Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Sustainable forest management plans are strengthening production systems and lucrative value chains, such as cacao and açaí. Credit: FAO

By Susana Muhamad and Kaveh Zahedi
CALI, Colombia, Oct 29 2024 (IPS)

As countries are meeting in Cali, Colombia, for the 2024 UN Biodiversity Conference (CBD COP 16), the fate of biodiversity hangs in the balance, and with it, the sustainability of our food systems.

Agriculture and food systems are often associated with biodiversity loss. Land-use change, climate change, pollution, overexploitation of wild species, and the spread of invasive species – the main drivers of biodiversity loss – can all be linked to unsustainable agricultural practices.

Sustainable agriculture can enhance biodiversity, improve soil fertility and water availability, support pollination and pest control, while also promoting climate change adaptation and mitigation and healthy diets for all

But there is another side to the coin. Agriculture is central to the sustainable use of biodiversity, an important goal and, possibly, the biggest breakthrough of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), in its roadmap to a world living in harmony with nature.

Sustainable agriculture can enhance biodiversity, improve soil fertility and water availability, support pollination and pest control, while also promoting climate change adaptation and mitigation and healthy diets for all.

Evidence shows that the adoption of agroforestry, for example, cultivating trees, shrubs, and crops together on the same plots, can achieve up to 80% of the biodiversity levels of natural forests, reduce 50% of soil erosion, and boost healthy diets for 1.3 billion people living on degraded land.

Using an ecosystem approach to fisheries could help restore marine fish populations, increasing fisheries production by a staggering 16.5 million tonnes.

In Colombia, the Pacífico Biocultural project, financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), harnesses several agrifood systems solutions across the Pacific region of the country, helping biodiversity and communities, including Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendents and small-scale producers, to flourish.

Sustainable forest management plans are strengthening production systems and lucrative value chains, such as cacao and açaí.

The project is working to restore mangroves, which defend the region against coastal erosion and extreme weather events. This also improves the harvest of piangua, a native mollusk valuable for both nutrition and livelihoods.

The project has provided new and existing protected areas with upgraded equipment and management plans. Ecotourism and bird watching corridors in these areas are creating new green jobs.

Among the main achievements of the Pacífico Biocultural project, the following stand out:

• Five ethnic territory planning instruments formulated or updated, covering 195,107.35 hectares;
• Increased management effectiveness for 586.035 hectares in eight protected areas;
• 27 green business initiatives, seven added value units (UVAs), and six community-based nature tourism initiatives supported; and
• Structured and implemented Participatory Ecological Restoration Plans in mangrove and tropical rainforest areas on 1,000 hectares.

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) also leads the implementation of two other projects in the country, in coordination with the Ministry of Environment of Colombia.

The ‘Paisajes Sostenibles – Herencia Colombia (HeCo)’ project, financed by the EU, uses an integrated landscape approach, to achieve sustainability in agrifood systems in Colombia´s two strategic biodiversity regions – the Caribbean and Andes.

In the ecological corridor between the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta and the Ramsar site Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta of the Caribbean region, the project works on the sustainability of coffee plantations, beekeeping, and tourism production chains in coastal areas.

In Ciénaga, it works on the artisanal fishing chain, mangrove restoration, tourism, and circular economy initiatives to address plastic pollution. In the Cordillera Central moorland ecosystem, the project aims to improve the sustainability of livestock management in the high mountains, hand in hand with the traditional inhabitants.

With an emphasis on the Amazon Biome, the Green Climate Fund (GCF)-funded ‘GCF-Visión Amazonía’ project, in collaboration with Colombia’s Ministry of Environment and the Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies (IDEAM), helps implement the REDD+ National Strategy, ‘Bosques Territorios de Vida,’ and the Deforestation Containment Plan. It specifically aims to shift from deforestation towards sustainable forestry development.

Colombia is clearly at the forefront of promoting the sustainability of agrifood systems. But while agrifood systems are receiving more attention in biodiversity policies, especially in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), most countries find it difficult to carry out these pledges.

The ability to incorporate biodiversity into policies and practices is frequently lacking in the agrifood sector. The amount of money that is available is insufficient to bring about change.

Today, we must consider how to scale up actions and investment to transform agrifood systems. Countries are updating their NBSAPs, to begin implementing the GBF.

Including biodiversity-friendly agrifood solutions and taking farmers, fisherfolk, and livestock herders and producers into account is an essential first step. Having a framework of policies which enable sustainable agrifood systems will smooth the path to creating peace with nature.

To help countries with this effort, FAO, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat, governments, and partners are launching the Agri-NBSAPs Support Initiative during the high-level segment of COP 16.

It proposes a work plan that includes tasks to help create an environment that is conducive to biodiversity, collect the best data for implementing and measuring biodiversity-friendly policies, obtain funding, and increase understanding.

The transition to sustainable, resilient, and inclusive agrifood systems will be accelerated by helping nations create and implement their NBSAPs and harmonize them with agrifood policies and interventions.

The GBF is an ambitious plan, a challenging plan. But in the long term, it will pay off for us and future generations. Biodiversity is the foundation of food security and nutrition, and an irreplaceable asset in our battle against climate change and its effects. Yet it continues to decline faster than at any time in human history.

Nature has enormous recuperative powers. Let’s give her all the help and opportunities we can to get back on her feet by restoring and sustainably using biodiversity, especially in the pursuit of agriculture. In the future, they will say this was the decade of transformation. We are the generation with the foresight to take steps to ensure the future.

 

Excerpt:

Susana Muhamad is Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia and President of the 2024 UN Biodiversity Conference, and Kaveh Zahedi is Director of FAO Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment

More than 700 authors representing 90 different nationalities written the AR6 for IPCC | Credit: Margaret López/IPS

By Margaret López
CARACAS, Oct 29 2024 (IPS)

Climate finance will be at the epicenter of the discussion at the UN Climate Change Conference 2024 (COP29). The focus will be on strengthening the fund and defining the conditions under which the countries of the Global South will be able to access this money. However, little is said about the scientific research that is required to gather the evidence and data to prove the loss and damage caused by the impact of climate change in developing countries.

One of the points under discussion is the need for countries of the Global South to provide comprehensive, scientifically backed reports on how they are being directly affected by the impacts of climate change. This requirement guarantees that money will flow to the most affected countries, but it ignores the inequality present in scientific research networks in the Global South.

Floods and the effects of storms or hurricanes are not the only topics we are discussing.  For example, will Latin American countries, such as Brazil or Argentina, be ready to provide data and evidence of how global warming precipitated an increase in dengue cases among their citizens in 2024?

Dengue cases in Latin America tripled compared to the same period in 2023. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) compiled reports of more than 12 million cases of dengue fever in the region up to middle October and, undoubtedly, this additional health burden is part of the less talked about impacts of climate change.

Research centers in Brazil or Argentina, two of the countries with the best scientific networks in the region, can surely deliver the studies to support a financial request to cover these health-related damages. But the scenario is very different if we look at the scientific networks of other Latin American countries such as Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Paraguay, or my native Venezuela.

More than 3,000 Venezuelan scientists have left the country for lack of support and financial problems in its laboratories since 2009, according to the follow-up done by researcher Jaime Requena, a member of the Academy of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences (Acfiman, its acronym in Spanish). This is equivalent to half of the Venezuelan scientific force, considering that Venezuela had 6,831 active researchers in the Researcher Promotion Program (PPI) in 2009.

Only 11 Venezuelan scientists participated as authors in all the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In AR6, the most recent IPCC report, only three authors were Venezuelan.

Colombia, Peru, and Uruguay were also represented by three researchers in AR6, while other countries such as Paraguay and Bolivia did not even manage to add a scientist to the group of more than 700 authors.

Climatologist Paola Andrea Arias was part of the Colombian representation. She is one of those promoting that the IPCC broaden the diversity of authors in the next report on the effects of climate change in the world.

“We all do science with different perspectives; we will follow the same methods and the same standards, but we have different perspectives. We ask different questions and have different priorities. We see in science the possibility of answering or solving different problems and, obviously, that will be very focused on your reality, the world in which you live, the country or city where you are,” said Arias when I asked her about her participation in AR6.

The low participation of Latin American scientists in global research on climate change, such as that of the IPCC, also means less space and dissemination for those studies that try to track the impacts of climate change in the region. This pattern is also repeated in Africa and Asia.

Promoting more research on the damages and impacts of climate change in the Global South, in the end, is not something that can be separated from climate finance. A clear example is that the Development Bank of Latin America (CAF) has just created a scientific committee for its biodiversity conservation fund, as announced during COP16 on biodiversity in Cali, Colombia.

CAF explained that this new biodiversity committee will have “a key role” with recommendations based on scientific evidence to invest in environmental projects. The first tasks of this scientific committee will be focused on providing recommendations for conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of ecosystems in the Amazon, Cerrado, and Chocó, a program that will have access to 300 million dollars.

The creation of a scientific committee to deliver climate finance can be a first step, as shown by CAF’s experience in biodiversity. To move forward on this path, however, it is necessary to promote more funding for Latin American, African, and Asian scientists to do more local research on the impacts of climate change. It’s the only way to gather the scientific evidence to support the contention that the climate crisis represents an obstacle to development in those countries with the largest populations and the greatest number of disadvantages.

This opinion piece is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.
IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• Explainer: Why Venezuela Needs To Reduce Its Gas Flaring
• Explainer: Why Is It Important for Venezuela to Adopt Escazú Agreement in the Coming Year?

Excerpt:

Climate finance will come under intense scrutiny during COP29, and its distribution aligned with scientific analysis of the impacts of climate change, but the methodology ignores the inequality in research networks of the Global South.

Woman farmer with her chicken, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Credit: ILRI/Apollo Habtamu

By Christian Tiambo
CALI, Colombia, Oct 29 2024 (IPS)

As the UN’s COP16 biodiversity conference continues, the temptation is to focus on the wild flora and fauna under threat.

But there is another, less obvious yet just as critical biodiversity crisis unfolding around the world that also deserves attention.

A quarter of livestock breeds – from chickens, ducks and geese to horses, camels and cattle – are classified at risk of extinction. Even more concerning is the fact that a lack of data means the status of more than 50 per cent of breeds remains unknown. More than 200 livestock breeds have gone extinct since 2000, some without having ever been recorded.

Just 40 out of thousands of species of mammals and birds have been domesticated for food and agriculture yet these domesticated food-producing animals contribute an average of 40 per cent of the world’s agricultural gross domestic product. Eight of these species provide more than 95 per cent of the human food supply from livestock.

The erosion of local and locally adapted livestock diversity poses an especially serious threat to developing countries, where livestock-keeping generates as much as 80 per cent of agricultural GDP, providing much-needed food, fibre, fuel and draught power.

A shrinking pool of commercially improved livestock provides increasingly limited potential for animals to support food security, economic growth, climate adaptation and even ecosystem services that protect biodiversity more broadly. Maintaining agricultural biodiversity is essential for diverse, healthy diets and resilient, diversified forms of rural livelihoods.

It is therefore vital that negotiators at COP16 include livestock as well as wildlife in their National Biodiversity Strategies and Adaptation Plans (NBSAPs), including agreements to compensate countries for indigenous livestock DNA sequences.

As a minimum, countries should include specific targets for protecting livestock breeds within their NBSAPs to help enshrine the preservation of genetic diversity.

Setting actionable targets is a fundamental step towards maintaining a rich variety of livestock breeds, which is essential for breeding more resilient, heat tolerant and healthy animals.

The ability to improve livestock and make use of the locally adapted characteristics of indigenous breeds is becoming increasingly valuable as the impacts of climate change threaten conventional and exotic breeds. The diversity of local, locally adapted and non-conventional livestock constitute an essential resource that will ensure animal production is able to adapt to climate change, respond to new market opportunities and deal with new disease threats.

For example, the hardy Red Maasai sheep that is indigenous to East Africa and can cope with arid and hot conditions, was on the brink of extinction after many farmers replaced their flocks with South Africa’s Dorper breed to produce more meat. But unlike the Red Maasai, Dorper sheep are less able to thrive in drought conditions. Thankfully, the preservation of the Red Maasai by researchers at the International Livestock Research Institute’s (ILRI) Kapiti Research Station has supported their reintroduction, as well as crossbreeding programs to harness the beneficial traits of both.

Plans to compensate countries for recording such genetic resources, known as digital sequence information, and the associated traditional knowledge, must include livestock so that countries across Africa and the Global South can benefit and use this funding to re-invest in livestock conservation.

Countries should also include protections for the conservation of forages that feed livestock and wild herbivores in their NBSAPs. This is equally important for identifying resilient and low-emissions crops that can meet the nutritional needs of livestock.

Koronivia grass, for example, is native to Africa and is among the collection of germplasm stored at the Future Seeds genebank in Colombia. Breeders produced an improved variety of the grass that was shown to increase levels of soil carbon on tropical savannas by 15 per cent while also reducing nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from grazing cattle by a factor of 10.

Leveraging the full range of the world’s biodiversity can unlock improved breeds and varieties of forages to support sustainable livestock production and maximise its benefits for human development.

Alongside such protections for genetic resources and agricultural biodiversity, governments should also include sustainable livestock production within their NBSAPs to support rangeland restoration and achieve their biodiversity goals.

Livestock systems that integrate sustainable practices like managed grazing can enhance soil health, increase carbon sequestration, and promote ecosystem diversity while generating emissions that are comparable to wild herbivores.

For example, livestock manure already provides 14 per cent of the nitrogen used for crop production globally and a quarter of that used for crop production on mixed crop-and-livestock farms. These closed nutrient cycles replenish soils with nitrogen while also enhancing soil structure and organic matter, improving the nutrient- and water-holding capacities of soils and reducing soil erosion.

The natural world thrives when the balance of biodiversity is maintained, and this includes local and non-conventional livestock as well as wild animals.

For the countries where the right livestock breeds can determine hunger or health, poverty or prosperity, it is essential that the biodiversity talks include cattle, pigs and chickens alongside pandas, rhinos and cheetahs.

To fully take advantage of the diversity of livestock, the global community must conserve genetic resources and put them to use to enable communities to cope with climate change, meet changing market demands, resist diseases, and enhance global food security.

Dr. Christian Tiambo, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, addresses the UN General Assembly’s 75th session September 2020. Credit: UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

By Norman Solomon
SAN FRANCISCO, USA, Oct 29 2024 (IPS)

The conclusion that Donald Trump is a fascist has gone mainstream, gaining wide publicity and affirmation in recent weeks. Such understanding is a problem for Trump and his boosters.

At the same time, potentially pivotal in this close election, a small proportion of people who consider themselves to be progressive still assert that any differences between Trump and Kamala Harris are not significant enough to vote for Harris in swing states. Opposition to fascism has long been a guiding light in movements against racism and for social justice.

Speaking to a conference of the African National Congress in 1951, Nelson Mandela warned that “South African capitalism has developed [into] monopolism and is now reaching the final stage of monopoly capitalism gone mad, namely, fascism.”

Before Fred Hampton was murdered by local police officers colluding with the FBI in 1969, the visionary young Illinois Black Panther Party leader said: “Nothing is more important than stopping fascism, because fascism will stop us all.”

But now, for some who lay claim to being on the left, stopping fascism is not a priority. Disconnected from the magnitude of this fateful moment, the danger of a fascist president leading a fanatical movement becomes an abstraction.

One cogent critic of capitalism ended a column in mid-October this way: “Pick your poison. Destruction by corporate power or destruction by oligarchy. The end result is the same. That is what the two ruling parties offer in November. Nothing else.”

The difference between a woman’s right to an abortion vs. abortion being illegal is nothing?

“The end result is the same” — so it shouldn’t matter to us whether Trump becomes president after campaigning with a continuous barrage against immigrants, calling them “vermin,” “stone-cold killers,” and “animals,” while warning against the “bad genes” of immigrants who aren’t white, and raising bigoted alarms about immigration of “blood thirty criminals” who “prey upon innocent American citizens” and will “cut your throat”?

If “the end result is the same,” a mish-mash of ideology and fatalism can ignore the foreseeable results of a Republican Party gaining control of the federal government with a 2024 platform that pledges to “carry out the largest deportation operation in American history.” Or getting a second Trump term after the first one allowed him to put three right-wing extremists on the Supreme Court.

Will the end result be the same if Trump fulfills his apparent threat to deploy the U.S. military against his political opponents, whom he describes as “radical left lunatics” and “the enemy from within”?

Capacities to protect civil liberties matter. So do savage Republican cuts in programs for minimal health care, nutrition and other vital aspects of a frayed social safety net. But those cuts are less likely to matter to the polemicists who will not experience the institutionalized cruelties firsthand.

Rather than being for personal absolution, voting is a tool in the political toolbox — if the goal is to avert the worst and improve the chances for constructing a future worthy of humanity.

Trump has pledged to be even more directly complicit in Israel’s mass murder of Palestinian people in Gaza than President Biden has been. No wonder, as the Washington Post reports, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “has shown a clear preference for Trump in this election.” During a call this month, Trump told Netanyahu: “Do what you have to do.”

Palestinians, Muslim leaders and other activists in the swing state of Arizona issued an open letter days ago that makes a case for defeating Trump. “We know that many in our communities are resistant to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s complicity in the genocide,” the letter says. “We understand this sentiment.”

“Many of us have felt that way ourselves, even until very recently. Some of us have lost many family members in Gaza and Lebanon. We respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones.”

The letter goes on:

As we consider the full situation carefully, however, we conclude that voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities. We know that some will strongly disagree. We only ask that you consider our case with an open mind and heart, respecting that we are doing what we believe is right in an awful situation where only flawed choices are available.

In our view, it is crystal clear that allowing the fascist Donald Trump to become President again would be the worst possible outcome for the Palestinian people. A Trump win would be an extreme danger to Muslims in our country, all immigrants, and the American pro-Palestine movement. It would be an existential threat to our democracy and our whole planet.

Exercising conscience in the most humane sense isn’t about feeling personal virtue. It’s about concern for impacts on the well-being of other people. It’s about collective solidarity.

The consequences of declining to help stop fascism are not confined to the individual voter. In the process, vast numbers of people can pay the price for individuals’ self-focused concept of conscience.

Last week, the insightful article “7 Strategic Axioms for the Anxious Progressive Voter” offered a forward-looking way to put this presidential election in a future context: “Vote for the candidate you want to organize against!”

Do we want to be organizing against a fascistic militaristic President Trump, with no realistic hope of changing policies . . . or against a neoliberal militaristic President Harris, with the possibility of changing policies?

For progressives, the answer should be clear.

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction.org and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. His latest book, War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine, was published in paperback this fall with a new afterword about the Gaza war.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Seedlings from the Seeds of Resilience initiative amid destruction in north Gaza. Credit: Bisan Okasha

By Dawn Clancy
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 29 2024 (IPS)

It was two weeks before October 7—when Hamas attacked Israel—that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood behind the rostrum in the United Nations General Assembly hall clutching a crude map of what he called the “new Middle East,” a visual that erased the land of Palestine.

A year later, Israel’s retaliatory war in Gaza has accelerated, including the destruction of Palestine’s agricultural lands, tipping Netanyahu’s vision of a Middle East without Palestine closer to reality.

According to a recent report by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), “as of September 1st, 2024, 67.6 percent of Gaza’s cropland has been damaged,” and much of its agricultural infrastructure, including “greenhouses, agricultural wells and solar panels,” has been destroyed.

“There is no agricultural sector anymore,” said Hani Al Ramlawi, director of operations for the Palestinian Agricultural Development Association (PARC). Ramlawi is from Gaza City but relocated to Egypt six months after the conflict began.

Ramwali told IPS that over the past year, no agricultural supplies have made it into the Strip. Ongoing water and electricity shortages have made fuel, used to power generators and solar panels, too expensive and caused the cost of produce in local markets to soar. In the north of Gaza, Ramlawi said one kilo of potatoes, roughly two pounds, costs $80, a kilo of tomatoes around $90 and one kilo of garlic is $200, and the prices fluctuate daily. Less than 10 percent of farmers have access to their land, and the soil is “diseased” due to ongoing military activities.

Everyone in Gaza is “food insecure,” Ramlawi said. Additionally, the International Labor Organization (ILO), a UN agency, estimates that after a year of war, Gaza’s unemployment rate has skyrocketed to 80 percent.

Seedlings waiting to be distributed to home gardens in displacement camps in north Gaza. Credit: Bisan Okasha

A new Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) report has found that between Sept. and Oct. 2024, 1.84 million or 90 percent of people across the Gaza Strip are experiencing crisis levels of food insecurity. “The risk of famine persists across the whole Gaza Strip,” the report added. “Given the recent surge in hostilities, there are growing concerns that this worst-case scenario may materialize.”

Starvation in Gaza, in the context of conflict, is not unique—a group of UN experts published a statement on Oct. 17 warning that “97 percent of Sudan’s IDPs” are facing severe levels of hunger due to “starvation tactics” implemented by the warring parties—but what is different about Gaza, said Michael Fakhri, the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food, is the “speed” and the “intensity” at which starvation has spread across the Strip.

“This is the fastest instance of starvation we’ve ever seen in modern history,” said Fakhri. “How is Israel able to starve 2.3 million people so quickly and so completely? It’s almost like they pushed a button or flipped a switch.”

What is happening in Gaza, according to Fakhri, is not entirely a humanitarian crisis brought on by prolonged armed conflict but rather a byproduct of decades of illegal land grabs, forced displacement, punitive economic policies and the physical destruction of Palestinian croplands—whether by bulldozers or ever-widening military buffer zones—by the Israeli government. Practices that began in the late nineteenth century, when the first wave of European Jews emigrated to Palestine, long before the State of Israel was established in 1948.

“There’s a consistent through line” that predates the horrors of October 7, said Fakhri. “What is happening today is not new,” he added, or limited to the Gaza Strip.

Relatedly, in response to Fakhri’s latest report examining food and starvation in Palestine, Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon sent a letter of complaint to Secretary-General António Guterres on October 17, calling on him to retract Fakhri’s “disgraceful” and antisemitic report.

Meanwhile in the West Bank, according to Ubai Al-Aboudi, executive director of the Bisan Center for Research and Development—a Palestinian think tank based in Ramallah—the destruction of crop lands and the targeting of farmers, primarily by Israeli settlers, is “systematic.”

“Now is olive season,” Al-Aboudi told IPS. “And we have this tradition; almost all Palestinian families in the West Bank have their olive trees that they go to in the olive picking season.” But with increased settler attacks, villagers now coordinate, Al-Aboudi said, and harvest collectively to protect their lands, their farmers and one another.

According to estimates from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), as of Oct. 7, 2023, over 40,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed, close to 100,000 injured and 1.9 million have been displaced. (OCHA relies on Gaza’s Ministry of Health for casualty figures.) However, a recent report from The Lancet, a weekly medical journal, suggests that the number of dead in Gaza is likely much higher.

While an official tally of the number of farmers killed in the Strip is not available, members of the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), a Palestinian NGO in Gaza, estimate that since Oct. 7, no fewer than 500 farmers out of roughly 30,000 have been killed.

“You know, the farmers and their families are experiencing the same as what we are witnessing for all the population,” said Mahmoud Alsaqqa in a phone interview with IPS. Alsaqqa is Oxfam’s food security and livelihood lead. He is based in Deir Al-Balah.

But, for the remaining farmers, accessing their lands, most of which are located on the eastern edge of the Strip next to the Israeli border, means risking death or sustaining life-altering injuries. “They become an easy target for the military,” said Alsaqqa. And when farmers are killed, their decade’s worth of agricultural knowledge and know-how dies with them.

“There is significant concern about the challenge of rebuilding the knowledge base in Gaza,” UAWC told IPS. “Many universities have been destroyed, and this creates a major fear regarding the re-establishment of academic and agricultural expertise in the region.”

Still, despite ongoing hostilities and sharp decreases in the availability of humanitarian aid, since Oct. 7, Alsaqqa with Oxfam said that more Palestinians are relying on urban or home gardening to feed their families and others in need.

Before the war, Bisan Okasha’s home garden in the Jabalia camp in northern Gaza was bursting with olive, palm and banana trees, citrus fruits, grapes and mint and basil seedlings. However, after Oct. 7, when her home and garden were destroyed and the threat of famine loomed large, Okasha’s father, determined to rebuild, cleared their land of debris and planted 70 eggplant seedlings on a mound of soil that covered the rubbled chunks of their home.

The effort was “successful,” said Okasha in a series of texts with IPS. The experience left her feeling inspired, and soon after, Okasha, despite being displaced three times, created Seeds of Resilience, a collaborative, community-driven initiative designed to revive and establish home gardens in the north by providing and planting seedlings and seeds for free. So far, Okasha and her team—all volunteers—have planted eggplant, cauliflower, chili, and peppers in multiple home gardens.

“My dad’s personal effort to change the reality we were living in is what gave me the belief that I can create change in my entire community and take a real, practical step to prepare the people in Northern Gaza for any future crisis that may threaten their lives,” said Okasha.

“Wars and disasters in this world show no mercy to souls,” she added.

According to the FAO report, out of the five governorates in Gaza, North Gaza, where the Jabalia camp is located, has the highest proportion of damaged cropland at 78 percent. Khan Younis has the largest amount of damaged agricultural infrastructure—animal shelters, home barns, agricultural houses, and cattle farms—while the Gaza governorate has the largest number of damaged wells, reducing access to water. Relatedly, OCHA estimates that over 70,000 housing units have been destroyed across Gaza.

The Israeli mission to the UN, based in New York, declined to comment on the FAO report, and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) did not respond.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• Will the UN’s Pact of The Future Modernize the World’s Outdated Multilateral Systems?
• Overwhelmed Healthcare Systems in Gaza Struggle Through Evacuation Orders

By Mawdudur Rahman and Habib Siddiqui
BOSTON / PHILADELPHIA, Oct 28 2024 (IPS)

The students and the common people of Bangladesh dared to do something in 36 days of July-August that was considered simply impossible by most people just days before August 5, 2024. They said ‘enough is enough’ to an old order that outraged their humanity, robbed their dignity and the rulers imagined that their citadel of power was simply impenetrable. The revolutionists refused to bow down to the murderous regime that knew no bounds to its cruelty and plundering. They were ready to sacrifice their lives for the freedom of the besieged nation.

Mawdudur Rahman

This revolution is unique in so many ways. It is a revolution in the digital age that is rooted in meta-modernist philosophy. The old political leadership with its moribund appeal and bankrupt philosophy proved irrelevant in this agenda. As Professor Yunus, the Chief Advisor to the Interim Government, has rightly said, ‘Now is the era of a new generation’.

Meta-modernism is the cultural philosophy of the digital age, coined by Mas’ud Zavarzadeh in 1975. meta-modernism is the Age of the Internet or more balanced worldview. As one analyst puts it, we went from modernism — “Make it new!” Let’s shape History! – to postmodernism — everything sucks! Nothing really matters! — to meta-modernism – maybe things are not this black-and-white, maybe there’s a middle ground.

Meta-modernist thinkers perceive the present world around them as a threat to their very existence. They work with pragmatic idealism and have no grand narrative thinking or any orthodox certainties. In other words, they try to strike a balance between all of this. They recognize that they have to face the problems of the society.

Habib Siddiqui

Arguably, all the activities of Bangladeshi revolutionists including their wall posters, followed a framework of Meta-Modernism. It is understood that the new Bangladesh is defined in a new ideology. Student revolutionaries have said that our ideology is reflected through the language we use. The basis of the new ideology is language. It is a revolution of change from the cultural context of fascist imperialist language to the native (spoken) language of the people. In other words, new ideals will be reflected through the language of the people.

It would be wrong to think that this people’s revolution was all about a change of government. Its victory is unlike 1947 and 1971. In both those cases, there was a change of government without any structural change. As a result, the incoming government followed imperialist practices of exploitation left behind by the British. Subsequent governments turned the country into a failed democracy, in order to control, exploit and subjugate its citizens. The police were used as an enabling force to subjugate the citizens, while the legislature and judiciary worked as the rubber stamps to sustain the total control of the government. This evil social system has corrupted the mindset and behavior of our people. An immoral society was formed with no fear of accountability, whose driving force was unfathomed greed and mantra — the ‘rule and exploitation by repression’. Government employees saw themselves as bosses and not as public servants. They thrived upon corruption at all levels.

There are now two competing ideologies in front of Bangladesh – one of decaying fascism that wants to resurface under old leadership and the other is the young leadership of equality and morality. As the revolution demonstrated, the ‘New Bangladesh’ does not approve fascist-supporting corrupt institutions. It desires a corruption-free new society. It is for paradigm shift – a transformational change.

The Chief Advisor and Student Coordinators have clearly highlighted the ideals of New Bangladesh through their speeches and interviews. Dr. Yunus said, ‘We are all one nation’. This is a clarion call to establish a holistic change in society. Such a radical change in society requires a change in values. A change in values lies in the change in public ideology.

The new Bangladesh is not the old Bangladesh with a new cover. It demands a change in the fundamental values of human behavior, actions, and beliefs. These include structural changes, personal changes, expectations.

To understand the ideology of this change, one has to listen carefully to the speech of Mahfuz Alam, the ‘thinker’ of the movement. Five points can be deduced from his recent talks: (1) unity, (2) ‘language is their inspiration’, (3) group leadership, (4) they are children of time, and that (5) they are not a slave to traditional thinking. His views reflect today’s meta-modernism.

For any transformational change to succeed, the change agents must own it, direct it, and ultimately excel in it. We think that this revolution of holistic change can benefit from the revolutionary approaches adopted in China and Cuba that were also led by youths. They owned the revolution and did not allow it to be hijacked by the reactionaries. We see some of these characteristics in the minds and mission of the Bangladeshi revolutionaries.

The bottom line is, bringing any changes in old culture habits was never an easy task. This revolution has presented an opportunity to change the destiny of Bangladesh as never before.

The meta-modernist youths of Bangladesh have come to lead and move forward; they will not go back to the old ways. Their message is clear: if you do not join us, the country will not wait for you. If older generations do not adopt the new view of change, we fear further instability and chaos to come, whose outcome cannot be pleasant.

Dr. Mawdudur Rahman, Professor Emeritus, Suffolk University, Boston, USA. He can be contacted at: mrahman@suffolk.edu.

Dr. Habib Siddiqui is a peace and human rights activists. His latest book – ‘Bangladesh: a polarized and divided nation?’ is available in the Amazon.com. Both are members of the steering committee of Esho Desh Gori – Let’s Build Bangladesh.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Transit Site in Roriak, Unity State, South Sudan. People receive support after fleeing conflict in Sudan. Credit: UNICEF/South Sudan

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 28 2024 (IPS)

Critical levels of nationwide hunger in Sudan has only increased to critical levels since the start of the Sudanese civil war in April 2023. Escalated hostilities between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have led to limited mobility and repeated blockages of humanitarian aid. This, coupled with the volatile floods and droughts, have decimated crop fields which has only exacerbated famine levels greatly. All of these factors have left nearly 25 million people in Sudan in need of humanitarian assistance in 2024.

“The situation in Sudan can now only be described as a humanitarian disaster of the highest level. All sides are committing atrocities, as recently confirmed by the United Nations fact-finding mission. The war, now in its second year, has pushed parts of North Darfur into famine conditions, with the situation expected to deteriorate,” said the European Union (EU) Commissioner for Crisis Management, H.E. Mr. Janez Lenarčič.

Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) estimates that since the wake of the conflict, there have been over 5,170 violent conflicts in the nation, culminating in the deaths of 14,790 civilians. Early figures from the World Food Programme (WFP) show that there has been little improvement in food security since relief efforts began. Heavy torrential rains and floods have led to the destruction of farmland. Continued fighting between the RSF and the SAF have made it difficult for farmers to cultivate and harvest crops. Approximately 25.6 million people are facing acute food insecurity in Sudan. 13 areas of the country are at risk of experiencing severe famine in the coming months.

The United Nations (UN) reports that sustained violence has led to over 10.7 million people being internally displaced and an additional 2.3 million fleeing to neighbouring countries. Humanitarian organizations are concerned about the scale of Sudanese refugees in neighbouring countries, fearing that this could overwhelm economies in northeast Africa.

“This brutal war has uprooted millions of people, forcing them to leave their homes, schools and jobs behind in search of safety. Countries neighbouring Sudan are generously hosting a rising number of refugees, but cannot shoulder that responsibility alone. The stability of the whole region hangs in the balance,” said UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued a report on October 25 predicting that the Central African Republic, Chad, Eritrea, and Ethiopia could be the most negatively impacted from adopting Sudanese refugees. “A number of these countries that are neighbors are also fragile countries with their own challenges. And then to be confronted with the refugees, the security issues, the trade issues, is very challenging for their growth,” said Catherine Pattillo, IMF’s deputy director.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres is expected to address the Security Council next week on initiatives to take to prevent further suffering in Sudan and its neighbouring countries. The African Union has expressed concern that the escalating situation in Sudan could become a genocide. As is the African Union report into the Rwanda Genocide: “Each case of modern genocide has taken the world by surprise. Even when, in retrospect, it is clear that unmistakable warning signs and statements of intent were there in advance for all to see.”

The UN and its affiliated nations are on the frontlines providing humanitarian assistance to affected communities. In August, Sudanese officials approved requests to open the Adre border in Darfur to allow for aid missions to access critical areas. The World Food Programme has delivered food assistance to over 360,000 people in Darfur. WFP is also mobilized to scale up efforts in Zamzam, aiming to assist more than 180,000 people.

The 2024 Humanitarian Needs and Response Plan for Sudan has requested 2.7 billion dollars to help over 14 million people until the end of the year. With funding having reached only 49 percent, the UN urges donor contributions as conditions grow more dire every day.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

The Busher nuclear power plant in Iran. IAEA/Paolo Contri
 
Israel’s strikes against Hezbollah and Hamas weaken Iran. The country’s will to cross the nuclear threshold is growing.

By Ruslan Suleymanov
CAIRO, Egypt, Oct 28 2024 (IPS)

Violence in the Middle East has escalated dramatically since the Hamas terrorist attack in October 2023 and the fallout that has since followed. There is tension, if not a state of war, between all the major opponents on the ground.

Israel is directly facing off with mainly non-state actors from other countries, who have more firepower than their country’s national armies. Think of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Ansar Allah (Houthis) in Yemen and Shia militias in Iraq. Together with Hamas, they form the ‘Axis of Resistance’, an armed pro-Iranian alliance in the region.

For years, Tehran’s military doctrine was based on keeping any conflict with a potential enemy far away from its own borders. Now things are different. Iran has launched massive attacks against Israel from its own territory. The country’s shift in foreign policy is primarily a product of events in the Gaza Strip.

Although there is no evidence that Iran was involved in the Hamas attacks on Israel on 7 October 2023, officials in Tehran have openly welcomed the events that killed at least 1 200 people. ‘What they have done signifies pride, glory and strength; God will support them’, said then-Iranian-President Ebrahim Raisi as he congratulated Hamas.

Israel’s subsequent campaign in Gaza has now been going on for a year, claiming the lives of 40 000 civilians. The fate of many Israeli hostages remains unknown.

Israel has now shifted its strategy to intelligence operations. These include the assassination of the head of the Hamas Political Bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran in July, the killing of numerous Hezbollah fighters through exploding communications devices, and the assassinations of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in September and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar in October.

All of these were huge moral blows to Iran, showing that it cannot protect its puppets’ commanders even in their own countries — hence Tehran’s response to Israel’s attacks.

The only success that the Israelis’ ground invasion has achieved is that it has diverted the world’s attention away from the Gaza Strip.

Hezbollah has lost at least 10 high-ranking leaders, not least Nasrallah, in Israel’s attacks. The militia seems to be on the ground in the long term, but how important it will be in the future is being questioned. Still, it’s too early to write off Hezbollah.

The group has around 100 000 fighters in its ranks, and its arsenal still consists of up to 150 000 missiles. History shows that these groups are quick to replace high-ranking leaders with other militants who can carry on the group’s work seamlessly. In 2004, Israel took out two Hamas leaders. But that only brought the group even greater popularity and influence.

The fact that the militia is still capable of resisting the Israeli government is demonstrated in its drone attack on 13 October this year. To date, more than 80 000 Israeli citizens have had to flee their homes in the north of the country and cannot return home because of coming under constant fire from Lebanon.

The only success that the Israelis’ ground invasion has achieved is that it has diverted the world’s attention away from the Gaza Strip. The situation there is dire: the prospects of freeing the remaining hostages are still slim, and Hamas continues to thrive. After all, Sinwar’s assassination does not mean Hamas has been defeated.

According to ACLED’s US analysts, the group has lost only about 8 500 of its 25 000 to 30 000 fighters in clashes with Israel. These losses are offset by unknown quantities of new Palestinian recruits, who lost friends and relatives in Israel’s attacks.

The attack on Lebanon also triggered the second massive Iranian missile attack on Israel within a year. Both attacks were calculated not in a way to cause maximum damage, but to send a symbolic message. Bold words from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued after the attack showed that Israel’s continued response is still unclear.

All-out war is not as likely as it is sometimes made out to be. This is also due to the great distance between Iran and Israel – at their nearest points, it is 1 200 kilometres. But it’s not just that …

Israel knows that attacking Tehran’s oil industry would send global prices in the crude oil market shooting up and upset its own allies, most notably the US.

Iran has mustered around 40 000 Afghan, Iraqi, Pakistani and Syrian militants together in Syria. Iran has not tried to use them against Israel yet, as the Tehran leadership only knows too well that doing so would be suicide. What’s more, the situation in the oil market is preventing escalation on both sides.

While Iran relies on its oil revenues, Israel knows that attacking Tehran’s oil industry would send global prices in the crude oil market shooting up and upset its own allies, most notably the US. Ultimately, a massive attack on Iran with civilian casualties would rally its population around the otherwise unpopular government.

So, despite its military inferiority, the Iranian regime is actually in quite a favourable situation if it comes to direct conflict. Any escalation could only end up strengthening it.

And then there’s the possibility of an Iranian nuclear bomb. Officials in Iran have been clear in recent years that when it comes to nuclear weapons, their aim is to maintain what they call a ‘threshold status’, i.e. to be capable of producing nuclear weapons quickly, but only if needed.

The situation has changed dramatically here too. International observers have raised concerns that Iran could soon start developing a nuclear bomb, with US intelligence agencies reporting in July that active preparations were underway.

Shortly afterwards, the International Atomic Energy Agency stated that it could no longer be confident that Iran’s nuclear programme was for peaceful purposes.

It might sound paradoxical, but despite high inflation, more and more people in Iran support the idea of producing nuclear weapons. In a survey conducted by IranPoll, nearly 70 per cent of Iranians surveyed said that the country should possess its own nuclear weapons.

The more pressure that Israel or the West puts on Iran, the more determined the country will be to cross that nuclear threshold to deter a conventionally superior opponent if it deems it necessary.

Ruslan Suleymanov is a Russian orientalist and journalist. He was the senior Middle East correspondent of the TASS news agency in Cairo until February 2022. He resigned from this post in protest against the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Source: International Politics and Society (IPS)-Journal published by the International Political Analysis Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Credit: UNRWA

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 28 2024 (IPS)

As it continues to leave a mounting trail of death and destruction in Gaza, Israel has come under severe attack from the international community, including the United Nations and its humanitarian agencies, Western allies, the International Criminal Court (ICC) and scores of human rights experts.

During a conference in Paris, focusing on the new crisis unfolding in Lebanon, President Emmanuel Macron of France, a longtime Western ally and one of the five veto-wielding permanent members of the UN Security Council, had “sharp words for Israel reflecting the view, even among Israel’s allies, that it has used excessive force against its enemies, resulting in disproportionate casualties and destruction,” according to the New York Times October 25.

“I am not sure you can defend a civilization by sowing barbarism yourself,” Macron declared.

Meanwhile, the rising death toll in Gaza has topped over 43,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, in retaliation for the 1,200 killed by Hamas inside Israel on October 7

And last week, over 150 civil society and non-governmental organizations (CSOs/NGOs) made a joint appeal to world governments to do “everything in their power to end this growing catastrophe and cycle of impunity. It is not only a moral imperative but a legal obligation.”

The CSOs urged all 193 UN Member States to “prevent further atrocities and ensure that those responsible for any violations of international law, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, are held accountable.”

Failure to act now risks further eroding international norms and emboldening perpetrators. The cycle of violence against civilians needs to stop, the CSOs declare.

The signatories include CIVICUS, Oxfam, United Nations Association — UK, Norwegian Refugee Council, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), Saferworld, and the Jewish Network for Palestine, among others.

https://www.civicus.org/index.php/media-resources/news/7372-open-call-for-a-ceasefire-in-gaza-lebanon-and-israel-and-end-to-impunity-amid-a-spiralling-humanitarian-catastrophe-and-escalating-regional-conflict

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Interim Co-Secretary General, CIVICUS, told IPS “it’s deeply unfortunate that the United States government for all its talk of human rights continues to engage in moral dualism by providing diplomatic cover to the Israeli government.”

This is happening, he pointed out, despite overwhelming evidence of the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide by Israeli forces. “It’s fair to conclude that there’s an element of inherent racism in how the Biden administration has approached the situation in Palestine.”

In the face of a relentless assault by an occupying force, the plight of the Palestinian people matters less to America’s top diplomats than the plight of the Ukrainian people to whom the same administration has extended all sorts of moral and material support, he added

“Until Israel’s politicians and military brass are brought before an international tribunal to face justice the cycle of violence in the Middle-East will continue to repeat itself,” warned Tiwana.

Even the US, one of Israel’s closest allies, couldn’t restraint itself.

Addressing a UN Security Council meeting on October 16, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, US Ambassador to the UN, said she “watched in horror as images from central Gaza poured across my screen.”

“There were no words, simply no words, to describe what we saw. Israel has a responsibility to do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties, even if Hamas was operating near the hospital in an attempt to use civilians as human shields. We have made this clear to Israel,” she said.

“Just as we have made clear to the Israeli government at the highest levels, that it must do more to address the intolerable and catastrophic humanitarian crisis in Gaza,” the US ambassador said.

Dr. James Jennings, President of Conscience International, told IPS that “Gaza’s horror defies description”.

For Israel to bomb the enclave day and night for a full year is certainly criminal, he argued, but to impose an embargo on vital medicine and food needed by millions for survival is the absolute depth of inhumanity.

Lately it has been almost impossible to get volunteer teams of doctors and life-saving medical supplies into the enclave. Shipments of food aid are now embargoed with no explanation or reason. Besides being inhumane, it makes no military sense, unless the objective is to punish the entire population, which is a war crime, he said.

International outrage is needed to force the gates of Gaza open again, declared Dr. Jennings.

The NGO letter says: Israel’s war in Gaza, following the deadly attacks by Palestinian armed groups on 7 October 2023, is the latest and most horrific onslaught of violence in the decades-long Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.

After a year of unfathomable killing and destruction, patterns of civilian harm by Israeli forces are spreading and escalating from Gaza to Lebanon, while rocket attacks by armed groups in Lebanon continue. We are now on the precipice of even greater devastation across the region.

Failure to act now is a choice – a choice that will fail to stop and prevent future atrocities. The UN Commission of Inquiry concluded last week that Israel has committed war crimes and the crime against humanity of extermination with relentless and deliberate attacks on medical personnel and facilities in Gaza, and called on member states to “cease aiding or assisting in the commission of violations.”

Over the last 12 months, the UN Security Council has passed four resolutions on Gaza, including one calling for a ceasefire, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of the Genocide Convention.

The ICJ also issued an Advisory Opinion that found that Israel’s occupation1 and annexation of Palestinian territory is illegal, and the UN General Assembly passed a resolution demanding that Israel end its unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) within 12 months. Despite this, none of these measures have been implemented or adhered to.

“The international community’s egregious disregard for international law and the government of Israel’s unchecked impunity in Gaza, the West Bank and now Lebanon, has set dangerous new precedents for the conduct of war,” says the letter.

For civilians in the occupied Palestinian territory and Lebanon, this has resulted in:

• Israeli military actions killing over 43,000 Palestinians across the oPt and more than 2,000 people in Lebanon.
• Israeli forces issuing displacement orders covering over 84% of Gaza’s territory and now 25% of Lebanon’s territory. These orders, combined with Israel’s bombardment, have forcibly displaced around 90% of Gaza’s population and over 800,000 people in Lebanon.
• An estimated 400,000 Palestinians are under siege and relentless bombardment in northern Gaza without access to food, water, fuel, or medical care. (UNRWA)
• The killing of over 300 Palestinian and international aid workers, and over 1000 health care workers in Gaza and 95 in Lebanon. UN peacekeeping forces in Lebanon are also coming under attack by Israeli forces (UNIFIL). Israeli military attacks on hospitals, clinics, and ambulances have decimated the health care system in Gaza, and are destroying it in Lebanon – leaving millions without access to care.
• Countless children and adults are dying of malnutrition and facing the risk of starvation, directly induced by the Israeli government’s siege on Gaza, which includes systematic obstruction of humanitarian aid and essential services. (IPC)
• The killing of nearly 1,200 people in Israel during the Palestinian armed group led attacks on October 7, 2023 (OCHA).
• Rockets fired by Palestinian and Lebanese armed groups have killed and injured dozens of people (Amnesty International) and displaced over 140,000 Israelis.
• 101 hostages remain held by Palestinian armed groups, and thousands of Palestinians are unlawfully detained by Israeli forces in detention centers, including children, many whose whereabouts are unknown and have effectively

Many among us, says the letter, have repeatedly called for a permanent and unconditional ceasefire, hostage release, a halt to arms transfers, and de-escalation of tensions in the region, and yet the violence only appears to be intensifying.

Again, we call on all Heads of State and Governments, the UN Security Council, and actors on the ground to prioritise the preservation of human life above all else by:

• Securing an immediate ceasefire by all parties to the conflict and an end to the indiscriminate attacks that kill civilians and
destroy civilian infrastructure;
• Halting the transfer of weapons, parts, and ammunition to parties to the conflict that may be used to commit violations of international humanitarian law (IHL);
• Enabling unhindered humanitarian access for the delivery of lifesaving assistance, including food, medical supplies and fuel, and the safe movements of civilians and aid workers.
• Ensuring the protection of civilians from further forced displacement, and the right to return for those forcibly displaced. Civilians who choose to stay or are unable to leave remain protected under international law.
• Securing the release of all hostages and
• Immediately activating independent international investigations into all apparent violations of international humanitarian law and war crimes committed by all parties.

Governments must do everything in their power to end this growing catastrophe and cycle of impunity. It is not only a moral imperative but a legal obligation.

All Member States must prevent further atrocities and ensure that those responsible for any violations of international law, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, are held accountable. Failure to act now risks further eroding international norms and emboldening perpetrators. The cycle of violence against civilians needs to stop.

For more on what international humanitarian law says about occupation, please see commentary by ICRC.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Three-Michelin-starred chef Mauro Colagreco, the flag bearer of circular gastronomy, which aims to align food and nature. Credit: Mirazur

By Busani Bafana
CALI, Columbia & BULAWAYO, Zimbabwe, Oct 28 2024 (IPS)

“How we prepare and eat food should not be at the expense of our biodiversity,” says 3-Michelin-starred chef Mauro Colagreco, who is on a mission to change our relationship with food and what we choose to eat.

Colagreco, the owner of Mirazur, an award-winning restaurant in Menton, France, is a tribute to gastronomy. Among other world rankings, Mirazur’s fine food and service have earned it first place in the World’s 50 Best Restaurants. In the 2020 edition of the “100 Chefs” world ranking, Colagreco’s peers named him the Best Chef in the World and Chef of the Year in 2019. 

A passion for cooking and the love of nature shaped Colagreco’s philosophy on gastronomy.

“Feeding others, for me, is the first act of love,” Colagreco told IPS in an interview. “You know, when I was looking at my son being born, the first thing my wife did after giving birth was to feed the baby. For me, it was super strong to see that, and I always think about that, and that, for me, is the first act of love.”

Eating Without Eating the Planet

For over two decades, Colagreco has been the flag bearer of circular gastronomy, a culinary movement he initiated when he opened Mirazur in 2006.

Circular gastronomy aims to reconnect with nature while reconciling the perfect mastery of the techniques of cuisine with a genuine commitment to society’s wellbeing.

The principles of Colagreco’s circular gastronomy are captured in a manifesto that brings together food, nature and sustainability. It proposes a profound change in our relationship with food by making food choices that respect nature. Some of the principles call for the consumption of fresh, local, seasonal, organically or biodynamically grown produce. There is also a particular focus on the restoration of the soil and cooking that preserves plant and animal biodiversity.

In 2022, Colagreco was named the first ever Chef Goodwill Ambassador for Biodiversity by the United Nations Educational and Scientific Organization (UNESCO) in recognition of his promotion and protection of biodiversity. At the onset of COP16 in Cali, Colombia, which is discussing global biodiversity, IPS spoke with Colagreco about sustainable food and nature-positive eating.

UNESCO Director General Audrey Azoulay with Mauro Colagreco when he was announced as the first Chef Goodwill Ambassador. Credit: UNESCO

Here are excerpts from the interview:

IPS: You were appointed the first ever Goodwill Ambassador for Biodiversity? Why would a 3-Michelin-starred chef accept a role like this and what do you see yourself bringing to the role of a global ambassador for biodiversity?

Mauro Colagreco: Well, first of all, it is with deep gratitude and pride. I was super happy to accept this because I am very involved in the implementation of sustainability practices in my restaurant, Mirazur. I am involved with regenerative agriculture, the fight against plastic use, waste management, and all kinds of things we can do to make our footprint more sustainable. This role gives a lot of power to our message and our practices. It is an opportunity for bigger action to democratize a necessary vision for gastronomy—a more circular gastronomy. I believe that, as chefs, if we can act together, we will have a real impact.

This new role of ambassador recognizes that our responsibility as chefs is bigger than our kitchens. It shows that from the soil to the plate, everything is connected, and that we can lead a paradigm shift.

I am a day-to-day peaceful activist, and I’m a campaigner; we can’t be silent anymore. We must take action!

So, that’s why I accepted this role of goodwill ambassador, and what can I bring? I think first of all, I can bring my knowledge of the food industry. I know how it works now, and I know how it can be reshaped to work better. I can bring my experience because we have spent years testing and learning about several topics where we can have a real influence in our industry, in our region, and on our planet. My mission is to save biodiversity, save our food traditions, and make our food more sustainable. For me, the plan to follow is to educate everyone. The key is education.

With my fellow chefs through the Relais & Châteaux Association, of which I am the vice president, we regularly educate chefs about the challenge of biodiversity. For example, we are now continuing a major campaign to stop serving endangered species like eel in all the 800 restaurants of the network. Also, I have initiated a big program that will turn the chefs of Relais & Châteaux into local biodiversity ambassadors on a daily basis. This is a huge program with UNESCO, which we will announce in the coming weeks.

IPS: What motivated your commitment to sustainable food in the first place? What are your personal convictions? Can you explain more about this?

Colagreco: Yes, my personal conviction is that by choosing what we eat and what we cook, we choose the world we want to live in and that is really my motto.

To me, everything is interdependent and interconnected. We cannot isolate one aspect of life from another. If we change the way we grow food, we change our actual food;  we change the way our society works; we change our values. That is my life vision and mission.

What motivates me even more is to propose a real alternative to resolve the alarming situation we are facing. I understood that when I opened Mirazur in 2006. I had a bit of land at the restaurant, and I started gardening on a very small plot.

At that moment, I started to read a lot about agriculture, many books, and one especially, The One-Straw Revolution by Masanobu Fukuoka, really influenced me. This book changed my mind.

That is when I began to understand the profound link between gastronomy and the environment. I understood the importance of biodiversity for our cuisine, for cuisine in general, and, of course, for our planet. And then the small land where I started turned into five hectares of permaculture and biodynamic gardens, where I grew more than 1,500 species and varieties of vegetables. We produce nearly 70 percent of what we serve at the restaurant. So, what we propose, in the end, is a seed-to-plate gastronomy, because we take care of the whole process

IPS: What does it mean to reconcile the environmental impact of the world’s most exclusive fine dining with concerns about sustainability and better stewardship of nature?

Colagreco: That means that making food can no longer be at the expense of the planet. We need to reconnect with nature and rediscover the joy of feeding people in harmony with the planet.

Again, we can no longer eat while eating the planet; that is sure, but the problem is not haute gastronomy. In high gastronomy, you touch a very small segment of the population. The problem is mass consumption. You know, it is how we will feed the 8 billion people on the planet.

That is a huge thing, but that is not a problem because we have great news: we can take the same respectful methods we use in haute gastronomy, apply them to more accessible cuisine, and scale them up. Circular gastronomy, as I say, is not just for the rich elite but for everyone. We’ve tested it, and it works.

Mauro Colagreco believes feeding people is a first act of love and believes food, nature and sustainability should be one. Credit: Mirazur

IPS: You are attending the big Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Cali, Colombia, this week. What are some of the things that you hope will be achieved by governments around the world at this meeting, and what do you personally hope to do at the COP?

Colagreco: I’m more than honored to be part of this important meeting. All the countries will be there, all the major organizations will be there, and we will all be looking at what we can do to save our biodiversity.

So, for me, in this situation of crisis, we need more ambitious policies to save where we live and our food, fundamentally change the way we live and consume, and fundamentally reorganize the way our society works.

As IPBES says, we need a common strategy because we are all in this together. My role as ambassador is to encourage change and show by example that there are solutions.

What I really want to do is make a solemn appeal to all governments, international organizations, chefs, educators, and citizens around the world to join forces and create and implement a global programme of good nutrition education for our children. I believe that this is the most important action to change the food system. Education is the key.

We need to create a generation that is aware of the importance of biodiversity and committed to making the right food choices. That’s why I really believe this appeal is important, and it is what I want to personally do at the COP.

IPS: You are clearly more than just a chef—your restaurants are exceptionally successful businesses as well. Why does sustainable food make good business sense?

Colagreco: Well, first, because I really believe it is the business of the future. To continue with our current paradigm is like a crime against humanity. The choice of circular gastronomy is a choice of awareness—it’s a choice of values. It means something to everyone. I’m delighted to see the younger generation becoming more aware of that. When I see my children, my sons, I tell myself that we are doing this for them to pass on the right message.

It is a real choice to work for sustainable food—it is usually more demanding—let’s face it. But what I find interesting is that it is like a sport. At first, it is hard to run a mile because you have not built up the muscles, but once you are trained, you can easily run for an hour or even more. So, it is the same for sustainable food and sustainable business; we need to start and be more physically ready.

To change habits is a choice. We must change habits. Of course, it is an effort; it is not easy to go out of your comfort zone. But we must. It is an obligation. Sustainable food is good business.

IPS: You are from Argentina—a country of the Global South—but you have restaurants in France, China, Thailand, and Japan. What role should the developing countries and the hospitality industries in the Global South play in sustainable food and biodiversity conservation?

Colagreco: We have to be careful because my role as ambassador is to lead by example and amplify the voice of biodiversity. We have about 30 restaurants worldwide, and it’s very interesting because the more I travel, the more I realize that the challenges are different everywhere. Situations vary so much that, of course, there is no one way.

It is not the same situation in Asia, South America, the United States, Europe, or Africa. Even in every area, you have very different situations

My first priority when settling in a new country is to identify the local committed producer, with whom I can work to implement our circular gastronomy. My aim is always the same: to cook as much local, fresh and well-grown produce as possible. It is a question of respect for our clients and for the communities that work hard to offer a better food alternative. It’s a question of respecting our planet.

Everyone needs to contribute, and my role is not to point fingers. The role of governments is to support their sustainable agriculture, their sustainable fishing industry, to protect their waste management, to regulate it and to fight against all unsustainable practices.

And the role of hospitality leaders is to have the courage to let circular gastronomy define their food and beverage offers.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• IPBES Calls for Holistic Solutions, Transformative Change in Tackling Biodiversity Loss
• Narrow Valuation of Nature is Widening Biodiversity Loss
• At COP16, Biodiversity Credits Raising Hopes and Protests

Indigenous women in Cali hold a protest commodificationof their traditional natural products. Majority of the indigenous organizations participants in the COP have been vocal about their opposition to biodiversitycredits, which they think is a false solution to halt biodiversity loss. Credit:Stella Paul/IPS COP16 Logo, installed at the conference venue atCali, Colombia. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

By Stella Paul
CALI, Columbia, Oct 26 2024 (IPS)

At the end of the first week at the 16th Conference of Parties on Biodiversity (COP16), finance emerges as the biggest issue but also shrouded in controversies.

On Saturday, as the COP moved closer to its most crucial phase of negotiations, resource mobilization—listed under Target 19 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF)—took centerstage, with most parties demanding faster action, greater transparency and the adoption of true solutions to halt biodiversity loss. 

Biodiversity finance: Expectation vs Reality

On Thursday, October 24, the government of China formally announced that the Kunming Biodiversity Fund—first announced by Chinese president Xi Jinping in 2021—was now fully in operation. The fund promises to contribute USD 220 million over the next 10 years, which would be spent especially to help developing countries in implementation of the KMGBF and achieve its targets, said Huang Runqiu, Minister of Environment and Ecology, China, at a press conference. It wasn’t clear, however, how much of the promised amount had been deposited.

This has been the only news of resource mobilization for global biodiversity conservation received at COP16, as no other donors came forth with any further announcements of new financial pledges or contributions to the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF), which was expected to receive USD 400 billion in contribution by now but has only received a paltry USD 250 million.  In addition, there were no announcements of the countries reducing their current spending on harmful subsidies that amount to USD 500 billion and cause biodiversity degradation and biodiversity loss.

In absence of new contributions and lack of any concrete progress on reduction of harmful subsidies, the new mechanisms like biodiversity credits to mobilize resources for implementation of the Global Biodiversity Fund is fast gaining traction.

From October 21–24, the COP16 witnessed a flurry of activities centered primarily around biodiversity credits and the building of new pathways to mobilize finance through this means. Experts from both the UN and the private sector were heard at various forums discussing the needs of developing tools and methodologies that would help mobilize new finance through biodiversity credits while also ensuring transparency.

COP16 logo, installed at the conference venue in Cali, Colombia. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

Inclusiveness and the Questions

According to a 2023 report by the World Economic Forum, the demand for biodiversity credits could rise to USD 180 billion annually by 2050. The report said that if major companies stepped into the market, the annual demand for biodiversity credits could go to as high as USD 7 billion per year by 2030.

Experts from the UN and a variety of technical people with various backgrounds said that since biodiversity credits are still in their infancy, there will undoubtedly be a lot of scrutiny and criticism. The Biodiversity Credit Alliance is a group that provides guidance for the establishment of a biodiversity credit market. The urgent need, they said, was to develop infrastructure and policies that would help answer those questions and tackle the scrutiny. The first and foremost of them was to help build digital tools and infrastructure that could be used to share and store biodiversity data in a credible and transparent manner.

Nathalie Whitaker, co-founder of Toha Network in New Zealand, a group of nature-based business investors, said that her organization is building digital tools, especially for helping local communities to participate in biodiversity credit programs and access the benefits.

“Once the communities have these tools, they can instantly see what data is being used to pay for the biodiversity credits or even decide the value of the natural sources in their territory. So, they can see what resources are being discussed, what is being valued, how it’s being done and how the whole discussion is moving forward,” Whitaker said.

Fabian Shimdt-Pramov, another speaker at the event, said that the quality of the tools would decide the course and results of a biodiversity credits project.

Shimdt-Pramov, chief business development officer at Biometric Earth, a German company that uses artificial intelligence to build biodiversity analytics tools from different sources such as remote sensing, wildlife cameras, acoustic monitoring, etc.

“If methodology is not correct, if the data is not correct, the system doesn’t work,” he said, emphasizing on the requirement of high-level technological expertise that is needed to get a biodiversity credit project off the ground.

However, when questioned on the cost of buying such high-end technologies and tools, especially by Indigenous communities living in remote areas without any internet connectivity, both speakers appeared to be at a loss for words.

“I have seen in the Amazon a community selling five mahogany trees on the internet, so I am guessing it’s not a big challenge,” Shmidt-Pramov said in a dismissive voice. Whitaker acknowledged that lack of access to digital technology in Indigenous Peoples communities was an issue but had no solutions to propose.

Terence Hay-Edie of Nature ID, UNDP, however, stressed the need to empower the communities with the knowledge and skills that would help them access the tools and be part of a biodiversity credit.

As an example, he cites restoration of river-based biodiversity as a biodiversity credit project where a river is considered to have the same rights as a human being. According to him, if values of credits are counted and traded for restoration of biodiversity around a river, it will require recognition of all these rights that a river has, which is only possible when the community living along the river has full knowledge of what is at stake, what is restored, what value of the restored biodiversity is to be determined and how the pricing of that value will be decided.

“A river can be a legal entity and have a legal ID. Now, can we build some tools and put them in the hands of the community that is doing the restoration to know the details of it? That’s what we are looking at,” Hay-Edie said.

A False Solution?

However, Indigenous peoples organizations at the COP16 were overwhelmingly opposing biodiversity credits, which they called “commodifying nature.”

What are biodiversity credits? It’s basically regenerating biodiversity where it is destroyed and earning money from that. But it doesn’t work that way, according to Souparna Lahiri, senior climate change campaigner at Global Forest Coalition.

“If we talk of a forest, the ecosystem is not just about trees but about every life that thrives in and around it—the rivers, the animals, plants, bees, insects, flowers and all the organisms. Once destroyed, it’s lost forever. And when you regenerate it elsewhere, you can never guarantee that it will be an exact replica of what has been lost.  This is why the very concept of biodiversity credit is a destructive idea,” says Lahiri.

Valentina Figuera, also of the Global Forest Coalition, said that while trading carbon credits could work as a tool in carbon change mitigation, it would not be the same in biodiversity.

“In climate change, you can measure the total carbon generated by a forest, for example. But in biodiversity, how do you measure it? What is the mechanism? How do you even value life that thrives there? So, this concept is a straight import from climate change and forcefully imposed in biodiversity, which is nothing but a false solution, so that businesses that cause biodiversity loss can conduct their business as usual.

The Dilemma of Participation

COP16, dubbed the “People’s Cop” by Colombia, the host country, has drawn several hundred representatives of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLC), especially from across Latin America, including Colombia, Brazil, Panama, Venezuela and Peru. While the Latin American IPLC organizations appeared united in their opposition to biodiversity credits, African organizations seemed to be willing to consider it.

Mmboneni Esther Mathobo of the South African NGO International Institute of Environment said that her organization was in support of biodiversity credits, which could, she said, not only help the community earn money but also motivate them further to preserve biodiversity.

“We are influencing and making sure that our rights are safeguarded and protected in this newly emerging market of bringing biodiversity credits,” said Mathobo.

Currently, Namibia is implementing its first biodiversity carbon credits project in partnership with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Known as the Wildlife Credits Scheme, the project is known as a Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) that rewards communities for protecting wildlife and biodiversity.  Mathobo said that the project in Namibia made her realize that there was a great opportunity for local communities to conserve and restore biodiversity and earn from it.

“We faced many challenges to earn carbon credits because that system was established and created behind our heads. And now we wake up, but we find ourselves sitting with a lot of problems in that market where our communities are not even benefiting. But we believe that with the engagement of the biodiversity alliance, UNDP, we are going to be the ones making sure that whatever happens in the biodiversity credit market, it benefits all our regions and all our communities, as well as safeguarding and protecting our rights,” she said.

“To each their own, if Latin American indigenous communities feel they don’t want to trade natural resources, that’s their right. But in Africa, we have the potential to earn biodiversity credits and we need the money, so we are supporting it,” Mahobo commented when reminded of the opposition of Latin American countries to biodiversity credits.

Source: World Economic Forum Report on Biodiversity Credit

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• Capacity Building Is Key to Africa’s Digital Sequencing Success Story
• Biodiversity: Roll Up the Sleeves and Do Something, says Astrid Schomaker, New UNCBD Head
• Explainer: COP16—What’s It About and What Does It Need to Achieve?

Anyone interested in unsolved murders and disappearances will find much to study in Sri Lanka. Fifteen to twenty years ago, the country made global headlines, not only for the government’s military offensive against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) guerrillas but also for the numerous murders of journalists. The newly elected president, Anura Kumara […]

Better drawing rights from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) could assist with the just transition.

By Kevin P. Gallagher and Abebe Shimeles
BOSTON, USA & CAPE TOWN, South Africa, Oct 25 2024 (IPS)

At the 2021 UN Climate Summit, Barbados prime minister Mia Mottley called for more and better use of special drawing rights (SDRs), the International Monetary Fund’s reserve asset.

The special drawing right is an international reserve asset created by the IMF. It is not a currency—its value is based on a basket of five currencies, the biggest chunk of which is the US dollar, followed by the euro. It is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members. Special drawing rights can provide a country with liquidity.

Countries can use their special drawing rights to pay back IMF loans, or they can exchange them for foreign currencies.

As Mottley is the newest president of the Climate Vulnerable Forum and Vulnerable Group of 20 (V20) finance ministers, which represents 68 climate-vulnerable countries that are among those with the most dire liquidity needs, including 32 African countries, her call would be directly beneficial to African countries.

In August 2021, as the shock from the COVID-19 pandemic battered their economies, African countries received a lifeline of US$33 billion from special drawing rights. This amounts to more than all the climate finance Africa receives each year and more than half of all annual official development assistance to Africa.

This US$33 billion did not add to African countries’ debt burden, it did not come with any conditions, and it did not cost donors a single cent to provide.

IMF members can vote to create new issuances of special drawing rights. They are then distributed to countries in proportion to their quotas in the IMF. Quotas are denominated in special drawing rights, the IMF’s unit of account.

Quotas are the building blocks of the IMF’s financial and governance structure. An individual member country’s quota broadly reflects its relative position in the world economy. Thus, by design, the poorest and most vulnerable countries receive the least when it comes to quotas and voting shares.

Special drawing rights cannot solve all of Africa’s economic challenges. And their highly technical nature means they are not always well understood. But at a time when African countries are facing chronic liquidity challenges—most countries in the region are spending more on debt service payments than they are on health, education, or climate change—our new research shows that special drawing rights can play an important role in establishing financial stability and enabling investments for development.

Financial stability includes macroeconomic stability (such as low inflation, healthy balance of payments, sufficient foreign reserves), a strong financial system and resilience to shocks.

African leaders are approaching a critical year-long opportunity: in November, the first Group of 20 (G20) summit will convene (with the African Union in attendance as a member for the first time). Then in December, South Africa assumes the G20 presidency.

As African leaders advocate for reforms to the international financial architecture, maximising the potential of special drawing rights should be a central component of their agenda.

The problem

African countries’ finances are facing tough times. External debt in sub-Saharan Africa has tripled since 2008. The average government is now spending 12% of its revenue on external debt service. The COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s war in Ukraine, and rises in interest rates and the prices of commodities, like food and fertiliser, have all contributed to this trend.

Debt restructuring mechanisms have also proved inadequate. Countries like Zambia and Ghana got stuck in lengthy restructurings. Weak institutional capacity and poor governance also impede efficient use of public resources.

At the same time, African economies need to increase investment to advance development, support a young and growing population, develop climate resilience and take advantage of the opportunity presented by the energy transition.

To meet the resources for a just energy transition and the attainment of the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, investment in climate and development will have to increase from around 24% of GDP (the average for Africa in 2022) to 37%.

Special drawing rights have proved to be an important tool in addressing these challenges. Research by the IMF and others shows that African countries significantly benefited from the special drawing rights they received in 2021 to stabilise their economies. And this happened without worsening debt burdens or costing advanced economies any money, particularly as they cut development aid.

However, advanced economies exercise significant control over the availability of special drawing rights. The IMF’s quota system determines both voting power and their distribution. Advanced economies control most of the IMF’s quotas.

The advanced economies made the right decision in 2021 and in 2009 to issue new special drawing rights and the time has come again.

The solution

African and other global south leaders need to make a strong case for another issuance of special drawing rights at the IMF and World Bank meetings in Washington.

In addition to a new issuance of special drawing rights, advanced economies still need to be pressured to re-channel the hundreds of billions of special drawing rights sitting idle on their balance sheets into productive purposes.

The 2021 allocation of special drawing rights amounted to US$650 billion in total. But only US$33 billion went to African countries due to the IMF’s unequal quota distribution. Meanwhile, advanced economies with powerful currencies and no need for special drawing rights received the lion’s share.

The African Development Bank has spearheaded one such proposal alongside the Inter-American Development Bank. Under this plan, countries with unused special drawing rights could re-channel them to the African Development Bank as hybrid capital, allowing the bank to lend around $4 for each $1 of special drawing rights it receives.

The IMF approved the use of special drawing rights as hybrid capital for multilateral development banks in May. But it set an excessively low limit of 15 billion special drawing rights across all multilateral development banks.

Even so, advanced economies have been slow to re-channel special drawing rights. The close to $100 billion that have been re-channeled—mostly to IMF trust funds—is meaningful.

But it still falls short of what should have been re-channelled.

In the long term, IMF governance reforms are needed to avoid a repeat of the inefficient distribution of special drawing rights.

As African countries rightly push to change shortcomings of the international financial architecture, new special drawing rights issuances should be at the centre of such a strategy. The IMF’s 2021 special drawing rights issuance showed the tool’s scale and importance. And special drawing rights re-channelling has had positive effects in easing debt burdens and freeing up financing to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.

With 2030 approaching and the window shrinking for climate action, global leaders should be using all the tools at their disposal, including special drawing rights, to build a more resilient future.

Kevin P. Gallagher, Professor of Global Development Policy and Director, Global Development Policy Center, Boston University and Abebe Shimeles, Honorary Professor, University of Cape Town

Note: This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Kevin P. Gallagher is from Boston University and Abebe Shimeles from the University of Cape Town

 

 

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

 

Ma Moe Wathan (21) feeds her daughter Pan Ei (1.8 year) in their hostel room in A Lal village, Hlaing Thar Yar township, Yangon, Myanmar. Credit: UNICEF/Nyan Zay Htet

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 25 2024 (IPS)

With the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and social media, the dissemination of public information moves at a faster speed than ever before. Social media platforms have become an integral tool for users of younger generations to access the news. Although this shift has led to public news being more accessible to younger users, it has also led to an overall decline in media literacy.

According to a study by the Pew Research Center, approximately 54 percent of U.S. adults get their news from social media platforms such as X (formerly known as Twitter), Tiktok, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube.

In an increasingly digital age, media literacy has seen a significant decline. Experts have attributed this to the rise of social media, which has led to shorter attention spans among younger generations. Gloria Mark, PhD, professor of informatics at the University of California, states that the average attention spans recorded in 2004 were about two and a half minutes. In the last five years, this has dwindled to about 47 seconds.

Social media platforms offer users a rapidly changing and endless flow of content, which has a negative impact on attention spans. Constant switches from one source of stimuli to another have adverse effects on the default network of the brain and its functions, making it difficult for users to maintain attention.

A study published by the University of British Columbia titled Mind-wandering as spontaneous thought: a dynamic framework, states that “attention and the focus of thoughts frequently shift back and forth between the internal and external environment; there is often a simultaneous deactivation of the DN (default network of the brain) in many different task paradigms”.

While news organizations have social media accounts in an effort to spread the truth and get more engagement, they find themselves being overshadowed by content creators who can more effectively captivate the short attention spans of internet users. These users often incorporate sensationalized language and spread false narratives.

The same study from the Pew Research Center reports that 64 percent of adults surveyed reported feeling confused on what is real or not due to the misinformation or ‘clickbait’ that runs rampant on social platforms. 23 percent reported that they shared false information either knowingly or unknowingly.

Misinformation, while not always intentionally harmful, can have negative effects on the relationship between experts and the public. “Polarization on topics such as climate change and vaccines has damaged public trust in science, which makes it harder for scientists to serve society,” said Dr Ataharul Chowdhury, an agricultural scientist at the University of Guelph.

The rise of generative AI in media spaces has added a layer of complication, as social analysts describe it as an amplifier for misinformation. The field of AI is largely unregulated and offers users the tools to create hyper realistic images and photos that could easily deceive viewers.

As Gita Johar, the Meyer Feldberg Professor of Business at Columbia Business School, Columbia University explained, the presence of AI and the “amount of misinformation” created in social media sites is going to multiply.

“People have started realizing that AI is behind a lot of this misinformation. Over time, they’re not going to know what to trust anymore, plus there’s such a deficit of trust in society as it is. As AI does more and more, even if you have disclaimers saying such and such was produced by AI, what you’re going to see is consumers becoming more skeptical of information,” she said.

The effects of the decline in media literacy has significant ramifications on the ways that people conduct their daily practices, inlcuding when it comes to food. Facts about the relationship between the meat industry and food production have been largely divisive among the American public.

According to the United Nations (UN), the meat production industry is a significant contributor to the climate crisis, emitting more greenhouse gasses than the world’s biggest oil companies. Additionally, meat production is responsible for dwindling water resources and exacerbates deforestation.

A 2023 survey conducted by the Washington Post-University of Maryland reports that 74 percent of Americans think that meat production and consumption has little to no detrimental impact on the environment.

A report published by Changing Markets Foundation (CMF) used opinion mining and language processing algorithms to detect over 948,000 tweets from 1 June 2022 to 31 July 2023 that contained misinformation about meat production and its impacts, as well as false statements about alternative practices such as adopting plant-rich diets and consuming poultry instead of red meat.

CMF summarized the main sentiments found in misleading posts that focused on meat production and consumption. 78 percent of users disparaged alternatives of meat and dairy products and discredited their potential benefits for the environment and public health. 22 percent of users tweeted that meat consumption is wholly beneficial for the human body. Many users also attempted to refute scientific data on the environmental impact of global animal agriculture.

Misinformation surrounding agriculture and plant consumption has become widespread in the past two decades. Genetically modified crops and organic farming have been points of significant contention for both farmers and consumers in recent years.

While there are supporters for both sides of the argument, it is farmers and marketers who appeal to the consumer’s fears of health concerns and environmental damage to convince people to buy their products. “Agri-food misinformation creates anxiety, uncertainty and confusion among farmers and consumers,” says Chowdhury.

Transparent advertising is essential for the agriculture industry, especially in today’s climate where people do not know if they can trust the food that they are eating. “Businesses can lead the way here. Advertisers need to work together to make this happen. It’s good for them, and it’s good for society. It’s really a win-win. Then they can actually force platforms to abide by some kind of rules and procedures and make sure that they’re actually monitoring and trying to prevent the spread of misinformation,” says Johar.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

Credit: World Meteorological Organization/Muhammad Amdad Hossain

By Selahattin Selsah Pasali and Selim Raihan
BANGKOK, Thailand, Oct 25 2024 (IPS)

In the coming decades, the Asia-Pacific region faces a series of challenges that threaten to exacerbate poverty. Among these, climate change, demographic shifts, particularly population ageing and the rise of digital technologies stand out as three interconnected global megatrends.

A recent technical paper supporting the Social Outlook for Asia and the Pacific 2024 explores various scenarios on how climate change, demographic shifts and digitalization could impact poverty. It reveals that 266 million people could be at risk of falling into poverty by 2040.

This underscores the urgent need to strengthen and finance social protection systems across the region, as addressing these issues proactively is far more cost-effective than reacting to them later.

Understanding the megatrends

Climate change is increasingly evident, with rising temperatures, extreme weather and disrupted ecosystems impacting both the environment and economies. This poses a direct threat to livelihoods, especially for those dependent on agriculture and natural resources.

Population ageing is another significant trend. While longer life expectancy is positive, it strains social services, healthcare and pension systems. Without integrated policies to address these pressures, public resources, already strained by debt, could face further strain, risking economic instability.

Digital technologies advance rapidly, offering growth and efficiency benefits but also posing challenges. Job displacement and increased inequality are potential risks if these technologies are not managed inclusively. Balancing their benefits and risks is crucial for equitable progress.

The Impact on Poverty

Using the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model to project 2040 scenarios, varying degrees of climate change, demographic shifts, and digitalization show a stark contrast between optimistic and pessimistic outcomes, highlighting the crucial need to enhance social protection expenditures. Two scenarios are considered in the model with results presented in Figure 1:

• Optimistic scenario: This scenario assumes a 1.5-degree Celsius increase in global temperatures, that populations age in a healthy manner, and significant improvements are made by countries in ICT productive capacity by 2040. Under this scenario, the projected increase in poverty by 2040 is 199.8 million people or 6.5 per cent of the total population in the Asia-Pacific region.
• Pessimistic scenario: In contrast, the pessimistic scenario assumes a 2.0-degree Celsius increase in global temperatures, no progress in healthy ageing and insufficient advancements in ICT productivity. Here, the poverty headcount is projected to increase by 266.1 million people or 8.7 per cent of the total population.

Source: ESCAP elaborations based on GTAP model and household income and expenditure surveys from 27 countries available in ESCAP SPOT Simulator. Note: As per table 5.1, three global megatrends including climate change, demographic shifts, including ageing, and digitalization are introduced in the GTAP model as shocks.
 
The pessimistic scenario presumes a 2-degree Celsius rise in temperature, populations ageing in an unhealthy manner and countries slowly improving their ICT Productive Capacity. The optimistic scenario presumes a 1.5-degree Celsius rise in temperature, populations ageing in a healthy manner with less health expenditures needed and countries making significant improvements in their ICT Productive Capacity.

The difference between these scenarios illustrates the profound impact of each megatrend. Climate change is a major driver of increased poverty. For instance, under a pessimistic scenario, Kiribati, Nepal and Tonga could see their poverty rates rise by over 15 percentage points relative to the baseline.

Even with just a 1.5°C warming, the regional average poverty rate could increase by 2.8 percentage points, highlighting climate change’s significant impact on poverty. Population ageing is also a critical factor.

Without healthy ageing, an additional 10 million people might fall into poverty due to rising healthcare costs, with countries like Armenia, Kiribati, Maldives and Mongolia being especially vulnerable. Digitalization, though less impactful overall, has notable effects in specific countries like Türkiye, Viet Nam and Vanuatu, influencing differences between optimistic and pessimistic scenarios.

The urgent need for action

If social protection expenditures are not increased, the cost of mitigating the rise in poverty could be substantial. To counteract the projected poverty increases, approximately 6.2 per cent of GDP would need to be mobilized under the optimistic scenario.

The total cost would increase to 8.7 per cent of GDP in 2040 under the pessimistic scenario. These are lower-bound estimates as they assume governments could directly target affected households and seamlessly provide cash transfers.

The projected rise in poverty and associated costs underscore the urgent need for government action which necessitates stronger political will to match the associated investment needs. Empirical analysis supports several key policy recommendations.

Governments should implement policies for a just transition, which includes effective climate action to mitigate the economic and social impacts of both sudden and gradual disasters and to support the shift towards a net-zero emissions economy.

Additionally, strategies for healthy ageing and investing in healthcare infrastructure, such as universal social health protection, can ease the financial strain of an ageing population, ensuring social stability and economic prosperity.

At the same time, policymakers should also focus on fostering inclusive digital economies, providing opportunities for all, including those at risk of being left behind. Investments in digital literacy and skills training are crucial to counteract digital disruption’s negative effects.

Overall, expanding social protection coverage and increasing benefit levels are essential. This includes implementing social protection floors and gradually enhancing multi-pillared systems to cover more individuals and increase benefits, ensuring no one is excluded from protection against life cycle contingencies and shocks.

Originally published as an opinion piece by Nikkei Asia.

Selahattin Selsah Pasali is Social Affairs Officer, Social Development Division, ESCAP; Selim Raihan is Professor, Department of Economics, University of Dhaka and Executive Director of South Asian Network on Economic Modeling (SANEM)

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

By Melek Zahine
PARIS, Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Nobody should be fooled by President Biden’s recent warning to Israel that the U.S. may level consequences if it doesn’t do more to surge humanitarian aid into Gaza within the next 30 days. Biden’s warning, along with Anthony Blinken’s 11th trip to Israel and the region to try and revive ceasefire talks, is nothing more than cynical double talk designed to appease domestic audiences and buy time for Israel to deepen its genocidal aims against the Palestinian people and brutally punish those who support their liberation.

Melek Zahine

Israel knows that Washington’s warnings aren’t serious. Despite independently documented evidence of Israel’s genocidal actions and war crimes in Gaza, the West Bank and now Lebonon, billions of dollars in offensive arms transfer, intelligence and military support from the United States continue unabated. Israel also knows that the U.S. government has consistently operated in their favor in breach of domestic U.S. laws not only for the past year but for decades. U.S. National Security Memorandum 20 and the Leahy Laws both stipulate that the United States cannot provide any form of assistance, especially military aid, to a country that is restricting the delivery of U.S.-funded humanitarian assistance.

It’s no surprise that Israel’s immediate response to Biden’s warning and Blinken’s shuttle diplomacy this week has been to escalate the humanitarian blockade and military offensive on Gaza’s already besieged civilian population, especially in famine-stricken Northern Gaza, where tens of thousands of unarmed and starved men, women and children are now being trapped, corralled, and slaughtered like animals by Israeli political elites who have an endless supply of lethal U.S.- weapons and Biden’s iron-clad loyalty on their side.

As Israel prevents humanitarian aid from reaching beleaguered and displaced Palestinian civilians throughout the Gaza Strip, hospitals are now faced with dwindling medical supplies amidst the growing numbers of injured and ill. Healthcare providers and first responders, who themselves are struggling to survive, now have little more than their compassion to offer the sick and the dying. Unless President Biden uses his singularly unique leverage to take decisive, immediate action, tens of thousands more Palestinians will be killed in the next thirty days, 75% of which will be women and children.

As a U.S. citizen who has worked in the field of humanitarian assistance for more than 30 years, I have both witnessed and paid keen attention to the devastating human toll on civilian lives that my government has consistently chosen to unleash since 9/11 in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Libya, Yemen and now Gaza and Lebanon. Rather than work to de-escalate during times of crisis through earnest, mature diplomacy, the United States, irrespective of which political party is in power, has all too often chosen to pursue extreme military force as the cornerstone of its foreign policy, benefitting narrow special interest groups in Washington at the expense of innocent populations abroad, U.S. soldiers and average U.S. taxpayers at home.

During my career, I’ve also had the privilege of witnessing those rare moments when the United States has chosen to mitigate harm by using its powerful foreign policy tools to de-escalate conflicts and secure humanitarian spaces. In 1991, in Northern Iraq, the U.S. led a multi-nation coalition of NATO and U.N. partners to deliver emergency aid and protection to Iraqi Kurdish refugees fleeing gas attacks by Saddam Hussein. Also, in the 90s, the United States helped deliver C5 Galaxy loads of lifesaving emergency supplies to besieged civilians in Sarajevo and worked with NATO and U.N. partners to enforce a no-fly zone over the former Yugoslavia. This decision helped lessen the level of violence between the various warring sides and protect civilians and U.N. personnel. During earthquakes, such as the ones that hit Turkiye in 1999 and 2023, the United States sent search and rescue teams, often being the first to reach people trapped under tons of concrete and metal with specialized equipment and dogs. Biden’s decision to leave Palestinian civilians and civil defense workers to desperately try and rescue people under destroyed homes and shelters caused by U.S. bombs, with nothing but their bare hands says everything one needs to know about the emptiness of his latest warnings, red lines, and shuttle diplomacy. Biden’s foreign policy is nothing but a cruel and unusual punishment that the U.S. Constitution’s 8th Amendment warns Americans against inflicting on others.

If President Biden were actually serious about addressing the humanitarian catastrophe facing Palestinians and now the Lebanese, he wouldn’t need to wait 30 days. All he would need to do is immediately emulate past American administrations and execute his executive powers, enforce an immediate no-fly zone over Gaza and Lebanon, and authorize an immediate arms embargo on Israel. This combined approach would immediately improve conditions for a lasting cease-fire, unimpeded humanitarian access and prevent a further escalation of regional tensions. Rather than use his remaining days in office to buy time for Israel to cause more human suffering, President Biden must buy time for those who won’t live to see another day without a more humane U.S. foreign policy intervention. Imagine being the most powerful leader in the world and choosing anything less.

The author is a humanitarian affairs and disaster response specialist.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Anne Olhoff, Chief Climate Advisor at UNEP

By Umar Manzoor Shah
COPENHAGEN & SRINAGAR , Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Anne Olhoff, Chief Climate Advisor at UNEP, underlined the urgent need for accelerated climate action ahead of COP29 in an exclusive interview with IPS. “The next six years are crucial—without accelerated action, we will miss the chance to limit warming to 1.5°C,” she warned.

Olhoff stressed that while ambition is essential, “What we need most is immediate action.”

Olhoff also termed the role of the Emissions Gap Report as a bridge between science and policy, advocating for financial and technical support to ensure a just transition for developing countries.

As Chief Climate Advisor and as part of the UNEP Copenhagen Climate Centre management, Olhoff provides climate science-policy advice and supports climate strategy development and implementation in the UNEP Copenhagen Climate Centre and UNEP.

Olhoff has worked with UNEP throughout her career and has more than 25 years’ experience in international science-policy advice, technical assistance and research on climate change mitigation and adaptation in the context of sustainable development.

Since 2012, Olhoff has led the annual UNEP flagship report on climate change mitigation—the Emissions Gap Report—guiding and coordinating the work of more than 70 scientists from at least 35 institutions across more than 25 countries in addition to being the chief scientific editor of the report.

On the eve of the publication of the 2024 emissions report entitled ‘No more hot air … please’ Olhoff gave an exclusive interview to IPS.

Here are excerpts from the interview.

Inter Press Service (IPS): What do you expect from COP29? How do you think it will help on the ground?

Anne Olhoff: That’s a tricky question. The Emissions Gap Report doesn’t dive deeply into COP29 specifically, but we aim to guide discussions during COP29 and the preparation for the next Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which countries will submit before COP30. The report highlights where we stand now and what needs to happen in the short term and with the next NDCs. Hopefully, this will provide useful insights for the discussions in Baku as well.

IPS: How do you see the role of science-policy advice in climate action, especially with the rise of net-zero targets?

Olhoff: That’s an excellent question. Through the Emissions Gap Report, we aim to contribute to this effort. Our goal is to provide science-based yet timely and relevant information for international discussions. Unlike IPCC reports, which are published every six years, the Emissions Gap Report offers an annual, tailored update.

What’s reassuring is that the report has been well received. Surveys show that 75-83 percent of national delegations use it during climate negotiations or in their submissions to the UNFCCC. This suggests we are filling a gap by offering valuable information between IPCC cycles.

IPS: After leading the Emissions Gap Report for several years, what are your key takeaways, and how have its findings influenced global strategies?

Olhoff: It’s hard to pinpoint specific changes directly resulting from the report, but it has certainly shed light on critical issues—both on where we’re headed and where we need to be. Importantly, this year’s report highlights solutions across all sectors, focusing on ways to accelerate emission reductions across the economy.

IPS: From your experience with both adaptation and mitigation, which areas need immediate attention, and where do you see the biggest gaps?

Olhoff: There’s a lot of potential for synergies between adaptation, mitigation, and development goals. Agriculture and forestry offer some of the greatest opportunities, but energy systems are equally critical. Access to electricity for cooling, for instance, is essential to building climate resilience.

It’s important to note that mitigation must come first. If emissions aren’t reduced, no amount of adaptation will prevent severe impacts and losses. Reducing emissions minimizes the future burden on adaptation efforts.

IPS: How has UNEP’s approach to climate change evolved over the years, and what recent developments excite you the most?

Olhoff: This is the 15th edition of the report, which we’ve been producing since 2010. Back then, temperature projections based on existing policies were about half a degree higher than they are now. This shows that we’ve made some progress, although it’s not enough.

One exciting development is the advancement of renewable energy, especially in terms of cost reductions and deployment. However, we need to ensure these breakthroughs benefit all countries, not just a select few. There’s a strong need to improve investment flows to developing economies, especially outside China.

IPS: Coordinating with scientists from over 25 countries must be challenging. How do you maintain alignment and quality control?

Olhoff: We follow a process similar to the IPCC. We have author teams, a steering committee involving IPCC representatives and UNFCCC experts, and rigorous external reviews.

Additionally, we send draft reports to countries mentioned in the report to allow for feedback and ensure we aren’t missing important perspectives. It’s a tightly managed process to maintain high scientific standards.

IPS: What trends or innovations do you think will play a pivotal role in climate transparency and reporting in the coming decade?

Olhoff: One major development will be the biennial transparency reports, which countries will submit by the end of this year. These reports will help track progress more accurately and offer opportunities to learn from each other’s experiences.

While we have many of the technologies needed to achieve steep reductions, investing in research and development for new mitigation options will be essential moving forward. Improved transparency will also help ensure accountability.

IPS: With your experience in advisory roles, how important is interdisciplinary collaboration in shaping climate policies, particularly at the intersection of health, disaster management, and climate resilience?

Olhoff: It’s absolutely critical. Often, experts focus on isolated components—like the energy system—without considering how everything connects. Interdisciplinary approaches help us understand the complex relationships and address flaws in narrower frameworks. This has been a key focus in my work.

IPS: How do you manage the tension between political agendas and scientific evidence when advising on climate strategies?

Olhoff: We stick to scientific principles. Of course, we consider political sensitivities, but we aim to provide unbiased and credible analysis. Engaging with authors from around the world and including extensive peer reviews helps ensure we capture different perspectives.

When we encounter differences of opinion, we stay grounded in science to maintain credibility. The goal is to provide sound, defensible analysis.

IPS: Transitioning away from fossil fuels is challenging, especially for countries with fossil reserves. How can a just transition happen for developing countries without jeopardizing their economies?

Olhoff: That’s a tough question, but an important one. Renewable energy is already cost-competitive in many parts of the world. However, countries need financial and technical support to transition away from fossil fuels.

For countries with large untapped fossil fuel reserves, compensation mechanisms may be necessary to encourage them not to exploit these resources. The next round of NDCs offers an opportunity for these countries to present investment-ready plans that outline what support they need to pursue ambitious climate goals.

IPS: Do you see COP29 as a now-or-never opportunity for climate action?

Olhoff: I wouldn’t say COP29 alone is the deciding moment, but the next six years are crucial. If we continue on the current path, we will miss the chance to limit global warming to 1.5°C by 2030.

The real focus should be on accelerating country-level actions. While increased ambition in the next NDCs is essential, it won’t mean much without immediate action. As the Emissions Gap Report emphasizes, every delay increases the risks of costly and irreversible impacts.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• UNEP’s 2024 Emissions Gap Report Warns: ‘No More Hot Air, Please’

Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station from an aeroplane. Credit: Matt Buck/Climate Visuals

By Umar Manzoor Shah
COPENHAGEN, Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

The United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) Emissions Gap Report 2024 delivered a stark reminder that the world is still far from meeting its climate commitments.

The report, released today, October 24, highlights the widening gap between climate rhetoric and reality as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reach 57.1 gigatons of CO2 equivalent (GtCO₂) in 2023—a record high that undermines the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.

Addressing the press conference while releasing the report, titled “No More Hot Air …please,” United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres issued a warning to the world. With current greenhouse gas emissions at record highs, Guterres said that humanity is “teetering on a planetary tightrope,” with catastrophic consequences looming unless countries act decisively to close the emissions gap.

 

The cover of UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report 2024 ‘No more hot air… please.’ Credit: UNEP

“Either leaders bridge the emissions gap, or we plunge headlong into climate disaster—with the poorest and most vulnerable suffering the most,” Guterres said during a video address from the report’s launch event in Nairobi.

According to the Emissions Gap Report 2024, global greenhouse gas emissions rose 1.3 percent in 2023 to their highest levels in history. At the current pace, the world is on track for a 3.1°C temperature rise by the end of the century—well above the limits set by the Paris Agreement.

Guterres emphasized that limiting global warming to 1.5°C remains technically feasible, but only if emissions fall by 9 percent annually until 2030. Without swift intervention, the UN chief warned of more frequent and extreme weather events.

“Record emissions mean record sea temperatures, supercharging monster hurricanes; record heat is turning forests into tinderboxes and cities into saunas; record rains are resulting in biblical floods,” he said.

Guterres termed the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, as a pivotal moment for global climate policy. The Secretary-General outlined two major areas where urgent progress is essential. One, he said, is National Climate Action Plans (NDCs).

“COP29 starts the clock for countries to deliver new national climate action plans—NDCs—by next year,” Guterres said.
Governments are expected to align these plans with the 1.5°C target by driving down emissions across all sectors and phasing out fossil fuels swiftly and equitably.

Guterres urged countries to commit to reversing deforestation and accelerating the deployment of renewable energy. Another area, according to the Secretary General, that merits immediate concern is climate finance.

Guterres said that the success of the clean energy transition depends heavily on financial support for developing countries, which are already struggling with climate-induced disasters.

“COP29 must agree to a new finance goal that unlocks the trillions of dollars they need and provides confidence it will be delivered,” he said.

The Secretary-General urged significant increases in concessional public financing, along with cutting-edge techniques like levies on fossil fuel extraction. He also urged reforms in multilateral development banks to enhance their role in climate financing.

The Secretary-General emphasized that climate action is not just a matter of environmental responsibility but also of economic foresight. He stressed that the cost of inaction far exceeds the cost of action.

As the largest emitters, G20 nations, responsible for 80 percent of global emissions, must take the lead in closing the emissions gap. Guterres challenged the wealthiest countries to act first. “I urge first-movers to come forward. We need leadership now more than ever,” he said.

Guterres echoed the UNEP report’s urgent message that “people and the planet cannot afford more hot air.” The time for empty promises has passed, and concrete steps are required to meet the climate goals. “Today’s Emissions Gap report is clear: we’re playing with fire, but there can be no more playing for time. We’re out of time,” he said.

The latest Emissions Gap Report 2024 by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has sounded a dire alarm on the disconnect between political commitments and the reality of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

In stark language, the report urges governments to close the widening gap between rhetoric and action.

“The transformation to net-zero economies must happen, and the sooner this global transformation begins, the better. Every fraction of a degree avoided counts in terms of lives saved, economies protected, damages avoided, biodiversity conserved, and the ability to rapidly bring down any temperature overshoot,” reads the report.

UNEP warned that the current trajectory leaves the world on a path toward 2.6°C warming this century, far beyond the Paris Agreement targets. The report calls for a “quantum leap” in ambition and urgent action from governments, particularly ahead of the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) due in early 2025.

Here are some highlights:

G20 Nations Hold the Key to Global Emission Reductions

The report has highlighted that G20 countries, responsible for 77 percent of global emissions, must take the lead in closing the emissions gap. While these countries have set net-zero goals, their current policies fall short of aligning with the necessary emission reductions. Without significant improvements, the G20 is projected to miss its NDC targets for 2030 by at least 1 GtCO₂e.

Required Cuts: 42 percent Reduction by 2030 for 1.5°C Target

To achieve the 1.5°C pathway, global emissions must decrease by 42 percent by 2030 compared to 2019 levels—equivalent to an annual reduction of 7.5 percent. The report highlights the severe consequences of delayed action, warning that any further postponement would necessitate doubling the rate of emissions cuts after 2030.

Sectoral Solutions: Renewables and Reforestation Offer Hope

The report has identified solar and wind energy as key contributors to bridging the emissions gap. Together, these technologies could deliver 27 percent of the total emission reduction potential by 2030. Forest-related measures, including reforestation and reducing deforestation, offer another 20% potential. However, achieving these targets requires massive increases in investment—at least six times the current levels—and rapid deployment of policies across sectors.

NDCs and Climate Finance: Critical Areas for Focus

It has also stressed the importance of the upcoming NDC submissions.  According to the report, these commitments, due before February 2025, must reflect higher ambitions, concrete plans, and robust financial backing to make meaningful progress toward net-zero emissions. Developing countries, in particular, require international support and reformed financial systems to meet their climate goals.

Urgency and Cooperation are Paramount

UNEP has underlined the need for a whole-of-government approach and stronger public-private partnerships to accelerate progress. “We are running out of time,” the report warns. “The transformation to net-zero economies is inevitable, and the sooner we act, the more lives, ecosystems, and economies we can save.”

The report has identified the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, as a crucial time for nations to align their policies with 1.5°C pathways. Without immediate, ambitious actions, UNEP cautions that 2°C—once the backup target—could soon become unreachable.

“With the clock ticking down to 2030 and 2035, the message is unequivocal: ambition without action is meaningless. Governments must move from pledges to policies and ensure that commitments are backed by robust implementation plans,” says the report.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

 

Excerpt:

"We’re playing with fire, but there can be no more playing for time. We’re out of time," says UN Secretary General António Guterres

The two White House hopefuls debated on ABC television on September 10, 2024, but their mentions of Latin America were mainly dedicated to the issue of migration. Credit: Michael Le Brecht II / ABC

By Humberto Márquez
CARACAS, Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Migration, trade, the defence of democracy, the confrontation with China and the collapse of multilateralism are issues that shed more doubts than certainties on Latin America’s expectations of the imminent presidential elections in the United States.

Interest and tension have grown after dozens of polls and bookmakers have shown similar chances of victory for Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump, particularly in a few decisive states.“After Washington's retreat from the wars it got into in the Middle East, there is resistance among people to getting involved in the world's problems, which weakens the liberal democratic order”: Vilma Petrash.

Latin America has been treated by many US administrations as its ‘backyard’, but it is now commonplace that Washington’s international priority lies far from the region.

Nevertheless, “we should not underestimate the ways in which Democrats and Republicans are different”, warned Tullo Vigevani, former professor of international relations at Brazil’s Paulista State University.

“For example, their proposals and policies are very different on the environment, in general and in relation to Latin America; on renewable energy and biofuels – particularly in the case of Brazil – and regarding human rights and some authoritarian trends in the region”, Vigevani told IPS from Sao Paulo.

Even if some governments are more sympathetic to Harris or Trump, Vigevani believes that both Washington and the region’s capitals will seek understandings and a relationship as normal as possible, after the 5 November election.

Migrants in the Mexican border city of Tijuana approach the barrier that closes access to the United States. Credit: Alejandro Cartagena / IOM

Migration rules

Among the campaign issues, such as economy and employment, taxes, health, wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, and the opposing personalities of both candidates, migration stands out, with Latin American countries being the main expellers of migrants to the United States.

“It is a sensitive issue for Americans, whether they are Democrats, Republicans or independents. It affects the immigrant population, the millions of refugees, and therefore the countries of Latin America,” Vilma Petrash, a Venezuelan professor of political science and international relations at Miami Dade College, told IPS.

Of the 336 million people living in the United States, 46.2 million were of foreign origin in 2022, according to the non-governmental Pew Research Center; 49% are already U.S. citizens, 24% are legal permanent residents, and the rest, more than 11 million people, are unauthorised immigrants, eight million of whom are from Latin American and Caribbean countries.

In fact, the United States is currently home to 65 million ‘Hispanics’, as Latin Americans are called in the country, according to different reports, and they have become a desired prize for the two candidates.

Trump, who pushed for the construction of a wall on the southern border during his presidency (2017-2021), now offers massive deportations of illegals – one million immediately, according to his vice-presidential candidate, James Vance -, and to contain irregular border immigration even by using the military.

They are “the enemy within”, Trump has said, and has stigmatised migrants: he said that criminals from Venezuela have left their country for the United States, “leaving Caracas as one of the safest cities in the world”, or that Haitians “are eating the pets” in the northern industrial state of Ohio.

Harris, who is the current vice-president and lead programmes with which president Joe Biden also tried to address causes of migration, such as poverty in Central America, has said that the immigration system “needs reform”, without going into details.

Whichever side wins, the controls will predictably increase, and Washington’s announcement that it will not renew in 2025 the temporary stay permits (parole), which allow Venezuelans, Haitians, Cubans and Nicaraguans to enter and remain in the United States for two years, was a warning sign.

The US aircraft carrier USS Nimitz sails through the Arabian Gulf. Credit: US Army

The United States isolates itself

The migration issue shows the United States’ willingness to isolate itself, to withdraw, instead of taking a proactive approach, as a great global power, to solving problems in the region and the world.

According to Petrash, “after Washington’s retreat from the wars it got into in the Middle East, there is resistance among people to getting involved in the world’s problems, which weakens the liberal democratic order. Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ policies are a case in point”.

The expert said from Miami, in the southeastern state of Florida, that there is also a lack of consensus over foreign policy, and in general over governance, to the point that a part of the population still, countering evidence, supports the version that it was Trump and not Biden who won the election four years ago.

While Biden has consistently supported Ukraine in the war against Russia, and Israel’s current military offensive in the Middle East, his political action in favour of democracy in Latin America has been weaker, and Harris would continue this, although with revisions, according to Petrash.

This is despite the certainty that, for example, among the alternatives for containing regional migration, in which the exodus of more than seven million Venezuelans in the last decade stands out, is to promote a solution to the democratic crisis in that country.

As a result of its policies and omissions, its polarised political confrontation and doubts about its electoral system, and the rise of isolationism, the United States “would have to regain the moral stature necessary to help stem democratic backsliding in the region”, says Petrash.

These setbacks are expressed in left-wing governments with authoritarian tendencies, such as those in Nicaragua and Venezuela, but also in sectors that have backed right-wing presidencies such as those of Jair Bolsonaro (2019-2022) in Brazil and the current administrations of Javier Milei in Argentina and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador.

Bolsonaro, Milei and Bukele have openly identified with Trump, whose sector harbours a far-right conservative current. For Petrash, this could favour a rapprochement with Latin American countries where there is a democratic backlash.

Unloading wind turbines from China at the port of Bahía Blanca, Argentina. It shows China’s penetration into the renewable energy sector in the Southern Cone, where it is already a major trading partner. Credit: Port of Bahía Blanca

China moves forward

Petrash points out that the United States’s international retreat was acute in Latin America, “its natural strategic zone”, after the failure of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) initiative in 2005. “It abandoned its vision of free trade in the region and let China move forward with its enclaves,” she said.

China, “an economic, political and ideological rival, has sold itself as successful authoritarianism, and has taken advantage of Washington’s absences in Latin America to advance its quiet, pragmatic diplomacy,” says Petrash.

Trade between China and Latin America reached US$480 billion in 2023 after increasing 35-fold in 2000-2022, while the region’s total trade with the world increased four-fold, according to the  Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). Nevertheless, trade with the Asian giant is still far from the region’s trade with the United States, which in the same year amounted to US$1.14 trillion.

Relations between Latin America and China “have grown and even strengthened in strategic areas such as new materials for energy production, lithium batteries -South America has large reserves of the mineral-, or artificial intelligence”, Vigevani states.

Certification of Brazilian meat for export. Brazil is the largest exporter of beef and poultry, and very active in the World Trade Organization. Credit: Abrafrigo

Brazil and Mexico

Meanwhile, Brazil is concerned about Washington’s disdain – which will be evident if Trump wins – for multilateral institutions, starting with the United Nations and the proposed renewal of its Security Council in order to make it effective.

For Vigevani, this distancing from multilateralism is illustrated by the blockade, which Washington has maintained since 2020, on the appointment of new members to the dispute settlement body of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), initiated by Trump and continued by Biden.

“Even if relations with Brazil and Latin America in general look normal, this United States refusal raises doubts for the future, because it is saying it is not interested in multilateral organisations,” said Vigevani.

In the case of a Trump victory, the Brazilian professor points out, there are also unanswered questions about what his war and peace policies will be.

An example is the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Trump has said that “ending this war quickly is in the best interest of the United States” and that he can achieve “a peace agreement in one day”, without offering further details, said Vigevani.

“It is important because, despite the war, Brazil has a strong relationship with Russia, and a very active participation in the Brics group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa),” Vigevani recalled.

According to Petrash, with Trump’s international policy, “the great power can be the bull in the china shop, and even more, the bull isolating itself in the china shop”.

At the other end of the region is Mexico, a partner of Canada and the United States in the trade agreement known as USMCA, which replaced in 2020 the North American Free Trade Agreement that has existed since 1994.

Along with maintaining the 3150-kilometre southern border of the United States, a destination for hundreds of thousands of migrants who cross the region each year, Mexico faces the campaign promise from both Harris and Trump that they intend to revise the USMCA as soon as they reach the White House.

Trump is expected to introduce tariffs and protectionist barriers, for example on Mexican production involving Chinese parts or technologies, and Harris is expected to increase environmental and labour requirements that favour industries with United States labour.

Whichever side wins, “with the new American policy of bringing companies back to the United States or to its partners in the USMCA, possibly the biggest issue now is the end of globalisation and the return to a developmentalist nationalism”, summarised Vigevani.

UNICEF delivered 25 tons of emergency medical supplies to the Ministry of Public Health at the Beirut international airport in response to the escalation of conflict in Lebanon. Credit: UNICEF/UNI657198/Fouad Choufany

By Oritro Karim
Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Attacks on Lebanon over the past two months, as instigated by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have been increasingly indiscriminate. The Disaster Risk Management Unit at the Lebanese Council of Ministers confirmed that the death toll of Lebanese civilians has risen to over 2,530. Furthermore, Israel’s hostilities have led to casualties among United Nations (UN) personnel, which has been described as “violations of international law”.

Most recently, on the morning of October 23, the IDF coordinated an airstrike on the Lebanese port city of Tyre, mere hours after a series of airstrikes hit the suburbs of southern Beirut, decimating infrastructure. On October 22, Lebanese Cabinet member Nasser Yassin reported that Lebanon will need approximately 250 million dollars on a monthly basis to help the over 1 million displaced people due to the recent escalation in hostilities between Israel and Lebanon.

“Overnight we’ve seen more than 1 million people being displaced by the attacks, hostilities, by the aggression. And this is similar to an earthquake. You don’t see this number in scale and the speed of it, except in major natural disasters. And this is what happened in 48 hours,” said Yassin.

On October 21, an airstrike in southern Beirut destroyed several buildings within range of the Rafik Hariri University Hospital, the largest in Lebanon, and killed 18 civilians. Fears of future attacks on hospitals have spread among Lebanese civilians and officials. Daniel Hagari, spokesperson for the IDF, reported that the hospital contained a bunker with millions of dollars’ worth of cash and gold.

“One of our main targets last night was an underground vault with tens of millions of dollars in cash and gold. The money was being used to finance Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel. According to the estimates we have, there is at least half a billion dollars in dollar bills and gold stored in this bunker. This money could and still can be used to rebuild the state of Lebanon,” said Hagari.

Hospital director Mazen Alame told reporters that no such bunker exists. Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, has warned that any and all attacks involving hospitals are subject to thorough investigations.

On Tuesday October 22, the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) detected over 1,417 projectiles that were fired south of the Blue Line, striking critical infrastructure in Al Matmurah, Al Qawzah, Aytaroun, Ett Taibe, Majdal Silim, Ghobeiry, and Khiam. The uptick in violence has led to Hezbollah taking a firmer stance, informing reporters that the conflict has reached a “new phase of escalation”. Political analysts such as Amal Saad predict that hostilities between the two parties will continue to rise in intensity.

“When you look at the bigger picture and you see in relative terms how Hezbollah has survived all this and been able to conduct such fierce resistance to an ongoing attempted invasion by the most powerful army in the Middle East, one can only conclude that Hezbollah is actually stronger than what we assumed it was. This might be a more ferocious Hezbollah that we’re seeing,” said Saad.

Reports from UNIFIL personnel indicate that peacekeeping missions along the border of Lebanon have grown increasingly difficult amid the escalation of airstrikes and ground incursions. On October 13, UNIFIL reported that the IDF breached one of their bases, firing several rounds 100 meters away from their position. 15 peacekeepers suffered injuries from smoke exposure.

UNIFIL issued a press statement on October 20, reporting that an IDF bulldozer had “deliberately demolished” a UN watchtower and perimeter fence. They reiterated that encroaching on UN positions and destroying UN assets constitute violations of international humanitarian law. Despite numerous security breaches and attacks on peacekeeping entities, UNIFIL maintains its positions in Lebanon, continuing to closely monitor and report Israeli offensives.

The UN and its affiliated organizations continue to provide support to affected communities in Lebanon. The World Food Programme (WFP) has been on the frontlines since “day one of the crisis”, distributing daily hot meals and food parcels to over 200,000 kitchens in Lebanon, and providing food assistance to nearly 150,000 Lebanese civilians who have fled to Syria.

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has delivered over 140 tons of medical supplies to medical facilities and first responders. UNICEF has also provided medical and psychosocial support to people across 50 shelters in Lebanon. They have also distributed essential supplies to displacement shelters, including hygiene kits, water sanitation supplies, bedding, supplements, baby food, and maternity kits.

UNICEF has also partnered with Lebanon’s Ministry of Education to provide educational resources for children to ensure that they maintain some form of schooling in the duration of this conflict.

In the beginning of October, the UN launched a flash appeal of 426 million dollars to provide assistance to impacted communities for the next three months. Continued funding and donor contributions will be crucial as attacks remain frequent.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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