Bula Central School in Bula, Camarines Sur, Philippines, remain flooded a week after Tropical Storm Trami brought heavy rains and strong winds to much of the country in 2024. Extreme weather patterns such as this illustrate the type of intensified climate risks associated with warming oceans and shifting climate patterns. Credit: UNICEF/Martin San Diego.
By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)
Earlier this week World Meteorological Organization (WMO) announced that the weakening conditions of La Niña conditions are beginning to fade, with climate conditions transitioning toward ENSO-neutral —a phase in which neither El Niño nor La Niña is present and oceanic and atmospheric conditions in the tropical Pacific remain near average. The agency noted that this shift could lead to the development of El Niño later in the year, a pattern typically associated with rising global temperatures and an increased risk of extreme weather events worldwide.
Although these forecasts carry a degree of uncertainty— particularly during the boreal spring, when the well-known “spring predictability barrier” temporarily reduces the accuracy of ENSO predictions — they remain crucial for global climate preparedness measures. Early warnings of shifts between El Niño, La Niña, and neutral conditions give governments, industries, and humanitarian organizations essential time to prepare for disasters.
By informing disaster planning, protecting critical infrastructure, and guiding responses for climate-sensitive communities, these forecasts can help reduce damage, strengthen resilience, and potentially save millions of dollars in economic losses from extreme weather patterns.
“The WMO community will be carefully monitoring conditions in the coming months to inform decision-making,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo, noting that the most recent El Niño event in 2023-2024 was one of the five strongest on record, contributing to the record-breaking global temperatures observed in 2024.
“Seasonal forecasts for El Niño and La Niña help us avert millions of dollars in economic losses and are essential planning tools for climate-sensitive sectors like agriculture, health, energy, and water management,” Saulo added. “They are also a key part of the climate intelligence provided by WMO to support humanitarian operations and disaster risk management, and thus save lives.”
According to forecasts from the WMO Global Producing Centres, there is a 60 percent chance that ENSO-neutral conditions will persist from March through May. From April to June, the likelihood of El Niño developing increases to approximately 70 percent. By May through July, the likelihood of ENSO-neutral conditions drops to around 60 percent, while the chance of El Niño rises to roughly 40 percent.
These projections suggest that global ocean temperatures will likely continue to rise as the year progresses, signaling a need for resilient climate-monitoring and preparatory efforts, particularly for the highly vulnerable populations in coastal regions in the Asia-Pacific.
“When El Niño develops, we’re likely to set a new global temperature record,” said climate scientist Jennifer Francis of the Woodwell Climate Research Center. “‘Normal” was left in the dust decades ago. And with this much heat in the system, everyone should buckle up for the extreme weather it will fuel.”
El Niño and La Niña are primarily driven by fluctuations in ocean and surrounding atmospheric conditions in the tropical Pacific region, with their impacts being exacerbated by human-induced climate change. Rising global temperatures have been found to amplify the frequency and severity of extreme weather events associated with these oscillations, including extensive droughts, prolonged monsoons, devastating floods, stronger tropical cyclones, heatwaves, and wildfires.
These shifts disrupt seasonal rainfall and temperature patterns, leading to biodiversity loss and widespread ecosystem degradation. Immediate consequences include growing food insecurity driven by declining crop yields and collapsing fisheries, along with heightened risks to human health, livelihoods, water security, and broader economic stability.
A joint study led by Professor Benjamin Horton, Dean of the School of Energy and Environment at City University of Hong Kong, in collaboration with researchers from Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, published in January, examined the long-term impacts of El Niño on human health. Titled Enduring Impacts of El Niño on Life Expectancy in Past and Future Climates, the study drew upon roughly six decades of findings from ten Pacific Rim countries, including the United States, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Australia.
The study found that intensifying El Niño periods are having increasingly detrimental effects on human mortality rates and life expectancy, having notably increased over the past several years. Researchers found a strong correlation between gradually hotter El Niño events and infectious diseases, cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, with children and the elderly facing heightened risks. The study also found a direct correlation between hotter El Niño periods and disruptions to healthcare systems as a result of infrastructure damage, which greatly compounds public health challenges.
Historically, the two strongest El Niño events on record — 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 — were linked with lowered life expectancy of approximately a year and one-third of a year, respectively, equivalent to economic losses of roughly USD 2.6 trillion and USD 4.7 trillion. In Hong Kong alone, the 1982-83 event resulted in an estimated 0.6 year decline in life expectancy and economic losses of nearly USD 15 billion, while the 1997-98 event resulted in a 0.4 year reduction and losses exceeding USD 5.8 billion.
Horton warned that intensifying El Niño events could reduce life expectancy across these regions by up to 2.8 years and generate cumulative losses of approximately $35 trillion by 2100. While the study does not provide region-level projections, current trends suggest that Hong Kong alone could face economic losses between USD 250 billion and USD 300 billion over the course of the century.
“El Niño is predictable,” Professor Horton said. “So, with the right planning, we can reduce its impacts. To mitigate El Niño events, countries and regions need strong early-warning systems, heat-health action plans, better water management, and protection for workers exposed to extreme heat. They also need resilient infrastructure, smarter agriculture that can cope with heatwaves, droughts, and heavy rainfall, and public health systems that are prepared for spikes in disease and pollution.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
In Japan, the youth group donated the proceeds from their recycling to single-mother families with hospitalized children through the NPO Keep Mama Smiling. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto.
By Karuta Yamamoto
TOKYO, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)
From the beginning, this project was a collaboration between student teams in Japan and Korea. Although we live in different countries, we shared one common question: How can young people reduce waste while supporting families facing food insecurities?
Our journey began with a problem we could see clearly in our communities.
In Japan, food insecurity often hides behind quiet dignity. According to a recent survey by Save the Children Japan, over 90 percent of low-income households with children reported struggling to afford enough food, with many families forced to cut back on even basic staples such as rice due to rising prices.
The Japan and Korean team of all 11 students presented ‘The Co-creation of Youth from Waste to Hope’ at the 9th Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD 9) Thematic Event. Credit: Ticad 9
The Japanese team leader, Karuta Yamamoto, and the Korean team presented ‘What we want in Africa for the future’ at the Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea, during TICAD 9.
Japan and Korea Team Leader, Karuta Yamamoto and Emma Shin, in an interview with UNFPA Seoul. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
The Korean team set up a shop at a bazaar at Arumjigi, Seoul, Korea. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Single-parent households—most led by mothers—face especially high levels of food hardship and are often compelled to make painful decisions about how limited budgets are spent. For some families, this means choosing between symbolic moments of celebration and everyday nutrition. A ¥3,000 Christmas cake may represent joy for one household, but for another, that same amount must stretch to five kilograms of rice—enough to feed a family for several days.
At the same time, vast amounts of edible food are wasted in Japan. Official statistics show that millions of tons of food are discarded annually in Japan, much of it still edible. Seasonal items such as Christmas cakes, which cannot be sold after December 25, are frequently thrown away. This contrast—waste on one side and hunger on the other—reflects the global challenge addressed by SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production.
As students in Japan and Korea, we asked ourselves, “What role can we play in closing this gap?”
We knew that awareness alone would not change habits. enough. Instead of telling people to feel guilty about food waste, we decided to take action together.
We began locally, but with shared purpose.
In Japan, students at Dalton Tokyo Senior High School noticed that mandarin oranges—one of the country’s most common fruits—often go uneaten, with peels and seeds discarded. In Korea, students identified a different issue: more than 150,000 tons of used coffee grounds are discarded each year, contributing to landfill emissions and greenhouse gas emissions.
Different materials.
One shared goal.
Rather than seeing waste as the end of a product’s life, we saw it as a beginning.
Research shows that citrus peels contain essential oils that can be used in soaps and cleaning products. Studies in Korea also demonstrate that spent coffee grounds can be processed into sustainable biomaterials suitable for eco-friendly design and 3D printing. Plantable seed paper—made from recycled paper embedded with seeds—is another example of how waste can be transformed into something regenerative.
Inspired by these ideas, our student teams turned theory into action.
Japanese students created handmade soaps using discarded citrus peels.
Handmade soaps using discarded citrus peels. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
The soaps ready for sale. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Korean students developed 3D-printed clip-on vases incorporating recycled coffee grounds, encouraging people to reuse empty bottles and cups instead of discarding them.
The Korean students developed 3D-printed clip-on vases incorporating recycled coffee grounds. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
They also produced plantable seed paper from recycled materials, allowing waste to literally grow into flowers and herbs.
Korean students produced plantable seed paper from recycled materials. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto.
These products were not sold as charity goods. Instead, they were shared as examples of responsible consumption—showing that waste can have a second life through our design. Through this work, we directly supported SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, which calls for reducing waste through recycling and reuse, and SDG 13: Climate Action, by lowering emissions through upcycling.
At the same time, the funds raised had a clear purpose.
The profits were used to support families facing food insecurity. In Japan, we donated to single-mother families with hospitalized children through the NPO Keep Mama Smiling (see main photo for the opinion piece).
They also provided essential cooking ingredients to the Karuizawa Food Bank. By connecting environmental action with helping families in need, our project also supported SDG 2: Zero Hunger.
The group provided cooking ingredients to the Karuizawa Food Bank. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Through this experience, we learned that caring for the planet and caring for people are not separate goals. Waste reduction and hunger relief became connected in one youth-led effort—turning environmental responsibility into community solidarity.
But our collaboration did not stop in Japan and Korea.
Through a partnership with the OneSmile Foundation—an organization that transforms digital smiles into donations—we connected our local initiatives to a global challenge. During workshops, we learned that school meal donations in Lesotho had stopped the previous year. Without reliable meals, many students were struggling to focus in class.
Together, our Japanese and Korean teams raised over 300,000 Japanese yen.
The Japanese and Korean teams celebrate their fundraising efforts. Credit: Karuta Yamamoto
Working with local partners in Lesotho, we organized a community-based food support initiative at Rasetimela High School, which serves 863 students. School feeding programs play a critical role in Lesotho, and recent disruptions have left many students more vulnerable to hunger.
Students at Rasetimela High School in Lesotho receive donations of food. Courtesy: Rasetimela High School
Ninety-one of the most vulnerable students were selected through transparent criteria, including those supported by social welfare programs and those who had previously relied on international assistance. Each selected family received staple foods such as rice and corn flour to make a local staple called pap. Distribution was organized near the school to ensure safety and allow parents to collect the supplies securely.
This cross-border effort—connecting students, NGOs, local leaders, and communities—reflects the spirit of SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.
Although we live in different countries, climates, and cultures, this experience reshaped how we understand global cooperation. The students in Lesotho were not distant beneficiaries. We became peers in a shared world.
They became peers in a shared world. Courtesy: Rasetimela High School
As young people, we often believe our impact is limited because we do not control large resources. This project challenged that belief. We learned that we can create change by designing solutions, raising awareness, and working together.
We even tried to measure what we called a “Happiness Index” by counting the smiles of students who received support. Those smiles reminded us that sustainability is not only environmental or economic—it is human.
Our experience shows that youth are not just future leaders. We are active contributors today. When creativity meets collaboration, waste can become opportunity, and local action can grow into global solidarity.
Turning waste into hope is not an abstract idea.
It is a choice—and young people are already making it.
Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon
IPS UN Bureau Report
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Cooking food to distribute free to children. The meals are made with food that is close to its expiry date. Workshop with Karuizawa Food Bank. Credit: Ippei Takemura
By Ippei Takemura
MIYAGI PREFECTURE, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)
I recently came across a statistic that stopped me in my tracks.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Japan has the highest suicide rate among the G7 countries. Even more alarming, suicide is the leading cause of death among people in their teens and twenties. Among elementary, junior high, and high school students, the most common factors linked to suicide are “school-related issues,” including academic pressure and difficulties with peer relationships.
At the same time, the number of children who do not attend school is rising every year. In 2023, Japan’s Ministry of Education reported that more than 340,000 elementary and junior high school students were chronically absent—a record high. These two realities are not separate problems. They are deeply connected.
Truancy is often misunderstood as a lack of motivation or discipline. In reality, it is rooted in complex emotional and psychological struggles that cannot be reduced to a single cause. Rather than treating truancy itself as the problem, society must ask a deeper question: Are we creating environments where young people feel safe, accepted, and understood?
I know this struggle firsthand. I began missing school just three days after entering junior high. My family had lived overseas for many years due to my parents’ work, and returning to Japan left me emotionally exhausted. I found comfort in playing online games with close friends I had made abroad, but while I was holding on to those connections, I missed the chance to build new ones at my new school. Before I realized it, I was caught in a cycle of frequent absences that lasted nearly three years.
What helped me break that cycle was not a dramatic intervention but a small and unexpected turning point. I joined a monthly, off-campus workshop focused on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To my surprise, students from my school were also participating. Because we shared a genuine interest in global issues, conversation came naturally as we worked together on projects. Eventually, we began spending time together outside the workshop. For the first time in a long while, I started looking forward to going to school again.
That experience taught me a powerful lesson: shared interests and common ground are the foundation of human connection.
Learn about the Internet of Things (IoT) using a toy. ‘Let’s upcycle’ workshop with the One Smile Foundation. Credit: Ippei Takemura
What’s the importance of gender in Japan? Workshop with Plan International, Japan. Credit: Ippei Takemura
Provide children with free meals made from food that is close to its expiry date. Workshop with Karuizawa Food Bank. Credit: Ippei Takemura
A place where someone feels safe and comfortable is different for everyone. Sociologist Ray Oldenburg describes this idea through the concept of a “Third Place”—a space that exists beyond home (the first place) and school or work (the second place). Third places allow people to relax, connect, and simply be themselves. Finding such a place was the catalyst that inspired me to want to create similar spaces for others.
Social connection is not optional for human beings. It is essential for mental and physical health, helping to reduce stress, strengthen cognitive function, and foster a sense of belonging. However, people connect at different speeds. Some are naturally outgoing, while others need time and distance before they feel ready to engage. A truly inclusive third place respects these differences.
Based on my experiences, I believe there are three key elements that make a third place successful. First, it must include both spaces for solitude and spaces for interaction, with a clear separation between the two. Some people need time to observe and feel comfortable before speaking. A quiet area allows them to exist without pressure and to join others when they are ready.
Second, there should be shared activities. When people gather around common interests—whether environmental issues, crafts, or sports—conversation becomes easier, and relationships develop more naturally.
Finally, many people struggle to take the first step socially. Having facilitators or mentors who can gently initiate activities or conversations can make a huge difference.
One place that embodies these principles is the Moriumius Summer Camp in Miyagi Prefecture, which I have attended since elementary school. In high school, I joined for the first time as a staff intern. The organizers intentionally build community by using shared work as a catalyst for connection.
Campers collaborate on everyday tasks such as cooking (photo ①), preparing fish, starting fires (photo ②), and cleaning. These shared responsibilities create trust and a sense of equality. Beyond that, participants can deepen relationships through activities aligned with their interests, including crafts (photo ③), marine sports, gardening, and farming. During one workshop, I befriended an elementary school student who was making a bamboo fishing rod and shaping slate into a knife. We connected naturally through our shared love of creating things. Because everyone at the camp already enjoys outdoor life, friendships form more easily—and shared hobbies strengthen them even further.
Campers help with cooking. Credit: Ippei Takemura
Campers can collaborate on starting fires and cleaning. Credit: Ippei Takemura
Participants can deepen relationships through activities aligned with their interests, including crafts. Credit: Ippei Takemura
A place can be more than just an escape. It can be the first step toward healing, renewed confidence, and hope. When young people find a space where they feel safe enough to be themselves, they often rediscover the courage to reconnect—with others, with learning, and with their own sense of possibility.
This is why I want to continue supporting the creation of spaces that can become “someone’s own place”—places where young people feel seen, valued, and free to grow at their own pace. Sometimes, finding the right space is all it takes for someone to realize that they belong.
Yet this need for belonging is not unique to one school or one country. Around the world, young people are facing increasing isolation, academic pressure, and mental health challenges. Rising youth suicide rates and growing school disengagement reflect a global crisis. When young people are left without spaces where they feel safe, heard, and supported, the consequences extend far beyond classrooms and households—they shape the future of entire societies.
Creating and protecting “third places,” therefore, is not merely a personal or local effort; it is a global responsibility. Governments, schools, communities, and international organizations must work together to invest in inclusive environments where young people can connect through shared interests, express themselves without fear, and rebuild a sense of belonging. Doing so directly supports the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) and SDG 4 (Quality Education), by addressing mental health, social inclusion, and equitable access to supportive learning spaces.
Every young person deserves a place where they feel safe enough to take their first step forward. By listening to youth voices and turning commitment into action, we can move from awareness to impact—and from isolation to hope. The future depends not only on how we educate young people but also on whether we give them places where they truly belong.
Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Discussion circles at the Dalton Junior High School, Japan. Credit: Miko Nakano
By Miko Nakano
TOKYO, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)
Around the world, conflicts often begin not with violence, but with assumptions. When people judge others before understanding them, labels replace dialogue—and division replaces trust. For young people growing up in an increasingly polarized world, learning to listen may be one of the most powerful tools for peace.
“We unilaterally assume that people we have never met are demons—and repeat the same mistakes.”
This line from the anime Attack on Titan made me stop and think. In the story, enemies who were taught to hate each other finally meet and realize they are human beings with fears, families, and dreams.
But this pattern is not fiction. Throughout history, societies have judged others before understanding them. During the Crusades, opposing sides saw each other only as threats. In modern times, media narratives and online discussions sometimes simplify complex issues into “good” versus “evil.” Once labels are applied, empathy becomes difficult.
Conversation time with children who live in the slum areas in Ghaziabad, India. Credit: Miko Nakano
Even justice systems are not immune to bias. The Hakamata case in Japan, widely reported by BBC News, raised serious concerns about how media pressure and unreliable evidence can influence judicial decisions. The case showed how justice can be compromised when assumptions take priority over careful examination of facts and individual voices. Around the world, wrongful convictions and discrimination continue to demonstrate how easily fairness can be undermined when judgment replaces understanding.
This is why SDG 16—peace, justice, and strong institutions—matters. Peace is not only about ending wars. It is about building societies where people are heard before they are judged.
Conversation about education with Yoshimasa Hayashi, Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications of Japan, at the National High School Future Conference, House of Councilors Members’ Office Building, Tokyo, Japan. Credit: Miko Nakano
My awareness of this issue began in elementary school. A classmate was widely labeled as “strange,” and many students avoided her. One day, she spoke openly about the pain of being ignored. Listening to her changed my perspective. I realized how easily we can judge someone without ever asking why.
Instead of keeping this reflection to myself, I decided to take action.
In junior high school, I helped organize small discussion circles during class activities where students could share experiences of being misunderstood or judged. We created simple rules: listen without interrupting, ask questions before assuming, and respect differences. At first, conversations were awkward. But over time, students began speaking more openly. Some admitted they had judged others too quickly. Others shared experiences of feeling excluded.
These small conversations changed the atmosphere in our classroom. They did not solve every problem, but they created space for listening.
I later learned that young people around the world are doing similar work. Programs like Seeds of Peace and Generation Global bring together youth from different backgrounds to engage in dialogue across conflict lines. Their work shows that listening is not passive—it is an active form of peacebuilding.
As young people, we may not control institutions or governments yet. But we shape the culture around us every day—in classrooms, online spaces, and communities. If we normalize quick labeling and division, conflict grows. If we normalize listening, trust grows.
Building peaceful societies begins long before political negotiations. It begins when we ask “why” instead of assuming. It begins when we recognize that every person has a story that deserves to be heard.
In a world facing rising polarization and mistrust, choosing to listen may seem small. But it is not weak. It is foundational.
Peace does not start in courtrooms or parliaments alone.
It starts in conversations.
And young people are ready to lead them.
Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Excerpt:
Youth voice on SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong InstitutionsCredit: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
By Azza Karam
NEW YORK, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)
In recent months, the language surrounding the escalating confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran has taken on a tone that should trouble anyone concerned with global peace.
Across television studios, online sermons, and political commentary, some American preachers and commentators have begun describing the conflict not merely as geopolitics or national security, but as a “holy war.”
Reporting in outlets such as The Guardian, along with coverage in other international media, has noted the growing number of Christian nationalist and Evangelical voices framing the Middle Eastern conflict in explicitly theological terms.
Certain Evangelical preachers in the United States have long interpreted tensions involving Israel through apocalyptic or biblical narratives. In these interpretations, the confrontation with Iran is sometimes presented as part of a divinely ordained struggle between good and evil.
In sermons broadcast online and amplified through social media, the war is described as a moment in which believers must stand with Israel in a battle perceived as spiritually consequential – even leading to ‘the rapture’.
The rhetoric is not limited to pulpits. Some former military figures and commentators have echoed similar themes, invoking civilizational language that portrays the confrontation with Iran as part of a broader clash between Judeo-Christian civilization and an Islamic adversary.
When such language enters strategic discourse, it transforms political conflict into something far more dangerous: a war imbued with sacred meaning.
History shows that once wars are framed as sacred struggles, compromise becomes nearly impossible. Political conflicts can, at least in theory, be negotiated. Holy wars, by contrast, are perceived as battles for divine truth. In that framing, negotiation is betrayal.
This phenomenon is not unique to the current Middle Eastern crisis. Religious legitimization of war has surfaced repeatedly in contemporary conflicts. At the outbreak of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, for example, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, framed the war in spiritual terms.
In sermons and public statements, he suggested the conflict represented a metaphysical struggle over the moral future of the Russian world. The language of spiritual warfare, cultural purification, and civilizational defence became intertwined with political justification for military action.
Such rhetoric matters. When religious authority sanctifies violence, it grants moral legitimacy to warfare and discourages dissent among believers. Faith communities that might otherwise advocate peace can become mobilized behind nationalistic or militaristic agendas.
We are therefore witnessing something deeply unsettling: the return of explicitly religious language to modern warfare. For decades after the Second World War, global diplomacy attempted—imperfectly but deliberately—to frame conflicts primarily in political and legal terms.
International institutions, treaties, and multilateral frameworks were designed to prevent precisely the kind of civilizational framing that once fueled centuries of bloodshed.
Yet the present moment suggests that these restraints are weakening. Wars are again being narrated as existential struggles between belief systems. Political leaders, clergy, and media personalities increasingly draw upon religious symbolism to rally support.
The danger is not simply rhetorical. When wars are sacralized, they risk becoming limitless conflicts, unconstrained by borders or diplomacy.
The Collapse of Multilateralism and the Silence of Faith Institutions
For years, I have written and spoken about the uneasy relationship between religion, global governance, and peacebuilding. In articles as well as in interviews and public lectures, I have repeatedly warned that governments and intergovernmental entities have failed to develop a coherent framework for engaging religions constructively in international affairs.
Faith-based organizations today are everywhere. They participate in humanitarian work, development programs, diplomacy initiatives, and interfaith dialogues. International institutions increasingly acknowledge the importance of religious actors in peacebuilding and development. Conferences, seminars, department programmes, global initiatives on “religion and …” or “faith and …” are not only commonplace, but proliferating.
Yet despite this apparent proliferation of engagement, the deeper structural problem remains unresolved: religious actors themselves remain profoundly fragmented, as are the political protagonists dealing with them.
Rather than forming robust alliances capable of confronting violence carried out in the name of religion, many faith organizations continue to operate within narrow institutional or theological boundaries. Interfaith initiatives exist, but they often remain symbolic—highly visible yet limited in their capacity to challenge political power or mobilize believers at scale.
I have argued that religious organizations too often underestimate their responsibility in shaping public narratives around conflict, and doing so together. When religion is invoked to legitimize violence, silence from religious leaders becomes complicity.
At the same time, the broader international system that might once have moderated such dynamics is itself under strain. The erosion of multilateralism has been one of the defining features of the past decade. International institutions that once served as mediators of global crises increasingly appear weakened or sidelined.
The United Nations Security Council remains gridlocked. International law is invoked selectively – if at all. Great-power competition has returned with renewed intensity. In such an environment, appeals to universal norms carry less weight.
Alongside this institutional weakening has come a worrying rise in authoritarianism worldwide. Governments across regions have adopted increasingly illiberal practices—restricting civil liberties, marginalizing minorities, and suppressing dissent. In many cases, religion is instrumentalized to reinforce nationalist narratives or legitimize political authority.
This combination—the decline of multilateral governance and the rise of politicized religion—creates a volatile global environment. Without strong international frameworks to mediate disputes, imperialist narratives and actions gain traction – as in Trump’s and Netanyahu’s war against Iran. Religion, ethnicity, and culture become tools through which political conflicts are interpreted and mobilized.
Faith-based organizations, despite their potential influence, have struggled to counter this trend effectively. Some remain focused on humanitarian services rather than confronting the ideological narratives that legitimize violence. Most hesitate to challenge political authorities with whom they maintain close relationships, and seek financial and/or political backing.
As a result, the global religious landscape today is marked by a paradox: religion is increasingly present in global discourse, yet its potential as a force for peace remains under-realized.
Islamophobia and the Seeds of a Wider Religious Conflict
Perhaps the most troubling dimension of the present moment is the resurgence of Islamophobia as a powerful political force in international discourse.
For more than two decades following the attacks of September 11, 2001, narratives portraying Islam as inherently linked to extremism became deeply embedded in political rhetoric and media representation across many Western societies.
Despite sustained efforts by scholars, religious leaders, and civil society actors to challenge these narratives, they continue to shape public perceptions.
In the context of the current confrontation with Iran, such narratives risk reinforcing the perception that the conflict is not merely geopolitical but civilizational. When Iran is framed not simply as a state actor but as a representative of a threatening Islamic force, the conflict becomes symbolically larger than any single nation.
The danger is clear: political wars are becoming interpreted as religious wars.
If such framing takes hold, the implications extend far beyond the Middle East. Conflicts that are perceived as religious struggles can mobilize believers across borders. They can radicalize communities, fuel sectarian polarization, and undermine the fragile coexistence of diverse religious populations.
History provides sobering examples. The European wars of religion in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries devastated entire regions, entangling political power struggles with theological disputes. Once religious identity became intertwined with warfare, violence spread across kingdoms and empires.
Today’s globalized world is even more interconnected. Diaspora communities, digital media, and transnational networks allow narratives of conflict to circulate instantly across continents. A war perceived as targeting Islam could ignite tensions in communities thousands of miles away from the battlefield.
Similarly, religious nationalism in multiple regions—whether Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, or Muslim—has been gaining strength in recent years. When one religiously framed conflict emerges, it can reinforce others. Narratives of civilizational struggle feed upon each other.
As the confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran becomes widely interpreted through a religious lens, the consequences may be profound. Christian–Muslim tensions, already strained in many contexts, could escalate dramatically. Such conflicts would not respect national borders. They would unfold within societies, across communities, and through global networks of believers.
Ironically, this escalation occurs at a time when religious leaders frequently emphasize the peace-promoting teachings of their traditions. Interfaith initiatives celebrate dialogue, coexistence, and shared values. Religious texts across traditions contain powerful injunctions toward compassion, justice, and reconciliation.
Yet these ideals remain fragile when confronted with political realities.
If religious institutions fail to challenge narratives that sanctify violence, they risk becoming spectators to a new era of religious conflict. Worse still, they may be drawn into it.
Are “Religions” Truly for Peace?
We may therefore be standing at the threshold of a profoundly dangerous historical moment.
Religious language is once again being used to justify war. Political conflicts are increasingly framed as civilizational struggles. Multilateral institutions that once mediated global disputes appear weakened. And faith communities—despite their moral authority—have yet to mount a unified challenge to the narratives that sacralize violence.
None of this means that religion inevitably leads to war. On the contrary, religious traditions contain some of humanity’s most powerful ethical teachings about peace, justice, and compassion. Faith communities have played vital roles in reconciliation processes, humanitarian action, and social movements for justice.
But these possibilities are not automatic. They depend on conscious choices by religious leaders, institutions, and believers.
If religious actors allow their traditions to be mobilized in support of political violence, then religion will become part of the problem rather than the solution.
The question confronting us today is therefore both urgent and uncomfortable.
At a moment when wars are increasingly described as sacred struggles, when geopolitical conflicts are interpreted through religious narratives, and when Islamophobia and other forms of religious prejudice continue to spread, we must ask ourselves: How are religions truly forces for peace?
Prof. Azza Karam, PhD. is President, Lead Integrity
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Will AI kickstart a new age of nuclear power? Credit: Unsplash/Taylor Vick In a data centre (above), servers are high-performance computers that process and store data. Meanwhile, the United Nations has taken a firm stance that decisions regarding the use of nuclear weapons must rest with humans, not machines, warning that integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) presents an unacceptable risk to global security.
By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)
As artificial intelligence (AI) threatens to dominate every aspect of human lives —including political, economic, social and cultural –there is also the danger of the potential militarization of AI.
The integration of AI into nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) systems, as well as its use in military decision-making, introduces severe, unprecedented risks to global security, according to one report.
Key negative effects include the acceleration of decision-making to “machine speed” (leaving little time for human judgment), increased vulnerability to cyberattacks, and the erosion of strategic stability.
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, command and control of nuclear weapons is a delicate and complicated system, designed to prevent error while ensuring reliability under high-pressure conditions.
In environments where vast amounts of data shape high-stakes outcomes, artificial intelligence has become a natural consideration.
“The integration of a rapidly evolving technology raises fundamental questions about responsibility, data quality, and system reliability. When a single error could have irreversible consequences, how can confidence be built around the integration of machine learning into systems that have long relied on human judgment and oversight?”
“What guardrails should be maintained? Where are the opportunities for international collaboration and consensus?”
Tariq Rauf, former Head of Verification and Security Policy at the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told IPS the role of and integration of Artificial Generative Intelligence (AGI) raises some of the most consequential questions of our technological era.
The integration of AGI into nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) systems is not merely an engineering challenge — it is a civilizational one.
The Problem of Machine Speed
Perhaps the most alarming aspect of the integration of AGI into NC3 systems, he pointed out, is the compression of decision-making timelines to “machine speed.” Nuclear strategy has historically depended on deliberate human judgment — the ability of decision-makers to pause, assess ambiguous data, consult advisors, and choose restraint even under pressure or attack.
AGI systems, by contrast, are designed to process and respond at velocities no human can match. In a crisis, this creates a dangerous paradox: the very speed that makes AGI attractive also makes meaningful human oversight nearly impossible.
“If an AGI system misidentifies a sensor anomaly as an incoming missile — something that has happened with human-operated systems before, as the 1983 Soviet false alarm incident illustrates — the window for correction could shrink from minutes to seconds.”
The margin for error in nuclear decision-making has always been uncomfortably thin; AGI risks eliminating it entirely, said Rauf.
Data Quality and System Reliability
Data quality and integrity are foundational concerns regarding AGI. Machine learning systems are only as reliable as the data on which they are trained, he argued.
“Nuclear environments present unique ultra complex challenges: they involve rare, high-stakes events with limited historical data, adversarial actors who may deliberately feed misinformation into sensor networks, and geopolitical contexts that shift faster than training datasets can capture”.
An AGI system that confidently acts on corrupted or misrepresented data in a nuclear context could trigger escalation based on a fiction. Worse still, the opacity of many machine learning models — the so-called “black box” problem — means that even system designers may not be able to explain why a particular output was generated, let alone correct it in real time, declared Rauf.
Vladislav Chernavskikh, Researcher, Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme, at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) told IPS existing state approaches to AI-nuclear nexus already broadly converge on the principle of retaining human control in nuclear decision making, yet there is no consensus on how this should be defined or operationalized.
A formal recognition of this principle by nuclear-weapon states and elaboration of what human control constitutes in this context and how it can manifest in the nuclear weapons domain can be one of the first steps towards minimising risks, he declared.
At the AI Impact Summit in New Delhi last month, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the future of AI cannot be decided by a handful of countries and the whims of a few billionaires.
Last year, the General Assembly took two decisive steps, he said.
First, by creating an Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence, and second, by launching a Global Dialogue on AI Governance within the UN, where all countries, together with the private sector, academia and civil society, can all have a voice.
He told participants at the summit that real impact means technology that improves lives and protects the planet. And he called on them to build AI for everyone, with dignity as the default setting.
UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters last month, the Secretary-General is not calling for the United Nations to rule over AI. He’s calling for – and has put in place – an architecture with the help of Member States to try to ensure that everybody gets a seat at the table.
And as he said: “AI will and has already impacted all of us. It is vital that those countries who may not have the technology also have a voice and that science and fairness be put at the centre of AI.”
Responsibility and Accountability
In a further analysis, Rauf said when AGI recommendations or autonomous actions contribute to catastrophic outcomes, the question of accountability becomes deeply problematic.
Traditional chains of command assign clear human responsibility at each decision point. AGI integration fractures this clarity. Is it the software developer, the military commander, the government that deployed the system, or the algorithm itself that bears responsibility for a miscalculation? he asked.
The absence of clear accountability frameworks is not just a legal or ethical problem — it is a strategic one, because adversaries and allies alike need to understand who is in control and what decision logic is being applied.
Cyberattack Vulnerability
AGI-enhanced or dependent NC3 systems also expand the attack surface for adversaries. Sophisticated cyberattacks — including adversarial inputs designed to manipulate AGI outputs — could potentially spoof or blind these systems in ways that are difficult to detect until it is too late. The integration of AGI thus creates new vectors for destabilization that did not exist in earlier nuclear architectures, said Rauf.
The Case for International Collaboration
Despite these alarming challenges, international collaboration could be a potential avenue for managing risk. Confidence-building measures, shared technical standards, and bilateral or multilateral ‘enforceable’ agreements on the limits of AGI autonomy in nuclear systems could help preserve strategic stability.
Arms control history, said Rauf, shows that even adversaries can agree on rules that serve mutual interests in survival. Extending that tradition to AGI-enabled NC3 systems is urgently needed — before the technology outpaces diplomacy entirely.
“The integration of AGI into nuclear systems technically might be inevitable. Whether it is managed wisely is a political and moral choice that remains very much open and seems beyond the intellectual, moral/ethical processing capabilities of today’s civil and military ‘leaders’, declared Rauf.
This article is brought to you by IPS NORAM, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
A panel discussion kicks off the inaugural Caribbean Civil Society Organisations (CSO) conference in Kingston, Jamaica. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS
By Alison Kentish
KINGSTON, Jamaica, Mar 5 2026 (IPS)
Civil society groups from across the Caribbean met in Jamaica in February 2026 for a landmark regional conference, with development leaders urging stronger governance, digital readiness and deeper partnerships to adapt to a shifting and increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.
Hosted by the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) through its Basic Needs Trust Fund (BNTF) in partnership with Global Affairs Canada’s Field Support Services Programme – Caribbean, the four-day event brought together 120 participants from 80 civil society organisations (CSOs) across 12 countries.
Held under the theme The Shift: Igniting Civil Society’s Next Chapter and coinciding with World NGO Day, the conference is focusing on what organisers call the “collective power” of community-based organisations (CBOs) to advance shared development goals for people and the planet.
‘Cornerstone of Resilience’Opening the conference, CDB officials described CSOs as a “cornerstone of resilience” in a region increasingly vulnerable to climate shocks, economic uncertainty and social inequality.
“Across our borrowing member countries, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community-based organisations (CBOs) are often the first responders during crises and the most trusted advocates in marginalised communities,” said George Yearwood, BNTF Portfolio Manager at the Caribbean Development Bank. “They are steadfast champions of social justice, environmental stewardship, gender equality, youth empowerment and inclusive growth.”
Yearwood said the bank had seen that sustainable outcomes are strongest when “community voices are embedded from project identification through implementation and monitoring”, adding that the region must move “from commitment to concrete action”.
The CDB official said over its next strategic cycle, the bank plans to formalise engagement with CSOs, creating predictable platforms for dialogue, improving access to knowledge and digital tools, expanding financing and partnership opportunities and strengthening data-driven, gender-responsive programming.
The conference also responded to findings from a 2023 CDB assessment of community groups in Guyana, Jamaica and Saint Lucia, which revealed significant weaknesses in governance and organisational readiness. According to the Bank, 69 percent of groups assessed lacked constitutions, nearly half had no mission or vision statements and many reported gaps in proposal writing, resource mobilisation and awareness of the Sustainable Development Goals.
The Canadian High Commissioner to Jamaica, Mark Berman, said while Caribbean CSOs perform an indispensable role in tackling developmental challenges like climate vulnerability, youth unemployment and gender inequality, they need urgent support to deal with systemic challenges.
“We can’t do it without CSOs,” the High Commissioner said, while cautioning that “weaknesses in governance, strategic planning, resource mobilisation and digital readiness all risk limiting organisations’ ability to deliver and influence policy in a way that is meaningful within the context of modern society and the changes and challenges that we are now facing.”
To address those concerns, the conference programme featured sessions on governance reform, results-based management, social returns on investment, financial resilience, and the use of digital tools, including artificial intelligence, to strengthen advocacy and impact measurement.
Through its Local Engagement and Action Fund (LEAF), Global Affairs Canada has invested CAD 1.6 million across 11 projects in seven Caribbean countries, supporting crime prevention, workforce upskilling, youth empowerment, community resilience, environmental protection and climate-smart livelihoods.
Organisers say the conference was not only a capacity-building exercise but also a call to action for policymakers to embrace community-based organisations as partners in national development.
In a region grappling with climate change, fiscal constraints and shifting geopolitical alliances, speakers repeatedly returned to the concept of collective power. They say civil society’s next chapter will depend on stronger institutions at the grassroots level. “The Shift” is being billed as a move to ensure that community organisations, which are at the heart of Caribbean countries, are equipped, heard and valued.
The conference ended on March 27 with a formal World NGO Day ceremony bringing together government leaders, development partners and civil society representatives to recognise the contribution of NGOs to sustainable development across the Caribbean.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Excerpt:
Community groups are being heralded as the Caribbean’s cornerstone of resilience, but leaders warn they need stronger support to withstand climate shocks and growing geopolitical uncertainty.Credit: UN Women/Marcela Erosa
From protection against gender-based violence to equal pay, women and girls remain unequal under the law, as impunity for violations of their rights persists worldwide, said UN Women.
By UN Women
NEW YORK, Mar 5 2026 (IPS)
On 8 March 2026, International Women’s Day, UN Women issues a global alert: justice systems meant to uphold rights and the rule of law are failing women and girls everywhere. Women globally hold just 64 per cent of the legal rights of men, exposing them to discrimination, violence, and exclusion at every stage of their lives.
This is one of the findings of the new United Nations Secretary-General’s report, “Ensuring and Strengthening Access to Justice for All Women and Girls”. The same report reveals that in over half of the world’s countries – 54 per cent – rape is still not defined on the basis of consent, meaning a woman can be raped and the law may not recognize it as a crime.
A girl can still be forced to marry, by national law, in nearly 3 out of 4 countries. And in 44 per cent of countries, the law does not mandate equal remuneration for work of equal value, meaning women can still legally be paid less for the same work.
“When women and girls are denied justice, the damage goes far beyond any single case. Public trust erodes, institutions lose legitimacy, and the rule of law itself is weakened. A justice system that fails half the population cannot claim to uphold justice at all,” said UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous.
As backlash against longstanding commitments on gender equality intensifies, violations of the rights of women and girls are accelerating, fueled by a global culture of impunity, spanning from courts to online spaces to conflict. Laws are being rewritten to restrict the freedoms of women and girls, silence their voices, and enable abuse without consequence.
As technology outpaces regulation, women and girls face growing digital violence in a climate of impunity where perpetrators are rarely held accountable. In conflicts, rape continues to be used as a weapon of war, with reported cases of sexual violence rising by 87 per cent in just two years.
The UN Secretary General’s report also shows that progress is possible: 87 per cent of countries have enacted domestic violence legislation, and more than 40 countries have strengthened constitutional protections for women and girls over the past decade. But laws alone are not enough.
Discriminatory social norms – stigma, victim-blaming, fear, and community pressure – continue to silence survivors and obstruct justice, allowing even the most extreme forms of violence, including femicide, to go unpunished.
Women’s access to justice is also prevented by everyday realities such as cost, time, language, and a deep lack of trust in the very institutions meant to protect them.
This International Women’s Day 2026, under the theme “Rights. Justice. Action. For ALL Women and Girls,” UN Women calls for urgent and decisive action: end impunity, defend the rule of law, and deliver equality – in law, in practice, and in every sphere of life – for all women and girls.
This year’s 70th Session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) – the United Nations’ highest-level intergovernmental body that sets global standards for women’s rights and gender equality – is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reverse rollback of women’s rights and ensure justice.
“Now is the moment to stand up, show up, and speak up for rights, for justice, and for action – so that every woman and girl can live safely, speak freely, and live equally,” stressed Bahous.
International’s Women’s Day Commemoration and the opening of CSW70 will take place this year on the same day, back to back, on March 9 2026 in the UN General Assembly, starting at 9:00 a.m. EST and online.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By External Source
Mar 4 2026 (IPS)
Women and girls have never been closer to equality.
And never closer to losing it.
In 1995, 189 governments adopted the Beijing Declaration.
A global promise for the equal rights of all women and girls.
On 8 March 2026, the United Nations International Women’s Day theme is clear:
RIGHTS. JUSTICE. ACTION. FOR ALL WOMEN AND GIRLS.
The call is for equal rights, and equal justice, to enforce, exercise and enjoy those rights.
Because progress is still too slow.
At the current pace, closing legal protection gaps could take 286 years.
Rights written into law are not enough.
Justice means those rights must be enforced.
Yet almost 1 in 3 women has experienced physical or sexual violence.
Women hold only 27.2% of seats in national parliaments.
And just 22.9% of cabinet posts worldwide.
Too many women and girls are still denied protection.
Too many are still shut out of power.
Too many are still failed by the systems meant to protect them.
Aligned with CSW70, this year’s UN focus goes beyond symbolism.
It demands full participation in public life.
It demands the elimination of violence.
It demands equal justice.
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Sania Farooqui
BENGALURU, India, Mar 4 2026 (IPS)
The ordinary sounds of Nahid Ali’s home in Khartoum were completely drowned out by the sound of war which began on April 15 2023. Her baby was just 21 days old. The morning started as any typical day for a mother who had just given birth to her baby and needed to nurse her newborn while she took care of her other children. The gunfire began to erupt. The fighting began when two groups started to battle each other in the streets. The fighting which began in her area developed into a destructive countrywide war in Sudan which spread to her street within moments.
Credit: Nahid Ali, Communications Manager, Plan International
Nahid states “I remember the sound of the war replacing the sound of my home.” Her children were shaking. It was the first time she had found herself at the center of live clashes. There was no time to gather documents, clothes, or memories. She grabbed her children and ran. Everything else was left behind. In that instant, Nahid stopped being only a humanitarian worker responding to crisis, she became one of its victims. Nahid Ali works as a Communications Manager at Plan International, where she helps women and children across Sudan through her work. Overnight, she joined the millions she had long served. She was now an internally displaced person who required home protection and humanitarian assistance. “It was confusing,” she says. “I needed to support my own family while also thinking about other families in need.”As a mother, she could not protect her children from the sound of airstrikes or the fear of hunger. As a humanitarian, she felt the crisis in her bones. “I became one of the people I used to help,” she says. Now, when mothers describe fleeing under fire or struggling to feed their children, she does not simply empathize. She understands. The war which forced Nahid to leave her house has developed into one of worlds worst humanitarian crisis. The World Health Organization estimates that more than 30.4 million people which represents two-thirds of the global population now require humanitarian assistance, including 7 million internally displaced people. Cities have been shattered, communities have emptied, front lines shift, but civilians remain trapped in the wreakage created by this war.
Sudan’s health infrastructure has come crumbling down under the pressure of the conflict. Over 70 percent of the health facilities are not functioning. Hospitals have been bombed, looted, or occupied. Healthcare staff have either fled, not been paid, or have been killed. Disease is rampant in the crowded camps, and lack of medication is the new normal. What was once curable is now fatal.
The situation is being made worse by the effects of the climate change and the economic collapse. The purchasing power has been eroded by the high rates of inflation. The prices of food have skyrocketed. Water is now a luxury. People are not eating for days. The situation is affecting the women, children, elderly, and the displaced the most.
The situation has now spread beyond the borders of Sudan. The conflict has displaced over 2.9 million people into Chad, the Central African Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, and South Sudan. These nations are already dealing with health challenges of their own.
The conflict started in April 2023, as tension between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces transformed into an armed conflict in Khartoum. The conflict has since spread across the Darfur region. What started as a political power struggle has now resulted in the displacement of populations, starvation, and genocide.
In a report released by the United Nations, an Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan established that the “evidence establishes the existence of at least three underlying acts of genocide in Darfur. These are the killing of members of the protected ethnic group, the causing of serious bodily and mental harm, and the deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part.”
The report is based on the situation in El Fasher, the capital of the state of North Darfur, a town besieged for 18 months before the main attack. The report established the “scale, coordination, and public endorsement of the operation by senior RSF leadership demonstrate that the crimes committed in and around El Fasher were not random excesses of war,” said Mohamed Chande Othman, chair of the mission. “They formed part of a planned and organized operation that bears the defining characteristics of genocide.”
Children are at the eye of this storm.
According to UNICEF, there are an estimated 1.3 million children in areas where famine is already taking place. Over 770,000 children are expected to face severe acute malnutrition this year. Many of them will not survive. In the final six months of 2024 alone, there were over 900 grave violations against children reported, eighty percent of them were killings, mainly in Darfur, Khartoum, and Gezira Province. These are just a few of the reported cases, which humanitarian agencies say is just a small fraction of the true extent of the crisis.
The Integrated Food Security Phase classification (IPC) said the thresholds for acute malnutrition were surpassed in two new areas of North Darfur, Um Baru and Kernoi, following the fall of the regional capital, El Fasher, in October 2025 and a massive exodus. December assessments found acute malnutrition levels among children of 52.9 per cent in Um Baru, nearly twice the famine threshold and about 34 per cent in Kernoi.
It is a challenging job to deliver aid to the war-torn areas. The roads are either unsafe or impassable, bureaucratic delays are common too and the armed groups attack aid convoys as well. “Sometimes the assistance cannot even arrive,” Nahid says.
In these places of displacement, Nahid witnesses the toll taken on the human body by the numbers.
“Sexual violence is a tool of war. Many of the women we meet were attacked as they fled their homes. Some were forced to watch as their friends were attacked in front of family members. Some are pregnant, waiting for services that might never materialize.” The trauma these women face is compounded by shame and a total lack of services.
In some communities, the shame of rape leads to the forced marriage of the raped women to the rapist. This provides a context for the child born of rape, it’s a way to give the family a sense of honour. But the damage done by this violence cannot be overstated. The girls who were raped have yet to open up about the violence they experienced, psychosocial services for these women are scarce, safe havens are hard to find and their needs are overwhelming. Children come to the camps alone, separated, orphaned, lost. Some saw their families die. Some crossed through combat zones to escape.
Nahid recalls a six-year-old girl who is always scared, she describes how in Sudan, women wear a traditional attire called the tobe. Whenever the girl sees a woman wearing a tobe, she runs towards her crying, “My mother, my mother.” She hopes against all hopes that this woman is her real mom, Nahid says.
“We need the world not to forget Sudan.” She says this is what she hopes for: more solidarity from the world community, more funding, more pressure on governments.
What keeps her going is the strength she sees all around her. She sees women organizing community kitchens from scratch. She sees families sharing the little food they have. She sees women organizing their own support groups. Sudanese women inspire her most. Many have lost homes, livelihoods, and loved ones, and yet, they still care for children, advocate for services, and hold communities together.
“They have lost so much,” Nahid says. “But they are still standing.”
Sania Farooqui is an independent journalist, host of The Peace Brief, a platform dedicated to amplifying women’s voices in peacebuilding and human rights. Sania has previously worked with CNN, Al Jazeera and TIME.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
The photo shows an all-girls cricket team from Dir that made it to the finals of the inter-regional games, all without coaching, back in 2023. "Imagine what they can achieve with the right facilities and proper training," said Noorena Shams, also from Dir. Courtesy: Noorena Shams
By Zofeen Ebrahim
KARACHI, Pakistan, Mar 4 2026 (IPS)
“I was very happy to see the way Aina Wazir was playing cricket,” says 28-year-old Noorena Shams, a professional squash player, when she saw the seven-year-old’s video. The clip, which spread rapidly across social media, drew widespread praise for the young girl’s remarkable talent.
But the events that unfolded were like reliving her past.
“It was like watching my younger self,” said Shams, who belongs to Dir, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), bordering Afghanistan, close to where Aina lives in North Waziristan. Both are part of Pakistan’s tribal region.
“Aina, like me, does not have a father to fight the world for her,” she said quietly.
The video also caught the attention of Javed Afridi, CEO of Peshawar Zalmi, who expressed interest in inducting Aina into the upcoming Zalmi Women League. In a post on X, he requested her contact details, promising her cricket equipment and training facilities.
“We couldn’t have imagined the video would get so much attention,” said her cousin, requesting anonymity, speaking to IPS by phone from Shiga Zalwel Khel, a village along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in North Waziristan. “We were overjoyed; it meant new opportunities and a brighter future for her.”
But the joy was short-lived.
Caught Between Militancy and Military
The video caught the attention of local militants.
Angered by the public display of a girl playing sport, the militants abducted Zafran Wazir—a local teacher who had filmed and uploaded the video with the family’s consent—and forced him to issue a public apology for violating “Islamic values and Pashtun traditions”. It has been reported that he was tortured.
The militants have warned the family that Aina cannot leave the village and that the girl must not accept any offers from anyone. “They said she can play cricket,” said her cousin, “But there should be no videos.”
“Ordinary people in the region are caught between a rock and a hard place—trapped between militant groups and the Pakistan army’s ongoing armed operations,” said Razia Mehsood, 36, a journalist from South Waziristan. “The Taliban tolerate no dissent, and our once-peaceful region is now scarred by landmines on the ground and quadcopters and drones overhead. People are living under constant psychological strain,” she added.
Noorena Shams, a professional squash player, has shown her support for Aina Wazir. Courtesy: Noorena Shams
Defying the Odds
“I hope she [Aina] can leave the place,” said Maria Toorpakai, 35, the first tribal Pakistani woman who went to play in international squash tournaments, turning professional in 2007.
“Whenever there is a talented girl, every effort should be made to remove her from the toxic environment—even if it means a huge sacrifice from the family,” she said, who belongs to neighbouring South Waziristan but was speaking to IPS from Toronto, where she now resides.
Both Toorpakai and Shams had to leave their homes to escape relentless scrutiny. Belonging to a conservative and patriarchal region, they had to disguise themselves as boys to pursue sports.
Toorpakai cut her hair short, dressed like a boy, and renamed herself “Genghis Khan” to participate in competitive sports.
Shams, meanwhile, was hesitantly allowed to play badminton because it was deemed “more appropriate for young women”.
Despite her parents’ support, she watched boys playing in the only cricket club in Dir, founded by her father.
But theirs is not the only journey fraught with hurdles because of a patriarchal mindset and a rigid tribal background where women’s visibility itself is contested.
“The greatest tragedy is that women’s voices are silenced and excluded from representation, while traditions disguised as religion persist, tying honour and dishonour to women,” said Mehsood. Both Toorpakai and Shams know all this too well. Their families faced constant social rebuke and accusations for bringing dishonour to their villages and tribes, all for playing a sport.
They are not alone.
Athletes like Sadia Gul (former Pakistan No. 1 in squash), Tameen Khan (who in 2022 was Pakistan’s fastest female sprinter), and Salma Faiz (cricketer) relocated from districts including Bannu, D.I. Khan, and Karak to Peshawar, the provincial capital—not just for better opportunities but to escape constant scrutiny.
“If you’re lucky enough that your grandfather, father, or brother doesn’t put a stop to your dreams, then it will be your uncles,” said Salma Faiz, the only sister among six brothers. “And if not them, the neighbours will start counting the minutes you take to get home. They’ll question why you train under male coaches, who watches your matches, and even what you wear beneath your chador. And if it’s still not them, then the villagers will whisper behind your back or land at your doorstep, convincing your parents that girls shouldn’t play sports at all.”
Faiz endured opposition from her elder brother but never gave up cricket. She eventually got selected for the national women’s cricket team.
“Aina is fortunate to receive such overwhelming applause,” said Faiz, now 40, living in Peshawar and working as a lecturer in health and physical education at Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Women University.
“I urge her parents not to surrender to social pressure; they should stand by her and encourage her. She has extraordinary talent—I’ve seen the way she plays,” Faiz pointed out.
Safe Spaces for Women Athletes
Each of these women is now creating ways for their younger counterpart to access the opportunity they lacked.
Faiz has opened her home to girls from tribal regions pursuing sport. When space runs out, she arranges hostel accommodation to ensure they get a shot at opportunities that would likely never reach their village.
Toorpakai, through the Maria Toorpakai Foundation, has, over the years, built a strong network, providing safe spaces for young sportswomen from her region.
But now she wants to go beyond providing temporary support. Her vision to build a state-of-the-art Toorpakai Sports School—a residential facility where girls like Aina Wazir can train seriously, study properly, and live without fear—remains a dream.
“All I want from the state is six acres of land near Islamabad,” she said. “Far enough from tribal hostility but accessible to girls from across Pakistan and international coaches I intend to rope in. I can manage the rest. I can raise funds.”
For over two years, her proposal has been stalled by bureaucratic red tape. “It tells you everything,” she said. “The state simply isn’t interested.”
Shams, too, like Toorpakai, runs the Noorena Shams Foundation, currently supporting four women athletes by giving them a monthly stipend for their training, transport and rent. But if anyone else needs equipment, tuition fees, or house rent, her foundation is able to furnish those needs. She even helped construct two cricket pitches for Faiz’s university.
As the first female athlete elected to the executive committees of the Provincial Squash Association, the Sports Management Committee, the Olympic Association, and the Pakistan Cycling Federation, she has championed young athletes—especially sportswomen— ensuring their concerns are heard.
“I continue to bring to the table issues of athletes’ mental and physical health, the need for international-level coaching, the safety and harassment women face, and the importance of integrating competitive sports into school curricula.”
Using Religion to Quash Dreams
Social media may have provided Aina Wazir with a platform to showcase her talent, but it has also exposed her to hostility.
“We are not against a child playing cricket,” said 27-year-old Mufti Ijaz Ahmed, a religious scholar from South Waziristan. “But she must stop once she becomes a woman. It is against our traditions for women to run around in pants and shirts in public. It is vulgar. If Aina is allowed to do this, every girl will want to follow—and we cannot accept that.”
“The mera jism, meri marzi (my body, my choice) slogan will not work here,” Ahmed went on, referring to a popular slogan that has been chanted since March 8, 2018, and which came under heavy criticism for being a rebellion against the cultural values and Islam.
“Who is he to declare that Aina can’t play?” retorted an incensed Maria Toorpakai, who also serves on the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) Women in Sport Commission. “Whenever a girl picks up a bat or a ball, Islam is said to be endangered,” she added.
“I would respect them if they confronted and condemned the real ills in my region—drug abuse, child marriage, bacha bazi (the exploitation of adolescent boys coerced into cross-dressing, dancing, and sexual abuse), and the spread of HIV and AIDS. Instead, they obsess over distorted ideas of honour and dishonour. They neither understand the world we live in nor the true essence of Islam. Moreover, they have done nothing for our people.”
National responsibility
Ultimately, she argued, the responsibility lies with the state. It cannot afford to look away while intimidation silences young girls with talent and ambition. It is not only a personal tragedy but also a national loss when talent in remote villages is stifled before it can surface.
“It is the government’s duty to deal firmly with such elements,” she said. “And if it cannot protect its daughters, then it must ask itself why it is in power at all.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Tehran, the capital of Iran. Credit: Unsplash/Hosein Charbaghi. Source: UN News
By Jacqueline Cabasso and John Burroughs
OAKLAND, California, Mar 4 2026 (IPS)
Operation “Epic Fury” manifests an epic tantrum by President Donald Trump, supported by his sycophantic minions, with dire consequences for the people in the region, peace and security worldwide, the global economy, and the post-World War II international legal order.
The United States/Israeli bombing of Iran clearly violates fundamental rules of international law. It violates the sovereignty of Iran, contrary to Article 2(4) of the UN Charter which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.
There is no plausible case that the U.S. and Israel are acting in self-defense against an imminent attack. Nor is regime change an acceptable justification for use of force, as it runs directly counter to the injunction to respect the political independence of states.
Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider
UN Secretary-General António Guterres, briefing reporters outside the Security Council, described the United States’ bombing in Iran as a “dangerous escalation.”
“I am gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today,” said the UN chief, reiterating that there is no military solution. “This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.”
It is striking that the Trump administration has made no real effort to use multilateral mechanisms or to invoke international law. Both by its action and by its contempt for international law, the administration is accelerating the erosion of basic rules relating to use of force that has been underway for nearly three decades following the end of the Cold War.
The erosion of the legal framework formally limiting the use of armed force has been a long process, punctuated in the 21st century by increasingly frequent shocks of large-scale wars launched by major powers with less and less regard for international law and institutions.
The first of these was the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the stage set by the long, massive U.S. presence in and around Iraq in the 1990s and the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in 2001. Unlike the Trump administration, the George W. Bush administration at least gestured toward providing an international law rationale for the invasion—but built its justifications for war on a foundation of lies.
Then came the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which both lacked any serious international law justification. There have been other instances of aggression in this century, such as the recent U.S. invasion of Venezuela to abduct its president. But U.S. actions in relation to Iraq, those of Russia in Ukraine, and the U.S./Israel bombing of Iran stand out as major developments in the erosion of rules on use of force.
Concerning Iran’s nuclear program, prior to the bombing it was not at a stage of development that provided any basis for a claim of self-defense. In general, it has appeared for many years that Iran had a uranium enrichment capability, in part in order to preserve the option of acquiring nuclear weapons at some point in the future, but had not made the acquisition decision.
And it was the United States, during the first Trump administration, that unilaterally withdrew from the painstakingly negotiated 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, an international agreement that placed effective and verifiable restraints on Iran’s nuclear program.
Discussions of Iran’s program generally do not address the fact that Israel has a robust nuclear arsenal. In the long run it is not practical to allow some states to have nuclear weapons and to deny them to others. The most straightforward way to deal with problems posed by the actual proliferation of nuclear weapons, as in the case of North Korea, or their potential proliferation, as in the case of Iran, is to move expeditiously toward the global abolition of nuclear arms.
Another at least partial way is to build new regional nuclear weapons free zones. That approach has indeed been tried in the case of the Middle East. Both in the context of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and in the United Nations, there have been serious efforts to get negotiation of a Middle East zone underway, with Iran’s willing participation.
However, Israel and the United States have boycotted these efforts. This severely undercuts the legitimacy of their position as they claim to act to stop a menacing Iranian nuclear program.
What should be the response to these developments?
First, the invasion of Iran should be condemned as unlawful aggression, and the basic UN Charter rules should be defended, with the aim of at least preserving them for the future.
Second, it should be recognized that the world is undergoing a major transformation marked by the resurgence of authoritarian nationalism, with authoritarian ethno-nationalist factions in power or constituting significant political forces in many countries, including all of the nuclear-armed states.
There is a need for realism about the nature of the challenge, and for new thinking and innovative forms of advocacy and politics for a more fair, democratic, peaceful, and post-nationalist world.
Jacqueline Cabasso is the Executive Director of Western States Legal Foundation in Oakland, California; John Burroughs is a member of the organization’s Board of Directors.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Civil society organizations (CSOs) are non-state, not-for-profit, voluntary entities formed by people to address social, political, or environmental issues.
By Gina Romero
BOGOTA, Colombia, Mar 4 2026 (IPS)
A year has passed since a 90-day freeze on U.S. foreign assistance signaled the deepening of a structural dismantling of international solidarity. Today, the “existential threat” to the freedom of association I warned of in my report to last year’s General Assembly (A/80/219) is no longer a warning; it is a lived reality.
Thousands of civil society organizations (CSOs) worldwide have been reduced to their minimum or are completely vanishing, while others are forced into transformations that compromise their core missions. This is not only creating more victims of human rights violations but has also left prior victims alone.
For the freedom of association, the impact is devastating. The dismantling of USAID, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL), and other dedicated funds from other countries has cut the lifelines for NGOs that served as democratic watchdogs worldwide (Refugees International).
Therefore, this is not merely a budgetary shift but a coordinated attack on the infrastructure of dissent. In the U.S., for example, foundations and nonprofits are facing “three overlapping crises” (Maecenata Stiftung, Refugees International, other):
• Organizational Targeting: Explicit vilification of networks like the Open Society Foundations and investigative letters targeting major funders like the Gates and Ford Foundations.
• Mass Closings: Organizations are laying off up to 95% of staff, leading to a “generational funding collapse” of the humanitarian system.
In the meantime, worldwide we also see ultra-conservative anti-rights groups and autocratic regimes rushing to fill the vacuum left by established aid agencies. These groups are, among others, reshaping the global health landscape with actions that restrict reproductive rights and LGBTQI+ protections (The Guardian). In the Asia-Pacific region alone, 240 million young girls are facing a “coordinated global backlash” as programs focused on education and gender equality are the first to be cut (Women’s Agenda).
As I reported to the UN General Assembly last year, the right to association is an integral part of human nature. When states vilify aid as “criminal” or “corrupt,” they dismantle the lifelines that keep civic space alive (United Nations). We must restore a sustainable aid architecture that serves human dignity and the planet rather than private profit or political control.
But the impact on communities and individuals is far too grave. The data emerging in early 2026 is devastating. Since the 2025 freeze, researchers estimate the dismantling of U.S. foreign aid alone has already caused 750,000 deaths, over 60% of whom are children—a rate of 88 preventable deaths every hour (different sources).
Projections indicate that without restoration, 22.6 million people could die from preventable causes by 2030 (The Guardian).
The “hammer” thrown at the aid system has undone decades of progress:
• Democracy and rule of law: Crisis in independent media and civil society reduces the critical voices that speak truth to the power and weakens checks and balances in democracies and hybrid regimes, while in authoritarian context the constraints of dissenting voices increases repression, especially against the most vulnerable groups (Global Democracy Coalition).
• Human rights: global and regional mechanisms of human rights protections have seen drastic cuts of funding, which jeopardize the human rights protections worldwide. The OHCHR received a 16% cut of its budget for 2026 and several Human Rights Council mandates are also being defunded, many tied to HHRR violations investigations in authoritarian states (ISHR).
• Global Health: Access to PrEP and life-saving HIV drugs has been halved for 80% of community organizations. Cholera deaths in the DRC alone surged by 361% in 2025 after essential water projects were halted (Oxfam).
• Education: The abrupt cancellation of nearly 400 USAID-funded education programs in 58 countries risks leaving millions of children—predominantly girls and refugees—without access to quality learning (ETF).
• Food Security: In West and Central Africa, 55 million people are expected to endure crisis levels of hunger, or worse by the end of the first semester of 2026, including over 13 million children are also expected to suffer from malnutrition during the year 2026 (WFP). In Afghanistan, monthly reach for emergency food aid plummeted from 5.6 million people to just 1 million (Refugees International).
Perhaps most alarming is the collapse of data collection systems. As USAID programs disappeared, so did the reporting requirements that tracked disease, death, and human rights violations (The Japan Times). We are entering a period where the true scale of suffering and needs may never be fully known (Refugees International).
Besides the cut of funding, the existential threat is also related to the reduction of possibilities of civil society organizations to collect new funding due to the increase of mis/disinformation about CSO work that lead to lack of trust in communities and therefore increases the shrinking civic space, already heavily affected by anti-NGO laws and persecution (Global aid freeze tracker).
We cannot allow a world without civil society. It is a world without hope, where the most vulnerable are left alone to face the most pressing human crises and wars. The international community must move beyond “business as usual” to restore a sustainable and just aid architecture that empowers civic engagement rather than advancing its suppression.
Gina Romero is UN Special Rapporteur, Freedom of Assembly and of Association.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Image: Hiroshi-Mori-Stock / shutterstock.com and 内閣広報室 / Cabinet Public Affairs Office / Wiki Commons
By Ria Shibata
Mar 3 2026 (IPS)
Sanae Takaichi’s electoral victory in February marks a historic turning point in Japanese politics. As Japan’s first female prime minister and the leader of a commanding parliamentary majority, she represents change in both symbolic and strategic terms. Conventional wisdom long held that younger Japanese voters leaned progressive, were sceptical of assertive security policies, and disengaged from ideological nationalism. Yet a segment of digitally active youth rallied behind a politician associated with constitutional revision, expanded defence capabilities, and a more unapologetic articulation of national identity. This shift cannot be reduced to a simple conservative swing. Rather, Takaichi’s rise reflects a deeper transformation in how democratic politics is constructed in the digital age: the growing power of imagery, digital mobilisation, and algorithm-driven branding in shaping political choice—particularly among younger voters.
Takaichi’s approval ratings among voters aged 18–29 approached 90 per cent in some surveys, far surpassing those of her predecessors. Youth turnout also rose, suggesting that Japanese youth are not politically apathetic. On the contrary, they are paying attention—but the nature of that engagement has changed. Viral images, short video clips, hashtags, and aesthetic cues travelled faster and farther than policy briefings. For many younger voters, engagement began—and sometimes ended—with the visual and emotional appeal of the candidate. This pattern is not uniquely Japanese. However, the scale of its impact in this election suggests that political communication has entered a new phase in which digital imagery can shape electoral outcomes as much as—or more than—substantive debate.
A New Phase of Digital Politics in Japan
In the months leading up to the election, Takaichi’s image proliferated across social media platforms. Supporters circulated clips highlighting her confident demeanour and historic candidacy. A cultural trend sometimes described as ‘sanakatsu’ or ‘sanae-mania’ framed political support as a form of fandom participation. Hashtags multiplied. ‘Mic-drop’ moments went viral. Even personal accessories—her handbags and ballpoint pens—became symbolic conversation pieces.
Political enthusiasm has always contained emotional and symbolic elements. What is new is the speed and scale at which digital platforms amplify them. Algorithms reward content that provokes reaction—admiration, anger, excitement. A charismatic clip often outperforms a detailed explanation of fiscal reform. For younger voters raised in scroll-based media environments, political information increasingly arrives as curated snippets. Policy complexity competes with—and often loses to—aesthetic immediacy.
Post-election surveys and interviews suggested that many first-time voters struggled to articulate specific policy distinctions between parties. Instead, they cited impressions—strength, change, decisiveness, novelty—suggesting that digital engagement does not automatically translate into policy literacy. Political identity can form through repeated exposure to imagery and narrative rather than sustained examination of legislative proposals. When campaigns are optimized for shareability, they are incentivized to simplify. Nuance compresses poorly into short-form video.
The Politics of Strength in an Age of Uncertainty
Japan’s younger generation has grown up amid prolonged economic stagnation, regional insecurity, and global volatility. China’s rise, tensions over Taiwan, North Korean missile launches, and persistent wage stagnation form the backdrop of their political participation. For many, the future feels uncertain and structurally constrained.
In such an environment, Takaichi’s assertive rhetoric carried emotional resonance. Her emphasis on strengthening national defence, revisiting aspects of the postwar settlement, and making Japan “strong and rich” projected clarity rather than ambiguity. Where institutional politics can appear technocratic or slow, decisive messaging offered the voters psychological reassurance.
At the core of her appeal is a narrative of restoring a ‘strong’ Japan. Calls for constitutional revision and expanded defence capabilities are framed as steps toward recovering national self-confidence. For younger Japanese fatigued by protracted historical disputes and what some perceive as externally imposed guilt, language emphasising pride and sovereignty resonates more readily than complex historical debates. This may not signal a rejection of peace. Rather, it may reflect a generational reframing of peace itself—understood not solely as pacifism, but as deterrence, defence capability, and strategic autonomy. Messages stressing ‘sovereignty’, ‘strength’, and ‘normal country’ can circulate more effectively in shareable digital formats than nuanced and complex historical analysis.
A Global Pattern: Virtual Branding, a Democratic Crossroads
Japan’s experience mirrors a broader transformation in democratic politics: the rise of virtual branding as the central organizing principle of electoral strategy. In earlier eras, campaigns revolved around party platforms and televised debates. Today, strategy increasingly begins with platform optimization. Campaigns are designed not only to persuade, but to perform within algorithmic systems. The guiding question is no longer only “What policies do we stand for?” but “What content travels?”
The election of Donald Trump in the United States illustrated how virtual media strategy can reshape political competition. Memorable slogans and emotionally charged posts dominated attention cycles, often eclipsing policy detail. Scholars have described this as “attention economics in action”: the candidate who captures digital attention shapes political reality before formal debate even begins. More recently, figures such as Zohran Mamdani have demonstrated how youth-centered digital branding can mobilize support with remarkable speed. Campaigns became participatory; supporters did not merely consume messaging but actively distributed political identity.
Takaichi’s recent victory reflects the evolving mechanics of digital democracy. Her leadership will ultimately be judged not by imagery but by governance — by whether her policies deliver economic stability, regional security, and social cohesion. The broader question, however, transcends any single administration. It means political decisions have migrated into digital environments optimised for speed and visual communication. In an age where images travel faster than ideas, democratic choice risks being guided more by what is seen than by what is discussed. In such an environment, political campaigns will be forced to adapt, and produce content that performs well within these algorithmic constraints. Over time, this may reshape voter expectations and politics will begin to resemble influencer culture. Campaigns that fail to master digital branding risk will appear outdated. Those that succeed can mobilize youth at scale.
Democracy has always balanced emotion and reason. The challenge today is ensuring that emotion does not eclipse reason entirely. The future of informed citizenship may depend on restoring that balance. This does not suggest that previous eras were immune to personality politics. What has changed is the proportion. The digital environment magnifies symbolic cues and compresses policy discussion. If democracies wish to maintain robust deliberation, they must consciously rebalance image and substance. This requires civic education focused on media literacy, virtual platform incentives that elevate substantive debate and political leadership willing to engage in depth, not just virality. And the responsibility is collective—voters, educators, media institutions, and candidates alike. The question facing democracies is whether this transformation can coexist with substantive deliberation or whether branding will increasingly overtake it.
Related articles:
Japan Stumbles: The Taiwan Fiasco
The New Takaichi Administration: Confronting Harsh Realities on the International Stage
Middle Powers After Davos
Ria Shibata is currently a Senior Research Fellow at the New Zealand Centre for Global Studies, and the Toda Peace Institute in Japan. She also serves as a Visiting Scholar at the University of Auckland. Her research focuses on identity-driven conflicts, reconciliation, nationalism and the role of historical memory in shaping interstate relations and regional stability in Northeast Asia.
This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and is being republished from the original with their permission.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Luther Bois Anukur, Regional Director of IUCN ESARO, interviewed at the IUCN Regional Headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IP
By Isaiah Esipisu
NAIROBI, Mar 3 2026 (IPS)
As the global community marks 2026 World Wildlife Day today (March 3), this year’s focus is on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants: Conserving Health, Heritage and Livelihoods. However, beneath these celebrations, a difficult question emerges: who will bear the cost of conservation when traditional donor funding becomes uncertain and in the face of climate change?
With geopolitical shifts causing traditional funders to tighten their budgets, conservation across Africa has reached a critical juncture.
In an exclusive interview with Luther Bois Anukur, the Regional Director for the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Eastern and Southern Africa, we explore how governments must now go further by creating space for community-led biodiversity conservation initiatives to evolve into sustainable enterprises. We discuss why protecting biodiversity matters as much as maintaining roads or power grids and why national budgets should consider it a priority.
IPS: With conservation donors tightening their budget, how serious is this funding shift for Africa, and what risks does it create for biodiversity protection?
Anukur: Overall, there has been a shrinking of financing for biodiversity conservation, especially with the closing of USAID, which was a big financier for biodiversity work in Africa. This came as a shock and certainly slowed down the work of biodiversity conservation in Africa because some organisations have gone under, and some projects have closed altogether.
However, having said that, there is a huge opportunity for Africa to relook at biodiversity financing models. Indeed, relying on donor funding is not the right way to finance biodiversity conservation. Biodiversity is not a charitable cause. It is actually part of the sovereign natural assets, and so we need to look at ways in which countries can link their economies to biodiversity conservation.
For example, you’ll find that what underpins our economies in Africa is fresh water, agriculture, tourism, and energy, and all these form the backbone of biodiversity conservation.
IPS: African communities often live with wildlife and bear the costs of conservation. How possibly can this be turned into community-led initiatives that can evolve into sustainable enterprises?
Anukur: First and foremost, people in Africa have lived alongside wildlife for many years. However, the cost of living with wildlife has been very high, because you find there’s crop loss, there’s loss of livestock, and even loss of lives. Yet, we have not seen benefits go to communities in a proportional manner.
To change this, there is certainly a need to rethink and redesign our conservation efforts so that communities can be right at the centre. We need to see benefits going to communities in an equitable manner that is commensurate to the services and the sacrifices they provide by living alongside wildlife.
We need to stop seeing communities as beneficiaries but as leaders of conservation efforts. And when we do that, then we will go a long way in conserving wildlife.
IPS: Why should finance ministries in Africa treat conservation as a core national investment rather than an environmental afterthought
Anukur: In many cases, ministers of finance look at risks, they look at assets, and they look at returns. That is what they usually understand. But very clearly, nature is Africa’s largest asset. And so investing in our environment basically means that we are supporting our water systems, our agriculture, our fisheries, and our ecosystems. That basically means that we are strengthening our economies.
The reverse is true. If we do not support that, we will face disasters. We are going to have a higher impact from climate change, and we are going to get into food imports. When you balance the books, investing in conservation makes sense, as it will ultimately affect national economies. So investing in natural assets will greatly support the GDPs of our countries and the livelihoods of our people.
IPS: Can you share examples of models that governments should be using to support protection of biodiversity as well as community-led conservation initiatives?
Anukur: There have been good examples in Namibia, Zimbabwe, and Kenya, among other countries, which have been able to demonstrate that community-led conservation can generate not only ecological recoveries but also economic returns.
But the key thing with these models is that you need to secure the land rights, make sure that there is accountable governance, and that revenue flows directly to communities. There is also a need to have partnerships with multi-stakeholders, especially the ethical private sector.
IPS: Tools like the IUCN Red List and Green List provide data on species and protected areas. How can governments better use these frameworks to move beyond reactive conservation decisions toward long-term, evidence-based policies?
Anukur: IUCN has got quite a number of tools; we have the red list of species, which basically looks at extinction risk, but we also have the green list, which looks at how effectively we manage our ecosystems. Governments have extensively used these tools as reference documents.
However, we would want to see these tools being used to build evidence for planning. This is because when you plan well, then you are able to avert risks. For instance, you need these tools to plan roads, infrastructure, agriculture, and mining.
IPS: Many African governments face pressure to expand infrastructure, agriculture, and extractive industries. What strategies can realistically balance economic development with ecosystem protection, especially for communities living closest to nature?
Anukur: There has been a big debate for a very long time about whether Africa should prioritise development or whether it should be conservation. But that debate is now very old. What we are focusing on is moving from extractive growth to generative growth. We also need to balance everything. For example, you can do agriculture but ensure that you have healthy soils. You can do energy transition in a manner that is not degrading to the environment. Or even create infrastructure that avoids critical ecosystems.
The most important thing is that there should be cross-sectoral collaboration. We have seen environmental and conservation issues treated as an afterthought. We would want the environment to be right at the centre of budget projections, as well; communities should also be brought to the centre for people to benefit from natural assets.
IPS: As we celebrate World Wildlife Day, what message would you give to African governments regarding the conservation of biodiversity?
Anukur: This time is an opportune moment when the world is changing. At the moment we have a lot of geopolitical change. We also do have a lot of geo-economic change. If Africa is to look at itself, the biggest asset is already what we have. The continent is viewed as poor, but the truth is that Africa is not poor. All we need is to connect with our natural assets and use them for development.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Excerpt:
Relying on donor funding is not the right way to finance biodiversity conservation. Biodiversity is not a charitable cause. It is actually part of the sovereign natural assets, and so we need to look at ways in which countries can link their economies to biodiversity conservation. - Luther Bois Anukur, IUCN Eastern and Southern AfricaThe effects of Typhoon Odette in Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu, Philippines, 2021. Credit: Unsplash/Carl Kho
By Anne Cortez
MANILA, Philippines, Mar 3 2026 (IPS)
Communities globally are increasingly exposed to overlapping threats. Extreme weather, health emergencies and cyberattacks are occurring more frequently and simultaneously, often interacting in ways that amplify risks and strain response systems.
Experts describe this as a polycrisis, where threats converge, creating a complex pressure point for governments, businesses and communities.
Today, a polycrisis is brewing at the intersection of climate change and cybersecurity. The latest Global Risks Report by the World Economic Forum ranks extreme weather and natural disasters among the top global threats, while risks linked to digital and artificial intelligence have climbed up the list.
Over the next decade, these environmental and technological dangers are expected to dominate, underscoring how deeply intertwined they have become.
Asia and the Pacific is increasingly becoming a hotspot for these twin threats. The world’s most disaster-prone region, it faced the highest number of disasters and deaths in 2023, with 66 million people affected and annual losses reaching an estimated US$780 billion. At the same time, the region has become the new ground zero for cybercrime, fuelled by rapid digital transformation during and after the pandemic.
In 2024, it accounted for over one-third of all global cyber incidents, including roughly 135,000 ransomware attacks in Southeast Asia alone, costing the region an average of US$3.05 million per attack. The Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam were among the most affected.
Asia’s geographic exposure and rapid digital growth have turned its climate vulnerability into a growing cyber vulnerability, especially across critical infrastructure and information systems.
As essential services including health, communications and energy depend on digital networks, climate-driven disruptions such as typhoons and floods can force systems into manual workarounds or less secure channels, creating openings for digital breaches at the worst possible moment.
The 9.1 magnitude earthquake and tsunami in Japan in 2011 provided an early glimpse into the interconnected climate-cyber risks. In weeks following the earthquake, cyber criminals exploited the chaos with phishing and malware schemes disguised as disaster relief efforts, stealing data and hindering recovery.
So far, cases in the region have largely involved natural hazards, but climate change is intensifying these events, increasing their frequency and severity and placing sustained stress on digital infrastructure, which in turn creates more openings for cyber attacks.
Some researchers suggest that, contrary to prevailing beliefs, climate change is expected to increase the frequency and severity of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in addition to other extreme weather events, and all of these events have been linked to spikes in cyber incidents.
Research shows that the likelihood of cyberattacks increases dramatically during natural disasters, as defensive systems and attention are compromised. In the United States, for instance, government agencies and researchers have warned the public of heightened digital threats including scams following hurricanes and wildfires, demonstrating how climate hazards can create openings for malicious actors.
When these vulnerabilities are exploited, response and recovery efforts can be paralysed at the very moment they are most needed.
This convergence of vulnerabilities changes the nature of disaster risk. The UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction now includes cyber threats in its hazard taxonomies because losses of connectivity and cyber incidents reshape exposure and coping capacity. Treating these threats separately leaves significant gaps in preparedness and response.
Across the Caribbean, interest in the climate-cyber convergence has grown, with governments and partners conducting assessments, dialogues and scenario planning to strengthen shared resilience and ensure that physical and digital systems can withstand compounded shocks. In Europe, researchers are drawing lessons from environmental law to inform and strengthen cybersecurity policies.
Given these global developments, it is concerning that the recent COP30 focused heavily on how technology can support climate adaptation, yet paid less attention to how the same systems become vulnerable during climate-driven disruptions.
Even more worrying is that Asia and the Pacific, despite being highly exposed to both disaster and cyber risk, has not yet shown the same level of integrated response or public alarm seen elsewhere.
The region has robust frameworks for disaster and climate resilience under the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, implemented through regional action plans, financing facility and cooperation programs.
At the same time, ASEAN and its partners have cybersecurity policy guidelines that cover digital governance, data management and response to transboundary cyber threats. However, these tracks largely operate in parallel, missing opportunities for integration.
Reports highlight gaps in how climate and cyber risks are managed and financed. Agencies still work in silos, with little joint analysis or shared data, and insufficient tools, financing and capacity to manage combined climate-cyber risks.
Asia and the Pacific has the institutions and expertise to respond, but what is missing is a mindset that treats climate and cyber threats as interconnected. As climate extremes and cyberattacks accelerate, the region cannot continue fighting on two fronts with divided defences.
Building climate-cyber resilience in the region requires integrated planning, strengthened continuity systems and regional cooperation.
First, joint climate-cyber assessments and exercises are needed to map interdependent failures and strengthen coordinated response.
Second, critical services need strong backups, diversified connectivity and tested recovery plans that anticipate physical damage to digital infrastructure, ensuring continuity even during disasters.
Third, financing and cooperation should harmonise reporting for compound events, require safeguards and build pooled insurance, supported by development banks and donors.
The convergence of climate and cyber risks is changing the nature of crises worldwide. Future disasters are likely to involve multiple, interacting shocks rather than isolated events. As this reality enters discussions in platforms such as Davos and ASEAN 2026, attention is turning to the Asia and Pacific region to advance integrated resilience as a policy priority. Delaying action will only compound impacts and put far more lives and futures at risk.
This article was originally published online at Devpolicy Blog. The Blog is run out of the Development Policy Centre housed in the Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University.
Anne Cortez is a knowledge and communications consultant for the Asian Development Bank’s climate and health portfolio. She also advises the APAC Cybersecurity Fund, an initiative of The Asia Foundation, on strategic communications and policy priorities. Learn more about her work here.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Credit: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 3 2026 (IPS)
As the build-up for a proposed “new world order” continues, a lingering question remains: will the country with the most powerful military reign supreme?
The United Nations remains politically impotent. The UN charter is in tatters. The sovereignty of nation states and their territorial integrity have been reduced to political mockery. And the law of the jungle prevails—be it Palestine, Ukraine, Venezuela or Iran.
What’s next: Colombia? Cuba? Greenland? North Korea?
The widespread condemnation of the ongoing conflicts – including charges of war crimes and genocide— has continue to fall on deaf ears.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council that under Article 2 of the UN Charter, all member states shall “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.”
But is anybody out there listening?
Norman Solomon, executive director, Institute for Public Accuracy and national director, RootsAction.org, told IPS killing from the sky has long offered the sort of detachment that warfare on the ground can’t match. Far from its victims, air power remains the height of modernity
Reliance on overwhelming air power is key to what the U.S. is doing in tandem with Israel. Bombing from the skies while not attacking with ground forces is the ultimate way of killing without suffering many casualties.
This reduces political blowback at home in a political and media culture that values American lives but sees the lives of “others” as readily expendable, he pointed out.
“This flagrant war of shameless aggression, launched by the United States and Israel, cannot be contained — much less rolled back — by the typical diplomatic euphemisms and caution.”
The U.S. and Israeli governments, said Solomon, are too completely run by psychopathic leaders who adhere only to the “principle” that might makes right. If ever there were a time that the vaunted “international community” should step up and confront an alliance of reckless outlaw governments, this is it.
The European allies of the United States, he said, should stop their cowardly vagueness and finally step up to demand a halt to this aggression that is setting the Middle East tinderbox on fire. The EU should be threatening huge countermeasures against the United States and Israel unless that pair of sociopathic governments immediately halts their assault on Iran.
“Playing evasive games with Washington makes the leaders in London, Paris, Berlin and elsewhere accomplices to methodical ongoing war crimes”, declared Solomon, author of “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine”
According to the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, the US-Israeli act of aggression against Iran was undertaken in violation of international law and the UN Charter, as they exercised use of force without authorization from the UN Security Council (UNSC) or without a demonstrated threat to their security that would trigger the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
“The attack came amid ongoing nuclear talks between the US and Iran and just hours after Oman’s Foreign Minister – a key mediator in the negotiations – shared details on progress achieved and announced that a breakthrough was near. The attack also mirrors the recent unlawful actions undertaken by the US in Venezuela on 3 January, culminating in the kidnapping of the head of state and setting in motion profound uncertainty for the region and the global order.”
Meanwhile, the Geneva-based UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, said it is deeply concerned about the escalation of conflict in the Middle East and its impact on civilians and further displacement in the region.
“Many affected countries already host millions of refugees and internally displaced people. Further violence risks overwhelming humanitarian capacities and placing additional pressure on host communities”.
“We echo the UN Secretary-General’s urgent call for dialogue and de-escalation, respect for human rights, the protection of civilians and full adherence to international law”.
James Jennings, President of Conscience International, told IPS the joint US-Israeli attack on Iran was misguided, illegal, and based on lies. It will retard, not advance, any future nuclear agreement, perhaps for decades.
It was illegal, he pointed out, because it violates both the US constitution and international law as enshrined in the UN Charter. It was based on lies because the nuclear watchdog groups have clearly indicated in essence that “There’s nothing to see here.”
“Trump regularly claims that June’s joint “Operation Midnight Hammer” obliterated Iran’s nuclear capability, yet his weak case for the current “Operation Epic Fury” war rests on the idea that perhaps someday in the future Iran might get a bomb. Several US administrations have worked diplomatically to prevent that, yet Trump tore the agreement up”.
Trump claims to be limited by no law, constitution, or the UN Charter. Guided only by his own morality, as he said recently, he followed Israel obediently in launching a massive war against a sleeping country of 92 million people, said Jennings.
“All the while, his amateur diplomats were negotiating deceptively for a compromise like Imperial Japan did in the run-up to the WW II Pearl Harbor attack. Ask the parents of the more than l00 schoolgirls killed on the first horrifying day of joint US-Israel bomb attacks at Minaj, Iran, and they will probably not see Mr. Trump as particularly moral”.
George W. Bush called himself “The Decider, so he foolishly decided to take the US into two unwinnable wars that most politicians in Washington, and even Trump himself, now consider monumental mistakes. Trump campaigned vigorously on keeping the US out of mistaken Middle East wars that became “Forever Wars,” said Jennings.
“Yet here he is being pulled around by the nose by Mr. Netanyahu. According to a classic rule when launching a war, one must recognize that two things cannot be changed: one is history and the other is geography. It is stunning that the leader of the United States is cavalier about going to war without understanding that or clearly stating the mission’s purpose or end game.”
Pundits and TV reporters are calling the attack on Iran “a war of choice,” said Jennings.
“Why not call it what it really is–a war of naked aggression? Nobody knows when will it end. Trump’s claim that the war will be over in a few days is a cruel joke. The other side gets a vote. Iran celebrated its 2,500th anniversary in 1971. Maybe people who have been around so long know a few things about survival,” declared Jennings.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Access to upgraded shea processing equipment is helping women in northern Ghana improve livelihoods and contribute to more peaceful, resilient communities. Credit: UNDP Ghana
By Praise Nutakor
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 3 2026 (IPS)
Across the world’s fragile borderlands where insecurity, climate stress, and marginalization intersect, communities often find themselves on the frontlines of violent extremism. Yet these same communities also hold the greatest potential for peace, when given the confidence, tools, and opportunities to shape their own future.
In northern Ghana, through the catalytic support of Denmark, Luxembourg, and the Republic of Korea to UNDP’s primary channel for thematic, flexible funding (Funding Windows), women, youth, and local institutions are redefining what community driven peacebuilding looks like. Through targeted peacebuilding interventions, they are strengthening social cohesion, expanding economic opportunities, and tackling the root causes of conflict.
Youth stepping forward as peace ambassadors, Northern Ghana’s border communities face growing risks of infiltration and recruitment by violent extremist networks operating across the wider Gulf of Guinea. Young people, often unemployed or excluded from decision making, are among the most vulnerable. But with support from the Funding Windows partners, youth are becoming champions for peace.
Surveillance and mobility support for local security actors in northern Ghana is enhancing early warning, border monitoring, and conflict prevention efforts. Credit: UNDP Ghana
Young people in border communities have been equipped with skills to identify early warning signs, counter hate speech, and prevent radicalization within their peer groups. Local language radio discussions, reaching more than 72,000 listeners, have further strengthened awareness of misinformation and the tactics extremist groups use to exploit frustration and fear.
For Alhassan Dasmani, a youth leader in Tempane in the Upper-East region of Ghana, the impact has been life changing:
“We never realized how easily conflict could spread in our communities. Unemployment, misinformation, and peer pressure make us vulnerable, but we also have the power to stop it. What we need is education, vigilance, and opportunities to build a better future.”
Her voice reflects a broader shift, with youth stepping forward to build safer communities.
Livelihoods that reduce vulnerability to extremism
One of the most effective ways to prevent violent extremism is by addressing the vulnerabilities extremist groups exploit: economic hardship, exclusion, and lack of perspectives.
In northern Ghana, the targeted peacebuilding investments are already making a tangible difference. Solar powered water systems are enabling women farmers to grow food year round, strengthening food security and household incomes.
In Yipala, Faustina, a small scale farmer, now supplies vegetables to nearby communities. What began as a modest plot has now become a source of dignity and stability.
“I can finally provide fresh food for my family and earn enough to support my children,” she said.
Training in climate-smart agriculture and support with seeds and inputs have helped women farmers like Faustina produce successful harvests. By enabling economic stability, these livelihood interventions are strengthening the community’s social fabric and reducing the incentives extremist groups often target.
Strengthening local institutions
Preventing violent extremism requires not only strong community engagement, but responsive institutions capable of sustaining peace over time. As part of the peacebuilding interventions, district assemblies, security agencies, and civil society organizations have been trained in conflict prevention. Targeted support including surveillance tools has strengthened border monitoring at the local level.
At the national level, institutions such as the Ghana Peace Council and the National Commission on Small Arms and Light Weapons have strengthened their technical and operational capacity in peacebuilding and arms control, supporting efforts to curb the illicit spread of small arms.
For Anne Anaba, a participant in the UNDP-supported training with Ghana’s Regional Peace Council, the shift has been deeply personal:
“This initiative has exposed us to the reality that we can provide solutions to chieftaincy conflicts and land disputes in our communities. It has rekindled hope in us as peace actors.”
Her experience underscores a critical truth: peace endures when institutions and communities are strengthened together.
Scaling what works
What makes these efforts particularly powerful is the speed and flexibility of Funding Windows resources. By enabling women to lead, youth to rise, and institutions to respond, the combined investment of Denmark, Luxembourg, and the Republic of Korea is contributing to a more peaceful, cohesive, and resilient world.
As one peace agent in Natenga in Northern Ghana put it: “When we work together, extremists have no place among us.”
This is peace built from the ground up. It is what becomes possible when the world invests not only in preventing violence, but in empowering people to shape the future they deserve.
Praise Nutakor is Partnerships and Communications Specialist, UNDP
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Picture alliance / Anadolu | Zed Jameson. Source: International Politics & Society
As fuel runs dry in Havana, Trump’s blockade risks humanitarian disaster and a dangerous new normal. Artikel auf Deutsch lesenЧитать статью по-русски
By Bert Hoffmann
BERLIN, Germany, Mar 2 2026 (IPS)
The crisis could scarcely be more dramatic. The US is blocking practically all oil deliveries to Cuba. The island depends on imports for all diesel, petrol and kerosine. Without diesel trucks cannot move, food cannot reach Cuban towns and hospitals will not get any oxygen.
The airports are already without kerosine and several airlines have already suspended flights to and from Havana. The strategy is clear: strangulation. The US extreme right is jubilant; at last, they have found the ‘choking point’ that may finally bring Havana to its knees, 67 years after Fidel Castro’s revolution.
Trump says that negotiations are already under way, outside of declaring that Cuba is a ‘failed state’ and the government there needs to make a deal. But Trump says a lot of things. Even a sober look at the alternatives, however, is fairly terrifying. There are basically four scenarios:
Scenario 1: Cuba continues to be denied oil deliveries. The government can impose austerity measures and commit itself to heroic resistance. But without new petrol or diesel the current crisis will become a humanitarian catastrophe within weeks. Havana could pin the blame for this on the US and with complete justification. For all its own faults, no other Caribbean island could withstand such an oil embargo, whatever its political system. But what good would playing the blame game do in the end? The social and human costs would be horrendous. Without diesel even international humanitarian aid deliveries couldn’t get from the ports to the towns that need them.
Moscow says that it is willing to supply Cuba with oil, but so far it hasn’t followed through.
Scenario 2: Some oil tankers reach the island, perhaps from Moscow, from spot market purchases or from other sources. This could relieve the worst of it, no doubt. But the question remains, to what degree? And for the foreseeable future? Trump’s threats of punitive tariffs and the seizure of proscribed tankers are already sufficient deterrent.
Even Mexico had to pull its support under pressure from Washington. But who else is up for incurring America’s wrath? Moscow says that it is willing to supply Cuba with oil, but so far it hasn’t followed through.
On top of that, Russian airlines are bringing their passengers home and suspending flights. Up until the US military strikes on Maduro on 3 January Venezuela had provided 70 per cent of Cuba’s oil imports. Instead of demanding hard currency payments, it settled for Cuban medical personnel. Who will take over this role?
Scenario 3: The desperate situation intensifies, leading to protests, unrest and the fall of the government. This is what the hardliners in Miami have been dreaming of. But for all the pent-up frustration Washington’s own policy is stymying mobilisation. Already in Venezuela Trump and Rubio ignored the opposition and made deals only with the post-Maduro elite.
If Trump is now saying that negotiations with Havana are already going on and the regime will fall of its own accord, who on the island will be inclined to put themselves on the line in demonstrations or protests? No doubt there’ll be outbreaks of desperation, windows may be smashed and sporadic looting.
But if the message is that only the power struggle between Washington and Havana really counts it makes more sense for the populace to see how things develop, waiting until things have been decided by those at the top.
Scenario 4: The US oil blockade could be lifted in the course of negotiations. But even though Havana has resumed communications with Washington dialogue remains a distant prospect. Some possible steps seem realistic. The Cuba government could order the release of hundreds of prisoners, held in the protests of 11 July 2021.
It could also remove particularly controversial sections of the penal code, push ahead with market reforms or improve investment possibilities for Cuban emigrees. And all without undermining the foundations of the system. This would not only serve US interests, but also many of the civilian population. In return, Washington could permit a resumption of oil deliveries to Cuba from Mexico and elsewhere. Restrictions on remittances from US Cuban expats could be lifted. A first milestone would be reached.
Never been weaker
Nevertheless, it is difficult to imagine what kind of common denominator could be found that would ease the tension and usher in some kind of new normal. Cuba has been a worldwide symbol for the left since the revolution in 1959. But the same could be said for the right in the US.
Indeed, the latter would like nothing better than to see it fall. Trump won’t say what kind of deal he wants. But rest assured it will involve Cuba once more within the US sphere of influence and a US-friendly government in Havana.
Cuba really has its back against the wall. Its negotiating position has never been weaker. Venezuela has shown, however, that the US wants more than political alignment and access to resources. It also desires stability. The government in Caracas may have changed, but the military and the police, the state apparatus and even para-military forces remain intact.
Cuba isn’t a complete match in this respect, but if the US doesn’t want to put boots on the ground it will continue to need the state’s existing forces of order: police, military and administration. This gives the Cuban side at least something to bring to the negotiating table.
Nevertheless, Havana will have to cross a lot of red lines to reach an agreement with this US administration. And what’s more, under the constant shadow of the latent threat that Washington will again turn off the oil tap. The US government would be well advised to be pragmatic enough to allow the other side to save face.
But this is unlikely given the intoxicating fantasy of omnipotence by which Washington is currently spellbound. Cuban-born hardliners in the US Congress are already demanding that the Department of Justice bring the 94-year-old Raúl Castro to trial.
Or perhaps everything will be resolved very quickly. The power bloc around Raúl Castro’s family and its associated network controls not just the military and the security apparatus, but also by far the biggest business entity in the country, the military holding GAESA. The profound crisis of recent years has enabled them to invest with grim determination in the expansion of luxury hotels, transferring state-run restaurants into private management and acquiring stakes in lucrative online supermarkets that emigrants in Miami and elsewhere use to support their families on the island.
Could the upshot be a form of capitalism that maintains their economic privileges, with American partners in the hotels, while the old networks retain control?
None of the four scenarios seem entirely credible, but surely one of them, or some combination, will be realised in the not-too-distant future. But maybe not, if all those who are currently mute in fear of falling victim to Trump’s random impulses actually come together. Not out of nostalgia for the Cuban revolution, but to stand up and be counted as the Washington regime calls into question the basic norms of coexistence between peoples and states, whether in Cuba or Greenland.
Professor Dr Bert Hoffmann is Lead Research Fellow at the GIGA German Institute for Global and Area Studies in Hamburg and Honorary Professor at Freie Universität Berlin.
Source: International Politics and Society, Brussels
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau