President John Dramani Mahama of Ghana addressing the UN General Assembly last September. Credit: UN Photo
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
MOSCOW, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
Squeezed between import substitution and dependency syndrome, a condition characterized by a set of associated economic symptoms—that is rules and regulations—majority of African countries are shifting from United States and Europe to an incoherent alternative bilateral partnerships with Russia, China and the Global South.
By forging new partnerships, for instance with Russia, these African countries rather create conspicuous economic dependency at the expense of strengthening their own local production, attainable by supporting local farmers under state budget. Import-centric partnership ties and lack of diversification make these African countries committed to import-dependent structures. It invariably compounds domestic production challenges. Needless to say that Africa has huge arable land and human resources to ensure food security.
A classical example that readily comes to mind is Ghana, and other West African countries. With rapidly accelerating economic policy, Ghana’s President John Dramani Mahama ordered the suspension of U.S. chicken and agricultural products, reaffirming swift measures for transforming local agriculture considered as grounds for ensuring sustainable food security and economic growth and, simultaneously, for driving job creation.
President Mahama, in early December 2025, while observing Agricultural Day, urged Ghanaians to take up farming, highlighting the guarantee and state support needed for affordable credit and modern tools to boost food security. According to Mahama, Ghana spends $3bn yearly on basic food imports from abroad.
The government decision highlights the importance of leveraging unto local agriculture technology and innovation. Creating opportunities to unlock the full potential of depending on available resources within the new transformative policy strategy which aims at boosting local productivity. President Mahama’s special initiatives are the 24-Hour Economy and the Big Push Agenda. One of the pillars focuses on Grow 24 – modernising agriculture.
Despite remarkable commendations for new set of economic recovery, Ghana’s demand for agricultural products is still high, and this time making a smooth shift to Russia whose poultry meat and wheat currently became the main driver of exports to African countries. And Ghana, noticeably, accepts large quantity (tonnes) of poultry from Russia’s Rostov region into the country, according to several media reports. The supplies include grains, but also vegetable oils, meat and dairy products, fish and finished food products have significant potential for Africa.
The Agriculture Ministry’s Agroexport Department acknowledges Russia exports chicken to Ghana, with Ghanaian importers sourcing Russian poultry products, especially frozen cuts, to meet significant local demand that far outstrips domestic production, even after Ghana lifted a temporary 2020 avian flu-related ban on Russian poultry.
Moreover, monitoring and basic research indicated Russian producers are actively increasing poultry exports to various African countries, thus boosting trade, although Ghana still struggles to balance imports with local industry needs.
A few details indicate the following:
* Significant Market: In any case, Ghana is a key African market for Russian poultry, with exports seeing substantial growth in recent years, alongside Angola, Benin, Cote d’Voire, Nigeria and Sierra Leone.
* Demand-Driven: Ghana’s large gap between domestic poultry production and national demand necessitates significant imports, creating opportunities for foreign suppliers like Russia.
* Major Exporters: Russia poultry companies are focused on increasing generally their African exports, with Ghana being a major destination. The basic question: to remain as import dependency or strive at attaining food sufficiency?
* Product Focus: Exports typically include frozen chicken cuts (legs and meat) very vital for supplementing local supply. But as the geopolitical dynamics shift, Ghana and other importing African countries have to review partnerships, particularly with Russia.
Despite the fact that challenges persist, Russia strongly remains as a notable supplier to Ghana, even under the supervision of John Mahama’s administration, dealing as a friendly ally, both have the vision for multipolar trade architecture, ultimately fulfilling a critical role in meeting majority of African countries’ large consumer demand for poultry products, and with Russia’s trade actively expanding and Ghana’s preparedness to spend on such imports from the state budget.
Following two high-profile Russia–Africa summits, cooperation in the area of food security emerged as a key theme. Moscow pledged to boost agricultural exports to the continent—especially grain, poultry, and fertilisers—while African leaders welcomed the prospect of improved food supplies.
Nevertheless, do these African governments think of prioritising agricultural self-sufficiency. At a May 2025 meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia’s Economic Development Minister, Maxim Reshetnikov, underlined the fact that more than 40 Russian companies were keen to export animal products and agricultural goods to the African region.
Russia, eager to expand its economic footprint, sees large-scale agricultural exports as a key revenue generator. Estimates suggest the Russian government could earn over $15 billion annually from these agricultural exports to African continent.
Head of the Agroexport Federal Center, Ilya Ilyushin, speaking at the round table “Russia-Africa: A Strategic Partnership in Agriculture to Ensure Food Security,” which was held as part of the international conference on ensuring the food sovereignty of African countries in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) on Nov. 21, 2025, said: “We see significant potential in expanding supplies of Russian agricultural products to Africa.”
It mentioned that the Agriculture Ministry’s Agroexport Department, and the Union of Grain Exporters and Producers, exported over 32,000 tonnes of wheat and barley to Egypt totaling nearly $8 million during the first half of 2025, Kenya totaling over $119 million.
Interfax media reports referred to African countries whose markets are of interest for Russian producers and exporters. Despite existing difficulties, supplies of livestock products are also growing, this includes poultry meat, Ilyushin said. Exports of agricultural products from Russia to African countries have more than doubled, and third quarter of 2025 reached almost $7 billion.
The key buyers of Russian grain on the continent are Egypt, Algeria, Kenya, Libya, Tunisia, Nigeria, Morocco, South Africa, Tanzania and Sudan, he said. According to him, Russia needs to expand the geography of supplies, increasing exports to other regions of the continent, increase supplies in West Africa to Benin, Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and the French-speaking Sahelian States.
Of course, Russian exporters have nothing to complain. Africa’s dependency dilemma still persists. Therefore, Russia to continue expanding food exports to Africa explicitly reflects a calculated economic and geopolitical strategy. In the end of the analysis, the debate plays out prominently and also the primary message: Africa cannot afford to sacrifice food sovereignty for geopolitical solidarity.
With the above analysis, Russian exporters show readiness to explore and shape actionable strategies for harnessing Africa’s consumer market, including that of Ghana, and further to strengthen economic and trade cooperation and support its dynamic vision for sustainable development in the context of multipolar friendship and solidarity.
Kester Kenn Klomegah focuses on current geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development-related questions in Africa with external countries. Most of his well-resourced articles are reprinted in several reputable foreign media.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Activists at a My body, My choice protest. Credit: Voicepk.net
By Zofeen Ebrahim
KARACHI, Pakistan, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
As 2026 dawns, women in Pakistan are left grappling with a stark reality: rape and marital rape continue to be misinterpreted by judges in the country’s highest courts.
Earlier this month, Pakistan’s Supreme Court set aside a rape conviction, changing it to fornication (consensual sex out of marriage) – reducing a 20-year sentence to five years and slashing the fine from 500,000 rupees to 10,000 rupees, sparking fresh calls for better protections for Pakistani women.
“Such judgments do not give confidence to women to come out and report sexual violence perpetrated on them,” said Ayesha Farooq, chairperson of the government-notified Committee of the Anti-Rape Investigation and Trial Act, formed in 2021.
Despite protective legislation, 70 percent of gender-based violence incidents go unreported. Of those reported, the national conviction rate stands at just 5 percent, with some categories as low as 0.5 percent and domestic violence convictions at 1.3 percent.
Senator Sherry Rehman highlighted the stark figures: in 2024, Islamabad had seven convictions out of 176 rape cases, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa one out of 258, Sindh none from 243 rape cases and Balochistan reported 21 rapes with no convictions.
Nida Aly, Executive Director of AGHS, said, “I have never felt so disappointed in our judiciary. Judges have failed as a gender-competent forum and lost credibility.”
The Supreme Court case involved a survivor who, in 2015, was raped at gunpoint while relieving herself in the woods. She reported the incident seven months later; DNA tests confirmed the accused as the father of her child. The trial court convicted him, and the Lahore High Court upheld the verdict. Yet at the Supreme Court, two of three judges reclassified the act as fornication, citing the complainant’s silence, lack of resistance, and absence of physical marks. Section 496-B of the Penal Code prescribes five years’ imprisonment and a Rs10,000 fine for fornication.
This reasoning drew sharp criticism from the National Commission on the Status of Women, which said consent cannot be inferred from silence, delayed reporting, or lack of resistance, and urged courts to recognise the realities of trauma, fear, coercion, and power imbalances in sexual violence cases.
Ironically, after the recasting of the case, the woman was exempted from punishment.
She was reminded of another case of rape in 2024, where a woman accused her brother’s friend of rape.
“The same judge converted the conviction of rape into fornication – along with arguments like “the woman showed no resistance; there were no marks of violence” and there was a two-day delay in reporting to the police.
Justice Ayesha Malik’s dissenting note arguing there was no “standardised” rulebook response by the victim emphasised consent.
Jamshed M. Kazi, Country Representative, UN Women Pakistan, said such cases resonate far beyond the courtroom. “The language used and the conclusions reached shape not only legal precedent but also social attitudes, survivor confidence, and public trust in justice.”
He added, “For survivors of sexual violence, judgements can leave lasting marks on the lives of women and girls, affecting how their experiences are believed and remembered, and may discourage reporting, reinforcing silence, fear, or self-doubt among survivors.”
Another case saw the Lahore High Court dismiss rape complaints against a husband because he was still legally married, even though he raped the woman at gunpoint. The judge, while maintaining the conduct of the man to be “immoral” and “inappropriate under religious or social norms”, said it was not a crime since the marriage continued to exist legally at the time of the incident.
“The judge focused on the validity of the marriage and completely disregarded the woman’s claim of non-consent and being subjected to forced sex at gunpoint,” pointed out Aly.
While there is no explicit provision criminalising marital rape, the Protection of Women (Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 2006 removed marriage as a defence to rape. When the definition of rape was substantially revised under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2021, no marital exemption was reintroduced.
Between 1979 and 2006, Maliha Zia, Director, Gender, Inclusion & Development at the Karachi-based Legal Aid Society, explained, marriage operated as a defence to rape because the law defined rape as sexual intercourse by a man with a woman “who is not his wife” under specified circumstances. The deliberate removal of the words “not his wife” in 2006 therefore eliminated marriage as a defence, a position that has remained unchanged since.
“The 2006 Protection of Women Act was an important step; it corrected major injustices by separating rape from zina (unlawful sexual intercourse – including adultery and fornication),” said Dr Sharmila Faruqui, a member of the National Assembly. “But it stopped short of clearly saying that lack of consent within marriage is also rape and that silence has allowed old assumptions to survive.”
Faruqui stressed the need for judicial sensitisation, particularly at senior levels, but noted that judges are ultimately bound by the law. “When the law is unclear, even well-intentioned interpretations can go wrong,” she said. She called for legislative clarity—through a penal code amendment or another carefully considered route—emphasising that consent, grounded in dignity and equality, must remain central regardless of marital status. “Marriage was never meant to be a license for violence.”
This was endorsed by Zia, who has been among the trainers of judges who hear GBV cases. “Much work needs to be done to constantly sensitise the justice sector on women’s experiences and the trauma they go through due to sexual violence. “Many work on the assumption that the woman is most likely lying, especially if she didn’t fight or run or report straight away,” she added.
To its credit, Pakistan, under the anti-rape act of 2021 special courts were notified to look into gender-based violence cases. To date there are 174 such courts. Unfortunately, these courts are not exclusively handling GBV cases, said Zia. But even with this limitation, rape case convictions in Sindh rose to 17 percent in 2025, from 5 percent in 2020, when such courts did not exist. “Imagine how much better it could be!” According to her, in districts where there is a high caseload of GBV, courts should be exclusive, not necessarily more.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Despite impressive global declines in mortality rates, life expectancies at birth vary significantly among countries. Credit: Shutterstock
By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Jan 7 2026 (IPS)
While death is inevitable for everyone, the timing of “The Appointment in Samarra” varies significantly among and within populations. Fortunately, mortality levels of human populations have declined significantly worldwide in recent years, leading to increased survival rates and delayed appointments in Samarra.
For example, in the mid-20th century, life expectancies at birth for males and females were 45 and 48 years, respectively. Today, males and females have life expectancies at birth of 71 and 76 years, respectively, which is an increase of more than 25 years. Additionally, females generally have higher life expectancies than males across countries (Figure 1).
Source: United Nations.
Despite impressive global declines in mortality rates, life expectancies at birth vary significantly among countries. Currently, life expectancies at birth for males and females range from highs of about 82 and 87 years, respectively, in Japan and Italy, to lows of approximately 55 and 57 years, respectively, in Nigeria and the Central African Republic.
Inequities in life expectancies at birth persist across different age groups. For example, by the age of 65, country differences in life expectancy remain substantial. In Japan and Italy, life expectancies for males and females at age 65 are approximately 20 and 24 years, respectively. In contrast, the life expectancies for males and females at age 65 in Nigeria and the Central African Republic are about 12 and 13 years, respectively.
Similarly, infant mortality rates vary greatly among countries around the world. The mortality rates of infants range from lows of approximately 2 deaths per 1,000 births in Japan and Italy to highs over 30 times greater, with about 68 deaths per 1,000 births in Nigeria and the Central African Republic.
Longer life expectancies for the world’s population have also led to an increase in the number of centenarians.
In 1950, there were nearly 15,000 centenarians worldwide, making up 0.001% of the global population. Today, there are approximately 630,000 centenarians, accounting for close to 0.01% of the world’s population. By 2050, the number of centenarians is projected to reach 2.6 million, representing around 0.03% of the world’s population (Figure 2).
Source: United Nations.
There are many important factors that influence when and how the appointment in Samarra will occur. These factors include place of birth, residence, sex, socio-economic status, housing, healthcare, nutrition, diet, education, friends, exercise, genetics, disease prevalence, economic stability, public health, injuries, mental health, environmental conditions, political stability, human rights, social support, sanitation, substance use, lifestyle choices, parenting, personal habits, poverty, and violence (Table 1).
Declines in fertility rates have followed mortality rate declines, commonly described as the demographic transition. The fertility rate of the world’s population has fallen from a high of about 5.3 births per woman in the early 1960s to 2.2 births per woman today.
More than half of all countries and areas worldwide have a fertility rate below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman. In many of these countries, deaths outnumber births, resulting in negative rates of population growth.
For example, in China, deaths began outnumbering births about five years ago. This trend is expected to continue for the rest of the 21st century, leading to population decline and the demographic ageing of the Chinese population.
The timing and circumstances of appointments in Samarra differ among the populations of more developed and less developed countries. People in the latter group are more likely to die from communicable diseases than from noncommunicable diseases, which are chronic conditions typically associated with older, aging populations and lifestyle factors.
Among more developed countries, major causes of death include heart disease, cancer, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lower respiratory infections. Other leading causes are Alzheimer’s and other dementia, tuberculosis, diarrheal diseases, HIV/AIDS, and external causes and injuries.
Currently, life expectancies at birth for males and females range from highs of about 82 and 87 years, respectively, in Japan and Italy, to lows of approximately 55 and 57 years, respectively, in Nigeria and the Central African Republic
Additionally, in many countries, cancer has replaced heart disease as the leading cause of death. The most common cancers are breast, lung, colon, rectum, and prostate cancer.
Approximately a third of cancer deaths are due to tobacco use, high body mass index, alcohol consumption, low fruit and vegetable intake, and lack of physical activity. Air pollution is also an important risk factor for lung cancer. Many cancers can be cured if detected early and treated effectively.
In many less developed countries, major causes of death include lower respiratory diseases, stroke, heart disease, malaria, and pre-term birth conditions. Other important causes include diarrheal diseases, tuberculosis, birth trauma, and HIV/AIDS.
Another major cause of death in recent years has been the coronavirus or COVID-19. The World Health Organization declared it a global pandemic on 11 March 2020, and it ended in May 2023, but remains an ongoing health threat. The pandemic resulted in over 7 million officially reported deaths worldwide, but the estimated excess morality is significantly higher, ranging between 18 and 35 million.
A crucial factor influencing the timing of appointments in Samarra is the availability of universal health coverage. According to the World Health Organization, universal health coverage ensures that every individual in a country has access to a wide range of health services, from emergency treatments to palliative care, without facing financial difficulties.
As of 2024, 73 out of the 195 countries worldwide were reported to offer some form of universal health coverage, which covers around two-thirds of the global population of 8.2 billion.
Among more developed nations, the United States stands out as a notable exception for not providing universal health care to all its citizens. In 2024, private health insurance coverage remained more prevalent than public coverage, with 66% of the U.S. population being covered. Additionally, the U.S. was noted for having the highest healthcare spending figure per capita in the world.
A significant debate surrounding the appointments in Samarra revolves around the right to die or medically assisted suicide. The differing perspectives about assisted suicide focus on the balance between individual autonomy and the sanctity of life.
Some believe that individuals experiencing unbearable suffering, often due to a terminal illness or incurable condition, should have the legal right and control to decide on medically assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia. In contrast, others argue that assisted suicide devalues human life and opens the door to potential abuse. They also emphasize the importance of palliative care for those facing illness or personal struggles.
Medically assisted suicide is legal under specific circumstances in a limited number of countries. Those places include Australia, Austria. Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Ecuador, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland, and twelve states in the United States.
In order to be eligible for medical assistance in dying, an individual typically must meet certain criteria. These criteria may include having a terminal illness or disability, being of sound mind, expressing a voluntary desire to die, and being capable of self-administering the lethal dose.
While the appointment in Samarra is inevitable for every human being, the timing of when this appointment will occur remains a topic of debate among the scientific community.
Some believe that there is a fixed limit to human life span, largely attributed to the gradual processes of biological ageing. They stress the implausibility of radical life extension for humans in the 21st century.
On the other hand, some argue that there is no conclusive evidence that the limit of human life span has been reached. The oldest supercentenarian on record, Jeanne Calment of France, lived to be 122 years and 164 days. Some experts predict that this current record of 122 years will be surpassed by the end of the 21st century, possibly even reaching 130 years.
In conclusion, the mortality rates of human populations have decreased globally in recent years, leading to improved chances of survival, longer life expectancies, and a growing number of centenarians. However, the timing and circumstances of the inevitable appointment in Samarra vary, with populations in more developed countries continuing to experience lower death rates and longer life expectancies compared to populations in less developed countries.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of many publications on population matters.
Girl at computer. Credit: UNFPA Central African Republic/Karel Prinsloo
A bold action by governments, tech companies, and all communities is needed to confront the rising tech-facilitated GBV that is silencing women’s voices and threatening hard-won gains in Africa.
By Sennen Hounton and Lydia Zigomo
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 7 2026 (IPS)
New estimates show that violence against women and girls remains one of the most pervasive human rights violations in the world – and that one of its fastest-growing frontiers is the digital space.
Technology-facilitated gender-based violence includes online harassment, cyberstalking, image-based abuse, deepfake exploitation and coordinated digital attacks, and all of these are proliferating.
Anonymous accounts, weak reporting systems, and limited legal consequences have enabled perpetrators to weaponize technology to shame, silence, and violate women and girls at unprecedented scale and speed.
Africa is no exception.
Across the continent, disturbing patterns are emerging: Girls are facing cyberbullying and sextortion. Women leaders and human rights defenders are disproportionately targeted through coordinated online abuse designed to intimidate them out of public life.
During elections, women in public roles report harassment, smear campaigns and doxxing – tactics meant to silence civic participation.
In humanitarian settings – from the Sahel to the Lake Chad Basin to Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo – displaced women and girls rely on digital tools to stay connected and access essential services.
Yet these same tools expose them to surveillance, extortion, blackmail and exploitation.
In conflict contexts, online threats have escalated into offline consequences – including intimidation, detention and physical violence.
Despite the scale of the problem, most cases remain invisible because technology companies, justice systems and communities have not kept pace. Reporting mechanisms are often ineffective.
Digital safety is rarely taught in schools or homes. Survivors face retaliation and victim-blaming. Perpetrators, and the platforms that enable them, are almost never held accountable.
The consequences are severe. Technology-facilitated violence impacts mental health, restricts mobility, destroys livelihoods and erodes confidence. “This virtual world can have real emotional impacts. It’s not enough to say ignore it or log off,” a 24-year-old woman in Chad told UNFPA.
Other young women in Africa also describe witnessing or experiencing harms with real-world impacts: “My page was hacked, I was forced to do things against my will,” a 31-year-old woman from Liberia said.
“Someone had published naked photos and videos of me in our local village Facebook group,” a young woman in Kenya shared. “I gathered the courage and went to a police station to report the incident. The officers I spoke to first admonished me and told me that this was not a criminal case, but rather a case of indecent behaviour on my part.”
In aggregate, these harms are reshaping the digital public sphere in ways that exclude women and girls.
When girls abandon online learning for fear their images may be misused, or when women delete their accounts to escape harassment, societies lose leadership, innovation and the voices essential to progress.
Gender equality cannot advance when half the population is pushed out of digital spaces.
That is why UNFPA and partners convened the first-ever Africa Symposium on Technology-facilitated Gender-based Violence in November, convening leaders in digital rights and gender-based violence prevention and response. It is time to build alliances and explore solutions. Africa is home to multiple hubs of technological innovation, and to the world’s youngest population.
As the digital divide slowly closes, we must ensure that the technology being adopted is safe, private and secure, and does not reinforce or amplify existing gender and social inequalities.
Symposium attendees recognized the need for a bold, coordinated response, one that follows the same principles that guide all efforts to end gender-based violence: dignity, consent, confidentiality, privacy, and survivor-centered care.
We must create a world where “African innovators lead the way in designing digital ecosystems that are safe, ecosystems that are inclusive and empowering for all, and in particular for women and marginalized communities,” said Judy Karioko, from the International Research & Exchanges Board (IREX) in Kenya, at one of the Symposium’s sessions.
UNFPA is committed to making every space – physical or digital – safe for women and girls in all their diversity. Through the Making All Spaces Safe programme, supported by Global Affairs Canada, concrete action is being taken across Africa, including Benin, Ghana, Kenya and Tunisia, to integrate technology risks into efforts to end gender-based violence.
But no single institution can end digital violence alone. Governments, tech companies, educators, civil society, faith leaders, families – and every digital citizen – share responsibility.
The world’s future begins with Africa. As a region, and as a global community, we cannot wait. Because if we fail to make the online world safe, we fail to protect the future of girls, and the world growing up in the digital age.
Dr. Sennen Hounton is the UNFPA Regional Director for West and Central Africa, while Ms. Lydia Zigomo is the UNFPA Regional Director for East and Southern Africa
Source: Africa Renewal, United Nations
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
The maternity ward at Kharkiv City Multifunctional Hospital No.25. Credit: UNFPA/Ukraine
By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Jan 7 2026 (IPS)
“It was an emergency caesarean section when the life of the pregnant woman was at risk. We did the operation with just flashlights and no water, and against a backdrop of constant explosions,” says Dr Oleksandr Zhelezniakov, Director of the Obstetrics Department at Kharkiv Regional Clinical Hospital, in eastern Ukraine.
He is recalling what he says was “one of the most difficult” medical procedures he has been involved in since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of his country.
But it was far from the only time he has had to work in extreme conditions while his city is pounded by Russian shelling. In fact, he says, it has become routine for him and his colleagues.
“The current reality is that, given we are in a frontline city, we work like this almost every day, because the alarms never stop and we hear explosions almost every day,” he tells IPS.
“You just do what you have to do to save a life, to save the future. In such moments, you only think about saving a life. We work [in these conditions] because life must always prevail,” he says.
Staff look at the beginnings of construction of a bunkerised facility at Kharkiv City Multifunctional Hospital No. 25. Credit: UNFPA/Ukraine
Zhelezniakov’s hospital has, like many other medical facilities in Ukraine, been repeatedly attacked and damaged since the start of the war. The World Health Organisation (WHO) had documented more than 2,700 attacks on Ukrainian healthcare facilities since February 24, 2024.
These have included attacks on more than 80 maternal healthcare facilities – with devastating consequences for maternal health, as recently released data has shown.
According to analysis by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) released in December, there has been a sharp rise in the risk of dying in pregnancy or childbirth in Ukraine as the conflict grinds on.
The agency says repeated strikes on hospitals and the breakdown of essential services are forcing women to give birth in increasingly dangerous conditions, and health workers have warned that a combination of violence, chronic stress, displacement and widespread disruption of maternity care is driving a surge in pregnancy complications and preventable deaths.
Its analysis of national data shows a 37-percent increase in the maternal mortality rate from 2023 to 2024 – the most recent full year of national data available. In 2023, Ukraine recorded 18.9 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. In 2024, that figure rose to 25.9. The organisation says most of these are preventable deaths, reflecting a health system operating under extreme strain.
It said it had also seen sharp increases in severe pregnancy and childbirth complications. Uterine ruptures — among the most dangerous obstetric emergencies — have risen by 44 per cent. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy have increased by more than 12 per cent, while severe postpartum haemorrhage has risen by nearly 9 per cent – from 2023 to 2024. Delays in accessing care, stress, displacement and disrupted referral pathways are key contributing factors.
Meanwhile, the situation in frontline regions is particularly acute. In Kherson, premature births are almost double the national average, and the region has the highest stillbirth rate in the country, according to UNFPA.
It cites contributing factors including stress, insecurity and difficulties in accessing care, which can lead to preterm labour and premature rupture of membranes.
Another indicator of system strain is the Caesarean section rate. Nationally, the rate now exceeds 28 per cent, already above recommended levels. In frontline regions, the figures are among the highest in Europe: 46 per cent in Kherson and approximately 32 per cent in Odesa, Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv. These high rates often reflect the need for doctors and women to time deliveries around short windows of relative safety and can additionally show an increased pregnancy complication rate that requires surgical intervention, according to UNFPA officials.
“Attacks [on healthcare, including maternity and neonatal facilities] have had measurable and severe consequences for maternal health. Ukraine is entering another winter under conditions that sharply increase risks for pregnant women, newborns and the health workers who care for them,” Isaac Hurskin, Head of Communications, UNFPA in Ukraine, told IPS.
In early December, a maternity hospital in Kherson, a facility supported by UNFPA, was struck by artillery fire. During the strike, hospital staff moved women in labour and newborns into a bunkered maternity ward—one of many such facilities constructed by the government with help from groups like UNFPA to protect mothers and babies during active hostilities.
While everyone survived the attack and a baby girl was born in the bunker during the shelling, Hurskin said it was “a stark illustration of the conditions under which pregnancy and childbirth are now taking place — conditions no woman or health worker should ever have to face”.
But the devastation wrought by the war in Ukraine is also impacting wider reproductive health.
IPS has spoken to women in Ukraine who have admitted they are avoiding getting pregnant because of concerns about their ability to access maternal healthcare safely but also the conditions in which they may have to raise an infant.
“Women in conflict-affected areas have specific reproductive needs. It is very hard to meet them when a maternity hospital gets bombed on a regular basis, or when energy infrastructure is targeted, limiting the functionality of hospitals and forcing pregnant women to unequipped hospital shelters. A woman considering getting pregnant needs to make a decision based on these factors – whether a hospital is safe, whether she can have access to services, and whether she is able to care for the child afterwards, with no electricity, heating, or water at home,” Uliana Poltavets, International Advocacy and Ukraine Program Coordinator at Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), told IPS.
“This is a trend which is being observed,” added Zhelezniakov. “Women fear not only for their lives and the lives of their unborn children during childbirth under shelling but also an uncertain future—a lack of safe housing, work, and normal conditions for raising a child. This is a rational fear in the irrational conditions of war. It is one of the reasons for the sharp decline in the birth rate.”
But he added that conversely, the effects of the war were impacting women’s ability to conceive.
“Chronic stress, high cortisol levels, anxiety, and sleep disorders directly affect hormonal balance and reproductive function. Constant stress also leads to hormonal imbalances (dysfunction of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis). This causes an increase in cases of secondary infertility, premature ovarian failure, and endometriosis. We are already seeing an increase in the number of pathological menopauses in young women,” he said.
These threats to fertility and maternal health come at a time when Ukraine is facing a demographic crisis.
According to UNFPA, since 2014, when Russia illegally annexed Crimea and supported separatist paramilitary movements in eastern Ukraine, the country has lost an estimated 10 million people through displacement, mortality and outward migration. Fertility has fallen to below one child per woman — one of the lowest rates globally.
It says that rising maternal deaths, increasing complications and pervasive uncertainty about the safety of childbirth reinforce one another, with long-term consequences for families, communities and national recovery.
“This is not only a humanitarian emergency. It is a demographic crisis with implications that will extend far beyond the end of hostilities. Protecting maternal health is central to Ukraine’s long-term recovery and future stability,” said Hurskin.
Indeed, examples from other recent conflicts where there has been widescale destruction of healthcare have shown the long-term effects of war on maternal and reproductive healthcare long after they have finished, from problems with rebuilding damaged and destroyed facilities, ongoing displacement, and continued shortages of medical staff just some of the barriers to women being able to access services.
“Look at Syria, for example. The healthcare system is being built back up, there is rebuilding of facilities, things are improving, but it will take decades to get back to where it was before. And maternal healthcare tends to be deprioritised both during and after a conflict – resources tend to go to other areas such as emergency and trauma care. Women in Syria will have problems with accessing maternal healthcare for years and years to come,” an expert on healthcare in war zones working for an international human rights group, who spoke on condition of anonymity for security reasons, told IPS.
Zhelezniakov admits that a worsening of the demographic crisis in Ukraine is inevitable.
“The expectation is that it will get worse. The destruction of the maternal health care system only exacerbates existing problems caused by the war: the migration of women and children abroad, loss of life, economic instability, and psychological pressure,” he says.
But he adds that even now measures can be taken to improve maternal healthcare, including strengthening primary care, improving digitalisation (e-health systems), investment in prevention, mental health support programmes, environmental improvement, legislative regulation, and raising awareness of reproductive health to reduce mortality and disability, among others.
Developing international cooperation by creating “medical hubs” in relatively safe regions with the support of international partners, such as UNFPA and WHO, to ensure services, would also help.
“Even during active hostilities, we can and must work to adapt the system,” he says.
He also vows that, no matter what happens, he and other medical staff will not stop their work, recalling the emergency caesarean section performed by flashlight as shells rained down on Kharkiv.
“The birth of a child in such conditions is always a miracle and a powerful motivator to continue working, despite everything,” he says.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
A man walks past a campaign poster for the military’s proxy party USDP ahead of strictly controlled elections in Myanmar. Credit: Guy Dinmore/IPS
By Guy Dinmore
YANGON, Myanmar and BANGKOK , Jan 6 2026 (IPS)
With thousands of civilians killed in years of civil war and over 22,000 political prisoners still behind bars, no one was surprised that early results from Myanmar’s first but tightly controlled elections since the 2021 coup show the military’s proxy party speeding to victory.
“How can you hold elections and bomb civilians at the same time?” asked Khin Ohmar, a civil rights activist outside Myanmar who is monitoring what the resistance forces and a shadow government reject as “sham” polls.
The junta had already cleared the path towards its stated goal of a “genuine, disciplined multi-party democratic system” by dissolving some 40 parties that refused to register for polls, which they regard as illegitimate, with their leaders and supporters still in prison.
These include the National League for Democracy (NLD) and its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, who won a landslide second term in the 2020 elections – only for the results to be annulled by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, a coup leader and self-appointed acting president. Mass street protests were crushed in early 2021 and war spread across Myanmar.
Although these elections will deliver just a façade of the legitimacy craved by some of the generals, they did succeed in projecting a power and authority that was quickly slipping away just two years ago as long-standing ethnic armed groups and newly formed People’s Defence Forces (PDFs) inflicted a series of humiliating defeats on the junta.
“The tide has turned in favour of the military,” commented a veteran Myanmar analyst in Yangon, crediting China, which reined in the ethnic groups on its shared border, fully embraced Min Aung Hlaing and, along with Russia, delivered the arms, technology and training needed to peg back the resistance.
Campaigners for the pro-military USDP canvas residents and check voters lists in Yangon ahead of the December 28 parliamentary election that excluded major anti-junta parties. Credit: Guy Dinmore/IPS
The regime’s air power and newly acquired drones have been deployed to ruthless effect, often hitting civilian targets in relatively remote areas where the resistance has grassroots support. Air strikes were stepped up as the elections approached. Major cities like Yangon were calm; people subdued.
Bombs dropped on Tabayin township in the Sagaing Region on December 5 killed 18 people, including many in a busy tea shop, AFP reported. On December 10, air strikes on a hospital in the ancient capital of Mrauk-U in Rakhine State were reported to have killed 10 patients and 23 others. The regime accused the insurgent Arakan Army and PDFs of using it as a base.
“I don’t think that anyone believes that those elections will be free and fair,” UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres stated while visiting the region ahead of the polls. He called on the junta to end its “deplorable” violence and find “a credible path” back to civilian rule.
In contrast, the Trump administration declared in November that the junta’s election plans were “free and fair” and removed Temporary Protected Status from Myanmar refugees in the US, saying their country was safe for them to return to.
“I’ll be jailed if I don’t vote,” said Min, a Yangon taxi driver, only half-joking on the eve of voting in Yangon, the commercial capital. “And what difference does it make? We are ruled by China and Xi Jinping, not Min Aung Hlaing,” he added.
With the polls spread over three stages, the first 102 townships voted on December 28. Others will follow on January 11 and January 25 to make a total of 265 of Myanmar’s 330 townships scheduled to vote for the bicameral national parliament and assemblies in the 14 regions and states.
Residents in downtown Yangon check their names on the electoral register and then cast their votes in a polling station on December 28. Credit: Guy Dinmore/IPS
No voting is to be held at all in the remaining 65 townships that the election commission deemed too unsafe.
Voting in the first round in Yangon, an urban and semi-rural sprawl of seven million people, proceeded calmly and slowly on a quiet Sunday – despite intense efforts, and sometimes threats, by the regime to boost the turnout.
In 2020 and 2015 – when Myanmar arguably held the region’s most open and fair elections and the military’s proxy Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), was soundly defeated – people gaily posted images of their ink-stained little fingers on social media as evidence of their vote after weeks of packed rallies and vibrant campaign rallies.
But not this time. Social media posts hurled insults, some comic and vulgar, at the regime. Those eager to support the resistance’s boycott but who were afraid of reprisals were relieved if they found their names had been omitted by mistake on electoral lists. Electronic voting machines in use for the first time made it impossible to leave a blank.
But as in past elections, a solid core of people close to the military and its web of powerful economic interests turned out to vote for the USDP.
“We are choosing our government,” declared one man exiting a polling station in central Yangon with his family, apparently USDP supporters. One proudly waved his little finger dipped in indelible ink.
How can you hold elections and bomb civilians at the same time? - Khin Ohmar, civil rights activist
Turnout for the first round was put by regime officials at 52 percent. This compares with about 70 percent in the past two elections. China’s special envoy – sent as an official observer, along with others from Russia, Belarus, Vietnam and Cambodia – praised the elections.
On January 2, the election commission unexpectedly issued partial results: the USDP, led by retired generals, had won 38 of 40 seats in the lower house where votes had been tallied to date. No one blinked.
The USDP campaign message focused on two main elements – get out and vote with all your family, and back a USDP government to restore stability and progress to Myanmar.
Its underlying message was a reminder that the last USDP administration, led by President Thein Sein introduced socio-economic and political reforms and ceasefire negotiations with ethnic groups after securing a large majority in the 2010 elections when the NLD and other opposition groups were also absent.
Aung San Suu Kyi, then under house arrest, was released just after the 2010 polls and went on to contest and win a seat in a 2012 by-election ahead of the NLD’s own sweeping victory in 2015. Aung San Suu Kyi governed in a difficult power-sharing arrangement with the military for the next five years and was thrown back into prison in the coup.
For now a large proportion of Myanmar’s population lives in areas under junta control, including all 14 of the state and regional capitals, swollen by an influx of people fleeing conflict. The military also holds major seaports and airports and – to varying degrees – the main border crossings for China and Thailand.
But in terms of territory, over half of Myanmar is in the hands of disparate ethnic armed groups and resistance forces. Alliances are fluid and negotiable.
The shadow National Unity Government is trying to establish its own authority over liberated territory, looking to cement a consensus around the concept of a democratic and federal Myanmar free of the military’s interference – something that has eluded the country since independence from British colonial rule in 1948.
Front lines shift back and forth as the military struggles to regain control over the Bamar heartlands of central Myanmar, once considered their bastion, while stretched elsewhere after losing vast tracts of border areas since the coup. Several million people have fled the country or are internally displaced.
Once again there is some speculation that a “smooth” election and the formation of a USDP government in April will lead to a gesture signalling the military’s confidence, such as a possible ending of forced conscription and the release of some political prisoners. Project power, then collect legitimacy.
“Political prisoners are used as bait,” said Khin Ohmar, the civil rights activist in Bangkok. “The world would at least have to applaud.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
The UN report, released last month, calls for a fundamental recalibration of global security and development strategies, prioritizing diplomacy and international cooperation to reverse the current trend of escalating military spending. Credit: UNDP
By Alice Slater
NEW YORK, Jan 6 2026 (IPS)
The United Nations issued a year end Fact Sheet: Rising global military expenditures, starkly illuminating that last year’s record high of $2.7 trillion in military expenditures, caused a cascade of devastating consequences to human well-being, the environment, possibilities for avoiding climate collapse, as well as blows to employment, ending hunger and poverty, providing health care, education, and other ills, due to a lack of adequate funding support.
The Fact Sheet does an admirable job of illustrating the shocking maldistribution of States massive military expenditures and what that money could buy in many instances, such as to end hunger and malnutrition, provide clean water and sanitation, education, environmental remediation, and so much more.
But isn’t it time for the UN to issue a Fact Sheet: Lost Opportunities to Halt Rising Military Expenditures and Heal the Earth? After all, just this summer on the 80th Anniversary of WWII, Russia and China issued a Joint Statement by the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on Global Strategic Security in which they urged that in acknowledging that anniversary and the founding of the United Nations, States and their associations “should not seek to ensure their own security at the expense and to the detriment of the security of other States.” adding that ”the destinies of the peoples of all countries are interrelated.”
Even a cursory examination of the sorry history of the United States and its nuclear alliance, in seeking to secure military domination at the expense of Russia and China, shows a sad list of missed opportunities to accept Russia and China’s offers to negotiate for peace and disarmament, which would have freed up trillions of dollars over the years to address the crisis we now face for preserving all life on earth.
The most recent opportunity that should be on the list, (met with deafening silence by the corrupt western media, laboring under the heavy thumb of their corporate military sponsors, who delight in the billions lining their pockets to produce the burgeoning war machine) was China and Russia’s Joint Statement criticizing the US misbegotten Golden Dome space project and opposing any countries use of outer space for armed confrontation.”
They urged negotiations based on the Russian-Chinese draft treaty to prevent weapons and use of force in outer space, proposed at the UN Committee on Disarmament in 2008 and 2014, where consensus is required to negotiate a treaty and the United States vetoed it each time, preventing any discussion. Amazingly, they further pledged that to prevent an arms race in outer space and promote peace in space, they would “agree to promote on a global scale the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to deploy weapons in outer space.” In other words, No First Use.
While peace in space is the most recent Lost Opportunity, the first Lost Opportunity happened in 1946 when President Truman rejected Stalin’s proposal that the US turn the bomb over to international supervision at the newly formed UN, so Russia got the bomb.
President Reagan rejected Gorbachev’s plea to give up Star Wars as a condition for both countries to eliminate all their nuclear weapons when the wall came down and Gorbachev released all of Eastern Europe from Soviet occupation, thus losing the opportunity to abolish our nuclear arsenals.
More Lost Opportunities: the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) up to Russia’s border despite promises made when the wall came down that NATO would not expand east of a reunified Germany:
President Clinton’s refusal of Putin’s offer to go down to 1000 bombs each, and then call all nuclear states to negotiate for their elimination, provided the US stopped developing missile sites in Romania.
President Bush walked out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and put the new base in Romania; President Trump put one in Poland.
President Obama rejected Putin’s offer to negotiate a treaty to ban cyber war! [i]
Had the US been more open over the years to cooperation, instead of losing so many opportunities to make peace, we would be so much more able to deal with the urgency of preserving a livable planet for all and avoiding the dire consequences enumerated in the new UN Fact Sheet on global military expenditures. It’s still not too late to take up the Russian-Chinese proposal for peace in space. May wiser heads prevail.
https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/milex-docs/MILEX_UN_Fact_Sheet.pdf
Alice Slater serves on the Boards of World BEYOND War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, and is a UN NGO Representative for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Jan 6 2026 (IPS)
While US President Donald Trump has blamed the BRICS and foreign investors for de-dollarisation, his rhetoric, actions and policy measures are mainly responsible for the trend’s recent acceleration.
Jomo Kwame Sundaram
Threats and reactionsDespite some temporary reversals, the dollar’s post-World War II role as world reserve currency has gradually declined over the decades, especially since the 1970s. Ben Norton has argued that several Trump measures have accelerated this trend.
Trump claims his supposedly ‘reciprocal tariffs’ will reduce the US trade or current account deficit with the rest of the world. But if countries cannot export to the US, they cannot earn dollars to meet their trade and investment needs.
Many believe Trump’s tariffs and other threats are enhancing US leverage vis-à-vis others, but their reactions, including defensive countermeasures, are accelerating de-dollarisation.
Trump’s measures, such as his insistence on bilateral negotiations, have alarmed most nations, including long-time allies. As nations, including allies, rethink their economic relations with and vulnerability to the US, de-dollarisation inadvertently accelerates.
Trump vs the Fed
The US Federal Reserve Bank’s overnight lending or funds rate has been higher since 2022, responding to higher consumer price inflation following the pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
As the Fed raised interest rates, yields on US government debt rose. But Trump now wants the Fed to cut interest rates to reduce the high debt servicing costs of both the government and private corporations.
In 2024, the US federal government paid about 3% of GDP in debt interest alone. Although such debt exceeds 120% of GDP, debt service costs are deemed manageable as long as interest rates remain low.
Trump’s pressures on the Fed to cut interest rates have inadvertently undermined investor confidence and prompted ‘flights [from dollar assets] to safety’.
Trump’s recent campaign against his earlier Fed chair appointee, Jerome Powell, has inadvertently raised investor concerns about his espoused monetary policy priorities.
Inflation fears persist
Investors now worry that Trump is pressuring the Fed to cut interest rates. They believe this will stoke inflation and cause the dollar to fall against other major currencies. As Trump is seen forcing down interest rates, he risks being blamed for persistent inflation.
If the Fed buys US Treasuries to reduce yields, for a new round of ‘quantitative easing’ (QE), dollar asset investments will realise lower, if not negative, real yields.
Although inflation hawks’ worst fears of higher inflation have not materialised so far, few believe tariffs will not raise inflation.
Expecting Trump 2.0 to impose more tariffs, many US companies stockpiled imports before April 2. As tariffs took effect and stocks declined, prices rose.
Many investors have sold their dollar assets as monetary authorities worldwide seek alternatives to the greenback. Such sell-offs lower the dollar’s value, further spurring de-dollarisation.
Trump now wants to lower US Treasury bond yields as foreign governments and investors seek alternatives to holding dollar assets.
Many are considering switching to non-dollar assets despite stagnation tendencies elsewhere in the Global North, especially in Europe and Japan. If investors stop buying dollar assets or sell them to purchase non-dollar assets, de-dollarisation will gain momentum.
Foreign demand falling
Washington is understandably worried that foreign investors will dump Treasury securities. In 2015, a third was held by foreigners, but this has since fallen to under a quarter.
The ‘Mar-A-Lago Accord’ proposal, which requires foreign governments to hold US Treasury ‘century bonds’ for 100 years despite assured losses, will compound resentment.
Lowering Treasury bond yields is both risky and difficult due to the highly financialised US economy. Past bond market turmoil has triggered stock market selloffs, lowering Treasury yields, share prices and tax revenue.
Government and corporate borrowing costs rise together. As trillions of dollars’ worth of corporate bonds mature over the next two years, high interest rates will raise corporations’ borrowing costs. Many want to refinance at lower interest rates.
These efforts to bring down interest rates are apparent to all. But lower interest rates and negative ‘actual yields’ for Treasury securities will ensure high inflation persists.
De-dollarisation accelerating?
Trump’s actions, especially threats of tariffs and sanctions, have elicited diverse reactions, often undermining dollar hegemony and accelerating de-dollarisation.
Many recent developments have undermined public confidence in the US government and the rule of law, accelerating de-dollarisation.
As investors sold US assets in mid-2025, the dollar saw its biggest fall since the 1973 oil price hike. It fell by over 10% against other major currencies, triggering temporary falls in the prices of many financial assets, including equities and bonds.
Since then, there has been increased capital market uncertainty and volatility, as in the US bond market, although a strong rally followed the ensuing stock market crash.
In many recent episodes of financial volatility, dollar liquidity was considered the safe option. But in 2025, confidence in dollar assets fell, prompting selloffs and de-dollarisation.
Thus far, Trump has been adept at managing short-term volatility, but his style implies no one knows when the music will stop.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau