By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Oct 12 2022 – Governments and international financial institutions must adopt new ways of providing post-pandemic support, say campaigners after a report found that in many poorer countries, big business benefitted most from Covid-19 recovery funds. At the same time, vulnerable communities have been “left behind.”

They say the level and distribution of support of these funds has been poor, with the most vulnerable in society, such as informal workers and women, among others, having been especially failed by relief programmes.

And they warn that the measures have actually only deepened inequalities at a time when the UN has warned that up to 95 million additional people could soon fall into extreme poverty in comparison with pre-Covid-19 levels.

Matti Kohonen, Director of the Financial Transparency Coalition (FTC), which was behind the report, told IPS: “The elite have been sheltered from the worst effects of the pandemic. Nearly 40 percent of Covid-19 recovery funds went to large corporations, through measures like loans and tax cuts. This means that social protection for, in particular, women and informal workers, has been inadequate.”

The FTC’s research found that in 21 countries in the Global South, large corporations received 38 percent of recovery funds while small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) got 20 percent. Social protection measures accounted for 38 percent.

Meanwhile, informal workers received only 4 percent of the funds in the countries surveyed, and the research showed that in many of those states, they actually received nothing at all.

Studies have shown that informal workers, and especially women, were globally hit hardest by the Covid-19 pandemic, and that economic policy measures taken in response have largely been gender-blind, exacerbating existing gender inequality and economic precarity in the sector.

According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), of the 2 billion informal workers worldwide, over 740 million are women. However, there is a higher share of women than men in informal employment in many of the world’s poorest regions: in more than 90 percent of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, 89 percent of southern Asian countries, and almost 75 percent of Latin American countries.

These women also often have jobs most likely to be associated with poor conditions, limited or non-existent labour rights and social protection, and low pay.

The FTC report points out that while the COVID-19 pandemic has had a huge impact on women’s employment, working hours, and increases in unpaid domestic and care work duties, it found that women received half the funds than men received as most money provided to corporates and also smaller companies predominantly went to men (representing over 59 percent of funds).

Klelia Guerrero, Economist at The Latin American Network for Economic and Social Justice (LATINDADD), who helped with research into the FTC report, said that just doing work collecting data on the distribution of recovery funds underlined how little thought had been given to women in Covid-19 response policies.

It was only in a handful of the countries surveyed (Guatemala, Honduras, Bangladesh, Brazil, and Costa Rica) that partial gender-disaggregated data on Covid-19 grants were made available to analyze Covid-19 support.

“Most countries did not have disaggregated gender data; it was only partial. This in itself should be a red flag – it shows that the people who were implementing these support schemes did not think of women as a priority,” Guerrero told IPS.

And while the report shows that women did receive the majority of social protection funds in the countries surveyed, even some of those programmes “had discriminative aspects”.

“For example, here in Ecuador, we had a scheme where people had to register online and then go at certain times to receive their aid products. This was difficult for a lot of women who had to be in the home at those times, or there was no public transport to get to the places to receive aid. So, women were disadvantaged,” she said.

“Some groups of the population did benefit from Covid relief measures, but the most vulnerable not as much. It was difficult for them to access the aid. The criteria under which aid is given out should include a gender perspective.” she added.

Other equality campaigners agree.

“Numerous research has shown how, especially in Africa, women make up the majority of the informal sector. One of the big takeaways of the report is the poor targeting of women in the support response. Programmes going forward need to take into account the gender dimension of any policy,” Ishmael Zulu, Tax and Policy Officer at the Tax Justice Network Africa (TJNA), told IPS.

Groups like the FTC and its members, including the TJNA, say the report’s findings are important not just in terms of the post-pandemic recovery but in highlighting the need to change how support is given to the most vulnerable communities in developing countries in the long-term future.

Ishmael pointed out that in one scheme in Zambia, the government introduced stimulus to help SMEs and informal workers, but the money was channelled through commercial banks that set specific requirements to access that money, including the need to provide bank statements.

“Of course, that is very difficult for many informal workers. They just couldn’t provide those documents. So, in the end, even money meant for vulnerable groups ended up in the hands of big corporations, which are the ones that can provide those documents,” he explained. “It speaks of the weakness of the system.”

The FTC report has also warned that policies pursued by international financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), of pushing countries to introduce austerity measures and cut funding for basic public services in return for debt restructuring is making things worse.

It cites the example of the cuts in public spending and rises in Value-Added Taxes (VAT) being imposed as part of an IMF loan program in Zambia, saying this will have the greatest impact on the poor.

Ishmael said: “Our current financial structures have perpetuated inequality in the way, for instance, financial institutions give loans: several countries have had to reform their tax systems … and these financial institutions say subsidies and spending should be channelled into some areas and not others, and it ends up that money is targeted towards large corporates, and vulnerable communities are left behind.”

He added: “We saw growing inequality [before the pandemic], and so when Covid-19 hit, we saw how these vulnerable communities were left behind without safety nets. Governments must put in place sustainable social protection systems providing safety nets to help lift people out of poverty and which won’t just respond to a pandemic or an emergency, but respond to fighting poverty and inequality.”

The FTC is planning to present its findings at the IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings later this month.

The FTC’s report calls for all countries and international institutions, including the IMF and World Bank, to implement what it describes as “alternative policies to bring a people-centered recovery instead of austerity”.

These include, among others, taxing excess windfall corporate profits, introducing progressive levels of income and wealth taxes, and increasing social security contributions and coverage.

Kohonen said informal workers and women should be at the heart of any such policies.

“Informal sector and women workers really pulled us through the pandemic, and it is wrong to now impose austerity on them. Support needs to be in place for informal and women workers, people on the front lines, before a pandemic so that support can be then scaled up if needed, in the form of loans, grants or other aid,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

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

By Bram Frouws
GENEVA, Oct 12 2022 – Since Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a military draft on September 21st aiming to mobilise around 300,000 Russian men to fight in the war in Ukraine, an estimated 400,000 Russians have fled the country, possibly even more.

They are fleeing Russia in all directions, with over 20,000 in Georgia and thousands more entering every day, possibly as many as 200,000 in Kazakhstan – with many moving on to Kyrgyzstan – and thousands in Turkey and in Armenia.

There are queues of thousands of citizens at land borders, prices for accommodation are soaring and flight tickets out of Russia simply not available anymore or only at sky-high prices.

Compared to the numbers in some of the Central Asian countries, the number of Russian refugees coming to Europe is still relatively low. But it does raise an important question for European countries, a question already raised shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine: what about Russian refugees?

Mixed responses to Russians fleeing conscription

So far, the response has been somewhat mixed. Some countries, like the Baltic countries, were fast in saying they will not accept asylum claims from Russians. For example, Latvia’s Foreign Minister said that since Russians were fine with killing Ukrainians, it is not right to consider them conscious objectors, adding that admitting them is a security risk and there are plenty of countries outside of the EU to go to.

Lithuania’s Foreign Minister said they will not be granting asylum to those who are simply running from responsibility and added that Russians should stay and fight, against Putin. Germany’s Justice Minister, on the other hand, said that anyone who hates Putin’s path and loves liberal democracy is warmly welcomed in Germany.

European Council President Charles Michel said, in his address to the United Nations General Assembly that Europe should allow in Russian citizens seeking to flee the country. While the EU already agreed to suspend a visa facilitation agreement with Russia earlier in September, many countries, most notably Finland essentially shut their borders to Russians after the draft announcement by Russia.

Shortly after these initial reactions, EU Home Affairs Commissioner Johansson announced an EU-wide policy towards those fleeing conscription, saying member states should do a thorough security assessment before issuing visa, that visa should not be issued to anyone intending to stay for more than 90 days and that the right to apply for asylum is a fundamental right, which also applies to Russians.

What would be the right approach?

First of all, Europe has been rather united in their responses to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and it would be important European countries remain united on the issue of Russian refugees as well.

The emotions around this issue, however, are very understandable, in particular in Eastern European countries, given their history and proximity to Russia, and given that it is clear who the aggressor is in this unjustified war.

Of course, it is also understandable that Ukrainian refugees evoke far more empathy than Russian refugees, but decisions about asylum should always be based on objective criteria and individual assessments.

It is crucial that emotions are set aside when it comes to defining who is a refugee and who isn’t. All EU countries signed up to international refugee law and European conventions, and there are objective criteria to decide whether someone is a refugee or not.

On a general note, it is highly concerning if decisions on whether we grant refugee status or other forms of protection are increasingly based on whether we – as a population or as policy makers or politicians – feel for a certain group and whether we sympathise with them.

We have also seen this in the striking difference in how Ukrainian refugees were welcomed across Europe, compared to refugees coming from further away. This should never be the case.

It will be challenging, and there will not be a whole lot of empathy among European populations towards Russian refugees. But that is actually the moment where we require and expect from our European leaders to stand up, be rational and objective and lead by example, saying Europe is a safe haven, for anyone who has good reasons to flee their home country, no matter which home country.

The EU’s announcement of its policy towards Russian refugees, as mentioned above, goes somewhat in that direction, though it also remains unclear how Russians – with basically, all routes out of Russia to the EU closed – in practice could even apply for asylum.

What does the law say?

As for every asylum seeker, applications must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Fear of persecution or punishment for desertion or draft-evasion does not in itself or automatically constitute a well-founded fear of persecution under the refugee definition, according to UNHCRs handbook on procedures and criteria determining refugee status.

However, the same handbook also provides several reasons where it does. For example, when the punishment would be disproportionate, or where it can be proven that soldiers would be forced to participate in war crimes, in this case in Ukraine, or when the type of type of military action, with which an individual does not wish to be associated, is condemned by the international community as contrary to basic rules of human conduct.

With these clauses in mind, it can probably be argued that many Russian men fleeing draft, might be persecuted as understood under refugee law. All European countries signed up to the Refugee Convention and European conventions, which means everyone has a right to seek asylum and have their case assessed.

A straightforward refusal to assess claims would be a violation of international law. In short, all Russians fleeing draft should be treated as asylum seekers if they claim asylum, like anyone else, from any other country in the world.

Moreover, closing the borders and restricting access to visa for all Russians, is not a solution either. This would probably push even more Russians into the asylum system, which is already quite overburdened in many countries. And, as argued above, all these individual claims should then still be assessed.

Of course, keeping borders open to Russians does not, and should not, mean anyone can come in unchecked. The concerns about Russian operatives joining these movements might be genuine, so it should be carefully checked who enters European countries. But again, that is all the more reason to conduct proper individual assessments.

What signal to send to Russia’s population?

Importantly, accepting Russians who are fleeing draft, also sends a clear signal to Russia’s population and leadership, and to the world. It signals that Europe takes the moral high ground, does not let its objective asylum policies be clouded by anti-Russian emotions.

It signals that the EU values human rights and sticks to international agreements, no matter where refugees come from, and even, as in the case of Russia, if they come from the aggressor. It will send a signal to the world that what Russia is doing, is wrong.

Additionally, a large and growing Russian diaspora outside of Russia, with full access to more objective news coverage than what they had at home, could also become a powerful force of opposition to Russia’s leadership, working together from abroad and sharing what they hear and see about the war from outside of Russia, with family and friends left behind in Russia.

Furthermore, if Europe would completely close its borders to Russian men, whether through normal visa procedures of through the asylum process, that will only fuel Putin’s rhetoric about the West waging a war on Russia and might dishearten the many Russians who are probably opposed to this war; if the West opens up its borders to Russians fleeing their regime, that actually undermines Putin’s narrative.

On a more practical note, the more men who are fleeing Russia, the fewer Russia will have to mobilise and fight in Ukraine, which is also why Ukrainian President Zelensky appealed to Russian men to defy the mobilisation and basically offer them asylum in Ukraine.

The need to support non-EU countries in receiving Russian refugees

Finally, as mentioned in the beginning of this article, the number of Russians fleeing to non-EU countries in Eastern Europe, Turkey and Central Asia are far higher than those fleeing towards the EU.

The numbers might soon become overwhelming for some of these countries, with prices for hotels and other commodities soaring. In most of these countries, the general population is opposed to this war as well, some countries may fear a future Russian invasion or already have, like Georgia, part of their territory occupied by Russia.

With such large numbers from Russia fleeing to these countries, it is a key moment for the EU to offer strong support and show that Europe is with them, as well as with the Russians who fled to these countries, who oppose Putin and refuse to fight his war in Ukraine.

Bram Frouws is director, Mixed Migration Centre.

This article was first published on the Mixed Migration Centre website: https://mixedmigration.org/articles/how-should-europe-respond-russians-fleeing-military-mobilisation/

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 Orlando Milesi
SANTIAGO, Oct 12 2022 – In Magallanes, Chile’s southernmost region, doubts and questions are being raised about the environmental impact of turning this area into the world’s leading producer of green hydrogen.

The projects require thousands of wind turbines, several desalination plants, new ports, docks, roads and hundreds of technicians and workers, with major social, cultural, economic and even visual impacts.”The scale of production creates uncertainties, heightened because there is no baseline. The question is whether Chile currently has the capacity to carry out large-scale green hydrogen projects.” — Jorge Gibbons

This long narrow South American country of 19.5 million people sandwiched between the Andes Mountains and the Pacific Ocean has enormous solar and wind energy potential in its Atacama Desert and southern pampas grasslands. This has led to a steady increase in electricity generation from clean and renewable sources.

In 2013, only six percent of the country’s total electricity generation came from non-conventional renewable sources (NCREs) – a proportion that climbed to 32 percent this year. Installed NCRE capacity in September reached 13,405 MW, representing 40.7 percent of the total. Of the NCREs, solar energy represents 23.5 percent and wind power 12.6 percent.

In Chile, NCREs are defined as wind, small hydropower plants )up to 20 MW), biomass, biogas, geothermal, solar and ocean energy.

According to the authorities, the wind potential of Magallanes could meet 13 percent of the world’s demand for green hydrogen, with a potential of 126 GW.

Green hydrogen is generated by low-emission renewable energies in the electrolysis of water (H2O) by breaking down the molecules into oxygen (O2) and hydrogen (H2). It currently accounts for less than one percent of the world’s energy.

However, it is projected as the energy source with the most promising future to advance towards the decarbonization of the economy and the replacement of hydrocarbons, due to its potential in electricity-intensive industries, such as steel and cement, or in air and maritime transportation.

The National Green Hydrogen Strategy, launched in November 2021 by the second government of then right-wing President Sebastián Piñera (2018-2022), seeks to increase carbon neutrality, decrease Chile’s dependence on oil and turn this country into an energy exporter.

The government of his successor, leftist President Gabriel Boric, in office since March, created an Interministerial Council of the Green Hydrogen Industry Development Committee, with the participation of eight cabinet ministers.

A spokesperson from the Ministry of Energy told IPS that “this committee has agreed to bring forward, from 2025 to 2022, the update of the National Green Hydrogen Strategy and the new schedule for the allocation of state-owned land for these projects.”

“We will promote green hydrogen in a cross-cutting manner, with an emphasis on harmonious, fair and balanced local development. By bringing forward the update of the strategy, we seek to generate certainty for investors and to begin to create the necessary regulatory framework for the growth of this industry in our country,” he said.

In the area known as Cabo Negro, in the Chilean region of Magallanes, several companies have installed wind turbines to generate wind energy. The installation of thousands of turbines will affect the landscape of Magallanes and environmentalists believe it will impact many birds that migrate annually to this southern region. CREDIT: Courtesy of Erika Mutschke

Warnings from environmentalists

In a letter to the president, more than 80 environmentalists warned of the risk of turning “Magallanes y La Antarctica Chilena” – the region’s official name – into an environmental sacrifice zone for the development of green hydrogen.

“The energy transition cannot mean the sacrifice of migratory routes of birds that are in danger of extinction, otherwise it would not be a fair or sustainable transition,” said the letter, which has not yet received a formal response.

Environmentalists argue that the impact is not restricted to birds, but also affects whales that breed there, due to the effects of desalination plants, large ports and harbors.

Carmen Espoz, dean of science at the Santo Tomás University, who signed the letter, told IPS that “the main warning that we have tried to raise with the government, and with some of the companies with which we have spoken, is that there is a need for zoning or land-use planning, which does not exist to date, and for independent, quality baseline information for decision-making” on the issue.

Espoz, who also heads the Bahía Lomas Center in Magallanes, based in Punta Arenas, the regional capital, clarified that they are not opposed to the production of green hydrogen but demand that it be done right.

It is urgently necessary, she said in an interview in Santiago, to “stop making decisions at the central level without consultation or real participation of the local communities and to generate the necessary technical information base.”

The signatories asked Boric to create a Regional Land Use Plan with Strategic Environmental Assessment to avoid unregulated development of projects.

“We are not only talking about birds, but also about profound social, cultural and environmental impacts,” said Espoz, who argued that the model promoted by the government and green hydrogen developers “does not have a social license to implement it.”

Sunset at Laredo Bay in the Magallanes region where the Chilean government will have to decide on what changes in the grasslands are acceptable, in the face of a flood of requests to use the area for largescale green hydrogen projects. CREDIT: Courtesy of Erika Mutschke

The bird question

Prior to this letter to Boric, the international scientific journal Science published a study by Chilean scientists warning about potential impacts of wind turbines on the 40 to 60 species of migratory birds that visit Magallanes.

“It is estimated that the installation of wind turbines along the migratory paths of birds could affect migratory shorebird populations, which is especially critical in the cases of the Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa) and the Magellanic Plover (Pluvianellus socialis),” said Espoz.

Both species, she said, “are endangered, as is the Ruddy-headed Goose (Chloephaga rubidiceps).”

She added that if 13 percent of the world’s green hydrogen is to be generated in southern Chile, some 2,900 wind turbines will have to be installed by 2027, “which could cause between 1,740 and 5,220 collisions with bird per year.”

Jorge Gibbons, a marine biologist at the University of Magallanes, based in Punta Arenas, said the big problem is that Magallanes does not have a baseline for environmental issues.

“The scale of production creates uncertainties, heightened because there is no baseline. The question is whether Chile currently has the capacity to carry out large-scale green hydrogen projects,” he told IPS from the capital of Magallanes.

Gibbons believes it would take about two years to update the data on the dolphin and Southern Right Whale (Eubalaena australis) populations

“The greatest risks to dolphins will be seen in the Strait of Magellan. I am talking about Commerson’s Dolphins (Cephalorhynchus commersonii), which are only found there in Chile and whose population is relatively small,” he said.

He proposed studying the route to ports and harbors of these species and to analyze how they breed and feed.

“The issue is how noise disturbs them or interrupts their routes. These questions are still unanswered, but we know some things because it is the best censused species in Chile,” he explained.

According to Gibbons, the letter to Boric is timely and will help reduce uncertainty because “the process is just beginning and the scientific and local community are now wondering if the plan will be well done.”

Conflict of interests

The partnership between HIF Chile and Enel Green Power Chile withdrew from the Environmental Evaluation System the study of the Faro del Sur Wind Farm project, involving an investment of 500 million dollars for the installation of 65 three-blade wind turbines on 3,791 hectares of land in Magallanes.

The study was presented in early August with the announcement that it was “a decisive step for the future of green hydrogen-based eFuels.”

But on Oct. 6, its withdrawal was announced after a series of observations were issued by the Magallanes regional Secretariat of the Environment.

“The observations of some public bodies in the evaluation process of this wind farm exceed the usual standards,” the consortium formed by the Chilean company HIF and the subsidiary of the Italian transnational Enel claimed in a statement.

The companies argued that “the authorities must provide clear guidelines to the companies on the expectations for regional development, safeguarding the communities and the environment.

“In light of these exceptional requirements, it is necessary to understand which requirements can be incorporated and which definitely make projects of this type unfeasible in the region,” they complained.

The government reacted by stating that it is important to remember that Faro del Sur is the first green hydrogen project submitted to the environmental assessment process in Magallanes.

“During the process, some evaluating entities made observations on the project, so the owners decided to withdraw it early, which does not prevent them from reintroducing it when they deem it convenient,” the Ministry of Energy spokesperson told IPS.

He added that the ministry stresses “the conviction to develop the green hydrogen industry in the country and that this means sending out signals, but in no case should this compromise environmental standards and citizen participation in the evaluation processes.”