more pregnant women,” added Thapa in an email interview.

The mapping found that 66% of the 14,000 women of reproductive age in the hospital’s catchment area practise chhaupadi, compared to 50% of the CHWs before Bayalpata’s intervention. CHWs are required to have at least Grade 10 education, which is far above the district average, so does that higher level of education not explain the hospital’s success in helping CHWs give up sheds?

“Education, understanding of menstruation as a biological phenomenon universal to the general population, is allowing this change (in attitude about chhaupadi) to take place,” says Thapa. “However, there needs to be a trigger for that final decision. For many CHWs, that point was that they wanted to give up the practice themselves before preaching to other women.”

Many activists say that chhaupadi is just the most extreme form of the menstrual segregation that occurs throughout Nepal among women of all socio-economic groups, in rural and urban areas.

In December, Parbati Raut of Achham became the last reported victim of the practice. But for the first time, an arrest was made over the death – of the woman’s brother-in-law Chhatra Raut, for banishing her to the shed. Unofficial reports from Achham say that he is out on bail, punished only with having to report to police twice monthly for three months.

A 2005 Supreme Court decision outlawed chhaupadi, and a 2017 national law made forcing a woman to use a shed punishable by up to 3 months in jail or a fine of Rs3,000. Yet, these changes, along with various local regulations that punish the practice or reward women who reject it, have failed to end it.

In one ward in Achham senior citizens’ allowances were reduced as punishment. It was effective because older family members have the strongest ties to beliefs that underlie chhaupadi, such as that not going to the shed once a month will anger gods and result in sickness, or worse, in a village.

CHWs have leveraged such local initiatives in order to give up the practice, particularly campaigns to destroy huts that are led by women. “It is the fact that these are led by local women that makes them so effective. I think it’s peer influence, pressure, that’s playing its part,” says Thapa.

For other CHWs, the decision was driven by practical considerations — absence of caretakers for their children, in cases where the women do not live with their in-laws and their husbands had to be away for work. Says Thapa: “They ended up sitting at home to ensure care for their children.”

 

This story was originally published by The Nepali Times

The post Tipping Point on Menstrual Banishment in Nepal appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Secretary-General António Guterres briefs the General Assembly meeting on his Priorities for 2020 and the Work of the Organization. Credit: UN / Mark Garten

By Antonio Guterres
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 23 2020 (IPS)

2020 marks the 75th anniversary of the United Nations. I draw tremendous strength from all that we represent and all that we have achieved together.

Yet anniversaries are not about celebrating the past; they are about looking ahead. We must cast our eyes to the future with hope. But we must also do so without illusion.

I want to speak to you in stark and simple terms about the challenges we face. I see “four horsemen” in our midst — four looming threats that endanger 21st-century progress and imperil 21st-century possibilities.

The first horseman comes in the form of the highest global geostrategic tensions we have witnessed in years.

Devastating conflicts continue to cause widespread misery. Terrorist attacks take a merciless toll. The nuclear menace is growing. More people have been forced from their homes by war and persecution than at any time since the Second World War. Tensions over trade and technology remain unresolved. The risk of a Great Fracture is real.

Second, we face an existential climate crisis. Rising temperatures continue to melt records. The past decade was the hottest on record. Scientists tell us that ocean temperatures are now rising at the equivalent of five Hiroshima bombs a second.

One million species are in near-term danger of extinction. Our planet is burning.
Meanwhile, as we saw at COP25, too many decision-makers continue to fiddle. Our world is edging closer to the point of no return.

The third horseman is deep and growing global mistrust. Disquiet and discontent are churning societies from north to south. Each situation is unique, but everywhere frustration is filling the streets. More and more people are convinced globalization is not working for them.

As one of our own reports revealed just yesterday, two of every three people live in countries where inequality has grown. Confidence in political establishments is going down.

Young people are rising up. Women are rightly demanding equality and freedom from violence and discrimination.

At the same time, fears and anxieties are spreading. Hostility against refugees and migrants is building. Hatred is growing.

The fourth threat is the dark side of the digital world.

Technological advances are moving faster than our ability to respond to – or even comprehend – them. Despite enormous benefits, new technologies are being abused to commit crimes, incite hate, fake information, oppress and exploit people and invade privacy.

We are not prepared for the profound impact of the Fourth Industrial Revolution on the labour market and the very structure of society. Artificial intelligence is generating breathtaking capacities and alarming possibilities.

Lethal autonomous weapons — machines with the power to kill on their own, without human judgement and accountability — are bringing us into unacceptable moral and political territory.

These four horsemen – epic geopolitical tensions, the climate crisis, global mistrust and the downsides of technology – can jeopardize every aspect of our shared future.

That is why commemorating the 75th anniversary with nice speeches won’t do.
We must address these four 21st-century challenges with four 21st-century solutions.

Let me take each in turn. First, peace and security, that I mentioned. There are some signs of hope.

Last year, conflict was prevented in the wake of several critical elections, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Madagascar …from Mali to the Maldives and beyond.

Despite hostilities in Yemen, the fragile cease-fire in Hodeidah is holding. A constitutional committee in Syria has taken form, even if it is still facing meaningful obstacles.

A peace agreement in the Central African Republic is being implemented. And the recent Berlin conference on Libya brought key players around the peace table at a critical moment, committing to “refraining from interference in the armed conflict or in the internal affairs of Libya” and urging “all international actors to do the same”.

All of these efforts require patience and persistence. But they are essential and save lives. As we look ahead, we have our work cut out for us.

We see Gordian Knots across the world — from the Gulf to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, from the Sahel and Lake Chad to Venezuela.

Security Council resolutions are being ignored. Outside interference is fueling fires.
And we are at risk of losing pillars of the international disarmament and arms control [architecture] without viable alternatives.

Yes, the United Nations continues to deliver life-saving aid to millions of people in desperate need. But temporary relief is no substitute for permanent solutions.

Prevention must orient all we do as we engage across the peace continuum. We must strengthen our mediation capacity and our tools for sustaining peace, leading to long-term development.

Our Action for Peacekeeping initiative is enhancing performance and safety. We are becoming more effective in the protection of civilians, and we have more female peacekeepers than ever before.

The 20th anniversary of Security Council resolution 1325 on women, peace and security is also an opportunity to further match words with deeds.

At the same time, we know peacekeeping is not enough where there is no peace to keep. We need to create the conditions for effective peace enforcement and counter-terrorism operations by our regional partners, under chapter VII of the Charter and with predictable funding.

This is especially true in Africa, from the Sahel to Lake Chad. And we must focus on the roots of crisis and upheaval — combatting the drivers of violence and extremism – from exclusion to economic despair, from violent misogyny to governance failures.

Last year, I launched first-of-its-kind action plans to combat hate speech and to safeguard religious sites.

This year, I will convene a conference on the role of education in tackling hate speech.
And we must continue to advance the Agenda for Disarmament.

I call on all State Parties to work together at the 2020 Review of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to ensure the NPT remains able to fulfil its fundamental goals – preventing nuclear war and facilitating the elimination of nuclear weapons.

The second “horseman” is the threat of climate catastrophe. We must respond with the promise of climate action.

We are at war with nature. And nature is fighting back hard. One cannot look at the recent fires in Australia – at people fleeing their homes and wildlife consumed by the flames – without profound sadness at today’s plight and fear for what the future may bring.

Meanwhile, air pollution combined with climate change is killing, according to the World Health Organization, 7 million people every year.

Gradual approaches are no longer enough. At the next climate conference — COP26 in Glasgow – Governments must deliver the transformational change our world needs and that people demand, with much stronger ambition – ambition on mitigation, ambition on adaptation, and ambition on finance.

Every city, region, bank, pension fund and industry must completely reimagine how they operate to keep temperature rise to 1.5 degrees. The scientific community is clear. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45 per cent from 2010 levels by 2030, and reach net zero emissions by 2050.

The main obligation rests on the main emitters. Those countries that contributed most to this crisis must lead the way.

If they dither, we are doomed. But I still believe the climate battle is a battle we can win.
People get it. Technology is on our side. Scientists tell us it is not too late.

Economists and asset managers tell us climate smart investments are the key to competing and winning in the 21st century.

All the tools and knowledge to move from the grey economy to the green economy are already available. So let us embrace transformation – let us build on the results of last September’s Climate Action Summit — and let us make the commitments to make Glasgow a success.

Together with Glasgow, we have two other opportunities to act decisively this year.
First, the Oceans conference in Lisbon in June.

The world’s oceans are under assault from pollution, overfishing and much else.
Plastic waste is tainting not only the fish we eat but also the water we drink and the air we breathe.

We must use the Lisbon conference to protect the oceans from further abuse and recognize their fundamental role in the health of people and planet.

For example, based on the success of several national initiatives, it is time for a global ban on single-use plastics.

Second, the Biodiversity conference in Kunming in October. The rate of species loss is exponentially higher than at any time in the past 10 million years.

We must make the most of the Kunming conference to adopt a post-2020 global biodiversity framework.

Living in harmony with nature is more important than ever. Everything is interlinked.

To help vanquish the third horseman — global mistrust —we must build a fair globalization.

We have a plan. It’s called the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and all of your governments pledged to make it a reality.

The good news is that I hear tremendous enthusiasm for the SDGs wherever I go —from political leaders at the national and local levels, to entrepreneurs, investors, civil society and so many others.

We see concrete progress – from reducing child mortality to expanding education, from improving access to family planning to increasing access to the internet.

But what we see is not enough. Indeed, we are off track. At present course, half a billion people will still be living in extreme poverty by 2030.

And the gender gap in economic participation would have to wait more than 250 years!
That is unacceptable.

For all these reasons, we are launching a Decade of Action to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. The Decade of Action is central to achieving a fair globalization, boosting economic growth and preventing conflict.

We will leverage the reformed United Nations Development System to engage partners from the local to the global: To mobilize a movement for the Sustainable Development Goals.

To unlock financing. To generate the ambition, innovation and solutions to deliver for everyone, everywhere.

Throughout the Decade of Action, we must invest in the eradication of poverty, social protection, in health and fighting pandemics, in education, energy, water and sanitation, in sustainable transport and infrastructure and in internet access.

We must improve governance, tackle illicit financial flows, stamp out corruption and develop effective, common sense and fair taxation systems.

We must build economies for the future and ensure decent work for all, especially young people. And we must put a special focus on women and girls because it benefits us all.

The 25th anniversary of the Beijing Platform is an opportunity to rethink economic, political and social systems from an equality perspective.

It’s time to drive women’s equal participation in decision-making and end all forms of violence against women and girls. We must dismantle obstacles to women’s inclusion and participation in the economy, including through valuing unpaid care work.

And we must listen and learn from so many women around the world who have been driving solutions.

I will convene, on an annual basis, a platform for driving the Decade of Action. The first SDG Action Forum in September will highlight progress and set the trajectory for success.

So let us make the 2020s the Decade of Action and let us make 2020 the year of urgency. And, as we do so, let us spare no effort to rebuild trust.

I make a special appeal to all Member States: Listen to people. Open new channels for all to be heard and find common ground.

Respect freedom of peaceful assembly and expression. Protect civic space and freedom of the press.

And let us harness the ideas and energy and sense of hope of young people —in particular young women — demanding change and constructive solutions.

Fourth, to address the dark side of digital world, we must steer technology for positive change.

I see several areas for action — starting with the global labor market. Automation will displace tens of millions of jobs by 2030. We need to redesign education systems. It’s not just about learning but learning how to learn, across a lifetime.

We need more innovative approaches to social safety nets and rethinking the concept of work, and the lifelong balance among work, leisure and other activities. We also must usher in order to the Wild West of cyberspace.

Terrorists, white supremacists and others who sow hate are exploiting the internet and social media. Bots are spreading disinformation, fueling polarization and undermining democracies.

Next year, cybercrime will cost $6 trillion. Cyberspace itself is at risk of cleaving in two.
We must work against digital fragmentation by promoting global digital cooperation.

The United Nations is a tailor-made platform for governments, business, civil society and others to come together to formulate new protocols and norms, to define red-lines, and to build agile and flexible regulatory frameworks.

Some responses may require legally-binding measures. Others may be based on voluntary cooperation and the exchange of best practices.

This includes support for existing processes and institutions like the Open-Ended Working Group on information and telecommunications in the context of security, and the Group of Government Experts on advancing responsible behavior in cyberspace and within the General Assembly.

I believe consensus has been built to strengthen the Internet Governance Forum to serve as a central gathering point to discuss and propose effective digital policies.

Following up on the Report of the High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation, I will soon present a Roadmap for Digital Cooperation covering internet connectivity, human rights, trust and security in the age of digital interdependence.

At the same time, we need a common effort to ensure artificial intelligence is a force for good. Despite last year’s important step within the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, we are still lurching toward a world of killer machines acting outside human judgment or control.

I have a simple and direct plea to all Member States: Ban lethal autonomous weapons now. These are the four big threats — and four big solutions I see in the year ahead.

Across this work, the promotion and protection of all human rights must be central. I am deeply concerned about the different ways in which respect for human rights is being eroded around the world.

As I have repeatedly underscored, the Charter compels us to place people and their rights at the heart of our work. That is why, next month in Geneva, I will launch a call for stepped up global action on human rights and human dignity.

In order to meet all these challenges, we must continue to make the United Nations fit for the challenges of our new age.

That is why from day one, and with your support, I have pursued wide-ranging reforms rooted in flexibility, transparency and accountability.

In 2020, we will build on our progress. Indeed, we already began the year with a major success.

On January 1st — for the first time in UN history — we achieved gender parity across our senior-most ranks of full-time Under-and Assistant-Secretaries-General taken together.

We did it two years ahead of schedule. And I plan to keep going — ensuring greater inclusion and parity at all levels of the Organization.

I appeal for your support in removing out-dated regulations and byzantine procedures that stand in the way. I am equally committed to making 2020 a year of meaningful progress for more equitable geographical distribution and greater regional diversity among staff of the United Nations.

We have launched a Secretariat-wide strategy to do so. But, as you know, reaching gender parity and diversity targets also depends on the ability to fill vacant posts — and that largely depends on resources.

I am also determined to build on our efforts to prevent and end sexual harassment.
A specialized investigation team in the Office of Internal Oversight Service is already up and running.

A new sexual harassment policy is being incorporated into respective frameworks across the wider UN family. A centralized, system-wide screening database is in place to deny the ability of sexual harassers to sneak back into the system.

Our strategy to combat sexual exploitation and abuse is also advancing, including through greater assistance and support to victims.

In the broadest sense, I am determined to make the United Nations a workplace leader in ensuring all staff are respected, all have a voice, and all are enabled to do their best.

We are making progress on our new disability inclusion strategy. And I am strongly committed to ensuring equality and non-discrimination for LGBTI staff in the UN system and our peacekeeping operations.

The year ahead will be pivotal for our common future. I want people around the world to be a part of it. Too often, governments and international institutions are viewed as places that talk —not places that listen.

I want the United Nations to listen. In this 75th anniversary year, I want to provide as many people as possible the chance to have a conversation with the United Nations.

To share their hopes and fears. To learn from their experiences.

To spark ideas for building the future we want and the United Nations we need. We are launching surveys and dialogues around the world to do so.

And we are giving a priority to the voices of young people. Together, we need to listen.
And together, we need to act.

At this 75th anniversary milestone, let us make the difficult yet vital decisions across our agenda that will secure a peaceful future for all.

The post UN Plans to Launch a “Decade of Action” to Deliver Development Goals by 2030 appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, in an address to the General Assembly

The post UN Plans to Launch a “Decade of Action” to Deliver Development Goals by 2030 appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Tribal women converge at the Boipariguda weekly market in Koraput District, in India’s Odisha state, to sell and buy farm produce. Indigenous communities remain at the centre of those affected by climate change, he said, disproportionately bearing the brunt of the crisis and facing higher risks. Credit: Manipadma Jena/IPS

By Samira Sadeque
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 23 2020 (IPS)

More than 70 percent of the global population is currently living in parts of the world where income inequality has grown, according to a World Social Report 2020 launched by United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). 

The report, which was launched at the U.N. on Tuesday, identified four “megatrends” that impacts this inequality:  technological innovation, climate change, urbanisation and international migration.

“The report underscores that these mega trends can be harnessed for a more equitable and sustainable world or they can be left alone to divide us further,” Elliott Harris, U.N. Chief Economist and Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development at DESA, said at the launch. 

He added that the current climate crisis especially causes the slowdown in reducing inequality between countries and further “presents major obstacle to reduce poverty”.

Indigenous communities remain at the centre of those affected by climate change, he said, disproportionately bearing the brunt of the crisis and facing higher risks. 

“And it’s affecting intergenerational inequality as well,” he said. 

Technological innovation, digital division

With regards to technology, Harris said technological innovations are “pushing wage inequality upwards”. 

“Despite its immense promise, technological change creates winners and losers and its rapid pace brings additional new challenges,” he said. 

But the “digital divide” exists through access to technology and technological devices (or lack thereof). According to the report, almost 90 percent of the population of most developed countries have access to the Internet, while only 19 percent of the population in least developed countries have the same access. 

According to the U.N. Committee for Development Policy (CDP) data from 2018, the list of least developed countries includes many countries in Africa — a continent being lauded for its massive technological growth.

As a PwC report on Africa states, “disruptive innovation is transforming Africa’s economic potential, creating new target markets and unprecedented consumer choice”. It then begs the question how technological divide is perpetuating inequality in these countries. 

When asked, Harris acknowledged this growth but added those countries that are lagging behind have a lot of “catching up” to do.

“The fact remains that because of the rapid advancement of technological innovation, the time that its taking to establish a digital infrastructure is time at which the advanced countries continue to move ahead at increasingly rapid pace,” he told IPS. 

“The cycles of tech innovation are getting shorter and shorter,” he said, adding a hypothetical analysis that by the time a developing country has set up 5G, a developed country is already establishing 8G.

“And we need to make a really concerted effort to catch up really quickly,” he said, “we need a big jump; we can’t go progressively at the speed at which we did it in the past.” 

A vicious cycle?

Another notable observation made in the report was how those who are poor and remain without access to education or healthcare remain at the core of the struggle.

“Disparities in health and education make it challenging for people to break out of the cycle of poverty, leading to the transmission of disadvantage from one generation to the next,” read a part of the report.

This is especially concerning at a time when the world has a massive refugee population that only continues to grow, whether due to climate change or conflict. The U.N. Refugee Agency (UNHCR) states the current refugee crisis is “unprecedented” with a total of 70.8 million people forcibly displaced.  

For communities that remain in transit, it poses a challenge to establish access to health and education, which can thus hinder the process of breaking out the poverty cycle, thus perpetuating the gap between the poor and the rich. 

When asked, Harris said this vicious cycle is “a very serious concern that we have.” 

“The problem, of course, is [in] many cases the refugees are concentrated in places that do not have large amount of additional resources they can devote to support refugees and so they are very dependent on the support of the international community,” he told IPS. 

“It’s been relatively less difficult to mobilise support at the onset of the crisis when people have to flee,” he said, adding that maintaining that support when in some cases they’re in refugee camps or displaced from their homelands for years at a time” is what becomes challenging. 

He lauded the efforts by host countries for doing their best in hosting the refugees, and added that the international community has a responsibility to “step up and help these host countries.” 

Marta Roig, Chief of Emerging Trends and Issues in the Development Section, Division for Inclusive Social Development, DESA, was also present at the launch.

Related Articles

• ‘Women Not Speaking at the Same Table as Men’ Means a Widening Digital Gender Gap in Africa
• Exclusive: Winnie Byanyima Speaks about Inequality in Africa and Next Steps at UNAIDS
• Traditional Farming Holds All the Aces

The post Global Inequality Continues to Grow: UNDESA Report appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Resident of Hamdaniya district stands before a house destroyed in a Coalition airstrike, February 2017. Credit: Mark Lattimer /Ceasefire

By Mark Lattimer
LONDON, Jan 22 2020 (IPS)

As Iraq this month faces the threat of new conflicts – including a proxy war between the US and Iran – the shadow of the last conflict runs long.

Two years ago the Iraqi prime minister declared victory over ISIS, but parts of Ninewa and Anbar are still in ruins, some 1.5 million people remain displaced and families have only begun to grieve for the tens of thousands killed.

Nowhere is this devastation more apparent than in Mosul, Iraq’s second city and the epicentre of the ISIS conflict. The World Bank has estimated that losses to the Mosul housing sector alone are estimated at US $6 billion.

And as revealed in a new report from the Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights and Minority Rights Group International, 35,000 claims for reparation for deaths, injury or destruction of property have now been lodged by victims of the ISIS occupation and the ‘liberation’ battle.

Interviews with civilians on the ground uncover a complex picture of loss and abandonment. The population who suffered under the occupation feel they were doubly punished by the devastating conflict waged to end it. Yazidis, Christians and other minorities who were forced to flee still remain largely displaced, despairing at the fact that no-one has been brought to justice for the crimes committed against them.

In such circumstances, individual reparations are essential, not least for reconciliation, a concept much-invoked by international missions in Iraq but rarely specified. Without formal recognition for the loss they have suffered and practical help to rebuild, civilians cannot move on.

As one interviewee explained: ‘The compensation payments will never bring me back the loved ones I lost, nor will they allow me to rebuild my house as if nothing happened. But they will help us all to rebuild the city and bring back life into it.’

But among those claiming reparations, long-standing frustration is turning into growing resentment. The claims have been made under Iraq’s Law 20 which established a system for awarding compensation to ‘the victims of military operations, military mistakes and terrorist actions’.

Over 420 billion Iraqi dinars (US $355 million) has been awarded under the scheme since it was first established ten years ago, but it has been overwhelmed by the scale of claims from the ISIS conflict. Claimants in Mosul complain of cumbersome bureaucratic procedures and pay-outs are agonisingly slow.

Meanwhile, the US-led Coalition against ISIS appears to have washed its hands of responsibility. During the nine-month battle the Coalition supported Iraqi forces mainly from the air, and it was Coalition bombardment which, along with ISIS vehicle-borne IEDs, was responsible for most of the material destruction of the city.

The monitoring group Airwars has conservatively estimated that between 1,066 and 1,579 civilians were killed by Coalition air and artillery strikes during the battle for Mosul. Local estimates are much higher. The Coalition describes all civilian deaths caused by its action as ‘unintentional’ and refuses to accept any liability for violations for which reparations should be paid.

Even the system of making discretionary ‘condolence’ payments in such cases, which the US employed previously in Afghanistan as well as Iraq, appears not to be applicable. In its annual report on civilian casualties, the Department of Defense states: ‘…in cases where a host nation or government requests US military support for local military forces, it may be more appropriate for the host nation or its military to respond to the needs and requests of the local civilian population by offering condolences themselves’.

But questions about the tactics used by the Coalition in Mosul, and in other recent sieges, are becoming hard to ignore. The civilian death toll acknowledged by the Coalition is slowly climbing, as it is pressured to reassess credible local reports, and currently stands at 1,347 deaths caused by Coalition actions in the anti-ISIS conflict across Iraq and Syria.

A claim last year by the UK Ministry of Defence that no civilians had been injured in over 1,300 Royal Air Force strikes in Iraq was met with open disbelief. In November the Dutch Defence Ministry finally admitted that Dutch forces had been involved in two airstrikes in Iraq in which at least 74 people, including civilians, were killed, but it still denied any liability for reparations.

The people of Mosul have nonetheless started to rebuild their homes and their city, albeit with inadequate support. Sponsorship by foreign governments of prestige projects, including the reconstruction of the great mosque of al-Nuri, is important for restoring Moslawis’ pride in their city and their cultural heritage.

Less high profile, but arguably more significant, is the ongoing work of UN and other humanitarian agencies to support basic services, including for IDPs. But, as so often in Iraq, the UN is caught in a bind. UN OCHA warned earlier this week that operations to deliver medicine, food and other assistance to 2.4 million in need were now compromised by the delay in the Iraqi government renewing letters of authorization.

Nor is the ISIS conflict over. In the west of Iraq military operations against ISIS continue, including with the support of the Coalition.

ISIS’ supporters are now gone from Mosul, a city which more than any other in Iraq knows the reality of ISIS rule. But with little official acknowledgement of the suffering of the population, practical help slow in coming for civilians to rebuild their lives, and tens of thousands of young men growing up in displacement, the situation is not sustainable.

As one interviewee for the report said: ‘I haven’t seen such anger in Mosul since 2003. It is a very dangerous situation.’

Iraq has tragically demonstrated in recent decades that the failure to deal with the legacy of past conflicts affects both the speed and the severity of their return. For the cause of both justice and peace, the question of reparations for civilian harm is now urgent.

‘Mosul after the Battle: Reparations for civilian harm and the future of Ninewa’ is published on 22 January and available at https://bit.ly/3ayqB0M

The post Mosul, an Epicentre of the ISIS Conflict, is a Devastated Iraqi City appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Mark Lattimer is Executive Director of CEASEFIRE Centre for Civilian Rights

The post Mosul, an Epicentre of the ISIS Conflict, is a Devastated Iraqi City appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By GGGI
PARIS, Jan 22 2020 (IPS-Partners)

The Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) signed a Declaration of Intent and a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the French Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs (MEAE) and the Agence Française de Développement (AFD), a French development bank today to promote sustainable development and climate action. The signing was witnessed by Mr. Ban Ki-moon, President and Chair of GGGI.

The MoUs complement the joint declaration of the France-Korea Summit in 2018 where the two countries pledged to support GGGI’s activities and efforts to accelerate the adoption of green growth models in developing and emerging countries.

“This is the first time GGGI has signed MoUs with the Government of France and a French development bank. The cooperation agreements we signed today will be a start of our collaboration, bringing opportunities on a number of fronts. We look forward to strengthening our partnerships with the MEAE and AFD to support countries achieve solid and ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) for the Paris Agreement,” said Dr. Frank Rijsberman, Director-General of GGGI.

Meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and setting ambitious climate action targets require strong partnerships and collaboration between development partners. The MEAE plans to promote collaboration between AFD and GGGI with regards to joint funding programs.

Remy Rioux, Director-General of AFD said, “We are delighted to work together with GGGI to build innovative green investments mechanisms, especially in Africa as one of the most vulnerable regions to climate change despite contributing the least to global warming. By partnering with GGGI, I am confident that we will create synergies and support countries to deliver on Paris Agreement commitments.”

Under the MoU, GGGI and AFD have agreed to collaborate through undertaking several financing operations to promote sustainable economic development in developing and emerging countries, including the least developed countries. The two organizations seek to deliver economic growth that is both environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. GGGI and AFD will help countries access climate finance to implement ambitious climate actions with a focus on the development of National Financing Vehicles. In addition, the two organizations will enhance countries’ NDC planning and implementation by providing support for long-term low-carbon and resilient economic development strategies/plans and Monitoring, Review and Verification (MRV) systems.

GGGI will strengthen its commitment to French-speaking developing countries to achieve their climate action goals, including the implementation of their NDCs, the formulation of resilient and low-carbon long-term economic development strategies, and the development of reliable systems for measuring, reporting and verifying greenhouse gas emissions.

“The signing of the Declaration of Intent comes at a time when there is an urgent need to take action in addressing global warming, which is in line with the commitments of the Paris Climate Agreement and 2030 Agenda,” said Philippe Lacoste, Director for Sustainable Development, MEAE.

GGGI will support countries to accelerate access to climate finance, particularly by developing innovative green investment funds and mechanisms, facilitating these countries to access the Green Climate Fund (GCF), as well as working together on the development of portfolio of green bankable projects.

The post GGGI inks Declaration of Intent and MoU with the French Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs and the Agence Française de Développement to strengthen cooperation appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Credit: Joe Brusky.

By Eco Matser
AMSTERDAM, Jan 22 2020 (IPS)

For the first time, the world’s elites meeting this year at Davos have listed environmental issues as their top concerns about the next decade.

The WEF’s annual Global Risks Report raises the alarm on increased extreme weather events, manmade environmental damage – including oil spills and contamination, major biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and failure of governments and businesses to mitigate and adapt to climate change. All resulting in loss of human and animal life, and major damage to infrastructure, with irreversible consequences for the environment.

“The political landscape is polarized, sea levels are rising and climate fires are burning. This is the year when world leaders must work with all sectors of society to repair and reinvigorate our systems of cooperation, not just for short-term benefit but for tackling our deep-rooted risks,” said Borge Brende, President of the World Economic Forum.

“The political landscape is polarized, sea levels are rising and climate fires are burning. This is the year when world leaders must work with all sectors of society to repair and reinvigorate our systems of cooperation, not just for short-term benefit but for tackling our deep-rooted risks,”

Borge Brende, President of the World Economic Forum

Does this mean that after Davos 2020 businesses and governments are actually going tackle these realities seriously and with the necessary financial investments? Seeing is believing.

 

Fundamental change of systems needed

If businesses and governments are serious about combating climate change, they must increase investments in climate change mitigation and adaptation as well as in the larger development agenda (Agenda 2030). However, this alone will not be enough.

If businesses do not start fundamentally changing current financial systems, we risk gaining only short-term benefits instead of addressing the real root causes.

The current world economy still relies on fossil fuels and energy-intensive production systems. And the fossil fuel industry continues to receive large subsidies from governments and investment banks. Although investment in renewable energy is on the rise, as long as fossil fuels are subsidized we will not make a shift towards zero-carbon economies.

Many argue that not investing in fossil fuels hinders the development of low-income countries by denying them access to the same economic opportunities as high-income countries.

However, this just masks a lack of will on the part of the world’s business elites who have the power and finances to pioneer a true transition. They are ignoring the fact that the economics of renewable energy have changed and there are many ways for low-income countries to leapfrog fossil fuels.

To succeed, the governments and companies at Davos should do two things:

1. Apply an integrated approach to mitigation, adaptation and development.
2. Ensure an inclusive process and equal access to benefits of climate change measures.

 

An integrated approach

Mitigation, adaptation and development should not be three separate work streams. As shown in this article, effective climate action requires coherence between measures. Take investing in renewable energy. It directly reduces the emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

But when used to provide energy access to the most vulnerable, it also brings communities social and economic benefits that increase their resilience to climate change.

For example, access to energy provides services for small-scale farmers or community enterprises, like solar powered agricultural irrigation systems, or food processing and storage. This in turn increases their general economic and climate resilience.

Another example is access to clean cooking solutions instead of burning wood. This not only reduces air pollution and deforestation, but also improves women and children’s health and frees up time for studying or income-producing activities. This in turn strengthens their position in society.

 

Inclusive process and equal access

On the one hand, we must invest vast resources to mitigate and adapt to global climate change; on the other, we need to tackle the deep injustices that lie at the heart of the climate crisis. The challenge is therefore to ensure a just transition in which all communities have equal access to the benefits of measures taken to tackle climate change.

Ironically, developing countries bear the brunt of the effects of climate change created by 150 years of unfettered industrial and agricultural development in the West. So we, in the West, have a moral obligation to help finance an inclusive climate transition and achieve the SDG development agenda.

 

A truly just transition

A truly just transition means including those who are generally left out of the decision-making processes: women, youth, and local or rural (indigenous) communities. So give back power to local communities and offer opportunities for collaborative decision-making.

Access to information, public participation and direct involvement of local communities are key to foster transformative societal change. But failure to act on the climate crisis in an inclusive, participatory manner will certainly fuel even greater distrust of political elites and representative democracy.

So, as governments and businesses gather in Davos, we urge them to listen to the words of Borge Brende when he says world leaders must reinvigorate the system of cooperation and focus on long-term benefits.

Only when they start investing substantially in tackling root causes and transforming systems in an integrated and inclusive way, will putting climate change at the top of the WEF’s agenda really mean something. Hivos will follow the conversations with interest and believe when we see.

 

This opinion piece was originally published here

The post Will 2020 World Economic Forum Deliver on Combating Climate Change? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Eco Matser is Hivos global Climate Change / Energy and Development Coordinator

The post Will 2020 World Economic Forum Deliver on Combating Climate Change? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 22 2020 (IPS)

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declared last week that the United Nations just “managed to survive its deepest financial crisis in a decade.”

But if countries continue to default on their assessed contributions to the world body – as 47 countries did in 2019 — the UN may be heading for another liquidity crisis in 2020, he warned.

“Unless all member states pay their assessed contributions on time and in full”, Guterres declared, “we risk receiving insufficient funds to implement the entire programme of work and the full budget approved for 2020.”

That budget, voted by the 193-member General Assembly last month, was $3.1 billion for 2020: an increase of approximately $8 million on what was initially requested by Guterres.

And it also marks the first time since 1973 that the UN is adopting an annual budget instead of a two-year one.

UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said on January 10 the United Nations closed out 2019 with 146 out of 193 member states having paid their dues in full for the last year’s budget.

Asked how another cash crunch was expected to impact on UN staffers in 2020, Patricia Nemeth, President of the United Nations Staff Union (UNSC) told IPS the General Assembly approving the budget– and individual countries paying their dues on time– are two different issues.

If member states don’t pay their contributions on time, then there could indeed be another cash crisis with repercussions for UN staff — both at UN headquarters and in overseas postings, she said.

“It’s not just about salaries; even the prospect of a repeat of last year’s liquidity crisis is disruptive to our daily work as UN staff, as we are unable to plan in advance so as to deliver our mandate in the most efficient and cost-effective manner”, said Nemeth, who is also Vice President for Conditions of Service at the 60,000-strong Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA).

Currently, the total membership of the UN staff union in New York is approximately 6,400 but overall it is close to 20,000 (representing UNHQs NY staff, locally recruited staff in overseas peacekeeping missions and some of the departments that are governed by the Secretariat but their offices based outside of New York ie.United Nations Information Centres (UNIC)

Credit: United Nations

Addressing the Group of 77 developing countries last week, Guterres said: “I will continue to manage our cash situation carefully, and I count on your continued support to help us avoid a deeper crisis. To this end, I hope that we could find more sustainable solutions to our cash problems.”

Over the years, he pointed out, “we have spent our budgets on the assumption that we should receive sufficient cash at the start of each year to execute the entire budget smoothly during the year.”

“In reality, we receive nearly half in the first three months but almost a quarter comes only at the very end of the year, leaving a very poor liquidity situation especially from July to October.”

“We could manage in the cash-strapped months if we had sufficient liquidity reserves and more flexibility in managing our resources as a pool. But our regular budget liquidity reserves are insufficient and structural impediments prevent us from minimizing the impact across programmes,” Guterres said.

He also said the UN’s programme implementation is now increasingly being driven by the availability of cash, “which is entirely against the way we should be working.”

Asked if the UN is in the process of eliminating short term and consultancy contracts –and whether teleconferencing has replaced overseas assignments– Nemeth said the UN does not eliminate temporary contracts, which are a regular component of the hiring structure.

“While the Staff Union will always advocate for job security, we do understand that the UN sometimes needs to make short-term hires to cover specific needs.”

However, she said, all staff working for the UN should be full-fledged employees, with a contract that guarantees the backing, resources and independence required to perform their tasks exclusively in the interest of the Organization and its mandates.

As for consultancy contracts, she said, “we welcome the General Assembly’s instruction ‘that the Organization should use its in-house capacity to perform core activities or to fulfill functions that are recurrent over the long term’”.

On teleconferencing, she said: “We cannot say that teleconferencing has replaced overseas travel, as UN staff are often posted in a country different from their own to perform specialized assignments”.

However, aside from their permanent assignments, colleagues make every effort to limit travel for meetings and discuss issues whenever possible via virtual technology.

“We are fully aware of the economic and environmental cost of our travel,” said Nemeth.

Asked if regular staffers are assured of permanent stay in New York or was it mandatory for them to serve in overseas posts, Nemeth said regular staff are not assured a permanent position in New York.

All international staff, she said, are encouraged to move geographically during their career.

“A new mobility policy is under development (under the umbrella of the staff-management committee working group) and we will have to see whether or not the proposal contains a mandatory requirement to move”.

She said the Staff Union in New York does not advocate for mandatory mobility, based on the results of a survey that was conducted in 2019 among New York staff.

Staff are very interested in a mobility scheme that is voluntarily in nature and that focuses on intra-departmental moves and/ or inter-agency mobility within the UN system, Nemeth declared.

On the UN’s proposed new locations, including Budapest, Nairobi, Montreal and Shenzen, Nemeth said: “There is no decision by the Member States, as of today, concerning the Global Service Delivery Model or any potential new offices”.

This will be discussed at the first resumed session of the General Assembly in the spring.

“We are following the matter closely, as it could affect the jobs of colleagues who are locally hired in the existing headquarter locations.”

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@ips.org

The post UN Chief & Staff Union Predict Another Cash Crisis in 2020—if Member States Don’t Pay Up appeared first on Inter Press Service.