By Simplex Chithyola Banda
LILONGWE, Malawi, Jun 21 2024 – After El Niño-induced floods and devastating drought, roughly two in five people in Malawi – a country of some 20 million people – are now facing the looming prospect of acute hunger by the end of the year.

At particular risk is the progress Malawi has made to improve maternal and infant nutrition, especially during the critical window of a child’s first 1,000 days.

Yet, facing similar challenges in the past, I have seen with my own eyes how international development aid can uplift and build the resilience of even the most vulnerable communities.

Concessional finance from the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA), for instance, has previously helped millions of Malawians access food, improve nutrition, and rebuild agricultural livelihoods in the aftermath of shocks. With its focus on addressing the most urgent long- and short-term challenges, the IDA is one of the greatest allies of low-income, climate-vulnerable countries.

However, conditions not of our own making are exacerbating the hunger challenges in Malawi and across the African continent, while simultaneously holding back governments from responding effectively.

Malawi’s external debt servicing alone, for example, will take up an estimated US$ 147 million this year, just over five percent of total government spending. This is money that would better serve the country in the long run as investments into building the resilience of smallholder farmers to safeguard food and income security against rising climate shocks.

In light of these compounding challenges, we urgently need donor governments to double their contributions to the IDA in its upcoming replenishment, without which countries like Malawi will simply lack the resources to break the cycle of crises.

Food systems in the countries receiving support from the IDA, where infrastructure and national resilience is already precarious, have been more acutely affected by recent shocks than elsewhere.

We already know that one in three IDA nations are now poorer than before the Covid-19 pandemic, while the cost of recent climate disasters has doubled over the past decade, and will continue to rise. These shocks are devastating setbacks to attempts to develop long-term resilience and foster agricultural development for food and nutrition security and rural livelihoods.

Yet, just as these countries are facing arguably greater challenges than ever before, the amount of funding provided via the IDA has stalled – and in some cases, begun to decline.

For almost a decade, contributions to the IDA have flatlined, which means financial support from the wealthiest countries in real terms has fallen as many countries have cut aid budgets.

And the results of this downturn in funding are now playing out on the ground. Over the past two replenishment cycles, for example, the number of food insecure people in IDA countries has doubled – a clear sign that donor countries must rapidly reverse course to save lives and economies worldwide.

In the face of mounting challenges, the IDA can still be a driver for positive change in many of the world’s most vulnerable contexts, but only with the enhanced support of the foremost donor countries.

Momentum for tackling the hunger crisis – which ultimately spans borders, cultures, and economies – is already growing, with the formation of a Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty ahead of the G20 meetings in Brazil this year.

Donor governments must now make up ground, rising to the scale and urgency of the food security challenge ahead of us by doubling their funding for one of the most potent solutions against hunger and poverty.

The IDA is one of the most proven and effective aid providers the world possesses today and will be vital in delivering the vision of a hunger- and poverty-free world.

With greater funding, the IDA can support the long-term investments needed to strengthen national food systems, while also breaking the cycle of crises that currently hold back the most vulnerable nations.

At the same time, adequately replenishing the IDA will be critical in achieving both the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the World Bank’s own mission to end poverty – both of which rely on sustainable agricultural development that allows for healthy people and planet.

Therefore, as the IDA meets in Nepal, Malawi and other IDA countries urgently need donor governments to step up both financially and strategically, directing more funding towards nutrition and food security.

The return on this investment is a world with less hunger, poverty and inequality, the toll of which is ultimately borne by all of us.

Hon. Simplex Chithyola Banda is Minister of Finance & Economic Affairs, Malawi

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 Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 21 2024 – The United States—which has continued to use its veto power to block Palestine from UN membership —may be out-maneuvered by a growing new campaign by some UN member states planning to establish full political and diplomatic relations with Palestine outside the confines of the United Nations.

The latest recognitions of the Palestinian territory as a sovereign State are by Norway, Ireland, Spain and Slovenia, which comes after the General Assembly overwhelmingly voted — with 143 votes in favour to nine votes against- – to back Palestine’s bid to become a full-fledged member of the United Nations on last month.

But, as expected, the resolution before the Security Council was vetoed by the United States last month—and will continue to be vetoed.

Mercifully, the US does not have a veto power to prevent countries from recognizing Palestine as a sovereign nation state — even though it could threaten to cut off economic and military aid, particularly to developing nations.

“In the midst of a war, with tens of thousands killed and injured, we must keep alive the only alternative that offers a political solution for Israelis and Palestinians alike: Two states, living side by side, in peace and security,” Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre said.

How many of the remaining 24 European Union (EU) member states will follow Ireland, Spain and Slovenia in establishing diplomatic relations with Palestine?

The 24 include: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Sweden.

Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco, told IPS this underscores how, despite the Biden administration’s claims that it supports a two-state solution, it has worked hard to prevent the United Nations from recognizing Palestine.

In addition to vetoing the recent UN Security Council resolution admitted Palestine as a member and voting against the General Assembly resolution to upgrade its status, the United States was one of only two countries in the 47-member UN Human Rights Council to vote against a resolution in early April which “reaffirmed its support for the solution of two States, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security.”

“It has been U.S. policy since 1990 to withdraw funding from any United Nations agency which grants Palestine full member status and the recently passed 2024 Appropriations bill promises to cut all U.S. funding for the Palestinian Authority if “the Palestinians obtain the same standing as member states or full membership as a state in the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof outside an agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians,” he pointed out

The Biden administration and Congress have long taken the position that Palestinian statehood is only acceptable on terms voluntarily agreed to by Israel in bilateral negotiations.

“However, given how there have been no such negotiations since 2015 and the Israeli government categorically rules out allowing any kind of Palestinian state, this appears to simply be a way of continuing to deny Palestine’s right to self-determination”, declared Zunes.

Among the G20, nine countries Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Turkey have recognized Palestine as a sovereign state.

China, one of the five permanent members of the Security Council has recognized the State of Palestine since 1988 and has declared that it supports Palestine’s bid for full UN membership.

Meanwhile, in a statement released June 3, a group of UN human rights experts say, “the State of Palestine was recognized by the vast majority of Member States of the United Nations”.

All States must follow the example of the 143 UN Member States, and recognise the State of Palestine, and use all political and diplomatic resources at their disposal to bring about an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the UN experts said.

“This recognition is an important acknowledgement of the rights of the Palestinian people and their struggles and suffering towards freedom and independence,” the experts said.

They insisted that Palestine must be able to enjoy full self-determination, including the ability to exist, determine their destiny and develop freely as a people with safety and security.
.
“This is a pre-condition for lasting peace in Palestine and the entire Middle East – beginning with the immediate declaration of a ceasefire in Gaza and no further military incursions into Rafah,” the experts said.

Meanwhile, Sri Lanka, a former chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), was one of the first countries to establish diplomatic relations with Palestine going back to the 1970s.

Dr Palitha Kohona, former Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN, and until recently Ambassador to China, told IPS Sri Lanka has consistently backed the two-state solution to the situation involving Israel and Palestine and to bring peace to the Middle East.

Despite the elimination of the anti-Israeli leaders of Iraq (Saddam Hussein) and Libya (Muammar Gaddafi), the violent changes resulting from the Arab Spring, and the diplomatic efforts at reconciliation between Arab countries and Israel, the situation in the occupied territories remains as dire as ever, he said.

“Consistent with our position”, he pointed out, “Sri Lanka was one of the first countries to establish diplomatic relations with Palestine with a Palestinian ambassador based in Colombo since 1975 whose costs are met by the Government of Sri Lanka”.

Sri Lanka maintains a diplomatic presence in Ramallah with a fully- fledged ambassador, and is also the chair of the “UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories”,

“During my period as Permanent Representative, we came under intense pressure from Israel to quit as chair of this Committee. Sri Lanka has consistently supported the call for Palestinian statehood at the United Nations,” declared Dr Kohona.

Ian Williams, President of the Foreign Press Association, told IPS the Coalition of the Appalled that supports Palestinian membership is more compelling than the US’s Coalition of “the willing” that the US dragooned to support its war in Iraq.

A vote on “recognizing” Palestine is as superfluous as a vote on accepting the gravity – it exists! It should be superfluous to counter the arguments of Israel and its supporters but en passant Israel itself has not had accepted boundaries since its admission.

Micronesia, the Marshalls and Palau, consistent supporters of Israel and the US have no real sovereignty over their foreign policy, while the US and UK fought hard to maintain “Kampuchean” membership of the UN when Pol Pot controlled a tent in Thailand across the border, said Williams, a former president of the UN Correspondents Association (UNCA) and author of “The UN For Beginners”.

“And many of the Governments who took part in the wartime negotiations on the UN Charter were in exile from their occupied territory. This is not about legal recognition, it is about Palestine, as the ghost of the Naqba, sitting at the table shaking its hoary locks at the Zionist murderers and their accomplices”.

Maybe other members should resolve to refuse recognition to the Israeli holders of positions that swell Gilad Erdan’s head – like the various vice presidencies and committees or assumed membership of the West European Group that Erdan is so proud of. Time to tweak the desert vulture’s feathers, declared Williams.

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 Norman Solomon
SAN FRANCISCO, Jun 21 2024 – “When someone shows you who they are,” Maya Angelou said, “believe them the first time.” That should apply to foreign-policy elites who show you who they are, time after time.

Officials running the Pentagon and State Department have been in overdrive for more than 250 days in support of Israel’s ongoing slaughter of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Supposedly dedicated to defense and diplomacy, those officials have worked to implement and disguise Washington’s war policies, which have taken more lives than any other government in this century.

Among the weapons of war, cluster munitions are especially horrific. That’s why 67 Democrats and an equal number of Republicans in the House of Representatives voted last week to prevent the U.S. government from continuing to send those weapons to armies overseas.

But more than twice as many House members voted the other way. They defeated a Pentagon funding amendment that would have prohibited the transfer of cluster munitions to other countries. The lawmakers ensured that the U.S. can keep supplying those weapons to the military forces of Ukraine and Israel.

As of now, 124 nations have signed onto a treaty banning cluster munitions, which often wreck the bodies of civilians. The “bomblets” from cluster munitions “are particularly attractive to children because they resemble a bell with a loop of ribbon at the end,” the Just Security organization explains.

But no member of Congress need worry that one of their own children might pick up such a bomblet someday, perhaps mistaking it for a toy, only to be instantly killed or maimed with shrapnel.

The Biden administration correctly responded to indications (later proven accurate) that Russia was using cluster munitions in Ukraine. On Feb. 28, 2022, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told journalists that if the reports of Russian use of those weapons turned out to be true, “it would potentially be a war crime.”

Back then, the front page of the New York Times described “internationally banned cluster munitions” as “a variety of weapons — rockets, bombs, missiles and artillery projectiles — that disperse lethal bomblets in midair over a wide area, hitting military targets and civilians alike.”

Days later, the Times reported that NATO officials “accused Russia of using cluster bombs in its invasion,” and the newspaper added that “anti-personnel cluster bombs . . . kill so indiscriminately they are banned under international law.”

But when the Ukrainian military forces ran low on ammunition last year, the U.S. administration decided to start shipping cluster munitions to them.

“All countries should condemn the use of these weapons under any circumstances,” Human Rights Watch has declared.

BBC correspondent John Simpson summed up a quarter-century ago: “Used against human beings, cluster bombs are some of the most savage weapons of modern warfare.”

As the Congressional Research Service (CRS) reported this spring, cluster munitions “disperse large numbers of submunitions imprecisely over an extended area.” They “frequently fail to detonate and are difficult to detect,” and “can remain explosive hazards for decades.”

The CRS report added: “Civilian casualties are primarily caused by munitions being fired into areas where soldiers and civilians are intermixed, inaccurate cluster munitions landing in populated areas, or civilians traversing areas where cluster munitions have been employed but failed to explode.”

The horrible immediate effects are just the beginning. “It’s been over five decades since the U.S. dropped cluster bombs on Laos, the most bombed country in the world per capita,” Human Rights Watch points out.

“The contamination from cluster munitions remnants and other unexploded ordnance is so vast that fewer than 10 percent of affected areas have been cleared. An estimated 80 million submunitions still pose a danger, especially to curious children.”

The members of Congress who just greenlighted more cluster munitions are dodging grisly realities. The basic approach is to proceed as though such human realities don’t matter if an ally is using those weapons (or if the United States uses them, as happened in Southeast Asia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen).

Overall, with carnage persisting in Gaza, it’s easy enough to say that Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has shown us who he is. But so has Presidente Biden, and so have the most powerful Republicans and Democrats in Congress.

While the U.S. has been supplying a large majority of the weapons and ammunition imported by Israel, a similar approach from official Washington (with ineffectual grumbling) has enabled Israel to lethally constrict food going into Gaza.

During his State of the Union address in early March, Biden announced plans for the U.S. to build a port on the Gaza coast to bring in food and other vital aid. But his speech didn’t mention the Pentagon’s expectation that such a seaport could take 60 days to become operational.

At the time, a Common Dreams headline summed up the hollowness of the gambit: “Biden Aid Port Plan Rebuked as ‘Pathetic’ PR Effort as Israel Starves Gazans.” Even at full tilt, the envisioned port would not come anywhere near compensating for Israel’s methodical blockage of aid trucks — by far the best way to get food to 2.2 million people facing starvation.

“We are talking about a population that is starving now,” said Ziad Issa, the head of humanitarian policy for ActionAid. “We have already seen children dying of hunger.”

An official at Save the Children offered a reality check: “Children in Gaza cannot wait to eat. They are already dying from malnutrition, and saving their lives is a matter of hours or days — not weeks.”

The Nation described “the tragic absurdity of Biden’s Gaza policies: the U.S. government is making elaborate plans to ameliorate a humanitarian catastrophe that would not exist without its own bombs.”

And this week — more than three months after the ballyhooed drumroll about plans for a port on the Gaza coast — news broke that the whole thing is a colossal failure even on its own terms.

“The $230 million temporary pier that the U.S. military built on short notice to rush humanitarian aid to Gaza has largely failed in its mission, aid organizations say, and will probably end operations weeks earlier than originally expected,” the New York Times reported on June 18. “In the month since it was attached to the shoreline, the pier has been in service only about 10 days. The rest of the time, it was being repaired after rough seas broke it apart, detached to avoid further damage or paused because of security concerns.”

As Israel’s crucial military patron, the U.S. government could insist on an end to the continual massacre of civilians in Gaza and demand a complete halt to interference with aid deliveries. Instead, Israel continues to inflict “unconscionable death and suffering” while mass starvation is closing in.

Maya Angelou’s advice certainly applies. When the president and a big congressional majority show that they are willing accomplices to mass murder, believe them.

It’s fitting that Angelou, a renowned poet and writer, gave her voice to words from Rachel Corrie, who was crushed to death one day in 2003 while standing in front of an Israeli army bulldozer as it moved to demolish a Palestinian family’s home in Gaza.

A few years after Corrie died, Angelou recorded a video while reading from an email that the young activist sent: “We are all born and someday we’ll all die. Most likely to some degree alone. What if our aloneness isn’t a tragedy? What if our aloneness is what allows us to speak the truth without being afraid? What if our aloneness is what allows us to adventure — to experience the world as a dynamic presence — as a changeable, interactive thing?”

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction.org and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of many books including War Made Easy. His latest book, ‘War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine‘, was published in 2023 by The New Press.

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’);