Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

UN Photo/Loey Felipe
 
The UN General Assembly voted on the “New York Declaration,” a resolution endorsing the two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. 12 September 2025. Of the 193 UN Member States, 142 countries voted in favour of a resolution backing the document. Israel voted against it, alongside nine other countries – Argentina, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Tonga and the United States – while 12 nations abstained. https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/09/1165835

By James E. Jennings
ATLANTA, USA, Sep 16 2025 (IPS)

In a long past due move, the UN General Assembly voted 142-10 to approve a plan called “The New York Declaration” that hopes to revive the long dead Two State Solution for Palestinian Independence.

Many observers may see it as a welcome initiative to curtail Israel’s century-long colonial project in Palestine. The declaration was proposed by France, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Canada and a gaggle of other countries as way to establish a Palestinian state on the West Bank of the Jordan River.

But it is a cruel deception.

Just last year the UN General Assembly demanded that Israel end its so-called “security operations” in Gaza before the end of this month of September, 2025. Israel has ignored the deadline and has no intention of complying.

Nothing approaching peace for Palestine is likely to happen, no matter the overwhelming vote at the UN General Assembly. Why? Because creating a virtual state in Palestine is not a real state and therefore does not solve the problem.

The clever leaders from this group of countries, most of them apparently sincere, have figured out a way—in the absence of a realistic plan to restrain Israel—to merely kick the can of peace down the road. But it doesn’t mean it will happen.

It may be designed to attenuate Palestinian suffering and limit Israel’s endless denial of human and political rights, but it cannot succeed by prolonging the already decades-long and miserably failed “Peace Process.” The Oslo process took thirty years, and peace is farther away than ever.

You either have peace, or you don’t. It cannot be a process. Although post-war peace negotiations are sometimes long and tedious, if intentions are sincere the shape of an agreement takes only minutes to define and outline. Any meaningful agreement, whether between individuals or nations, requires a straightforward statement of goals and adherence to the principles of equality, and justice.

Yet despite UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ frequent statements that Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank Is illegal under international law and must stop, and bombing civilians is illegal and must stop, those standards are not being faced honestly by the coalition of nations operating now as “The New York Declaration.”

None of the great nations involved in this latest initiative are calling for Israel to withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank, much less to stop the genocide immediately. Why not?

The intent of this diplomatic maneuver led by France, the UK, Canada, and other countries is to avoid these pressing demands, not implement them. Rather, if the UN vote does succeed in getting Israel to temporarily stop bombing the hapless civilians in Gaza, the world can expect a great follow-up hubbub about a “Peace Process” for Palestine that may last years but will in fact sideline the principled demands of the General Assembly’s September 12 Resolution.

That in fact may be the point of this initiative, as sincere as President Macron and the others may be. The threat of UK Prime Minister Starmer to recognize a Palestinian state in September is hollow and just the same: to distract from the UN General Assembly’s demands by signing on to a “process” that will never end. It’s a good guess that, like Lucy in the Peanuts Cartoon, he will pull the football away in the nick of time, leaving Palestine like Charley Brown flat on the ground.

Creating a virtual state, not a real one, is just playing into Netanyahu’s hands. The key nations leading the agreement have not labeled Israel’s actions in Gaza genocide as they should or called for an immediate halt to the killing and starvation.

Neither have the three leading military suppliers, Germany, the UK, and France, stopped sending weapons and technical military support components to Israel.

And for what? Not for advancing justice or even humanity, much less Palestinian political rights, but to smoothly guide the international community to an endorsement of Israel’s genocide in Gaza and its military control of the entire Middle East.

They imagine that the countries of the Middle East, led by Saudia Arabia’s murderous crown prince Muhammad bin Salman, aka MBS, will eventually allow the Western powers to confirm Israel’s military hegemony in Gaza and the West Bank.

The vision endorsed by these leading countries fails to call Israel to account for its genocide in Gaza or its de facto takeover of the West Bank. If implemented, the people of Palestine will become merely “hewers of wood and drawers of water,” in the Biblical phrase, for Israel’s triumphant military umbrella over the Middle East region.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States will be free to make money, and the US will pay for Gaza’s reconstruction. The world can expect a great hubbub about the “Peace Process” in the coming months that will sideline the principled demands of the General Assembly’s Resolutions.

What will happen to the people in Gaza is left out of the calculation. Be warned. Pay attention. It is a cruel deception.

James E. Jennings is President of Conscience International, a former aid worker in Gaza, and a longtime advocate for Palestinian human and political rights.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Windmills are at the backdrop of a highway in Ninh Thuận, Vietnam. Governments should invest in renewable energy and infrastructure as part of financing for development to close SDG gaps in Asia and the Pacific. Credit: Unsplash/Moc Diep

By Heather Lynne Taylor-Strauss and Eiichiro Takinami
BANGKOK, Thailand, Sep 16 2025 (IPS)

Over the past two decades, foreign direct investment (FDI) has been the single largest and most stable source of external development capital in Asia and the Pacific (see Figure).

In 2022 alone, FDI flows into the region exceeded US$300 billion, outpacing official development aid (ODA), remittances and portfolio investment flows. Even in 2023, when global investment slowed under higher interest rates and geopolitical uncertainty, FDI into the region remained close to $290 billion.

Figure: External capital inflows to developing countries in Asia and the Pacific

Source: Created by ESCAP based on World Development Indicators, UNCTAD, and IMF data.

For a region facing a $1.5 trillion annual financing gap to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), this is more than a statistic. It is a reminder that the future of development finance and achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development depends on whether countries can effectively attract and channel FDI.

From the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (AAAA) in 2015 to the most recent Sevilla Commitment agreed at the International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), the global community is aligned to leveraging FDI for sustainable development. In fact, the Sevilla Commitment elevated the role of FDI.

While the AAAA positioned FDI as complementary to public finances for sustainable development, the Sevilla Commitment identified FDI as a key source of development capital, devoting an entire subsection to scaling up FDI.

ODA, portfolio investments and remittances all play important roles. But none match the stability, scale or transformative power of FDI. While ODA is vital for humanitarian and social priorities, donor budgets are increasingly squeezed by competing demands such as defence spending and climate adaptation.

Portfolio investments represent a large volume but are more susceptible to global economic events and often seek short-term returns. Personal remittances are stable and sustain household welfare. However, remittances are primarily consumption-oriented and often are not channelled to building productive capacity. FDI is different. It can build renewable energy plants, expand digital infrastructure, and create jobs. It is not just money flowing in; it is productive capital tied to long-term development.

Nonetheless, not all FDI is equal. Its impact depends on whether investments are effectively channelled towards SDG priorities. To accomplish this, investment promotion agencies (IPAs), with their mandates to promote, attract, and facilitate FDI, play a crucial role. With the right strategies and tools, IPAs can ensure that the FDI contributes to sustainable development needs.

The following three areas are particularly important for action by the IPAs.

1. Aligning and implementing IPA’s investment attraction strategies with SDGs.

IPAs need to create medium-term investment promotion and attraction strategies that are aligned with their SDG priorities. This involves IPAs finding their country’s “niche” target sectors to attract investments.

Aligning strategies with the SDGs is essential because many corporate investors now value alignment as part of their ESG investment criteria. Over the past several years, ESCAP has supported its member States in developing and implementing practical, targeted investment promotion and attraction strategies. These projects have enabled IPAs to narrow their focus, identify niche opportunities, and connect with high-potential investors.

2. Leveraging regional cooperation on investment promotion.

While IPAs often compete for investors, regional cooperation can be even more powerful—especially in attracting cross-border investments that require scale. By pooling markets and aligning promotion efforts, countries can present themselves not as fragmented destinations but as part of a larger, integrated investment destination. This approach not only makes the region more attractive to global investors but also enables each country to highlight its comparative strengths within wider value chains.

ESCAP has been at the forefront of advancing such cooperation. In South East Asia, the ASEAN Regional Investment Promotion Action Plan (RIPAP) 2025–2030 was endorsed by all ASEAN member States as the first region-wide initiative to jointly promote investment opportunities.

In Central Asia, ESCAP and the International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation launched the Boosting Exports through FDI programme, which helps countries attract investment that strengthens regional value chains and to become more competitive. Regional collaboration of this kind demonstrates that cooperation—not just competition—can unlock larger, more sustainable flows of FDI.

3. Developing impact measurement tools.

Developing and utilizing impact measurement tools can help IPAs demonstrate how their work is contributing to advancing the SDGs. With database systems and tools, IPAs can track growth in sectors like green industries or progress on digital transformation, making their impact more visible. For example, Investment Fiji has tailored its Customer Relationship Management system to more effectively monitor how the investment they have helped facilitate contributes to the SDGs.

As traditional development aid budgets plateau, FDI remains the most stable and transformative capital for building productive capacity. FDI has already been instrumental in driving SDGs in areas such as transitioning to clean energy, accelerating digital connectivity, and generating decent jobs needed for inclusive growth. But to fully realize this potential, governments and IPAs must be strategic, collaborative and impact-driven.

ESCAP stands ready to support its member States and their IPAs in developing and implementing FDI promotion and attraction strategies aligned with SDGs.

Heather Lynne Taylor-Strauss is Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP; Eiichiro Takinami is Junior Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Opinion polls show that the majority of the U.S. population holds positive views on immigration. Credit: Shutterstock.

By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

Most of the population in this country wants immigrants, but the current government does not share the same sentiment. The country in question is the United States, often referred to as “a nation of immigrants”, home to more immigrants than any other country worldwide, having received over 100 million immigrants since its founding in 1776.

Opinion polls show that the majority of the U.S. population holds positive views on immigration. A national survey conducted in June revealed a record high of 79% of U.S. adults considering immigration beneficial for the country, with 17% viewing it negatively (Figure 1).

 

Source: Gallup Poll.

 

The poll also found that 62% of U.S. adults disapprove of the president’s hardline immigration enforcement measures. Specifically, a majority of the U.S. public opposes immigration arrests in protected areas such as places of worship, schools, hospitals, and clinics.

Opinion polls show that the majority of the U.S. population holds positive views on immigration. A national survey conducted in June revealed a record high of 79% of U.S. adults considering immigration beneficial for the country, with 17% viewing it negatively

It is estimated that the current government authorities have deported at least 180,000 people so far. By the start of August, the number of deportations is reported to have reached close to 1,500 people per day.

Analyses of recent census data show that in the first seven months of 2025, the U.S. foreign-born population declined significantly, estimated to be between 1.5 million and 2.2 million.

The foreign-born population decreased from 53.3 million immigrants, a record high representing 15.8% of the U.S. population, to 51.9 million immigrants or 15.4% of the country’s population, with other estimates of the decline even lower at 51.1 million. The drop in the foreign-born population marked the first decline in the country’s immigrant population since the 1960s.

Many in the U.S., estimated to be about a third of the population, have expressed agreement with the general principle of deporting undocumented migrants, especially those who have committed violent crimes.

However, a national opinion poll conducted in late June found that the majority of the U.S. population, 54%, believe the government’s immigrant enforcement program has “gone too far” with their methods and tactics being extreme, aggressive, and heavy-handed.

Additionally, 78% of the U.S. population favor providing pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already living in the country, with the proportion rising to 85% for immigrant children.

The proportion of U.S. adults who want immigration to remain at its current level is 38%, while 26% would like to see it increased. In contrast, 30% prefer a reduction in immigration (Figure 2).

 

Source: Gallup Poll.

 

Another survey found that 60% of the U.S. population disapprove of the suspension of most asylum applications and the termination of Temporary Protected Status. Many have objected to the administration’s steps to block access to the asylum process, which is in violation of U.S. law.

Additionally, on his first day in office, the U.S. president issued an executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for babies of undocumented immigrants and individuals with temporary status in the country.

If birthright citizenship were to end in the U.S., it would impact an estimated 6% of the country’s annual births, or about 225,000 babies born in the country each year.

However, a national survey conducted in June revealed that 68% of registered U.S. voters actually support birthright citizenship, which was established by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1868.

Section 1 of the amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”. The president’s executive order ending birthright citizenship has become a significant legal battle for the country and will likely be decided by the Supreme Court.

The current administration considers all undocumented immigrants living in the country as criminals and has falsely claimed that undocumented migrants are responsible for the rise in crime, despite data showing crime rates have been decreasing.

It is important to note that being in the United States illegally is a civil violation, not a criminal one. Many undocumented immigrants who have been arrested have not been convicted of a crime.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled that the administration could resume expedited deportations of migrants to countries that are not their places of origin, referred to as third-country deportations. The administration has reached agreements with countries like Honduras, Rwanda, and Uganda to accept deported migrants who are not their own citizens.

These agreements allow for redirecting asylum-seekers to countries that are not their own if the U.S. government believes these nations can fairly assess their claims for humanitarian protection.

Confusingly, the U.S. president recently ordered a “new” population census that excludes undocumented immigrants.

This is a historic demand, considering the U.S. has counted every person in its census for over 230 years, dating back to 1790. During his first term, the president tried to alter the country’s decennial population census by adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, but the Supreme Court blocked it.

The U.S. Census Bureau projects that approximately one million immigrants per year will drive the country’s population growth throughout the rest of the 21st century. The nation’s fertility rate, at 1.63 births per woman in 2024, is expected to remain well below the replacement level in the coming decades.

By mid-century, immigration is expected to contribute twice as many people to the U.S. population as natural increase. According to the main series population projection, by 2080, the current U.S. population of 342 million is projected to reach nearly 370 million (Figure 3).

 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau.

 

However, without future immigrants and fertility remaining below replacement, the U.S. population is projected to decline as deaths soon begin to outnumber births. The Congressional Budget Office expects deaths to exceed births by 2031.

By the end of the 21st century, the Census Bureau estimates that without immigration the country will experience nearly 2 million more deaths than births. The U.S. population in the zero immigration scenario is expected to decline to about 226 million, or approximately 116 million fewer people in 2100 than today.

The United States is currently experiencing a significant need for workers across various sectors of the economy, including agriculture, construction, healthcare, hospitality and manufacturing.

Immigrant workers are seen as crucial in filling these labor shortages, especially for jobs such as farmworkers that the native-born U.S. population typically does not want to do.

Many economists have emphasized that immigration is a vital component of a healthy U.S. economy. The president’s deportation and tariff policies are believed to be contributing to an inflationary shock to the economy.

Immigration can help reduce inflation, strengthen manufacturing and increase employment rates. The chair of the Federal Reserve has indicated that the president’s stricter immigration policies are one of the reasons U.S. economic growth has slowed.

In addition to filling job vacancies, immigrant workers also contribute to the growth of the country’s economy and boost tax revenue. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that immigration growth will add $1.2 trillion in federal revenue over the period from 2024 to 2034.

The U.S. population is expected to undergo significant demographic ageing in the coming decades. By 2035, the number of people in the U.S. aged 65 years or older is projected to exceed the number of children under the age of 18.

As the U.S. population ages, the number of working-age individuals per retired person is decreasing. In 1975, the potential dependency ratio of those aged 20 to 64 years old per person aged 65 years or older was slightly over five. Currently, the dependency ratio is about three and is expected to decline to two by 2075. Without future immigration, the U.S. dependency ratio is projected to be approximately 1.5 by 2075.

In summary, it is clear that the majority of the population in the United States supports immigration, while the government does not. Despite the widespread backing for immigration and the substantial demographic, economic, and social impacts of immigration, the new administration is concentrating on significantly decreasing immigration. They have put in place policies, initiated programs, and issued executive actions to achieve this objective.

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of various publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.

 

A wind farm in the state of Baja California, in Northwestern Mexico. This territory depends on fossil fuels for electricity generation, while the contribution of renewables is still low, but it is gradually moving towards residential solar generation. Credit: Sempra

By Emilio Godoy
MEXICO, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

Over the past four months, Mexican researcher Nicolás Velázquez has paid around US$23 for electricity, thanks to the photovoltaic system installed in his home in the northern city of Mexicali.

“You can see the direct benefit. My neighbor received a bill over US$400. The problem is the high temperatures, which double demand” from March to August, said Velázquez, coordinator of the  Center for Renewable Energy Studies at the Engineering Institute of the public Autonomous University of Baja California.

Due to the high temperatures in cities such as Mexicali, capital of the northwestern state of Baja California, people need air conditioning systems during the summer, which increases electricity consumption in a state with 3.77 million inhabitants, affected by a shortage of infrastructure and generation.“Distributed generation is better for us. It is done by Mexican companies. We import the technology, but there is a chain of Mexican participation. We participate from engineering onwards, activating the economy to a certain level, helping the residential sector”–Nicolás Velázquez.

In late August, residents of several neighborhoods in Mexicali blocked the highway between that city and neighboring Tijuana due to a lack of electricity.

In an attempt to alleviate the situation, the Mexican government launched the Techos Solares del Bienestar (Solar Roofs for Welfare) program in March, aimed at low-income homeowners who pay high rates and consume between 400 and 1,000 kilowatt hours between July and August, so they receive solar panels for their homes in Mexicali and the neighboring municipality of San Felipe.

It is one of the steps to relaunch the energy transition to less polluting sources that the previous government halted in 2018.

The initial plan is to install solar panels in 5,500 homes in Mexicali with an investment of around US$10 million. The ultimate goal is to cover 150,000 homes by 2030. The scheme promises to reduce electricity bills from 49% to 89%.

For Velázquez, the central question revolves around the advisability of resorting to centralized or distributed generation, which consists of electricity production by systems of many small generation sources close to the end consumer.

“Distributed generation is better for us. It is done by Mexican companies. We import the technology, but there is a chain of Mexican participation. We participate from engineering onwards, activating the economy to a certain level, helping the residential sector,” he said from Mexicali.

In his opinion, “there has to be a balance between centralized and distributed generation, because there will not be a single solution. More energy justice is achieved through distributed generation.”

In Mexico, home to some 129 million people, there are at least 12,000 communities without electricity and some 9,000 homes without connection to the national grid, a quarter of which are located in Mexicali, which had 1.05 million inhabitants according to the 2020 census.

Small-scale or distributed generation is on the rise in the country.

Since 2007, the government’s Energy Regulatory Commission has authorized 518,019 licenses for a distributed energy generation capacity of 4,497 megawatts (MW). In 2024, it approved 106,934 interconnections for 1,086 MW.

The western state of Jalisco and the northern states of Nuevo León and Chihuahua top the list, while Baja California ranks 14th among the 32 Mexican states.

In July, the government’s National Energy Commission updated the regulations for interconnected self-consumption for installations between 0.7 and 20 MW, which expands the margin for distributed generation, also known as citizen generation.

Solar panels in a community in the municipality of Ensenada, in the northwestern state of Baja California. The existing microgrid in that town provides electricity to the small community. Credit: Secihti

More promises

The energy policy of president Claudia Sheinbaum, in office since October 1, has so far been marked more by proposals than by concrete actions, and Baja California is no exception to this dynamic.

Her government will allocate US$12.3 billion for electricity generation, US$7.5 billion for transmission infrastructure, and US$3.6 billion for decentralized photovoltaic production in homes.

The plan would add 21,893 MW to the national energy matrix, reaching 37.8% clean energy from the current 22.5%, so that the state-owned Federal Electricity Commission (CFE) would hold 54% of the market, with the rest going to private and individual entities.

On August 26, the president announced the construction of two solar thermal plants in the state of Baja California Sur, which shares a peninsula with Baja California, with a public investment of US$800 million to generate more than 100 MW. The territory is also isolated from the national grid and suffers from a chronic energy deficit.

Solar thermal energy converts solar radiation into electricity using mirrors to generate steam and drive turbines, as well as enabling energy storage.

The CFE plans to tender phase II of the Puerto Peñasco photovoltaic plant, in the town of the same name in the northern state of Sonora, with a capacity of 300 MW and 10.3 MW of battery backup. The first 120 MW phase of this facility has been operating since 2023. Completed in 2026, it will contribute 1,000 MW at a cost of US$1.6 billion.

However, the Mexican government continues to promote fossil fuels, despite the urgency of phasing them out, as it seeks to strengthen the CFE and the state-owned Petróleos Mexicanos.

All of this impacts places such as Baja California, where 16 public and private power plants operate, with an installed capacity of 3,461 MW, including three wind farms with more than 300 MW of capacity and three solar farms with 50 MW.

The private company Sempra Infraestructura, a subsidiary of the US company Sempra, is building a wind farm with a capacity of 300 MW, which is expected to be operational in 2026. In addition, CFE operates a 340 MW geothermal plant.

Despite its shortcomings, the state exports around 1,100 MW to the neighboring US state of California and imports around 400 MW. Baja California could produce 6,550 MW of solar power, 3,495 MW of wind power, and 2,000 MW of geothermal power.

In addition, CFE is building two combined-cycle power plants in Baja California that burn gas and generate steam to drive turbines, which would reduce blackouts.

The country faces insufficient production to meet annual demand growth of about 4% and an obsolete power grid.

In the first half of 2025, the country generated 310.49 terawatt-hours, virtually the same as during the same period last year. Some sources, such as gas, hydroelectric, wind, and photovoltaic, increased, but others, such as thermoelectric and nuclear, decreased.

In Mexico, electricity generation depends mainly on fossil gas, followed by hydroelectricity and nuclear energy. Renewable sources have a capacity of 33,517 MW, but only contribute one-fifth of the electricity produced.

Energy map of the northern Mexican state of Baja California. Electricity generation is not enough to meet growing demand, causing frequent blackouts. Credit: Government of Baja California

New schemes

Baja California’s 2022-2027 Energy Program consists of four strategies, including providing access to electricity to remote communities and unregulated housing, as well as promoting the rapid transition to decarbonization and the use of clean energies.

In addition, it envisions eight outcomes, including the promotion of two annual microgrid power generation projects for isolated communities and a 3% increase in alternative electricity generation. However, there is no evidence of progress toward these goals.

If it so desired, the Mexican government could transform its national electricity subsidy of more than US$5 billion annually into distributed generation.

The Universal Electricity Service Fund is a case in point. Intended to cover marginalized communities, available data indicate that it has covered more than 1,000 municipalities out of a total of 2,469, including two in Baja California, since 2019.

Velázquez proposed that these funds could finance solar panels and microgrids.

“Year after year, they give a subsidy, but if these families were provided with a photovoltaic system, it would solve the problem at its root. We need to look for more far-reaching measures; the actions have to be different,” he said.

In December 2023, during the climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Mexico joined the Global Renewables and Energy Efficiency Pledge, which consists of tripling alternative installed capacity and doubling the energy efficiency rate by 2030. In comparison, Sheinbaum’s plans fall short.

Winnie Wambui, co-founder of Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm in Kenya, speaks to IPS outside the Dealroom at the Africa Food Systems Forum 2025, held at the Centre International de Conférences Abdou Diouf (CICAD) in Dakar, Senegal, September 4, 2025. Credit: Chemtai Kirui/IPS

By Chemtai Kirui
DAKAR, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

Winnie Wambui leans forward on the panel stage, microphone in hand, scanning the room until she spots a raised hand.

Everyone in the room wears headphones, each voice isolated so that discussions don’t clash with sessions in adjacent halls. A question cuts through: how did a student science project become a commercial business?

At 24, Wambui, a Kenyan agripreneur, runs Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm, which recycles organic waste into animal feed using black soldier flies.

“Back then, I didn’t know it would become a farm or a business,” she said to a room of agripreneurs, researchers, and investors, describing her first experiments in 2022 as an energy engineering student at Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT).

Today, her eight-person team processes around 30 tonnes of waste each month and monitors the carbon emissions avoided.

The enterprise now generates at least USD 1,000 in monthly revenue, a modest but steady profit by Kenyan standards.

Inside the calm Knowledge Hub, on a panel organized by the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), Wambui tells her story to a dozen listeners in an intimate, almost subdued setting. But just outside, at the leafy Centre International de Conference’s Abdou Diouf (CICAD) in Dakar, Senegal, the atmosphere is charged.

Presidents, cabinet ministers, development banks, and agribusiness executives pace the halls at the annual Africa Food Systems Forum (AFSF) 2025, the continent’s flagship platform for agricultural policy and investment.

This year, the forum positioned youth at the center of Africa’s food security agenda.

Wambui is part of a new generation of innovative agripreneurs that governments and financiers promise to support.

For the first time, youth agripreneurs joined heads of state on the Forum’s opening stage, a symbolic gesture of recognition in a region where nearly 400 million people are under 35.

“Our median age is just 19. And by 2050, one in three young people in the world will be African,” said Claver Gatete, Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA).

He said that if given land, finance, technology and markets, the youths can feed not only Africa but also the world.

However, turning such vision into reality is where the continent struggles.

The African Development Bank (AfDB) often says that Africa holds roughly 60 percent of the world’s uncultivated arable land, yet poor infrastructure, limited financing, and climate shocks keep much of it idle.

With the continent collectively importing approximately USD50 billion worth of food annually, according to the African Export–Import Bank (Afreximbank), the stakes are high.

At the national level, countries like Kenya continue to face hunger crises at emergency levels.

At the start of the year, the World Food Programme estimated that around two million people were experiencing acute hunger—a recurring crisis in a country with relatively better infrastructure and higher investment flows than many of its East African neighbors.

Experts say that despite localized crises, structural issues in African agriculture worsen food insecurity across the continent.

“We have relied on grants and aid to keep agriculture afloat, and this has made the agriculture sector stuck in a risk perception trap,” said Adesuwa Ifedi, Vice President of Africa Programs at Heifer International.

Ifedi said that commercial banks and investors avoid the sector, leaving grants to fill the gap. But grant dependence can undermine ventures in the eyes of private financiers.

“Grants should leverage commercial capital so the ecosystem can thrive,” Ifedi said.

This year’s Forum coincided with the recent African Union’s rollout of its Kampala Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Strategy & Action Plan (2026–2035), or CAADP 3.0.

The new 10-year plan aims to mobilize USD 100 billion in investment, raise farm output by 45 percent, cut post-harvest losses in half, triple intra-African agrifood trade by 2035, and place youth inclusion at the core of Africa’s food future under the AU’s Agenda 2063.

In Dakar, over 30 agriculture ministers gathered under the chairmanship of former Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn Boshem, pledging to move beyond policy drafting toward delivering tangible results for agribusiness investment.

Their top priority, they said, was to shrink Africa’s food import bill by strengthening regional value chains.

Dr. Janet Edeme, head of the Rural Economy Division at the African Union Commission, told IPS that the Forum provides mechanisms to operationalize CAADP 3.0, aiming to empower at least 30 percent of youth in the agri-food sector while closing a USD 65–70 billion annual financing gap for agricultural small and medium-sized enterprises (agri-SMEs).

She said AFSF offers a rare opportunity for youthful agripreneurs to showcase bankable projects, access mentorship, and meet investors who would otherwise be out of reach.

“There are dedicated spaces—deal rooms, youth innovation competitions, investment roundtables—where these innovators can connect with governments, development finance institutions, and private investors,” said Edeme.

Organizers pointed to new spaces for youth to meet investors, but agripreneurs like Wambui said those opportunities felt distant.

She had never heard of the AU’s new flagship plan.

“I’m only hearing about that from you. If it’s meant to guide Africa’s food future, why aren’t there clear materials or programs I can see and use?” Wambui said. “Otherwise, we leave without knowing what strategies exist to support our work.”

By day two of the six-day forum, she had found her way into the deal room, the flagship space to connect entrepreneurs with investors, but instead of streamlined matchmaking, she found confusion.

“We are looking for the investors, and they’re looking for us—yet we don’t meet. Deals still depend on connections. That’s why I came to Dakar.”

Wambui, who co-founded Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm with two other partners, said the business has grown enough to cover wages, taxes, and debt repayments. Banks now extend her loans.

But that access to financing remains an exception in a system stacked against most, said Dr. Eklou Attiogbevi-Somado, the African Development Bank’s Regional Manager for Agriculture and Agro-Industry in West Africa.

He said that AfDB data shows commercial banks in Africa channel just 3–4 percent of their lending into agriculture.

Dr. David Amudavi, CEO of Biovision Africa Trust, said this capital drought is a huge concern in a sector that drives most livelihoods on the continent.

Amudavi, whose non-profit organization promotes ecological agriculture, said that the squeeze leaves farmers, and especially young agripreneurs, struggling to access credit for starting or scaling their agribusinesses, even though nearly 60 percent of Africa’s unemployed are under 25.

“Without finance, many youth-led ventures stay stuck at micro-scale or collapse,” Amudavi said.

Not far from the Youth Dome, at the deal room, Tanzanian agripreneur Nelson Joseph Kisanga, the co-founder of Get Aroma Spices, is also navigating the same maze.

Seven years ago, he left a banking career to try poultry farming, losing almost everything in his first three years.

Kisanga regrouped, merged his venture with that of his wife, Deborah, also a young agripreneur, and built Get Aroma Spices, now working with more than 50,000 farmers across southern Tanzania.

“Agriculture back home is seen as not for young people,” he said. “Even now, scaling means loans at high interest rates. There’s no other way.”

The family-run company exports turmeric, ginger, cardamom, and avocado oil while operating a youth- and women-led agro-processing hub through a public-private partnership.

His presence at the AFSF forum has already borne fruit.

“My intention coming here was to break into the West African market, and I’m happy to say I have clinched a supply deal in Ghana. All that’s left is for the lawyers to finalize the contract.” Kisanga said, before moving to the Youth Dome, a separate pavilion for young participants.

Inside, some groups chatted, others played basketball and table tennis, while others listened as young agri-food innovators pitched their ideas to a panel of investors.

Despite the fanfare, the forum ended without revealing how much capital reached youth-led ventures.

The most visible funding for youth at the summit came via the GoGettaz Agripreneur Prize, a pan-African initiative under the Generation Africa movement. The prize awarded USD 50,000 each to Egypt’s Naglaa Mohammad, who turns agricultural waste into natural products, and Uganda’s Samuel Muyita, who uses nanotechnology to reduce post-harvest fruit and vegetable losses.

An additional USD 60,000 impact award brought total prizes to roughly USD 160,000.

Other announcements included a USD 6.7 million trade programme from the United Kingdom (UK), the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), and the African Union (AU).

Senegal also launched a USD 22.5 million pilot for Community Agricultural Cooperatives, with financing linked to the African Food Systems Resilience Fund.

Yet there was no breakdown showing how much, if any, flowed to youth-led ventures.

The opacity mirrors past patterns.

Public summaries from the 2023 deal room reported only USD 3.5 million in closed investments, with no traceable flows to youth-led enterprises.

With AFSF positioned as Africa’s premier delivery platform, observers measured the announcements against CAADP 3.0’s USD 100 billion mobilization target, saying the gap is stark.

“We have seen this pattern before: big pledges at the summit, but little clarity or follow-up on how much actually reaches youth and smallholder farmers—the backbone of African food production,” said Famara Diédhiou, a Senegal-based food systems program manager with a regional civil society network.

“Without such accountability and inclusion of all stakeholders, these forums risk becoming mere showcases rather than platforms that deliver,” he said.

For now, even with the youth-first theme, AFSF still leaves young founders stuck in the same cycle of chasing visibility, hustling for contacts, and stitching together their own contracts.

As Wambui found, Kisanga, who has attended three previous Forums, said that in AFSF access is everything: you need to know in advance who to meet and be in the right room at the right moment.

“All visibility is currency,” said Kisanga. “That’s how you survive.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report, Senegal,

Related Articles

• Africa, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors' Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Systems, Headlines, TerraViva United Nations Climate Change Finance Kenyan Biochar Project Becomes First in Africa Validated Under European Carbon Standard
• Kenya Pilots AI System to Protect Black Rhino Calves in Aberdare National Park

By Sania Farooqui
BENGALURU, India, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

Wars and oppression leave behind not just rubble and graves. They leave behind invisible wounds, profound trauma carried by survivors. And most often, women carry the largest burden. They are targeted not only because of their gender, but because surviving and leading threaten structures based on patriarchy and domination.

Mozn Hassan

In an interview with IPS Inter Press News, Egyptian feminist, peace builder and founder of Nazra for Feminist Studies, Mozn Hassan speaks about a question she has spent decades grappling with, why are women always attacked in times of conflict? Her response is sober, because women hold the potential to rebuild life.

“Violence against women is never accidental,” Hassan explains. “It is systematic. It’s about control, silencing, and making sure women do not have the tools to stand up, to resist, to create alternative futures.”

In this report by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the percentage of women killed in armed conflict doubled in 2024, accounting for 40 percent of all civilian casualties. “Over 600 million women and girls live in conflict-affected areas, a 50 percent increase since 2017.” The report points out that nearly every person exposed to a humanitarian crisis suffers from psychological distress, and 1 in 5 people go on to develop long term mental health conditions like depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. “Only 2 percent get the care they need”.

The matter of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) has been brought up during the previous two reviews of the UN peacebuilding architecture (2020 and 2024) mentioned in this report of the International Peace Institute, “a peaceful society cannot exist if psychological impacts of war (such as grief, depression, stress and trauma) are left unaddressed in individuals, families and communities.”

Hassan has been a pioneer in the application of narrative exposure therapy (NET) among women in refugee camps and war zones. In contrast to other therapy models that concentrate on one-on-one psychological treatment, through NET she pushes for collective healing ans solidarity.

“Narrative exposure therapy is one of the tools of community psychology. It puts collective trauma-informed therapy higher than individual approaches,” she explains. “Being within collective spaces brings sharing of experiences, solidarities, and makes the community itself resilient. They can go through this afterward by themselves, they don’t need another, more educated person in a power dynamic over them.”

The approach, according to Mozn, has shown to be successful in dealing with Syrian, Palestinian, and Lebanese women in refugee camps in Lebanon and Turkey. Through five- or six-day workshops, participants narrate and re-narrate their stories, building strength on each other while creating knowledge and data on the realities of war.

Hassan remembers how women in camps, frequently from various ethnic or religious minorities, drew strength not just from sharing their own experiences but from hearing others. In this way, they developed resilience where there should have been none. “But when it’s collective, people are not left alone with their pain. They gain tools, they gain solidarity, and they gain resilience.”

Hassan points out that trauma is not a monolithic experience: “Studies show that only 20–25% of people who face trauma develop PTSD. One of the misconceptions has been that everyone who experiences trauma must have PTSD, it’s not true. Collective approaches make interventions more applicable and save resources, which are always limited for women.”

Above all, NET has given strength and mechanisms to these women to move forward. “Trauma doesn’t happen overnight, it’s an accumulation. Healing is the same. It’s not about saying: I was sick, and now I’m healed. Healing is a process. When you are triggered, you shouldn’t go back to the first point. You can have your own tools to say: I don’t want to be this version of myself while I was facing trauma,” she reflects.

For Hassan, one of the key questions of feminist peacebuilding is why women are so typically assaulted in war, revolution, and even in so-called peacetimes.

“We must stop thinking about peacebuilding only in the traditional way, only when there is open war,” she argues. “Patriarchy, militarization, securitization, and societal violence are all forms of violence that normalize abuse every day. Stability is not the same as peace.”

She points to Egypt as an example. While the country has not witnessed a civil war like Syria or Sudan, it does have systemic gender-based violence: “Egypt has more than 100 million people, half of them women. Official statistics say domestic violence is more than 60%, sexual harassment more than 98%. Femicide is rising. This is the production of collective trauma and acceptance of violence.”

The 2011 revolution, she remembers, brought these dynamics into sharp focus: “What we saw in Tahrir Square, the gang rapes, the mass assaults, was the production of societal violence. Years of harassment and normalization led to an explosion of gender-based violence that was then denied.”

Hassan’s warning is stark: the absence of bombs does not mean peace. “As long as you are not bombed by another country, people say you don’t need peace because you live in peace. But the absence of war is not peace.”

Healing, for Hassan, cannot be separated from politics and accountability. She rejects the idea that healing means forgetting.

“Forgiveness or letting go needs a process. Many people cannot sit at the same table with those who hurt them personally. But maybe it’s not our generation who will forgive. Maybe we can at least leave to others a better daily life than we lived,” she says.

Accountability, she argues, is a requirement for stability. “You couldn’t reach stability while people are thinking only about revenge. Collective healing in Egypt is important, but it also needs accountability, acceptance, and structural change.”

She also criticizes the tendency to depoliticize feminist movements: “Our definition of politics is not only about being in parliament. It is about feminist politics as tools for change everywhere. Too often feminists were pushed to say ‘we are not political.’ That sidelined many women who were engaging directly in politics.”

In spite of repression and trauma, Hassan says that women remain incredibly resilient. What they need most is recognition and tangible support to rebuild their lives and societies.

“The amazing tools of women on resilience gives me hope. I saw it so clearly with Syrian women, leaving everything, rebuilding societies, changing everywhere they go. Their accumulation of resilience is what gives me hope,” she says.

However, Mozn is wary of the narrative that glorifies women’s strength without addressing its costs. “We shouldn’t have to be strong all the time. We should be free, and lead lives where we can just be happy without strength and grit. But unfortunately, the times we live in demand resilience.”

Mozn Hassan’s words make us question what peace actually is. It is not merely ceasefires or agreements, but a challenge to deal with patriarchy, violence, and trauma at its core. Healing is political, accountability matters, and rebuilding with women is imperative. As she says: “Maybe it’s not our generation who will see forgiveness, but we can try to leave to others a better daily life than we lived.”

Her vision is both sobering and optimistic: peace will not be arriving tomorrow, but as long as women keep building resilience and insisting upon self-respect, the way to it is not yet closed.

Sania Farooqui is an independent journalist, host of The Peace Brief, a platform dedicated to amplifying women’s voices in peacebuilding and human rights. Sania has previously worked with CNN, Al Jazeera and TIME.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Credit: Suriya Phosri/Getty Images via Gallo Images

By Samuel King
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

Algorithms decide who lives and dies in Gaza. AI-powered surveillance tracks journalists in Serbia. Autonomous weapons are paraded through Beijing’s streets in displays of technological might. This isn’t dystopian fiction – it’s today’s reality. As AI reshapes the world, the question of who controls this technology and how it’s governed has become an urgent priority.

AI’s reach extends into surveillance systems that can track protesters, disinformation campaigns that can destabilise democracies and military applications that dehumanise conflict by removing human agency from life-and-death decisions. This is enabled by an absence of adequate safeguards.

Governance failings

Last month, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution to establish the first international mechanisms – an Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and a Global Dialogue on AI Governance – meant to govern the technology, agreed as part of the Global Digital Compact at the Summit of the Future in September. This non-binding resolution marked a first positive step towards potential stronger regulations. But its negotiation process revealed deep geopolitical fractures.

Through its Global AI Governance Initiative, China champions a state-led approach that entirely excludes civil society from governance discussions, while positioning itself as a leader of the global south. It frames AI development as a tool for economic advancement and social objectives, presenting this vision as an alternative to western technological dominance.

Meanwhile, the USA under Donald Trump has embraced technonationalism, treating AI as a tool for economic and geopolitical leverage. Recent decisions, including a 100 per cent tariff on imported AI chips and purchase of a 10 per cent stake in chipmaker Intel, signal a retreat from multilateral cooperation in favour of transactional bilateral arrangements.

The European Union (EU) has taken a different approach, implementing the world’s first comprehensive AI Act, which comes into force in August 2026. Its risk-based regulatory framework represents progress, banning AI systems deemed to present ‘unacceptable’ risks while requiring transparency measures for others. Yet the legislation contains troubling gaps.

While initially proposing to ban live facial recognition technology unconditionally, the AI Act’s final version permits limited use with safeguards that human rights groups argue are inadequate. Further, while emotion recognition technologies are banned in schools and workplaces, they remain permitted for law enforcement and immigration control, a particularly concerning decision given existing systems’ documented racial bias. The ProtectNotSurveil coalition has warned that migrants and Europe’s racial minorities are serving as testing grounds for AI-powered surveillance and tracking tools. Most critically, the AI Act exempts systems used for national security purposes and autonomous drones used in warfare.

The growing climate and environmental impacts of AI development adds another layer of urgency to governance questions. Interactions with AI chatbots consume roughly 10 times more electricity than standard internet searches. The International Energy Agency projects that global data centre electricity consumption will more than double by 2030, with AI driving most of this increase. Microsoft’s emissions have grown by 29 per cent since 2020 due to AI-related infrastructure, while Google quietly removed its net-zero emissions pledge from its website as AI operations pushed its carbon footprint up 48 per cent between 2019 and 2023. AI expansion is driving construction of new gas-powered plants and delaying plans to decommission coal facilities, in direct contradiction to the need to end fossil fuel use to limit global temperature rises.

Champions needed

The current patchwork of regional regulations, non-binding international resolutions and lax industry self-regulation falls far short of what’s needed to govern a technology with such profound global implications. State self-interest continues to prevail over collective human needs and universal rights, while the companies that own AI systems accumulate immense power largely unchecked.

The path forward requires an acknowledgment that AI governance isn’t merely a technical or economic issue – it’s about power distribution and accountability. Any regulatory framework that fails to confront the concentration of AI capabilities in the hands of a few tech giants will inevitably fall short. Approaches that exclude civil society voices or prioritise national competitive advantage over human rights protections will prove inadequate to the challenge.

The international community must urgently strengthen AI governance mechanisms, starting with binding agreements on lethal autonomous weapons systems that have stalled in UN discussions for over a decade. The EU should close the loopholes in its AI Act, particularly regarding military applications and surveillance technologies. Governments worldwide need to establish coordination mechanisms that can effectively counter tech giants’ control over AI development and deployment.

Civil society must not stand alone in this fight. Any hopes of a shift towards human rights-centred AI governance depend on champions emerging within the international system to prioritise human rights over narrowly defined national interests and corporate profits. With AI development accelerating rapidly, there’s no time to waste.

Samuel King is a researcher with the Horizon Europe-funded research project ENSURED: Shaping Cooperation for a World in Transition at CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

 

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

Stakeholders in an India-UN Development Partnership Fund project in Fiji, focusing on developing a climate disaster risk financing framework and parametric insurance.
 
In recognition of the continued importance of South-South cooperation, the United Nations General Assembly, in its resolution 58/220, endorsed the observation of the United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation. 12 September marks the adoption of the 1978 Buenos Aires Plan of Action (BAPA), a pivotal framework for technical cooperation among developing countries.

By Omar Hilale and Dima Al-Khatib
NEW YORK, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

As the United Nations commemorated the UN Day for South-South Cooperation last Friday, we are reminded that solidarity among the countries of the Global South is not just a matter of history or principle, but a proven pathway to building a fairer, more sustainable future.

This year’s commemoration took place at a defining moment.

We are past the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, yet global progress is lagging. More than 800 million people still live in extreme poverty. Many developing countries continue to spend more on debt servicing than on essential public services like health, education, or infrastructure.

At the same time, shared crises – climate change, food insecurity, digital divides, conflict, and systemic inequalities – are colliding and compounding what the Secretary-General has called a polycrisis.

And yet, South-South and triangular cooperation are emerging as beacons of resilience and collective action. They are not abstract concepts, but vibrant modalities driving innovation, scaling tested solutions, and ensuring ownership by the communities most affected by today’s challenges. They show us that every nation – regardless of income level – has something to contribute to our common future.

Across the Global South, we see powerful examples of solutions that are both home-grown and widely adaptable. Through peer-to-peer learning and solidarity, countries are advancing digital transformation, expanding access to health coverage, creating resilient food systems, and mobilizing innovative financing such as blended finance, debt swaps, and impact investments.

Triangular cooperation – where Southern-led initiatives are complemented by the expertise of developed-country partners or multilateral actors – is amplifying these results, connecting experiences across regions and continents.

UNOSSC is providing best practices, offering peer-to-peer learning and innovation to connect and scale these efforts. Our South-South Galaxy makes tested solutions accessible to policymakers, practitioners, and development partners worldwide.

These range from climate adaptation strategies in Small Island Developing States to sustainable agriculture innovations in Africa and Latin America. Our new South-South and Triangular Cooperation Solutions Lab is incubating promising ideas and linking them with partners and financing mechanisms to achieve impact at scale.

But we must go further. At the 22nd Session of the High-level Committee on South-South Cooperation earlier this year, Member States made clear that the financing gap remains a critical obstacle. They called for sustained, predictable resources — and for the UN system itself to design innovative financing windows that align with the scale of ambition required.

Meeting this call to action is essential if South-South and triangular cooperation are to reach their full potential. As the primary intergovernmental body guiding South-South cooperation within the United Nations, the High-level Committee plays a vital role in shaping global policies, mobilizing political will, and ensuring that the voices of the Global South are heard at the highest levels. Its leadership is indispensable to driving collective action and fostering equitable partnerships.

The theme of the 2025 United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation – New Opportunities and Innovation through South-South and Triangular Cooperation – resonated deeply. It reflected the choice before us: to recommit and reimagine partnerships that leave no one behind, and to harness the creativity, leadership, and resilience of the Global South to transform today’s challenges into tomorrow’s opportunities.

As we marked this Day, we called on all partners and stakeholders – governments, international institutions, the UN family, civil society, and the private sector – to join hands in strengthening South-South and triangular cooperation. We must scale up what works, deepen cross-regional ties, and invest in institutional architecture that enables collaboration, innovation, and resilience.

The stakes could not be higher. But with an economically empowered and innovative Global South, we can pave the way toward a more just, inclusive, and sustainable future.

As we marked the United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation last week, let us celebrate the spirit of solidarity that unites us – and let us recommit to making it the force that carries us forward to 2030 and beyond.

Omar Hilale is Ambassador of Morocco and President of the 22nd session of the High-level Committee on South-South Cooperation; and Dima Al-Khatib is Director of the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) is a coalition of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in over 100 countries promoting adherence to, and implementation of, the United Nations nuclear weapons ban treaty. Credit: ICAN

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 15 2025 (IPS)

When the high-level meeting of over 150 world political leaders takes place September 22-30, thousands of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and their accredited UN representatives will either be banned from the UN premises or permitted into the building on a strictly restricted basis– as it happens every year.

This year will not be an exception to the rule.

In a message to staffers, journalists and NGOs last week—spelling out the rigid ground rules during the summit– the UN said members of civil society organizations (CSOs) and NGOs who are invited to attend high-level meetings or other events will be required to be in possession of a valid NGO pass– and a special event ticket (indicating a specific meeting, date and time) at all times to access the premises.

“A United Nations non-governmental organization (NGO) pass alone does not grant access during the week of 22–30 September 2025”, the message warned

These restrictions have continued despite the significant role played by NGOs both at the UN and worldwide.

A former UN Secretary-General, the late Kofi Annan (1997-2006), once characterized NGOs as ”the world’s third superpower.”

And a former Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro (2007-2012) told delegates at a UN meeting, the United Nations relies on its partnership with the NGO community “in virtually everything the world body does”.

“Whether it is peace-building in sub-Saharan Africa or human rights in Latin America, disaster assistance in the Caribbean or de-mining efforts in the Middle East, the United Nations depends upon the advocacy skills, creative resources and grass-roots reach of civil society organizations in all our work,” she said, paying a compliment to NGOs.

The NGOs playing a significant role in humanitarian assistance include Oxfam, CARE International, Doctors Without Borders, International Committee of the Red Cross, the Red Crescent, Save the Children, Action Against Hunger, among others,

During an event marking the 75th anniversary of the UN Charter in 2020, the current Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, said civil society groups were a vital voice at the San Francisco Conference (where the UN was inaugurated 80 years ago).

“You have been with us across the decades, in refugee camps, in conference rooms, and in mobilizing communities in streets and town squares across the world.”

“You are with us today as we face the COVID-19 pandemic. You are our allies in upholding human rights and battling racism. You are indispensable partners in forging peace, pushing for climate action, advancing gender equality, delivering life-saving humanitarian aid and controlling the spread of deadly weapons”.

“And the world’s framework for shared progress, the Sustainable Development Goals, is unthinkable without you”, he declared.

But none of these platitudes have changed a longstanding UN policy of restricting NGO access to the UN during high-level meetings.

The annual ritual where civil society members are treated as political and social outcasts has always triggered strong protests. The United Nations justifies the restriction primarily for “security reasons”.

Currently there are over 6,400 NGOs in active consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
https://social.desa.un.org/issues/disability/cosp/list-of-non-governmental-organization-accredited-to-the-conference-of-states

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Secretary General, CIVICUS, a global alliance of civil society organizations, told IPS: “It’s really disappointing to see how year on year, civil society representatives who help the UN achieve its mandate, share its values and provide vital entry points to peoples’ needs and aspirations, are systemically excluded from the UN’s premises during UNGA week despite possessing valid annual security passes that are thoroughly vetted.”

Such blanket prohibitions on civil society representatives’ entry to the UN when momentous decisions and contentious debates are taking place are a missed opportunity to engage decision makers, he said.

“Such asymmetries in participation are the reason why many of us have been pushing for the appointment of a civil society envoy at the UN to enable better and more systemic involvement of civil society at the UN, ensure consistent engagement modalities across the UN system and drive the UN’s outreach to people around the world”.

“Despite, the UN Charter beginning with the words, ‘We the Peoples’, our call has fallen on deaf ears. It is well within the UN Secretary General’s power to appoint a civil society envoy that could be a legacy achievement, if realized,“ declared Tiwana.

Mads Christensen, Executive Director, Greenpeace International, told IPS: “We continue to believe in the UN and multilateralism as essential to achieving a green and peaceful future. Those in frontline communities and small island states most impacted by climate change must have their voices heard, as must young people whose very future is being decided. “

“We the peoples”, the opening words of the UN Charter, must not be reduced to “stakeholders consulted.” Civil society needs to be “in the room where it happens,” said Christensen.

Sanam B. Anderlini, Founder of the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), told IPS: “I find the exclusion or NGOs from UNGA ironic and tragic.”

Globally, she pointed out, “ We have raised the alarm bells about conflict, human rights abuses, the desecration of international law. Our sector is also the strongest of supporters for the UN system itself.”

“We believe in the power and potential of multilateralism, and the need for a robust UN that adheres to the principles of peace and human security. Yet the system does not stand with us. “

Today more than ever, she argued, civil society globally is under pressure, politically, financially, systematically. “Yet we still persist with doing ‘what we can’ to address societal needs – as first responders to humanitarian crises, mitigating violence”.

As the powerful abrogate their responsibilities, the least powerful are taking on that responsibility to protect.

The UN should be embracing and enabling this sector’s participation at UNGA. Just as civil society is a champion of the UN, the UN should be a champion of civil society. Yet it seems that ‘We the People of the United Nations’ are not only being marginalized but over-securitized. How many security checks, how many grounds passes does each person need?, she asked.

“How tragic that those of us advocating for peace and justice are outside of the halls of power, while those waging wars, enabling genocide and trampling international laws are inside”.

“But we will be there. If our voices are absent within the UN, that absence itself will speak louder than any words”, she declared.

Andreas Bummel, Executive Director, Democracy Without Borders, told IPS: “The UN should resist efforts by authoritarian states to delegitimize and shut out affiliated civil society groups.”
As the organization is under dramatic pressure to implement cost-cutting reforms, seen in the UN80 initiative, he said, it really needs to seek stronger engagement with civil society, citizens, and the public at large, not less.

Not admitting NGO representatives during the UNGA general debate is another lost opportunity to make a mark, declared Bummel.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Ann Maina of BIBA addressing the media at the Africa Climate Summit. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

By Isaiah Esipisu
ADDIS ABABA, Sep 12 2025 (IPS)

African climate negotiators and civil society organizations at the second Africa Climate Summit (ACS 2) have called on governments to include sustainable farming approaches and other Africa-led solutions in their revised Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) and National Adaptation Plans (NAP) ahead of COP 30, as the only way to have their priorities on the global climate negotiation agenda.

NDCs are climate action plans submitted to the UNFCCC by individual countries under the Paris Agreement, outlining their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change, while NAPs outline how countries will adapt to climate change in the medium and long term.

“Most of the issues we discuss in the negotiation rooms carry political inclinations and economic implications,” said Dr. Antwi-Boasiako Amoah, the Lead of Ghana’s delegation at the UNFCCC climate negotiation conferences and the incoming Chair for the Africa Group of Negotiators (AGN).

“If we fail to prioritize sustainable farming practices and other innovations through our NDCs and NAPs, the developed nations will happily keep the status quo because Africa remains an important market for their farm inputs, particularly fertilizers, pesticides, and fossil fuel-powered machinery, among other items,” said Amoah.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed backed this call, saying that Africa must lead in championing its solutions.

“We are not here to negotiate our survival; we are here to design the world’s next climate economy,” he told delegates at the ACS2, ahead of the 30th round of climate negotiations (COP 30) later this year in Belem, Brazil.

According to Ann Maina of the Biodiversity and Biosafety Association (BIBA), such solutions include advancing food sovereignty by rejecting exploitative industrial animal agriculture, rejecting high use of synthetic fertilizers, rejecting the grabbing of Africa’s resources in the name of greening projects, and rejecting carbon markets that come at the expense of communities while opening up polluting opportunities, especially for the Global North.

“Having Africa-led solutions will encourage just transition, which will lead to decentralized energy that should power agroecology, territorial markets, and resilient livelihoods, breaking (away from) dependence on imported fossil fuels and exploitative ‘green grabs,’” she said.

“If we make the right choices now, Africa can be the first continent to industrialize without destroying its ecosystems,” reiterated Ethiopia’s Prime Minister.

Evidence-based studies consistently show that the most viable and sustainable farming practice in Africa is the use of agroecological approaches, which emphasizeecological balance, social equity and cultural integration, thereby presenting viable strategic opportunities to address impacts of climate change while supporting sustainable development.

Yet, the progress has been very slow. A recent report by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) in all 53 African countries reveals that integration of agroecology into the NDCs and NAPS across the continent remains alarmingly low, with only 22 percent of NDCs explicitly mentioning agroecology.

“This study exposes a critical gap in policy integration and calls on all industry players to act with urgency,” said Dr. Million Belay, AFSA General Coordinator. “Agroecology is not just a farming method; it is a bold climate solution rooted in African realities, which governments should be promoting instead of working towards subsidizing harmful chemical farm inputs.”

Some of the inputs, particularly pesticides exported to Africa, are banned in countries of their origin due to their negative impact on human health, environment and important insects.

According to Amoah, recognizing agroecology at the UNFCCC level will require up to 50 countries to explicitly include it in their NDCs. “Without a deliberate and united push for sustainable farming approaches for Africa, I can foresee very serious resistance from developed countries because while such approaches benefit African economies and food systems, they are a threat to economic and political interests in the global north,” he said.

The AFSA report shows that incorporating agroecology into NDCs and NAPs, supports the dual goals of adaptation and mitigation by enhancing carbon sequestration, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and fostering climate-resilient farming systems.

So far, Africa has consistently faced a lack of adequate finance to meet the costs of adaptation. Less than two percent of global climate finance reaches small-scale actors in the entire food system.

According to the African negotiators, financing projects that foster business interests of developed countries will always be accepted in the negotiation rooms without much struggle, unlike approaches like agroecology, for which negotiators from the global north often demand evidence—just to frustrate the process.

“As followers of agroecology, we need to be very strategic because negotiations are about consensus building,” said Amoah. “It is one thing to talk about a subject and another thing to convince other parties to accept it.”

So far, African countries are in the process of updating their NDCs to be submitted to the UNFCCC probably ahead of COP 30. “AFSA is currently working with individual African countries towards integrating agroecology into their NDCs,” said Belay.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• Organic Fertilizers Prove Effective on Tea as Farmers Abandon Synthetic Inputs
• African Leaders Challenged To Unite Against Energy Transition Mineral Oppressors

Catherine Russell, Executive Director of UNICEF, briefs the Security Council meeting on the current humanitarian situation in Haiti. Credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 12 2025 (IPS)

In recent months, the humanitarian crisis in Haiti has taken a considerable turn for the worse, with armed gangs continuing to exert dominance over nearly 90 percent of the capital, Port-Au-Prince. Rising violence, the collapse of essential services for millions, and severe cuts to humanitarian funding have left the international community struggling to provide immediate relief and find a sustainable, long-term solution.

Figures from the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH) show that the security situation in Port-Au-Prince remained volatile in the second quarter of 2025, with hostilities rising outside the capital as well. It is estimated that between April 1 and June 30, at least 1,520 civilians were killed and 609 injured, primarily in the Port-Au-Prince metropolitan area, followed by Artibonite and the Centre Department.

Furthermore, roughly 12 percent of civilian casualties were a result of violent clashes between gang members and self-defense groups and civilians linked to the Bwa-Kalé movement. Approximately 73 percent of the summary executions recorded during this period involved members of the police force and the government commissioner of Miragoâne.

During a UN Security Council session on the ongoing situation in Haiti on August. 28, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Executive Director Catherine Russell addressed the UN Security Council on the worsening impact of gang violence on the children of Haiti. According to Russell, in the first quarter of 2025 there has been a 54 percent increase in killing and maiming and a 25 percent increase in human rights violations when compared to the first quarter of 2024.

Additionally, Russell noted that the introduction of new armed coalitions and “more sophisticated technology”, such as explosive weapons, has intensified violent clashes and led to additional civilian casualties. According to BINUH, approximately 64 percent of civilian casualties were killed during security force operations against armed gangs, with 15 percent of these victims being innocent civilians that were in their homes or on the street.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres informed the Security Council that roughly six million Haitians are in dire need of humanitarian assistance. The latest figures from the UN show that nearly 1.3 million Haitians have been displaced throughout the country as a result of rampant violence, half of them being children.

Armed groups continue to obstruct humanitarian access, causing a near total collapse of essential services across Haiti. As a result, millions are left without adequate healthcare, while attacks on schools have disrupted the education of approximately 243,000 children. Approximately 1.7 million people are at risk of receiving no humanitarian assistance at all. According to Guterres, Haiti now ranks among the top five highest-concern hunger hotspots worldwide and remains the world’s least-funded humanitarian appeal. Figures from the World Food Programme (WFP) show that roughly 5.7 million Haitians are facing acute hunger, with 2 million facing emergency levels of food insecurity.

UNICEF estimates that there has been a nearly 700 percent increase in the rate of child recruitments, with children estimated to make up roughly 50 percent of all gang members. Russell notes that these figures only account for the cases that the UN has been able to verify, with the true number of violations estimated to be much higher.

“Children are being forced into combat roles, directly participating in armed confrontations,” said Russell. “Others are being used as couriers, lookouts, porters to carry weapons, or are exploited for domestic labor – roles that expose them to grave and lasting physical and psychological harm”.

During the second quarter of 2025, BINUH recorded 185 kidnappings and 628 cases of gender-based violence. A significant portion of these violations involved gang rapes, with BINUH also highlighting the widespread persistence of sexual slavery, sexual exploitation, and child trafficking in Haiti.

According to Stéphane Dujarric, UN Spokesperson for the Secretary-General, one in seven gender-based violence survivors is a girl under 18. Roughly half of these incidents involve internally displaced people, with only a quarter being able to access medical care within a 48-hour window. Severe social stigma and an overwhelming lack of resources often prevent the vast majority of victims from accessing psychosocial support and justice.

The worsening crisis has been compounded by a significant reduction in international funding, particularly from the U.S., which has historically been Haiti’s largest donor. In 2025, budget cuts from the Trump administration resulted in a substantial scaling back of U.S. foreign assistance to Haiti, forcing several humanitarian organizations to suspend or reduce lifesaving operations.

“These cuts to peacekeeping funds not only undermine the administration’s plans to help stabilize Haiti, they jeopardize the global response to conflicts around the world, and they are counter to the law,” said Congressman and member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Gregory Meeks.

On August 28, acting U.S. Permanent Representative to the UN Dorothy Shea announced that the United States is seeking UN authorization for a new gang suppression force. The proposal would transform the Kenya-led multinational mission—widely criticized as ineffective—into a 5,500-strong deployment working in partnership with Haiti’s government for an initial 12-months.

The force would facilitate independent, intelligence-driven counter-gang operations aimed at isolating, neutralizing, and deterring armed groups that threaten civilians and Haitian institutions. Additionally, it would provide security for critical infrastructures—such as schools, hospitals, and airports—and assist Haitian efforts to control the illicit trafficking of arms.

According to a draft resolution from the U.S. and Panama, the force would primarily be funded through voluntary contributions, also receiving logistical support from the newly created UN Support Office in Haiti. With the Security Council mandate for the Kenya-led multinational force to end on October 2, council members are expected to vote at the end of the month on this draft resolution.

“The next international force must be resourced to hold territory, secure infrastructure, and complement the Haitian national police. In parallel, a comprehensive approach is required to disrupt gang financing, arms trafficking and other illicit flows fueling instability,” Shea told the Security Council.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

By Vijay Prashad
SANTIAGO, Chile, Sep 12 2025 (IPS)

At eighty, the United Nations is bogged down by structural limitations and political divisions that render it powerless to act decisively – nowhere more clearly than in the Gaza genocide.

There is only one treaty in the world that, despite its limitations, binds nations together: the United Nations Charter. Representatives of fifty nations wrote and ratified the UN Charter in 1945, with others joining in the years that followed.

The charter itself only sets the terms for the behaviour of nations. It does not and cannot create a new world. It depends on individual nations to either live by the charter or die without it.

The charter remains incomplete. It needed a Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, and even that was contested as political and civil rights had to eventually be separated from the social and economic rights. Deep rifts in political visions created fissures in the UN system that have kept it from effectively addressing problems in the world.

The UN is now eighty. It is a miracle that it has lasted this long. The League of Nations was founded in 1920 and lasted only eighteen years of relative peace (until World War II began in China in 1937).

The UN is only as strong as the community of nations that comprises it. If the community is weak, then the UN is weak. As an independent body, it cannot be expected to fly in like an angel and whisper into the ears of the belligerents and stop them.

The UN can only blow the whistle, an umpire for a game whose rules are routinely broken by the more powerful states. It offers a convenient punching bag for all sides of the political spectrum: it is blamed if crises are not solved and if relief efforts fall short. Can the UN stop the Israeli genocide in Gaza?

UN officials have made strong statements during the genocide, with Secretary General António Guterres saying that ‘Gaza is a killing field – and civilians are in an endless death loop’ (8 April 2025) and that the famine in Gaza is ‘not a mystery – it is a man-made disaster, a moral indictment, and a failure of humanity itself’ (22 August 2025).

These are powerful words, but they have amounted to nothing, calling into question the efficacy of the UN itself.
.
The UN is not one body but two halves. The most public face of the UN is the UN Security Council (UNSC), which has come to stand in as its executive arm. The UNSC is made up of fifteen countries: five are permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and the others are elected for two-year terms.

The five permanent members (the P5) hold veto power over the decisions of the council. If one of the P5 does not like a decision, they are able to scuttle it with their veto. Each time the UNSC has been presented with a resolution calling for a ceasefire, the United States has exercised its veto to quash even that tepid measure (since 1972, the United States has vetoed more than forty-five UNSC resolutions about the Israeli occupation of Palestine).

The UNSC stands in for the UN General Assembly (UNGA), whose one hundred and ninety-three members can pass resolutions that try to set the tone for world opinion but are often ignored. Since the start of the genocide, for instance, the UNGA has passed five key resolutions calling for a ceasefire (the first in October 2023 and the fifth in June 2025).

But the UNGA has no real power in the UN system. The other half of the UN is its myriad agencies, each set up to deal with this or that crisis of the modern age. Some predate the UN itself, such as the International Labour Organisation (ILO), which was created in 1919 and brought into the UN system in 1946 as its first specialised agency.

Others would follow, including the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), which advocates for the rights of children, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which promotes tolerance and respect for the world’s cultures.

Over the decades, agencies have been created to advocate for and provide relief to refugees, to ensure nuclear energy is used for peace rather than war, to improve global telecommunications, and to expand development assistance. Their remit is impressive, although the outcomes are more modest.

Meagre funding from the world’s states is one limitation (in 2022, the UN’s total expenditure was $67.5 billion, compared with over $2 trillion spent on the arms trade).

This chronic underfunding is largely because the world’s powers disagree over the direction of the UN and its agencies. Yet without them, the suffering in the world would neither be recorded nor addressed. The UN system has become the world’s humanitarian organisation largely because neoliberal austerity and war have destroyed the capacity of most individual countries to do this work themselves, and because non-governmental organisations are too small to meaningfully fill in the gap.

With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the entire balance of the world system changed and the UN went into a cycle of internal reform initiatives: from Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s An Agenda for Peace (1992) and An Agenda for Development (1994) and Kofi Annan’s Renewing the United Nations (1997) to Guterres’ Our Common Agenda (2021), Summit of the Future (2024), and UN80 Task Force (2025).

The UN80 Task Force is the deepest reform imaged, but its three areas of interest (internal efficiency, mandate review, and programme alignment) have been attempted previously (‘we’ve tried this exercise before’, said Under-Secretary-General for Policy and Chair of the UN80 Task Force Guy Ryder).

The agenda set by the UN is focused on its own organisational weaknesses and does not address the largely political questions that scuttle the UN’s work. A broader agenda would need to include the following points:

Move the UN Secretariat to the Global South. Almost all UN agencies are headquartered in either Europe or the United States, where the UN Secretariat itself is located. There have been occasional proposals to move UNICEF, the UN Population Fund, and UN Women to Nairobi, Kenya, which already hosts the UN Environment Programme and UN-Habitat.

It is about time that the UN Secretariat leave New York and go to the Global South, not least to prevent Washington from using visa denials to punish UN officials who criticise US or Israeli power. With the US preventing Palestinian officials from entering the US for the UN General Assembly, there have been calls already to move the UNGA meeting to Geneva. Why not permanently leave the United States?

Increase funding to the UN from the Global South. Currently, the largest funders of the UN system are the United States (22%) and China (20%), with seven close US allies contributing 28% (Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, and South Korea).

The Global South – without China – contributes about 26% to the UN budget; with China, its contribution is 46%, nearly half of the total budget. It is time for China to become the largest contributor to the UN, surpassing the US, which wields its funding as a weapon against the organisation.

Increase funding for humanitarianism within states. Countries should be spending more on alleviating human distress than on paying off wealthy bondholders. The UN should not be the main agency to assist those in need. As we have shown, several countries on the African continent spend more servicing debt than on education and healthcare; unable to provide these essential functions, they come to rely on the UN through UNICEF, UNESCO, and the WHO. States should build up their own capacity rather than depend on this assistance.

Cut the global arms trade. Wars are waged not only for domination but for the profits of arms dealers. Annual international arms exports are nearing $150 billion, with the United States and Western European countries accounting for 73% of sales between 2020 and 2024. In 2023 alone, the top one hundred arms manufacturers made $632 billion (largely through sales by US companies to the US military).

Meanwhile, the total UN peacekeeping budget is only $5.6 billion, and 92% of the peacekeepers come from the Global South. The Global North makes money on war, while the Global South sends its soldiers and policemen to try and prevent conflicts.

Strengthen regional peace and development structures.

To disperse some of the power from the UNSC, regional peace and development structures such as the African Union must be strengthened and their views given priority. If there are no permanent members in the UNSC from Africa, the Arab world, or from Latin America, why should these regions be held captive by the veto wielded by the P5? If the power to settle disputes were to rest more in regional structures, then the absolute authority of the UNSC could be somewhat diluted.

With the genocide unrelenting, another wave of boats filled with solidarity activists – the Freedom Flotilla – attempts to reach Gaza. On one of the boats is Ayoub Habraoui, a member of Morocco’s Workers’ Democratic Way Party who represents the International Peoples’ Assembly. He sent me this message:

What is happening in Gaza is not a conventional war – it is a slow-motion genocide unfolding before the eyes of the world. I am joining because deliberate starvation is being used as a weapon to break the will of a defenceless people – denied medicine, food, and water, while children die in their mothers’ arms. I am joining because humanity is indivisible. Whoever accepts a siege today will accept injustice anywhere tomorrow.

Silence is complicity in the crime, and indifference is a betrayal of the very values we claim to uphold. This flotilla is more than just boats – it is a global cry of conscience that declares: no to the siege of entire populations, no to starving the innocent, no to genocide. We may be stopped, but the very act of sailing is a declaration: Gaza is not alone. We are all witnesses to the truth – and voices against slow death.

Vijay Prashad is Director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.
https://thetricontinental.org/

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

By External Source
Sep 11 2025 (IPS-Partners)

 
Tom Dannatt is a Founder and CEO of Street Child, an international non-government organization active in over 20 disaster-hit and lowest-income countries – working for a world where all children are ‘safe, in school and learning’. Tom founded Street Child in 2008 with his wife Lucinda and has led the organization since its inception. Street Child leads the civil society constituency within ECW’s governance and, accordingly, Dannatt represents the constituency on the Fund’s High-Level Steering Committee.

ECW: In places like Nigeria, Pakistan and Uganda, Street Child is working together with local partners to provide children with holistic learning opportunities through ECW investments. How can we maximize the impact of these investments to ensure education for all?

Tom Dannatt: Street Child is really clear on this one – maximizing the role of local organizations is key to maximizing the immediate, and longer-term, impact of ECW’s investments. It has been a privilege for Street Child to work closely with ECW in recent years, through multiple grants, on practical strategies to bring this perspective to life. It is superb to see a prominent commitment to localization embedded in ECW’s strategy and being increasingly lived out through a growing norm of seeing local organizations playing significant roles in consortia delivering ECW investments.

An especially promising ‘next-level’ innovation that Street Child had the opportunity to trial in the present Multi-Year Resilience Programme (MYRP) in Uganda is what we have called the ‘localization unit’ approach. This saw a minimum portion of the MYRP budget being reserved purely for local organizations to competitively apply for, amongst themselves – free from competition with INGOs. Street Child, as the localization unit manager, conducted a uniquely inclusive, transparent and supportive application process; and has since provided hands-on management and assistance to the five successful grantees to help them maximize the impact of their award and fulfill all necessary reporting and compliance demands.

I was in Uganda myself a few weeks ago (in fact, I had to join a 90-minute ECW High-Level Steering Group call by a dusty roadside, surrounded by a group of curious children!) It was mid-way through the final year of the MYRP, and I witnessed first-hand phenomenal, sophisticated, transformative programming being delivered by all five of these organizations – work of a quality that I am sure the most famous global charities would have been proud to have showcased to any donor. And here is the thing – for all five of these local NGOs, this was the first time they had ever received a grant from a global donor; but now, not only had they ‘smashed it’ in terms of delivering great impact with the ECW funds awarded, most of them had gone on – using the credibility of being an ECW-grantee and the experience gained of successfully managing an award from a demanding global donor – to win further institutional grants themselves. Without exaggeration, ECW’s bold initiative in establishing this ‘localizations unit’ has transformed the ability of these organizations to attract the support they so richly deserve – and their ability to serve refugee children long after this MYRP closes. This is real, lasting impact.

ECW: Street Child leads the civil society constituency of Education Cannot Wait’s High-Level Steering Group and Executive Committee. How is civil society coming together with donors, governments, UN agencies, the private sector and local non-profits to position education – especially for children caught in humanitarian crises – at the top of the international agenda?

Tom Dannatt: Street Child is proud to follow in the footsteps of Plan International, Save the Children and World Vision in leading the civil society constituency within ECW. What this means is that I, as CEO, sit on the High-Level Steering Group; and then my colleague Tyler Arnot, who many in the sector know well as co-coordinator of the Global Education Cluster, sits on the ECW Executive Committee. And together, we try to faithfully and fearlessly bring the voice of civil society into these key fora!

We take this role incredibly seriously: because it really matters. Civil society has been central to this mission from the very beginning. ECW itself was born out of years of sustained civil society advocacy to close the funding gap for education in crisis. And the need for civil society to bring the same vital, fresh ground-level perspective to ECW’s ongoing decision-making remains as strong today – not least given the winds of extreme change blowing through our sector today.

For Street Child to credibly and effectively represent the voice and views of civil society, it is essential that we regularly convene the sector, and we do – online, of course, but also in-person wherever possible. For example, this June on the sidelines of ECW’s Executive Committee meetings in Geneva, we brought together civil society representatives, local NGOs, youth constituencies and INGO partners to strategize on coordination, funding and sustaining support for Education Cannot Wait. We held two days of intensive, passionate discussion at the EiE Hub and then in the main conference centre which helped shape ECW priorities and ensured that the most vulnerable children remain central to decision-making at this critical moment in ECW’s evolution. Bad news: both rooms we booked were too small! Which, of course, is actually good news, because it shows how much passion there is in our community, how relevant they see our fora and the need to come together in these important but complex times.

Looking ahead, we will continue this work later this month in New York on the edges of UNGA, where Street Child will co-host a discussion with ECW focused on local leadership and locally-led partnerships in education in emergencies. Robert Hazika, the Executive Director of YARID – one of the five local NGOs who received awards from the Uganda localization unit that I mentioned earlier – will join us.

ECW: In the face of limited resources, why should donors and the private sector invest in education through multilateral funds such as Education Cannot Wait?

Tom Dannatt: The dangerous ‘lacuna’ that education in emergencies naturally rests in makes the case for investing in a strong, relevant and loud ECW, as a champion for the sector, incredibly important.

Education for children affected by emergencies is so obviously utterly vital – and right – few decent people would disagree. But it is so easy to miss because it sits in this tricky lacuna. Because, on the one hand, for too many humanitarians, education seems a less visceral and less apparently urgent ‘life-saving’ priority than food, water, shelter – a view can exist that education is inherently a long-term venture so ‘best left to the development community’. Meanwhile, much of that development community will look at a warzone, the aftermath of an earthquake or a refugee camp and say, ‘oh no, this is not the sort of context we are set up to work in’ … And so whilst everyone agrees that educating children in emergencies is critical – all to easily, no one does it: it falls between the cracks. And that is why ECW is so critical – yes to be a superb funder; but equally, and perhaps more so, to be this urgent loud voice for these ‘inconvenient children’ demanding the ‘developmental initiative of education’ in a ‘humanitarian situation’. And ensuring they do not fall between any of our structural cracks.

And then, of course, you have the unique character and fundamental qualities of ECW that make it a compelling proposition – a collective platform to impact education-in-emergencies that truly brings together governments, donors, civil society and the private sector – to coordinate, reduce duplication and ensure more resources flow directly to children’s learning, as quickly as possible!

A final word on the importance of speed and duration: we know that for every day a child is out of school, it becomes increasingly unlikely that they ever return, so ECW’s speed, especially through its First Emergency Responses is absolutely critical – and unique. On the other hand, most other humanitarian funds for education are often too short to ensure continuity of learning. Quality education cannot be provided in 6-12 months, and the Multi-Year Resilience Programmes allow for greater predictability in providing education services in a protracted crisis.

ECW: Education is life-building and life-sustaining. How can investments in quality education and foundational learning support our vision for a world without war, without hunger and without poverty?

Tom Dannatt: The first emergency I experienced professionally was Ebola, 11 years ago. I wouldn’t be talking to you today if it wasn’t for what I, and Street Child, learned in those days: it shaped us. But the point I want to remember here is where were the last, and hardest, places to shake Ebola from? It was the least educated villages.

Where have I heard young people talk the most casually about joining armed groups? In unstable societies offering little prospects or hope for the future.

If you come across a child alone at night on the streets of some West African market town and ask them how they came to be there – many times, the answer you’ll get is a story that begins in a village with no school and then a venture to the town to try and find an education that hasn’t worked out. These are the type of conversations that launched Street Child into the education sector more broadly, fifteen years ago. Children thirst for education. It is the world’s responsibility, whatever the circumstances, to meet that thirst.

Education underpins health. Education builds safety and security. Education builds hope and promise for the future – in dire settings such as emergency contexts, the importance and power of ‘hope’ cannot be overstated. Humans with hope can do extraordinary things.

When we invest in education in emergencies, we invest directly into the most powerful idea around – that today will be better than tomorrow. That is exciting anywhere, no more so than if you have the misfortune of growing up in one of the world’s most crisis-affected places.

ECW: We all know that ‘readers are leaders’ and that reading skills are key to every child’s education. What are three books that have most influenced you personally and/or professionally?

Tom Dannatt: What a question … On any given day, I could probably give a different answer, but here are the three that leap to mind today.

Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin, the Lincoln biography they made into a film, is over 900 pages but so good that I’ve read it twice! Moral courage and vision, character, empathetic leadership, unity from division, strategy, humility and self-confidence … there is so much there. I like a good biography.

We started Street Child in 2008. I read Bottom Billion by Paul Collier in 2007 and was engaged by the core thesis that whilst much of the world was gradually getting better, there were corners of the world where the ‘rising tide was not lifting all boats’ because they were ‘detached’ from the factors gradually driving global prosperity up. And that these places were where extra effort and aid was especially needed and best directed. I see the work of Street Child, and of course ECW, very much in these terms – giving children in the toughest situations a chance to gain the skills that will allow them to take part in everything this world has to offer.

Finally, to switch off, I love a sports book. And if a better sports autobiography than Andre Agassi’s Open is ever written, I so much look forward to reading it. Searingly and surprisingly honest (one of the most memorable players to ever wield a racket, yet hated tennis most of his life!), vulnerable, compelling, yet ultimately incredibly inspiring.

 

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

Delegates at the Second Africa Climate Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Credit: Farai Shawn Matiashe/IPS

By Farai Shawn Matiashe
ADDIS ABABA, Sep 11 2025 (IPS)

Despite climate change being a health risk multiplier, health is often underrepresented in climate negotiation processes.

Experts attribute this to a lack of funding by the African governments and a lack of capacity building among climate negotiators.

At the Second Africa Climate Summit (ACS2) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 8 to 10 September, health experts are calling for funding to bring health negotiators to the table at the Conference of the Parties (COP30) in Belém, Brazil, to demand more funding for the health sector.

Amref Health Africa, a Kenyan-based non-governmental organization providing community and environmental healthcare across Africa, launched a Climate Change and Health Negotiators’ curriculum on 9 September at the summit.

The Climate Change and Health Negotiators’ curriculum, developed for the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), seeks to address this gap by equipping African negotiators with the technical, policy understanding, and advocacy skills required to integrate health considerations into climate policy and finance Agendas.

Desta Lakew, a group director of partnerships and external affairs at Amref Health Africa, said when they started conversations around climate and health, health was not included.

“At COP27, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, there were no health ministers because health was not included. We thought we needed to bring the health issues in Africa,” she said while speaking at a side event at the Rockefeller Foundation Pavilion during the ACS2.

“We have developed a curriculum to bring health to the climate negotiation process. AGN; they speak for us and people in the rural areas who are affected by climate change.”

At COP28 in Dubai in 2023, health was included only in the declaration.

But this was seen as progress by climate experts.

Climate change is devastating health in Africa 

Though Africa contributes less than 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, it continues to experience the effects of climate change.

Climate change presents a fundamental threat to human health.

It affects health by increasing heat-related illnesses, worsening respiratory conditions and air quality, expanding the range of infectious diseases and disrupting food and water security.

Extreme weather events like floods in Africa cause injuries and distress while also damaging essential health infrastructure.

In southern Africa, countries such as Botswana, eSwatini, Namibia, and Zimbabwe experienced a dramatic surge in malaria cases in 2025.

From 2023 to 2024, the region was hit by El Niño-induced drought, a natural climate phenomenon in which surface waters of the central and eastern Pacific warm, causing changes in global weather patterns.

In 2025, the region experienced La Niña, which brought above-average rainfall.

The prolonged rains fuelled mosquito breeding.

In other parts of the continent, climate variability is also facilitating the spread of non-communicable and infectious diseases, such as dengue, malaria, West Nile virus, and Lyme disease.

Climate change is not just an environmental issue-it is a health emergency.

Yet, only a tiny fraction of climate funding goes to the health sector.

Many health systems in Africa, which are underfunded and collapsing, were not built for this.

They are being overwhelmed, under-resourced and on the brink.

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO), in a report last year, revealed that Africa warmed faster than the rest of the world.

The WMO report revealed that African countries lost up to 5 percent of their gross domestic product on average, with many of them forced to allocate 9 percent of their budgets to deal with climate extremes.

The WMO estimated that the cost of climate adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa would be between USD 30 and USD 50 billion annually over the next decade.

Adaptation and climate finances could make a difference, giving many people in the path of extreme danger a new lease of life, increasing their access to health infrastructure, smart agriculture, and improved nutrition.

Africa receives less than 5 percent of global climate finance.

Capacitating negotiators on health and climate change issues

The Climate Change and Health Negotiators’ curriculum was developed with support from different partners, including AGNES and Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), a specialized technical institution of the African Union that works to support public health initiatives across Africa.

Dr Modi Mwatsama, head of capacity and field development for climate and health at Wellcome Trust, a London-based charity focused on health research, said the curriculum would ensure that Africa’s health issues are prioritized in climate negotiation processes.

Dr. Martin Muchangi, a director for population health and environment at Amref Health Africa, said the curriculum targets negotiators, including health and environment ministers, as well as mid-level state and non-state actors.

He said the idea is to train negotiators to understand the technical aspects of climate and health.

Muchangi said the curriculum provides a place where negotiators can always refer.

“We want health to be at the negotiating table. We want to empower AGN by building the capacity of negotiators,” he said while speaking at the same side event.

Muchangi said the curriculum will equip negotiators to use evidence and data to make a strong case at COP30 in Brazil as well as develop actionable plans.

Dr. Petronella Adhiambo, a capacity building officer at AGNES, said the curriculum is in line with what they want, which is to have health featured in the climate negotiation process.

“We will be able to provide evidence,” she said.

Adhiambo said it is possible to have health as an agenda item at COP30 in Brazil in November.

Dr. Jeremiah Mushosho, a regional team lead for climate at the World Health Organization, said the curriculum is aligned with Global Climate Action and is relevant to the needs of African countries.

“This is quite a big opportunity to prepare negotiators and create a regional pool of climate expert negotiators,” he said.

Mushosho said it is critical to push for resources to be allocated equitably.

Dr. Yewande Alimi, Antimicrobial Resistance and One Health Unit lead at Africa CDC, said her organization will amplify this initiative.

She said the curriculum is timely and Africa will no longer just sit at the negotiating table, but negotiators will be able to demonstrate that health should be prioritized.

Health Experts called for more funding to bring health and environment ministers to COP30 to demand health to be on the Agenda, as well as increase funding to the health sector.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• A New Solar Power Plant Powers Progress in Zimbabwe’s Renewable Energy Sector
• Girls in Kenya Are Repurposing the Invasive Mathenge Tree Into Furniture

The State of Qatar delivered a message, September 10, to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and to Sangjin Kim, the Charge d'Affaires at the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea and President of the Security Council for September, “regarding the cowardly Israeli attack that targeted residential buildings housing several members of the Hamas Political Bureau” in the capital, Doha. The message was delivered by the Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar to the United Nations Sheikha Alya Ahmed bin Saif Al-Thani. The State of Qatar requested that the message be circulated to members of the Security Council and issued as an official document of the Council.

By Alon Ben-Meir
NEW YORK, Sep 11 2025 (IPS)

Israel’s brazen attack on Hamas’ negotiating team in Qatar while they were deliberating a new ceasefire with Israel raises serious questions not only about the legality of the attack, which violated international laws and norms, and concerns over Qatar’s sovereignty, but also the potential regional and international fallout.

The fact that Israel notified the Trump administration of its impending attack and was given the green light to proceed adds another troubling dimension for all those who will be affected, especially the Gulf states.

Israel’s attack was calculated to achieve several objectives. First, Prime Minister Netanyahu did not want a new ceasefire at a time when the Israeli military is engaged in a major incursion into Gaza City to eliminate the remaining Hamas leaders and fighters.

Second, the gathering of Hamas’ top leaders in one place provided him with an opportunity to eliminate many of them, which he did not want to miss.

Third, he wanted to send a clear message to other Arab states that he would not hesitate to undertake bold action against what he considers an existential enemy, regardless of where they reside and how that might affect their relationship with the Arab countries involved.

Fourth, he wanted to project Israel as the dominant power in the Middle East, if not the hegemon, especially at this juncture when Israel is enjoying nearly unconditional support of the Trump administration.

Fifth, Netanyahu wanted to prevent the collapse of his government by complying with the demands of two of his extremist ministers who threatened to resign if he were to stop the war before the elimination of Hamas “from the face of the earth,” however lofty and unattainable a goal that might be. The attack in Doha was too tempting to pass up.

It is rather hypocritical of Netanyahu to attack Hamas on Qatari soil, when in fact Qatar’s years-long aid payments to the Gaza Strip through Hamas, meant to pay public salaries and prevent a humanitarian crisis, was approved by Netanyahu himself and sent through Israeli territory in cash-filled suitcases—all in an effort to create a wider divide with the Palestinian Authority and prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres condemned the attack and noted that Qatar has played a constructive role in efforts to secure a Gaza ceasefire and the release of hostages held by Hamas.

France’s President Macron said, “Today’s Israeli strikes on Qatar are unacceptable, whatever the reason. I express my solidarity with Qatar and its Emir, Sheikh Tamim Al Thani. Under no circumstances should the war spread throughout the region.”

The adverse implications of Israel’s attack will reaffirm the prevailing international view of Israel as a rogue state that blatantly ignores international norms of conduct and believes it can do so with complete impunity. Still, there will be a time when Israel will have to account for its mischiefs.

The attack further strained the relationship between Israel and Egypt, in particular, because it has been and continues to be involved in the ceasefire negotiations.

Moreover, the attack has certainly further damaged the chance of normalizing relations with other Gulf Arab states, even though both Netanyahu and Trump wanted to expand the Abraham Accords.

The Gulf states are now concerned about the US’ commitment to their security, given that the Trump administration allowed a close ally—Israel—to attack another ally, especially as Qatar hosts the largest US military base in the region.

According to Al Jazeera, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani condemned Tuesday’s strike on Doha, calling it “state terrorism” allegedly authorized by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said the attack demanded a firm regional response and warned that Qatar would defend its territory, reserving the right to retaliate and take all necessary measures.

To be sure, the pitfall of all of these developments transcends the Israel-Hamas war and the prospect of a new ceasefire. Israel’s habitual assassinations of its enemies, irrespective of their country of residence, raises a serious question as to how far Israel, with the support of the Trump administration, will go in violating international norms of conduct and laws with presumed impunity.

Indeed, beyond the green light that Trump gave Netanyahu to attack Hamas leaders in Doha, his unrelenting support of Netanyahu’s genocidal war in Gaza is deeply troubling for many countries around the world. They now see the US, which has been leading and preserving the world order in the wake of World War II, as a country that lost its way and poses an extraordinary danger to global stability.

Without the US’ consent, Netanyahu would not have dared to attack any of Israel’s enemies across the region, be they Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, Syria, and now Qatar. They see the US as the culprit and are extremely concerned about what might come next.

None of this augurs well for either Israel or the United States because sooner or later, these actions will sow consequences that neither nation can ignore and will come back to haunt them in a very real way.

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

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

A powerful 6.0-magnitude earthquake struck eastern Afghanistan late on 31 August 2025, with its epicenter near Jalalabad in Nangarhar province. Early reports indicate a significant loss of life, including many children, with hundreds of fatalities and thousands injured, alongside widespread destruction of homes and infrastructure. Credit: UNICEF/Amin Meerzad

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Over the past week, Afghanistan’s humanitarian situation has deteriorated significantly following the August 31 earthquake, which measured over 6.0 in magnitude and caused an immense loss of life and widespread destruction of critical infrastructure. Compounded by the nation’s fragile economy, severe shortages of essential resources, and persistent access challenges, humanitarian organizations have found it increasingly difficult to reach vulnerable communities—especially women and children.

On September 9, the United Nations (UN) launched a four-month emergency response plan totaling to USD 139.6 million in an effort to support roughly 457,000 people left struggling to survive in the aftermath of the earthquake. The response will prioritize communities in high-elevation areas as well as women, children, and the disabled, who are the most vulnerable populations. The International Rescue Committee (IRC) also announced a response plan that would target the Nangarhar and Laghman provinces, aiming to distribute cash assistance and essential items such as dignity kits.

“The Afghanistan earthquake has caused massive devastation. Hundreds of thousands of people in remote areas already scarred by decades of conflict and displacement have lost their homes and livelihoods,” said UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs Tom Fletcher. “Communities hit include those where people returning from Iran and Pakistan had only just begun to rebuild their lives”.

Prior to the earthquake, Afghanistan was already in the midst of a multifaceted humanitarian crisis marked by pervasive poverty, restrictive measures on women’s autonomy, and some of the lowest civic space conditions globally. According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), roughly 22.9 million people in Afghanistan urgently required humanitarian assistance prior to the earthquake, nearly half of the nation’s population.

Additional figures from OCHA show that as of September 7, approximately 500,000 people across the Kunar, Laghman, and Nangarhar provinces of eastern Afghanistan have been directly impacted by the earthquake, with over 2,200 civilian fatalities and 3,600 injuries recorded. Over 6,700 homes were destroyed or damaged, with many families losing their food stocks and finding refuge in open, makeshift settlements that leave them exposed to the elements, compromising safety and privacy.

OCHA warns that millions are facing limited access to essential services, with critical infrastructures for sanitation, healthcare, water, food, and education having been damaged or destroyed by the earthquake. Stephen Rodriques, the resident representative for the UN Development Programme (UNDP) in Afghanistan, informed reporters that 68 major water sources have been destroyed, leaving thousands without access to clean water. Shannon O’Hara, Head of Strategy and Coordination for OCHA Afghanistan, has said that outbreaks of infectious diseases such as cholera are imminent due to an overwhelming lack of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services, as well as roughly 92 percent of civilians residing in open shelters practicing open-defecation.

Afghanistan’s ongoing hunger crisis has further escalated following the earthquake. The World Food Programme (WFP) have reported that nearly 10 million people are facing acute food insecurity. Rates of child malnutrition have also skyrocketed to the “highest levels on record”, as roughly one in three children face stunted development and urgently require medical intervention. WFP projects that approximately 15 people will need lifesaving food assistance in the coming months, with winter weather conditions expected to amplify health risks and access challenges for humanitarian personnel.

Women and girls are projected to face the heaviest burden of this crisis. Estimates from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) show that thousands lack access to essential feminine hygiene supplies, while around 11,600 pregnant women have been directly impacted by the earthquake. This is particularly concerning as Afghanistan holds one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the entire Asia-Pacific region.

“For pregnant women, a natural disaster can turn an already challenging time into a life-threatening crisis,” said UNFPA Representative in Afghanistan, Kwabena Asante-Ntiamoah.

“In a context like Afghanistan, it is essential that women are delivering assistance to women and girls,” added UN Women Afghanistan Special Representative, Susan Ferguson. “Cultural restrictions can make it harder for women to access support and services – as we have seen with the Afghan women returnees from Iran and Pakistan,” the UN Women official stressed. “Women humanitarians are vital to overcome these barriers. Without them, too many women and girls will miss out on lifesaving assistance.”

Currently, humanitarian access to vulnerable communities in high-elevation areas remains severely strained, as landslides and rock falls have destroyed critical roads and cut off remote populations. The approaching winter season is expected to exacerbate these challenges. “Even before the earthquake, these villages were difficult to reach,” O’Hara said. “Now, with the earthquake, it takes extraordinary effort to get there.”

Additionally, numerous aid groups have warned that persistent funding shortfalls threaten to curtail lifesaving emergency services in Afghanistan. WFP’s top official in Kabul John Aylieff noted that current funds can only feed earthquake victims in Afghanistan for a few more weeks before being depleted entirely. Meanwhile, helicopter support from the UN Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS)— critical for reaching remote areas— has been suspended until additional funding is secured.

“As relief efforts are well underway, this week is a tragic testimony to the devastating impact of aid cuts on one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries,” said Ibrahim. “The international community must step up now to address Afghanistan’s escalating humanitarian needs—from drought-affected communities and returnee crises on both sides of its borders, to sudden natural disasters like the one that has just struck.”

Through its newly-announced emergency response plan, the UN is dedicated to providing multi-sectoral support, including shelter, clean water, food assistance, protection, education, and agricultural and livestock aid to help foster livelihoods. Relief efforts have already begun in the hardest-hit areas, with humanitarian personnel delivering hot meals, tents, warm clothing, and blankets to communities in need. Additionally, the UN is in the process of establishing safe spaces for women and children, aiming to keep high-risk populations at the center of their response.

“This is a moment where the international community must dig deep and show solidarity with a population that has already endured so much suffering”, said Indrika Ratwatte, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Afghanistan. “With winter fast approaching, we are in a race against time to support affected communities with just the bare minimum. The resilience of the Afghan people has been continually tested and there is a real danger, with each crisis that hits, that the fragile gains made in recent years will be reversed.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Secretary-General António Guterres arrives to brief reporters on the launch of his report, 'The Security We Need - Rebalancing Military Spending for a Sustainable and Peaceful Future.' Credit: Manuel Elías/UN Photo

By Naureen Hossain
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Global military spending has been on the rise for more than 20 years, and in 2024, it surged across all five global regions in the world to reach a record high of USD 2.7 trillion. Yet, such growth has come at the cost of diverting financial resources away from sustainable development efforts, which the United Nations and its chief warn puts pressure on an “already strained financial context.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Tuesday that member states needed to prioritize diplomacy and multilateralism to protect global security and development. His new report, The Security We Need: Rebalancing Military Spending for a Sustainable and Peaceful Future, goes into detail on the conditions that have allowed for increased military spending in contrast to an overall reduction in global development financing.

Amid rising tensions and global and regional conflicts, military spending has increased as an indication of governments’ priorities to address global and regional security concerns through military strength and deterrence. As some countries engage in conflicts, neighboring nations may boost military spending to mitigate what the report describes as “the external risks of conflict spillover.”

Military expenditure has also increased in its share of the global economy. Between 2022 and 2024, it grew from 2.2 to 2.5 percent of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP). More than 100 countries alone boosted their military spending in 2024, with the top ten spenders accounting for 73 percent of the global expenditure. Europe and the Middle East recorded the sharpest increases in recent years, while Africa accounted for just 1.9 percent of the total world military spending.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres (left) address reporters in New York at the launch of his new report on global military spending in 2024.  Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

To put this into scale, the USD 2.7 trillion in military expenditure is equivalent to each person in the world contributing USD 334. It is seventeen times greater than the total spending on COVID-19 vaccines, the total GDP of every African nation, and thirteen times greater than the amount of official development assistance (ODA) provided by OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) countries in 2024. It is 750 times higher than the UN’s annual budget for 2024.

The report also warns that development financing has not kept up with this increased spending. As the development financing gap widens, official development assistance (ODA) has reduced. The annual financing gap for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is already at USD 4 trillion and could widen to USD 6.4 trillion in the years to come. This is critical at a time when the world is far off track to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)’ 2030 deadline.

The report indicates that governments allocate less of their budgets to social investments when they increase their military spending. This has reverberated across multiple civil sectors, notably education, public health and clean energy. Military spending can create employment and these benefits can be critical in times of severe insecurity. But it also generates fewer jobs per dollar compared to the civilian sectors needed to contribute to sustaining long-term productivity and peace. If USD 1 billion can generate 11,000 jobs in the military, that same amount can create 17,200 jobs in health care and 26,700 jobs in education.

What this latest UN report reveals are the misaligned priorities in global spending and the growing resource scarcity for essential development and social investments. It also warns that countries are moving away from diplomacy and prioritizing militarized strategies.

At the report’s launch Izumi Nakamitsu, the UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, remarked that the global trends in military spending indicated a systemic imbalance, where “militarization is prioritized over development.”

“We need a new vision of security—human-centered and rooted in the UN Charter. A vision that safeguards people, not just borders; that prioritizes institutions, equity and planetary sustainability,” said Nakamitsu. “Rebalancing global priorities is not optional—it is an imperative for humanity’s survival.”

“We are in a world where fissures are deepening, official development assistance is falling, and human development progress is slowing,” said Haoliang Xu, the Acting Administrator of the UN Development Programme (UNDP). “But we know that development is a driver of security and multilateral development cooperation works. When people’s lives improve, when they have access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, and when they can live lives of dignity and self-determination, we will have more peaceful societies and a more peaceful world.”

Xu warned that the progress made towards development in the past 30 years may start to decline and even regress, noting that progress in the Global Human Development Index has dramatically slowed down in the last two years.

Military spending puts debt burdens and fiscal constraints on both developed and developing countries, yet the impact is more significant for developing countries, as the report notes that their domestic resources are diverted away from development projects, while simultaneously international support through ODAs is reduced. A one-percent increase in military spending in low- and middle-income countries also aligned with a near-equal reduction in spending on public health services.

In his statement, Guterres acknowledged that governments have legitimate security responsibilities, including safeguarding civilians and addressing immediate threats, while also remarking that “lasting security cannot be achieved by military spending alone.”

“Investing in people is investing in the first line of defense against violence in any society,” he added. He noted that even a fraction of the budget allocated to military spending could “close vital gaps” in essential sectors such as education, healthcare, energy and infrastructure.

“The evidence is clear: excessive military spending does not guarantee peace. It often undermines it—fueling arms races, deepening mistrust, and diverting resources from the very foundations of stability,” he said.

The report concludes with a five-point agenda for the international community to address global spending across multiple sectors and promote diplomatic dialogue:

1. Prioritize diplomacy, peaceful settlement of disputes, and confidence-building measures to address the underlying causes of growing military expenditure through 2030.
2. Bring military expenditure to the fore of disarmament discussions, and improve links between arms control and development.
3. Promote transparency and accountability around military expenditure to build trust and confidence among Member States and increase domestic fiscal accountability.
4. Reinvigorate multilateral finance for development.
5. Advance a human-centered approach to security and sustainable development.

Just prior to the report’s official launch on Tuesday, news broke that Israel launched a strike targeting Hamas members in Qatar’s capital, Doha, who stand as one of the key mediators in ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas. Guterres called the attack a “flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Qatar.”

“It lays bare a stark reality: the world is spending far more on waging war than on building peace,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Excerpt:

Just prior to the UN Secretary-General releasing his report on global military spending, news broke that Israel launched a strike targeting Hamas members in Qatar’s capital, Doha. António Guterres commented, “It (the strike) lays bare a stark reality: the world is spending far more on waging war than on building peace.”

Protestors torched the administrative headquarters of Nepal, the palace of Singha Durbar. This was one of several public properties that were set alight. Credit: Barsha Shah/IPS

By Tanka Dhakal
KATHMANDU, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Nepal entered into a new era of constitutional and political crisis after deadly protests by the deeply frustrated young generation (Gen-Z). Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli resigned on Tuesday after protests grew out of control.

Gen-Z protestors took to the streets on Monday, where the government used force. Security forces opened fire at youth protests against corruption, nepotism, and a social media ban. At least 19 people were killed on a single day. It’s one of the deadliest protest days in Nepal’s history. So far, at least 24 people have been confirmed to be dead during this ongoing unrest.

Protesters took to the streets after the government of Nepal banned most social media last week. Social media ban was the final straw, and on TikTok and Reddit, Gen-Z (13-28 years old) users organized peaceful protests, but they escalated. Now the Himalayan country with nearly 30 million people is facing uncertainty.

On Tuesday many of the government agencies and courthouses were set on fire. The country’s administrative headquarters and parliament house burned down. The homes of political leaders were also torched.

Initially reluctant, Oli resigned on Tuesday, citing “the extraordinary situation” in the country. He submitted his resignation to the President effectively immediately.

Later Tuesday, Nepal President Ramchandra Paudel issued a statement urging protestors to cooperate for a peaceful resolution.

“In a democracy, the demands raised by the citizens can be resolved through talks and dialogue, including Gen-Z representatives,” he said in a statement. Paudel urged Gen-Z representatives to “come to talk.”

Balen Shah, mayor of Kathmandu metropolitan city, who is seen as one of the possible leaders, also urged youth protestors to stop destroying public property and come to talk.

“Please gen Z, the country is in your hands; you are the ones who will be building. Whatever is being destroyed is ours; now return home,” he wrote on social media on Tuesday evening.

After the security situation got out of control, the Nepal Army deployed throughout the country from late evening on Tuesday. Army chief also urged protesters to come forward to talk with the president to find solutions.

After the rapidly escalating situation, international agencies, including the United Nations, issued their concerns.

Expressing deep concern over the deaths and destruction, UN human rights chief Volker Türk called on authorities and protesters to de-escalate the spiraling crisis. In a statement, Türk said he was “appalled by the escalating violence in Nepal that has resulted in multiple deaths and the injury of hundreds of mostly young protesters, as well as the widespread destruction of property.”

“I plead with security forces to exercise utmost restraint and avoid further such bloodshed and harm,” he said. “Violence is not the answer. Dialogue is the best and only way to address the concerns of the Nepalese people. It is important that the voices of young people are heard.”

The UN Secretary-General is also closely following the situation, according to his spokesperson. During Tuesday’s daily briefing in New York, Stéphane Dujarric said António Guterres was “very saddened by the loss of life” and reiterated his call for restraint to prevent further escalation.

“The authorities must comply with international human rights law, and protests must take place in a peaceful manner that respects life and property,” Dujarric said, noting the dramatic images emerging from Nepal.

The UN Country team in Nepal urges authorities to ensure that law enforcement responses remain proportionate and in line with international human rights standards.” UN Resident Coordinator Hanaa Singer-Hamdy described the situation as “so unlike Nepal.”

Nepal is known for its political insatiability and has seen more than a dozen governments since it transitioned to a republic after abolishing its monarchy. In 2008, after long protests and a decade-long Maoist war, Nepal transitioned into a republic and got its new construction in 2015.

One decade later, Nepal has again found itself in a political crisis.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• ICJ Ruling Is a Pivotal Moment for Climate and Health Justice, Experts Say
• Extreme Weather Will Place Toll on Asia’s Economies and Ecosystems, Says World Meteorological Organization
• Glaciers More Sensitive to Global Warming, Now in Extreme Danger—Study

Abu Amer Al-Sharif and his family in Gaza City remove their belongings and household items from their home, preparing for yet another displacement. Credit: UN News
 
One million people being forced towards unlivable, so called “humanitarian area” in mass forced displacement.

By Oxfam International
MEXICO CITY, Mexico, Sep 10 2025 (IPS)

Israel’s intent to displace around 1 million civilians, half of whom are living in famine, is impossible and illegal Oxfam said, while the Israeli military continued to flatten Gaza City building by building as its mass forced displacement of civilians in the city gains terrifying momentum.

Displacement orders, on leaflets thrown from the sky, or posted on social media, signal grave next steps, a scene all too familiar in Gaza where every order has preceded new waves of destruction and mass casualties. This is the latest chapter in the genocide that Israel is committing in Gaza and part of a broader campaign of ethnic cleansing engulfing the entire
Gaza Strip, where nothing and no one has been spared.

Israel’s plan to concentrate around 1 million people into tiny slivers of already overcrowded and ill-equipped “camps” has no basis in reality, with just 42.8 square kilometres (under 12% of the Gaza Strip) allocated to this so-called “humanitarian area” for people to move to.

That would mean an additional 1 million people are expected to live in under–resourced spaces located in the Southern part of the Gaza Strip, whilst most of the remaining humanitarian and emergency infrastructure is currently located in the middle area of the Strip, further limiting access to support.

The plan is not only inhumane it is physically impossible and would compound disease and hunger and be a flagrant breach of international humanitarian law (IHL).

These orders cannot be carried out in a way in which Israel can meet its IHL obligations, or the terms of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Mass forced displacement is not a pressure tool to replace negotiations and amounts to collective punishment.

Under IHL, there must be guarantees of support to ensure Palestinians forced to flee Gaza City can do so in safety and safely return. There also needs to be guaranteed provision of accommodation, hygiene, health, nutrition, water and non-separation of families. Without these supports in place, it amounts to forcible transfer, which in current circumstances amount to war crimes and a crime against humanity.

It is the latest result of a deliberate policy of the Government of Israel to use starvation and forced mass displacement, food and water as weapons of war. Mass forced displacement is not a pressure tool to replace negotiations and amounts to collective punishment.

“The ongoing displacement orders and the push of people deeper into “humanitarian zones”- which we know have never been safe at all- mean it becomes almost impossible to deliver aid effectively. Israel’s siege and severe limitations placed on the entry of aid also means people already in these zones lack the most basic of services even before hundreds of thousands more are forced into the same area,” said Ruth James, Oxfam’s Regional Humanitarian Coordinator, speaking from Gaza.

Oxfam’s partner organisations are under attack and facing severe pressure. On Sunday, an Israeli attack near the headquarters of the Aisha Association for Woman and Child Protection in Gaza City, resulted in the killing of one of the employees, a pregnant woman, and a 7-year old boy and critically injuring many others.

The organization plays a leading role in the protection of women and children. Their premises are used as shelters by displaced people.

Dr Umaiyeh Khammash, Director of Juzoor, an Oxfam partner, and working in Gaza City promoting health as a basic human right, said: “While Juzoor’s team continues its humanitarian mission, moving alongside the forcibly displaced population and sharing in their suffering and uprooting, the coming days will inevitably bring more loss of lives and even further deterioration in the health and well-being of the population”.

“Mental health is collapsing under the weight of sustained trauma—people are enduring daily nightmares of fear, shock, and hopelessness, with no sense of safety anywhere, in a crisis that will leave deep scars, not just on this generation, but on generations to come.”

Many of those already ordered to leave their homes are too weak from starvation, cannot afford the exorbitant transport costs to move, or are unwilling to leave for an area already over-crowded and not guaranteed safe.

A recent multi-agency survey found that while 53% of surveyed residents said they would move if they received an official order, only 27% of those said they would move out of Gaza City, with others saying they would move to another area within Gaza City. 14% said they would not move.

This indicates that hundreds of thousands of people will be trapped in the city under increasingly heavy bombardment, with little or no aid reaching them.

“As the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza City deepens by the hour, there must be an end to this violence and deprivation,” said Ruth James. “There must be an urgent halt to all forced displacement operations, and large-scale delivery of food, water, medicine, vital water-infrastructure repair equipment and fuel.”

Oxfam is calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire and release of all hostages and unlawfully detained prisoners. The unimaginable violence and suffering Palestinians in Gaza have been enduring for over 700 days needs to end now. The moral failure of states to act is palpable. For as long as they are silent and continue to send arms support to Israel, they are complicit in the genocide that continues to unfold.

Customary IHL Rule 129 and Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 explicitly prohibits an occupying power from deporting or forcibly transferring members of the occupied civilian population, regardless of motive. This provision is a cornerstone of the laws of occupation; it is designed to prevent demographic changes being made by the occupying power to the occupied territory, regardless of any ‘justification’ it may provide for such changes.

It underscores the principle that the rights and dignity of the civilian population must be protected, reflecting an occupying power’s obligations to ensure the welfare and security of those under its administration. There are exceptions for evacuation of civilians for their own safety, but only on a temporary basis and where adequate shelter, food, water and access to medical care are provided.

Crimes Against Humanity: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court states that:

– Article 7(1)(d): Treats deportation or forcible transfer of population, when perpetrated as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians, as a crime against humanity. Ohchr+1

– Article 8(2)(a)(vii) and (2)(b)(viii): Make it a war crime to transfer, directly or indirectly, by the occupying power, parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies or to deport or transfer civilians of the occupied territory, in whole or in part, within or outside that territory.

Harvard Dataverse report with mapping and analysis of “humanitarian” zone announcement.

The recently published Intergrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) report determined that Famine (IPC Phase 5) is currently occurring in Gaza Governorate. Furthermore, the FRC projects Famine (IPC Phase 5) thresholds to be crossed in Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis Governorates in the coming weeks.

According to the UN, at least 1.9 million people – or about 90 per cent of the population – across the Gaza Strip have been displaced during the war. Many have been displaced repeatedly, some 10 times or more.

On 6 September, Israeli authorities published a map of the new “humanitarian zone” comprising Al Mawasi, including the western parts of Khan Younis city (mainly Khan Younis Camp and al-Amal district) and excluding the Middle Governorate.

As of 3 September, 86.5 per cent of the Gaza Strip remains within the Israeli-militarized zone, under displacement orders, or where these overlap.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Ahead of the Conference of the Parties (COP30), the Second Africa Climate Summit (ACS2) in Addis Ababa is looking to mobilize billions for renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, green housing, and gender-focused financing.