A view of Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. Credit: Unsplash/Ekrem Osmanoglu
By Maximilian Malawista
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 27 2026 (IPS)
On Wednesday, July 22, the U.S. Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, and Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Energy, HRH Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman bin Abdulaziz signed a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement, best known as a 123 agreement, as well as an accompanying bilateral safeguards agreement, according to the U.S. Department of Energy and the Saudi Ministry of Energy.
While the agreement was expected to be submitted to Congress for review, President Donald Trump has conditioned U.S. nuclear cooperation on Riyadh, normalizing relations with Israel in order to receive U.S. nuclear technology. A condition that appears difficult to satisfy given the Kingdom’s hardline stance that it will not normalize relations with Israel until a Palestinian state is established with East Jerusalem as its capital, according to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader.
Washington mentions that these two agreements “lay the legal foundation for a decades-long, multi-billion-dollar partnership that advances several priority economic and strategic objectives, including nuclear nonproliferation.” The agreement has a 30-year term.
The 123 agreement, named after Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 – a U.S. federal law – provides the legal framework for long-term civilian nuclear cooperation between the United States and partner countries. The 123 agreement is mandatory before any significant exports of U.S.-origin nuclear material, such as nuclear reactors, nuclear fuel, and other major components can go to any partner.
Saudi Arabia’s nuclear agreement with the U.S. is more than an energy deal. It has the potential to reshape the Kingdom’s relationship with oil, and its geopolitical role in building the Middle East’s next-generation clean-energy infrastructure.
The advent of nuclear energy could also free up the amount of hydrocarbons Saudi Arabia can export. The Kingdom produced 22,744,529.0 TJ of oil and oil products in 2023, having consumed 6.4 million TJ domestically, equivalent to approximately 28 percent of its production. The Kingdom also produced 3,640,348.0 TJ of natural gas, having consumed all of its domestically produced natural gas that year. For reference, 3,600 TJ is equal to 1 TWh.
Expressed in barrels of oil equivalent (boe), Saudi Arabia produced the energy equivalent to 3.72 billion barrels of oil, in oil and oil products in 2023, consuming 1.05 billion barrels of that oil. This indicates that roughly 72 percent of the Kingdom’s oil and oil products, measured in energy terms, are not domestically consumed, leaving a substantial share available for exports and other uses. Saudi Arabia is the world’s second to third largest exporter of oil, producing 11 percent of global demand.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), transport accounts for roughly 30 percent of Saudi Arabia’s final energy consumption, followed by non-energy uses (29.7 percent), industry (19.9 percent), and commercial and public services (11 percent).
Although the pace at which Saudi Arabia can transition away from fossil fuels remains uncertain, nuclear power could gradually reduce domestic oil consumption, freeing up oil for export. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), a reactor can take about five or more years to be built after licensing and regulatory approvals are already completed.
Saudi Arabia’s first nuclear plant is expected to consist of two reactors, each producing around 1.4 GW, bringing the plant to a total capacity of 2.8 GW (2,800 MW). Assuming a 90 percent capacity factor, annual energy generation will be 22.1 TWh per year, nearly five percent of Saudi Arabia’s 431.9 TWh electricity generation.
Although Saudi Arabia’s first nuclear plant would account for only about 5 percent of the Kingdom’s current electricity generation, it would represent an important step toward reducing domestic hydrocarbon consumption in support of the country’s national strategy, Vision 2030.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Student-made posters and artwork line the streets of Jantar Mantar, capturing messages of resistance and hope. Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS
By Aishwarya Bajpai
NEW DELHI, Jul 27 2026 (IPS)
On July 25, after 50 days of protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan resigned.
The movement had begun in May as a satirical social media page called the Cockroach Janta Party, founded by Abhijeet Dipke after the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, used the term “cockroaches” during a Supreme Court hearing, apparently referring to young people with fake law degrees, but his remark sparked a massive public backlash.
Weeks later, the NEET-UG paper (for admission into medical colleges) leaked, and alleged irregularities in the Central Board of Secondary Education on-screen marking process transformed satire into a nationwide campaign.
On June 6, Dipke called for a sit-in protest at Jantar Mantar, demanding Pradhan’s resignation. But by the time the protest entered its seventh week, the movement had outgrown its original demand – and many argue that replacing one minister will not restore faith in an education system battered by paper leaks, administrative failures and growing privatisation.
The crowd reflected that evolution.
Protesters gather at the main stage at Jantar Mantar, where peaceful demonstrations and slogans continued throughout the sit-in. The stage later became the focal point of the movement as education reformer Sonam Wangchuk began his indefinite hunger strike. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS
The seat of the protest, Jantar Mantar, had become far more than a student protest. Farmers stood beside parents, young professionals, senior citizens, queer activists and wage labourers. Volunteers distributed food, arranged train tickets for protesters travelling home and coordinated donations. People travelled from across India, while a handful of foreign nationals joined in solidarity. Despite their different backgrounds, they shared one belief — that the crisis threatened the future of public education itself.
Ashutosh Agarwal (centre), national vice-president of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, India’s Youth Wing, stands with colleagues from Meerut in solidarity with the student-led movement. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS
The seriousness and urgency are also reflected in the numbers. India has recorded 152 examination paper leaks in the past decade – roughly one every month. In 2026 alone, more than 20 million candidates appeared for NEET-UG, while reports of the leak were followed by the deaths of nearly 20 aspirants by suicide. Yet clearing these examinations offers no certainty. According to the State of Working India 2026 report by Azim Premji University, nearly 40% of graduates aged 15–25 remain unemployed, while unemployment among graduates aged 25–29 stands at 20%. Although the country produced 5 million graduates each year between 2004/05 and 2023, only 2.8 million found employment.
As the protests grew, they also drew support from opposition leaders, public figures and education reformers, expanding the movement beyond student circles.
The turning point came on June 28, when education reformer Sonam Wangchuk joined the sit-in with an indefinite hunger strike. CJP announced a march to Parliament on July 20, the opening day of the Monsoon Session. Later, on 18th July, Delhi Police removed Wangchuk from the protest site and admitted him to Safdarjung Hospital for medical observation, a move his family described as forced hospitalisation against his wishes.
What followed altered the course of the movement.
On July 20, police and the Rapid Action Force dispersed marchers using batons, tear gas, water cannons and pellet guns. Protesters alleged that some lathis were studded with nails, while the RAF’s own chief later admitted that “excessive force” had been used during the operation.
Nazia Khanam (left) and her friend travelled across Delhi to join the protest. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS
Instead of dispersing the protesters, however, the crackdown brought more people to Jantar Mantar.
Nineteen-year-old Anshil Khan was among those who returned.
A first-year student at Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University, he had spent nearly three weeks at the protest. Four days earlier, he said, police had beaten him while demonstrators were trying to march towards Parliament Street. Even as he spoke, he carried hospital reports documenting his injuries.
“I got hit three times by the Delhi police,” he said. “I have been resting for four days, and today I have come back.”
He recalled crossing two barricades before police stopped the march at the third.
“We were peacefully protesting and only raising slogans of “Inquilab Zindabad” (Long Live Revolution). Nothing violent happened from our side.”
Delhi Police had issued a public advisory before the march stating that no permission had been granted for any procession beyond the designated protest site and later maintained that officers were enforcing prohibitory orders. Officials also said that both protesters and security personnel suffered injuries during the clashes.
For Anshil, however, the police action only strengthened public support.
“The students are coming along with their parents now,” he said, referring to the days following Wangchuk’s detention and the July 20 crackdown.
Anshil Khan, a member of the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), joins fellow protesters at Jantar Mantar. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS
His demands had also evolved.
“Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation is the first step,” he said. “Education is our first priority.”
That sentiment surfaced repeatedly across conversations at Jantar Mantar. Protesters were no longer speaking only about accountability for one minister; they were debating how India’s education system itself should function.
Standing nearby with a placard reading “We are fighting for our rights,” Nazia Khanam had travelled across Delhi to join the demonstration, despite never having been directly affected by an examination scandal.
A law student from Jodhpur interning in the capital, Khanam had successfully cleared the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT). But with her younger sister now preparing for the same examination, she felt she could not remain on the sidelines.
“Being an elder sister of a student who is going to give a competitive exam, it becomes my responsibility,” she said. “Even though I’m not personally affected, I should still come here and raise my voice.”
Unlike many demonstrations driven solely by outrage, Khanam arrived with ideas for reform.
“There should be stricter checks and balances at every bureaucratic level,” she said, referring to agencies such as the National Testing Agency, examination centres and other bodies involved in conducting competitive exams.
She also questioned how education policy is made.
“There should be other stakeholders involved,” she said. “Educators who have done actual groundwork, who know the ground reality, should be part of consultations before policies are formulated like Sonam Wangchuk.”
That conversation had drawn unexpected allies.
Among those standing with the students was Ashutosh Agarwal, National Vice-President of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, India’s youth wing. Before arriving in Delhi, he said, the union had organised meetings across Meerut, Muzaffarnagar and other parts of western Uttar Pradesh to mobilise support for the students.
“We demand one nation, one education,” he said.
For Agarwal, the increasing commercialisation of essential public services was inseparable from the examination crisis.
“We demand the end of privatisation of both education and health,” he said. “Otherwise paper leaks won’t stop.”
He argued that growing corporate influence over private schools, colleges and hospitals had weakened public institutions, making quality education increasingly inaccessible.
Parents had reached a similar conclusion.
Alisha Siddique came to Jantar Mantar thinking about her three children, particularly her daughter pursuing a Bachelor of Science degree. Unlike many protesters, she did not begin with paper leaks. Instead, she pointed to the everyday rules that, in her view, unfairly punish students.
“If students reach one or two minutes late because of an accident or emergency, they are not allowed to sit for the exam,” she said. “Their entire year’s hard work goes to waste.”
For Siddique, the issue was larger than examinations.
“We want our children to become good citizens,” she said. “That starts with good education.”
The examination crisis merely provided the spark for Avinash Kumar, a human rights practitioner and activist who is the former Executive Director of Amnesty International India and the Director of Policy, Research and Campaigns at Oxfam India.
“The constant leaking cauldron of competitive exams provided that cause,” he said. “Yet everyone knows it’s now not just about that.”
According to Kumar, the protests became an outlet for frustrations that had accumulated over years — declining public services, rising costs, increasing privatisation, shrinking civic freedoms and a growing sense that institutions no longer worked for ordinary citizens.
“You need a cause which cuts across classes and masses, age and gender and religion,” he said. “Competitive exams became that cause.”
What struck Kumar most was not just the scale of the demonstrations in Delhi but also the emergence of protests in places that rarely make national headlines.
“My attention was particularly drawn towards mass-scale showings in small unknown towns like Begusarai, Narnaul and Aurangabad,” he said. “All were speaking in one language of years of frustration.”
To him, that distinguished this movement from many previous protests.
Rather than revolving around one organisation or one political leader, it drew strength from multiple voices – student leaders, education reformers, farmers, parents, opposition politicians and ordinary citizens – each contributing from their own experience.
“It is a movement with very different leaders at different points of time,” Kumar said.
Two days after resignation, the protest site is almost empty.
The questions raised over 50 days of protest — about accountability, privatisation, public education and the future promised to India’s youth — remain standing.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Related Articles
Les féminines d'Énergie BBC sont toujours reines du basket béninois. Samedi 25 juillet, au Hall des Arts, Loisirs et Sports de Cotonou, les championnes en titre ont battu Élan Coton 52-50 en finale de la YouZou Ligue Pro. Un 2e sacre consécutif arraché dans la douleur.
La finale a tenu toutes ses promesses. Devant un public venu en nombre, les deux équipes ont livré un match intense et à suspense.
Énergie BBC prend d'emblée les commandes et boucle le 1er quart-temps sur le score de 15-07. Mais Élan Coton réagit et recolle au score. À la pause, Énergie mène encore 27-21.
Au retour des vestiaires, Élan Coton accélère. À 8 minutes de la 2 ème pause, les deux équipes sont à égalité 39-39. Le dernier quart-temps vire au bras de fer.
Plus lucides dans les instants décisifs, les joueuses du coach Pyrius Sindehou font la différence et s'imposent de justesse 52-50.
A l'arrivée, Énergie BBC confirme dans la douleur sa suprématie sur le basket féminin national et garde son trophée.
Finale haletante :
Les hommes d'Energie BBC sont champions du Bénin. Samedi 25 juillet, au Hall des Arts, Loisirs et Sports de Cotonou, les "Électriciens" ont battu Aspac BBC 58-55 en finale de la YouZou Ligue Pro 2025-2026.
Dès l'entame, Energie met la pression. Premier quart-temps maîtrisé 19-11. À la pause, l'avance est réduite mais toujours là : 31-27.
Au retour, Aspac réagit et recolle. 47-43 à la fin du 3e quart-temps. Le suspense est total.
Dans un dernier acte irrespirable, Aspac revient à 54-53 à 3 minutes de la fin. L'occasion d'égaliser se présente même à 1'48 pour le n°6 d'Aspac, mais le tir ne rentre pas.
Energie en profite pour faire le break 58-53. Un dernier panier à 3 points d'Aspac sera refusé pour une marche. Tournant décisif.
Malgré une ultime réaction, Aspac s'incline 58-55.
Quelques heures après le sacre des féminines, Energie BBC réalise le doublé et confirme sa domination sur le basket béninois cette saison.
Refugees fleeing violence in Ethiopia's Tigray region cross the Tekeze River into Sudan in November 2020. Credit: UNHCR/Hazim Elhag
By Elizabeth Tan
GENEVA, Jul 27 2026 (IPS)
Seventy-five years after the Refugee Convention was opened for signature on 28 July 1951, it remains the foundation of the international refugee protection system and one of the most consequential international legal instruments ever adopted.
Born in the aftermath of the Second World War, it codified a simple but powerful principle: people forced to flee persecution, conflict or violence must be able to find safety and protection.
No society is immune to war, persecution or sudden upheaval. The Convention was built on that universal truth: that people forced to flee must be protected.
Over the past seven and a half decades, it has been a lifeline for people fleeing conflicts and persecution, from post-war Europe and wars of national liberation across Africa, to the Indochina wars and military dictatorships in Latin America, to more recent crises in Afghanistan, Syria, Ukraine and Sudan.
A total of 149 States are parties to the Convention, its 1967 Protocol, or both, making it one of the most widely supported international legal frameworks. Together, the Convention and its Protocol define who is a refugee, set out refugees’ rights, and establish the standards of treatment States have agreed to uphold. The core principle of non-refoulement – prohibiting the return of people to a place where they would face persecution, torture or other serious harm – is recognized under customary international law, which applies to all countries, whether or not they have signed the Convention.
Importantly, the Convention has proven to be a living instrument, retaining its relevance in responding to contemporary challenges. Through evolving State practice, court decisions and guidance from UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, it has supported protection responses to issues such as gender-based persecution, forced recruitment and risks that may be compounded by climate impacts where these intersect with conflict, persecution or other serious harm.
In a world experiencing record levels of crisis and instability – with more than 130 armed conflicts recorded worldwide in 2025, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross – some 41.6 million refugees remained uprooted. Even amid increasingly polarized debate, public support for asylum remains strong, with around two-thirds of people surveyed this year by Ipsos across 29 countries supporting the right of those fleeing war or persecution to seek refuge.
The global asylum system, however, is under strain. Nearly 70 per cent of refugees are hosted by low- and middle-income countries, many of which face their own economic and development challenges. Seven in ten refugees live in exile for five years or more.
Some argue that the Convention is no longer suited to today’s globalized world of mixed movements and overstretched asylum systems. We disagree. The Convention remains the framework that allows States to distinguish those who need international protection from those who do not, while ensuring that no one is returned to persecution, torture or other serious harm. Fair and efficient procedures to determine refugee status, protect refugees, reassure host communities and preserve confidence in asylum. UNHCR is ready to redouble its work with States and partners to ease capacity constraints and ensure decisions are accurate and as swift as possible. Those who do not need refugee protection should not be granted asylum and can be returned, safely and in dignity. That, too, is part of a credible asylum system.
At the same time, border management must remain anchored in protection. We are concerned by practices that restrict access to asylum, including pushbacks, denial of access to territory and forced returns. The Convention provides a framework for States to manage borders while protecting people with a well-defined need for international protection.
These pressures are compounded by severe funding shortfalls. With UNHCR funded at only 31 per cent as of the end of June, essential services for people forced to flee – including extremely vulnerable groups – are being constrained.
Marking the 75th anniversary of the Convention, UNHCR is calling for renewed commitment to the institution of asylum, stronger international cooperation and greater support for refugees and the communities that host them. Through a series of dialogues in 2026 – taking place at local, regional and global levels, and involving governments, civil society, refugees, the private sector and other stakeholders – we are working to identify practical ways to strengthen protection and advance solutions.
Seventy-five years on, the Convention is a test of our collective resolve today to protect those forced to flee and to keep asylum available for those who need it.
Elizabeth Tan is UNHCR’s Director of International Protection and Solutions
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
A man walks past a sign reading 'unjustly persecuted' featuring journalist José Rubén Zamora, former CICIG lawyer Claudia González and Maya leaders Luis Pacheco and Héctor Chaclan in a Guatemala City, 12 May 2026. Credit: Johan Ordóñez/AFP
By Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Jul 24 2026 (IPS)
José Rubén Zamora, founder of elPeriódico, Guatemala’s now-defunct leading investigative newspaper, spent 1,295 days in detention before a court granted him house arrest on 12 February. He endured long stretches of solitary confinement in a military jail, held in near-constant darkness and subjected to treatment that six UN experts warned could amount to torture. His offence was simply doing his job. For decades, he exposed the corrupt dealings of Guatemala’s economic and political elites. Prosecutors are still trying to send him back to prison.
Police arrested Zamora in July 2022 on a complaint brought by a former banker who was under investigation for financial crimes, following Zamora’s reporting on corruption under then President Alejandro Giammattei. Within months, elPeriódico had shut down following intimidation of its advertisers and criminalisation of its staff. A court convicted Zamora of money laundering in June 2023, and when an appeals court overturned the conviction, a second case kept him in jail anyway. Courts ordered his release several times, and each time appeals chambers reversed those decisions. The Supreme Court transferred a judge who ruled to free him to a court in another part of Guatemala. At least 10 lawyers who took up his defence were forced to abandon it under pressure. Some were prosecuted and jailed.
In May 2024, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention declared Zamora’s detention arbitrary and retaliatory and recommended his immediate release. It took almost two more years for him to be allowed home. In March, the Supreme Court voided the rulings that had returned him to prison, finding they violated due process. The Constitutional Court heard the prosecution’s latest appeal to send him back to jail in June, but has yet to issue its ruling.
The machinery of impunity
Zamora’s ordeal is no aberration; it’s how captured institutions are designed to work. The Guatemalan state has long been in the hands of what Guatemalans call ‘the pact of the corrupt’, a coalition of business leaders, drug traffickers, military officers and politicians that has captured the justice system to guarantee their own impunity. Anyone who threatens that arrangement risks prosecution on fabricated charges, reinforced by coordinated smear campaign. This includes journalists who investigate corruption, judges and prosecutors who pursue it, and Indigenous, land rights and climate activists who mobilise against its consequences. The aim, as a Guatemalan civil society leader put it, is to instil fear so nobody dares question anything. Over 100 people, including around 50 judges and prosecutors, have fled into exile rather than face trumped-up charges.
Because the justice system serves the corrupt pact rather than the law, any serious attempt to dismantle corruption has required external support. In 2006, the UN and the Guatemalan government agreed to establish the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG). Over 12 years, CICIG and the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigated over 70 complex criminal structures and brought charges against more than 1,540 people, including former presidents, ministers, members of Congress and business figures. This challenged the perception that the powerful were untouchable.
But success sealed its fate. When CICIG investigated sitting president Jimmy Morales in 2017, he moved to destroy it, refusing to renew its mandate and appointing a compliant attorney general, Consuelo Porras. President Giammattei reappointed Porras, who prosecuted or forced out dozens of judges and prosecutors who had worked with CICIG. She turned the Public Prosecutor’s Office into an instrument of persecution while dismissing 74 per cent of the complaints filed with it without investigating them. By the time her term ended in May, over 40 states had sanctioned her and some associates. The institution built to prosecute crime had become the state’s key tool for committing it.
New president, same system
Guatemalans elected Bernardo Arévalo in 2023 with a mandate to dismantle this system, but the system has consistently tried to disable him. His unexpected win – he scraped into the runoff largely because the establishment had not seen him as a serious enough threat to block – triggered what civil society described as an attempted electoral coup, with spurious legal complaints, raids on his party’s headquarters and at least two credible assassination plots. It took 106 days of peaceful resistance led by Indigenous authorities to ensure he was sworn in.
But taking office was not the same as taking power. Arévalo’s party had only 23 of 160 congressional seats, and its legal status was subsequently cancelled by judicial order. Congress blocked the legislative change that would have allowed him to dismiss Porras, and the Supreme Court, 13 of whose judges were selected in 2024 through a process stacked with candidates tied to corruption networks, refused to lift her immunity. Throughout Arévalo’s term, the Public Prosecutor’s Office continued to criminalise dissent and repeatedly tried to strip Arévalo of immunity.
A narrow window
But Porras’s term eventually expired, and his successor, Gabriel García Luna, a career judge with no ties to corruption networks, has moved quickly, dismissing prosecutors linked to Porras and closing the special prosecutor’s office that fabricated cases against Zamora and many others. His arrival offers the first genuine opening in eight years. But it’s a narrow one. Congress remains in opposition hands, and the Constitutional Court, the Comptroller General’s Office and the electoral authority are all due for renewal this year. Corrupt interests are well placed to exploit these processes to entrench their grip.
Much now depends on whether Arévalo throws his political weight behind García Luna’s efforts to rebuild the institution Porras weaponised, and whether the bodies up for renewal can be kept out of the corrupt pact’s hands. The clearest sign of change will come if Zamora and the dozens of others criminalised for exposing corruption and defending rights no longer face prosecution, and instead their persecutors face justice.
Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Head of Research and Analysis, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report. She is also a Professor of Comparative Politics at Universidad ORT Uruguay.
For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
The Global Nobel Laureates Assembly on Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear War brought together more than 200 of the world’s most authoritative figures on peace and artificial intelligence. Here the 'The Rome Declaration for a Disarmed and Disarming Peace' was signed in the main council chamber in Rome's city hall Campidoglio. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri/INPS Japan
By Ariel F. Dumont
ROME, Jul 24 2026 (IPS)
After two days of debate at an international conference devoted to the challenges of artificial intelligence (AI), nuclear war and global security, Nobel laureates, former heads of state and government, scientists, human rights defenders, religious leaders and representatives of civil society adopted a joint declaration, calling for it to be based on human dignity.
Inspired by Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas and signed in the halls of the Capitol, Rome’s city hall, this text states that artificial intelligence cannot be left solely to military or commercial interests. It also calls for international cooperation based on human dignity, the development of global AI governance and the continuation of efforts towards nuclear disarmament.
As major powers are investing increasingly substantial sums in the development of AI, participants considered that humanity stands at a genuine crossroads. The choices that will be made will have a decisive impact not only on tomorrow’s geopolitical balances but also on the future and place of human beings in a world where decisions could increasingly be entrusted to artificial intelligence.
This point was highlighted by Rome’s mayor, Roberto Gualtieri, the master of ceremonies of this meeting, organised by the Global Nobel Laureates Assembly on Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear War, who described it as historic.
The declaration, named “The Rome Declaration for a Disarmed and Disarming Peace”, was signed on Thursday, July 16.
For Rome’s mayor, “the crucial issue, both at the global and local levels, is technological development, which must be inspired by fundamental ethical principles: respect for individuals, equality among human beings and democratic responsibility in the name of the common good.”
Gualtieri also stressed that today, more than ever, “the world needs an international coalition capable of promoting a new model of development combining economic growth, social justice, human rights and environmental protection”, thus echoing Pope Leo XIV’s call for “a disarmed and disarming peace”.
A few hours earlier, Agnès Callamard, secretary general of Amnesty International, had warned against the development of autonomous weapons.
“The idea that decisions to kill could be made by machines is repugnant to us.”
Delegates at the Global Nobel Laureates Assembly on Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear War pose in the main council chamber in Rome’s city hall Campidoglio. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri/INPS Japan
According to Callamard, the danger does not lie in an artificial intelligence that would suddenly become conscious but rather in the decision to delegate to it responsibilities that belong exclusively to moral judgement.
“It is not that the machine decides that it will become the boss; it is we who programme these systems,” she explained.
For the head of Amnesty International, the growing integration of AI into military operations represents a major change. These systems can already analyse enormous quantities of data, identify targets and recommend strikes, while gradually reducing the need for human intervention.
Beyond autonomous weapons, the Callamard reminded the world that it must pay close attention to the implications of the progressive integration of AI into what the military calls, in its jargon, the “kill chain”, meaning the process from target identification to the conduct of an operation.
“Even when a human being officially retains the final decision, the growing dependence on automated systems profoundly changes the way military operations are prepared and conducted,” Callamard stated, adding that these technologies rely on immense volumes of data that may themselves be altered.
“Analyses and recommendations can be biased because they are based on data that themselves carry these biases. We must remain attentive to the risks arising from erroneous or discriminatory decisions in contexts where the consequences can be irreversible.”
Another danger: the multiplication of force. Thanks to artificial intelligence, a single operator could simultaneously supervise dozens, or even hundreds, of drones or other autonomous systems, considerably increasing military capabilities.
“These technological developments are taking place within a broader context of strategic competition between states. We are living in a period when many governments are seeking military hegemony,” Callamard concluded.
Beyond military issues, several speakers also insisted on the geopolitical consequences of this technological revolution. Romano Prodi, former president of the European Commission and former Italian prime minister, estimated that the growing rivalry between the United States and China considerably complicates the emergence of genuine international regulation.
In an increasingly fragmented world, Prodi warned, no nation will be able to address alone the challenges linked to artificial intelligence, global security or the control of ever more powerful technologies.
These words anticipated the essence of the final declaration, according to which international cooperation is now an indispensable condition for preventing artificial intelligence from fuelling a new arms race and widening geopolitical fractures.
The discussions also focused on the economic and social consequences of this technological revolution. In the world of work, the sudden arrival of AI is already raising many concerns, particularly regarding the professional future of younger generations and the profound transformation of several professions in the coming years.
The programme brought together a number of leading international figures, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate and former Chief Advisor to Bangladesh Muhammad Yunus; Yoshiyuki Nagaoka, Executive Director of the Office of Public Affairs at Soka Gakkai; Filipino journalist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Ressa; Amnesty International Secretary General Agnès Callamard; and several scientists and nuclear experts.
Research published by King’s College London shows that a study carried out on hundreds of millions of job advertisements across 39 countries reveals an average 6.1% decline in job offers in professions most exposed to automation, while the remaining positions require increasingly specialised skills.
Ultimately, what will remain of this conference and of the Rome Declaration? The main point to remember is that participants accept the development of artificial intelligence and do not believe it should frighten us. On the contrary, they consider that this technology can become a powerful driver of progress – provided, however, that it remains at the service of humanity. The ball is therefore in the court of states and their leaders, who must above all place human dignity at the forefront.
The real question is no longer only what artificial intelligence will make possible, but rather what limits societies and humanity as a whole will choose to set for it before the imperatives of power permanently override collective responsibility.
Note: This article is brought to you by IPS Noram in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Related Articles
Satellite image of the Red Sea, the Bab el-Mandeb strait being at the bottom right opening. Credit: Wikimedia/NASA
By Maximilian Malawista
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 24 2026 (IPS)
With regional friction between Iran and the Gulf monarchies escalating, Houthi leadership in Yemen has proclaimed a total maritime blockade against all vessels linked to Saudi shipping. While this declaration does not constitute a verified military obstruction of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, it significantly heightens the risk of volatility at the Red Sea’s southern gateway, potentially severing the primary arterial link to the Suez Canal.
The embargo is already being framed as more than a simple ban on Saudi-flagged vessels. In messages sent to shipping companies navigating the Strait, the Houthis warned against any activities at Saudi ports, including by non-Saudi-flagged ships, saying that vessels could be targeted “in any location.” This is significant as Saudi Arabia’s maritime infrastructure managed 331 million tonnes of freight in 2024—a volume roughly equal to 12 million fully laden 20-foot containers.
Within days of these threats being made, five ships have been recorded turning around after heading towards the Bab el-Mandeb passage. Among these ships, the Xin Long Yang, a VLCC loaded at Yanbu and bound for Qinzhou, China, carrying 2 million barrels of Saudi crude, initially reversed north towards the Suez Canal. The vessel later reversed course again, choosing to resume its original route heading south towards Bab el-Mandeb.
Additionally, Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree said that two Saudi oil tankers, named Encelia and Layla, were targeted for their “violation of the blockade decision issued by the armed forces.”
Jeddah Islamic Port, the Kingdom’s principal commercial gateway on the Red Sea, received 3,805 vessel calls in 2024, more than any other Saudi port. Yanbu has become Saudi Arabia’s critical Red Sea oil-export network, where crude is moved from eastern fields using the East–West pipeline before being loaded onto tankers. With the Strait of Hormuz severely disrupted, the Red Sea corridor is no longer simply an alternative route: it is Saudi Arabia’s critical remaining maritime outlet to Asian markets.
Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu port was loading approximately 4 million b/d in mid-July, close to 4 percent of daily global oil demand. Disruptions at Bab el-Mandeb would also affect the Suez Canal, which carried approximately 22 percent of global seaborne container trade in 2023 and acts as the link between European and Asian markets. Of the cargo which transits through Bab el-Mandeb, 3.97 million b/d of crude passed through its gates in March, according to Kpler.
If the Houthis can continue to enforce their threat and create enough uncertainty, even selective attacks on some vessels can increase wartime insurance costs and undermine security guarantees, which could push carriers to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa.
Credit: Maximilian Malawista
For an Asia–Europe container voyage, rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope can add roughly 3,000 to 3,500 nautical miles and approximately seven to ten days of sailing time. This also increases the cost of the voyage, heightening fuel costs, requiring more vessel capacity to maintain scheduled services, and exposing cargo to higher insurance premiums. The World Bank has estimated that the additional fuel bill alone could reach USD 1 million for a round trip. Analysis by the OECD put the wider cost increase at USD 1.7 million for a medium-sized container ship on an Asia–Europe round trip—roughly an increase of USD 272, or 19 percent, for one standard 40-foot container.
In late 2023, similar Houthi threats, which led to selective attacks against commercial vessels, led major carriers to avoid the Red Sea passage and use the alternative route around the Cape of Good Hope. In just three months, by mid-February 2024, UNCTAD had recorded 586 container vessels taking the longer route around Africa, while container tonnage moving through the Suez Canal had simultaneously fallen 82 percent. Spot rates—the price of booking a container on short notice—also rose by 256 percent during the same period on voyages from Shanghai to Europe.
The Suez Canal in Egypt. Credit: Unsplash/Samuel Hanna
For Yemen, the consequences could be especially severe. The country relies on imports for more than 90 percent of its staple foods, including about 90 percent of its wheat and all of its rice requirements. Much of that supply enters through the ports of Aden and Hodeidah. The World Food Programme estimates that 18.2 million people in Yemen require humanitarian aid, being in dire need of humanitarian assistance and protection services.
Even considering that the Houthis formally exempt humanitarian cargo from the embargo, an escalation of insecurity can delay vessels and raise freight and insurance costs, deterring commercial shipping lines from calling at Yemeni ports. Humanitarian aid will not be nearly enough to replace the normal commercial flow of food and fuel, which affects Yemeni civilians first, who are already facing hunger and economic collapse.
The central question is not whether the Houthis can permanently seal Bab el-Mandeb. It is whether they can make the route risky enough that insurers, carriers, and oil traders abandon it themselves.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Investments in jobs, basic services and community infrastructure can reduce the pressures that drive displacement in Myanmar. Credit: UNDP Myanmar
By Norimasa Shimomura
YANGON, Myanmar, Jul 24 2026 (IPS)
When asked what development looks like today, a community leader in Kalaw township points to these fields. Once destroyed by a typhoon, they are now productive again. What began as emergency food assistance in the first month was followed by UNDP support in the community—seeds, training, debris removal, support to microbusinesses and small infrastructure—backed by the Republic of Korea, Norway and Switzerland. One year on, the fields sustain three annual production cycles—rice and flowers—with more resilient practices and higher yields. “This is what development looks like to us,” he says.
Communities in Myanmar today are not facing a single crisis. They are facing many, and layered on top of one another, recurring over time. Conflict, insecurity, economic uncertainty, market volatility and climate- and disaster-related shocks do not occur in isolation. Global crises are placing added pressure on already-stretched humanitarian and development financing. Together, these dynamics reinforce one another, creating a cycle that is harder to break. These protracted, compounding crises are reshaping the country’s social and economic fabric and putting communities under enormous stress.
Myanmar shows why separating humanitarian action from development no longer fits reality. Relief keeps people alive, but it will not on its own restart livelihoods, steady local services, increase risk preparedness or reduce the pressures that drive displacement. The smarter play is to link emergency support to a continuum of recovery, stabilization and longer-term development, backing community systems and local markets so today’s spending also buys a more durable future.
A crisis that feeds on itself
Myanmar is fragmented: conflict in too many areas, economic freefall in others, and climate shocks across the country—from floods and droughts to rising temperatures and environmental loss. But these pressures are connected. When livelihoods collapse, people move. When insecurity rises, local economies contract. When disasters hit, already-fragile services give way. Families then face hard trade-offs; taking on high-interest debt, moving to precarious urban fringes, attempting risky migration, or turning to illicit markets.
For many, participation in informal, and sometimes criminal economies is less a choice than a last resort. Others flee, often towards cities such as Yangon. But urban areas are already under strain. In peri-urban Yangon, poverty rates are estimated to be around 50 percent, and new arrivals stretch housing, services and jobs further, deepening vulnerability and inequality. Women shoulder this burden most heavily, with women-headed households in peri-urban areas more likely to have lower incomes, depend on precarious and poorly paid employment, and facing heightened safety concerns.
This is how the crisis sustains itself. Conflict and violence breed insecurity; insecurity forces people from their homes and pushes some into illicit economies; displacement fractures livelihoods and the resulting economic hardship reinforces instability. And so the cycle continues.
The limits of a humanitarian-only response
Myanmar has received humanitarian aid for decades. It remains essential. People need immediate support for food, shelter and protection. But the challenges Myanmar faces today are not only humanitarian. They are structural and long-term. When support can only be planned and financed in short cycles, it can help people survive, but without enabling them to rebuild livelihoods, restore services or reduce future risk. This can create dependence on humanitarian aid without a clear exit.
The question is no longer whether humanitarian support is needed—it clearly is—but whether it is sufficient on its own, and how development can help build resilience. To break the cycle, investments must also focus on recovery, livelihoods, risk preparedness, access to finance and local systems. The bridge between humanitarian action and development must be deliberately built. UNDP in Myanmar has designed a new phase of its Community First Programme backing community-led solutions that can absorb shocks now while laying foundations for medium- and longer-term development.
Where the bridge matters most
There are three areas where this bridge is critical.
By combining community-based approaches with more targeted economic interventions, it is possible to offer a more comprehensive response in a protracted crisis. Credit: UNDP Myanmar
First, livelihoods and early recovery. Investments in jobs, basic services and community infrastructure can reduce the pressures that drive displacement. When people have viable ways to earn a living, they are less likely to move out of necessity. This also reduces the burden on humanitarian systems and can be an immediate stabilizing factor.
Second, local systems and community capacity. Even in constrained contexts, support to community-level structures can have a powerful effect. It enables people to manage their own recovery, strengthens local decision-making and builds a sense of ownership. It helps communities to think longer term and create some community wealth. These are the building blocks of future governance.
Third, economic alternatives to illicit activity. When large parts of local economies in some regions operate in grey or black markets, the implications go beyond livelihoods, they affect national and regional security. Creating alternatives—through job creation, support to small businesses and financing—gives people options. It reduces reliance on illicit networks, lowers risks of exploitation and opens pathways for more sustainable economic activity. These directly affect stability within Myanmar and across its borders.
Navigating a complex funding landscape
Despite the clear need to bridge humanitarian and development approaches, funding structures often work against it. In Myanmar, much of the available funding is still categorized as humanitarian. This creates challenges for organizations with strong development expertise, which must adapt their language and delivery models to fit short-term funding criteria.
At the same time, partner expectations are evolving, but not always consistently. Some continue to fund purely humanitarian outputs. Others expect development impact from humanitarian interventions. Still others fund development but want to demonstrate humanitarian impact.
This creates a fragmented landscape: humanitarian funding for humanitarian results, humanitarian funding seeking development impact, development funding framed as humanitarian and, more rarely, development funding investing directly in long-term results.
Navigating this requires flexibility and clarity of purpose. Development actors must be able to articulate the longer-term impact of their work, even when operating in a humanitarian context. The value lies precisely in that distinction: connecting immediate interventions to sustained recovery and future stability.
A window of opportunity
There are signs of change. Some partners are beginning to recognize that continued investment in short-term relief, without parallel investments in recovery and livelihoods, is not sustainable.
This creates an opportunity. By combining community-based approaches with more targeted economic interventions—jobs, enterprise development, access to finance, climate and energy solutions—it is possible to offer a more comprehensive response in a protracted crisis context, one that addresses both immediate needs and underlying drivers of crisis. But this window may not remain open indefinitely. As other actors reposition and global priorities shift, the space for shaping this agenda could narrow.
Looking ahead
Myanmar’s challenges are complex but the direction of response is clear. Humanitarian aid remains indispensable. But on its own, it cannot break cycles of crisis that are structural and self-reinforcing.
Bridging humanitarian action and development is how people regain agency. It is how communities stabilize. And ultimately, it is how countries begin to move beyond crisis—not just survive it.
Norimasa Shimomura is UNDP Resident Representative in Myanmar.
Source: UNDP
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
En mêlant des contes du Kosovo au récit d'une arrivée en France à l'adolescence dans les années 1990, cette pièce raconte une histoire singulière qui fait écho à de nombreuses expériences universelles : le déracinement, la transmission, la construction de soi et le regard des autres.
« Comme toujours, une guerre éclate, l'enfant troque une vieille maison en brique au pied des montagnes contre une cité HLM en banlieue parisienne. Ce pays, c'est la Yougoslavie et cet enfant, c'est moi. » (…)
Latin America and the Caribbean has the world’s most expensive healthy diet. Credit: Max Valencia / FAO
By Máximo Torero
ROME, Jul 23 2026 (IPS)
Hunger is falling across most of Latin America and the Caribbean. The region’s next challenge is harder: ensuring that everyone can afford a healthy diet, not merely enough calories to survive.
The regional hunger rate fell for a fifth consecutive year in 2025, reaching a record low of 4.8 percent, down from the pandemic peak of 6.1 percent in 2020. About 32 million people faced hunger, more than 1 million fewer than in 2024 and 7.5 million fewer than in 2020. Moderate or severe food insecurity, which includes people forced to skip meals or eat less, also fell to 22.9 percent, below its 2015 level of 23.4 percent. The region’s share of the world’s hungry has remained at about 5 percent for 15 years.
This progress was not accidental. It reflects sustained investment in agricultural productivity and stronger social protection, including the cash transfer and school feeding programs developed by Brazil and Mexico.
Poor roads, limited rail networks, inadequate cold storage, unreliable energy, inefficient markets and post harvest losses raise costs as nutritious food moves through storage, processing, transportation, wholesale and retail
The countries recording the largest gains differ greatly, but their policies reveal a consistent pattern. Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guyana and Uruguay have reduced hunger below 2.5 percent, the level below which the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations reports the estimate simply as “less than 2.5 percent.” Since the mid 2000s, Peru has cut its rate from 17.9 to 5.7 percent; Bolivia, from 27.6 to 19.5 percent; Colombia, from 11.0 to 4.1 percent; and Panama, from 14.8 to 4.7 percent.
These findings, from the 2026 edition of The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World, show that hunger falls when agricultural, economic and social policies reinforce one another. Social protection preserves purchasing power. Agricultural investment raises productivity. Rural infrastructure connects farmers to markets. School meals and cash transfers protect vulnerable families while creating demand for locally produced food.
The gains, however, remain fragile and uneven.
The 2026 Middle East crisis poses a less uniform threat here than in Africa or Asia. Latin America and the Caribbean produces more crude oil than it consumes, and some energy exporters could benefit from higher prices. But this regional average conceals the exposure of many Central American and Caribbean economies that depend heavily on imported fuels and remain vulnerable to rising energy, fertilizer, transportation and food import costs. The crisis will create winners and losers within the region, not leave it untouched.
The sharpest divide is in the Caribbean. Its hunger rate edged up to 16.6 percent in 2025, nearly five times the rate in South America, while moderate or severe food insecurity reached 52 percent, the highest of any subregion.
Haiti is the most extreme case. Its hunger rate rose from 47.7 to 51.4 percent, and more than half the population faces acute food insecurity. Haiti is the only country in the Americas, and one of five globally, where people face catastrophic levels of hunger. Armed violence, institutional breakdown, economic decline and climate shocks are erasing years of development, even without a formally declared war.
But hunger captures only one dimension of deprivation. The cost of a healthy diet reveals a larger structural problem.
Latin America and the Caribbean has the world’s most expensive healthy diet. In 2025, it cost an average of 4.91 purchasing power parity dollars per person per day, compared with 4.35 in Africa, 4.33 in Asia and 3.64 in Northern America and Europe. In the Caribbean, the cost reached 6.04 purchasing power parity dollars, the highest of any subregion, compared with 4.66 in Central America.
Because regional incomes are higher on average, the share of people unable to afford a healthy diet, 25.7 percent, remains far below Africa’s 66.1 percent and has been declining since 2021. But averages again conceal severe deprivation. In Haiti, 88.9 percent of people cannot afford a healthy diet.
Latin America and the Caribbean has therefore made genuine progress against calorie deprivation. But sufficient calories are no longer its only, or even its largest, food challenge. A diet that prevents hunger does not necessarily prevent anaemia, child stunting, obesity, diabetes and other forms of malnutrition. A healthy diet requires adequate fruits, vegetables and animal source foods, yet that diet costs more here than anywhere else.
The region’s high diet costs are driven particularly by vegetables and by what happens after food leaves the farm. Poor roads, limited rail networks, inadequate cold storage, unreliable energy, inefficient markets and post harvest losses raise costs as nutritious food moves through storage, processing, transportation, wholesale and retail. This is not simply a production problem. It is a midstream problem.
The policy response must therefore be more precise than simply spending more on agriculture. Broad farm subsidies will not repair broken supply chains. Governments should invest in horticultural productivity, rural roads, rail connections, cold chains, storage, packhouses, reliable energy, wholesale markets and competitive transportation. These investments would reduce losses, expand supply and lower the price of fruits, vegetables and other nutrient rich foods.
Sequencing also matters. Expanding school meals, cash transfers or food vouchers before supply can respond may raise local prices and exclude the consumers these programs are intended to support. Investment in production and supply chains must precede, or at least accompany, measures that stimulate demand.
A decade ago, Brazil, Peru, the Dominican Republic and Colombia might have appeared to be unrelated success stories. We now know that their gains came from deliberate investments in social protection and agricultural productivity.
Making healthy diets affordable will require the same determination, directed this time toward the infrastructure, logistics and markets that move nutritious food to consumers. The immediate priority is to extend the region’s progress to the Caribbean and, most urgently, to Haiti.
Latin America and the Caribbean has shown that hunger can fall. It must now prove that a healthy diet need not remain a privilege.
Excerpt:
Máximo Torero is the Chief Economist of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsAmir Saeid Iravani, Permanent Representative of Iran to the United Nations, addresses the Security Council high-level debate on the safety of global waterways, amid growing concerns over threats to shipping and freedom of navigation, held on April 27, 2026. Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten
By Maximilian Malawista
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 23 2026 (IPS)
Prior to the latest round of hostilities between the United States and Iran, freight traffic had been increasing in the Strait of Hormuz, and negotiations were underway for a new agreement to fully restore trade through this channel.
According to UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), energy markets were likely to bounce back to normal pre-conflict levels faster than that of food, public finance, and transport, leaving many vulnerable economies worse off. UNCTAD research shows a change from about 125 daily ship transits through the Strait of Hormuz in 2026, January 1st through February 27th, to a drop of around 10 daily transits from February 28th through June 14th during the conflict, marking a 92 percent decrease in overall transit ability.
According to UNCTAD and the Strait of Hormuz monitor, levels on June 2nd recorded around 40 ship transits, with an average of 60 through the days after signing the MOU (The Memorandum of Understanding signed by both US and Iranian delegations). This represents roughly half of pre-conflict transit levels.
Source: Author’s visualizations using data from Strait of Hormuz Trade Tracker (WTO)
Note: Daily outbound shipments represent AIS-traceable crude oil tanker departures from the Strait of Hormuz to destinations outside the Persian Gulf. Additionally, this graph is roughly similar to overall shipments of LNG, fertilizer, and Agricultural products through the same period.
Following the closure of the Strait, the daily price of crude oil jumped to USD 120 per barrel, then averaged around USD 100 per barrel throughout the conflict. The daily price of crude oil fell to USD 70 per barrel upon the signing of the MOU, roughly returning to pre-conflict levels. However, following the latest escalations and the breaking of the MOU, crude prices have risen again to approximately USD 100, indicating that agreements to cease conflicts can quickly bring prices down significantly, if agreed to once more.
On the contrary, the IGC Grains and Oilseeds Freight index (GOFI), indicates a slow decrease of the heightened costs of transporting both grains and oilseeds by sea (e.g., Wheat, Corn, Barley, Sorghum, Soybeans, Rapeseed (canola), Sunflower seed), across 68 key exporting origins in the regions of the United States, The European Union, Canada, the Black Sea region, Brazil, Australia, and Argentina.
Source: Author’s visualizations using data from the International Grains Council (IGC).
Note: The index is normalized so that 100 represents the average grain and oilseed freight rate on January 1, 2013. During the conflict, the index rose to approximately 190, representing a 90 percent increase relative to the base value and a 30 percent increase from the beginning of the conflict on February 28, 2026.
As a result of the heightened price of grains and oilseeds, among other agriculture components, UNCTAD says, “Past input price shocks remain a risk to future food security,” laying out the cycle in which costs can amount:
This process has exposed 61 vulnerable economies to dual impact of higher oil and cereal import prices. (e.g., wheat, rice, corn, barley, oats, sorghum, millet, rye) These countries consist of 35 least developed countries and 26 small island states, with seven of those countries being both least developed and small island developing states.
According to UNCTAD, the pressure is “sharpest for economies that rely heavily on imported fuel”, citing an example in Cabo Verde where net imports of oil and petroleum products averaged 24.6 percent of GDP within recent years. This dependence on fuel imports means that those extra costs can quickly make food prices, electricity, transport, and public finances more expensive.
Source: Author’s visualizations using data from UNCTADStat.
Notes: Orange countries are small island states, and blue countries are least developed countries (LDCs).
Yemen was also cited to be at high risk, with analysis showing that net imports of cereal and cereal products averaged 10.8 percent of GDP. For countries like Yemen dealing with conflict, hyperinflation, debt pressure, and limited public financing, a higher import bill for grain compounds an already declining situation.
Source: Author’s visualizations using data from UNCTADStat.
Notes: Orange countries are small island states, and blue countries are least developed countries (LDCs).
UNCTAD analysis indicates that a real increase of food cost by just 5 percent is associated with a higher risk of child wasting (a life-threatening form of acute malnutrition), especially among poor children and children living in rural landless households.
While restoring full trade through the strait is a necessary step to recovery, this will not undo the aftermath that higher import bills, delayed shipments, and higher priced food and energy have on the global economy, especially vulnerable economies.
“The policy task is therefore broader than reopening a route. Vulnerable economies need support to manage higher import bills, protect households from food and fuel shocks, and invest in systems that reduce exposure before the next disruption hits household budgets,” said UNCTAD, indicating the importance for vulnerable economies to develop supply chain resilience, sustainable systems, and have less reliance on concentrated international trade for vital goods such as food and energy, among financial support from the international system.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau