By Sarah Strack
NEW YORK, Sep 20 2024 – In a context of shrinking civic space that threatens civil society participation in an increasing number of countries and all the way to some UN processes, world leaders will gather to discuss the “multilateralism we want” at the Summit of the Future at the United Nations headquarters in New York.

The summit aims to tackle one fundamental question: How can the global community cooperate better to meet present needs while preparing for future challenges?

Already in February, over 400 civil society organisations, under the UNmute initiative, issued a collective statement for more meaningful engagement of civil society in the preparatory process of the Summit of the Future. One thing is clear: civil society’s engagement has largely been limited to virtual consultations and written inputs at relatively short notice, signaling a deterioration of opportunities for participation of civil society.

The limited access to informal consultations with Member States, coupled with the lack of interpretation services, further restricts participation for non-English speakers and those outside of the New York “bubble”. This asymmetry creates barriers to meaningful dialogue between civil society and Member States.

Civil society organisations continue to call for designated seats and consistent participation channels to ensure their voices are included and have a genuine impact on the outcomes.

As we approach the Summit of the Future taking place next week in New York, here’s what to expect and some key asks.

It’s time to walk the talk

The Summit of the Future arrives at a moment when it is more important than ever for global institutions to demonstrate accountability and deliver tangible results, to rebuild trust. With the Pact for the Future, the Summit aims to design a roadmap to strengthen multilateralism and advance collective action and accountability for the 2030 Agenda and beyond.

Civil society leaders at the Forus General Assembly in Gaborone, Botswana. Credit: Forus

“Civil society has always warned of the urgency of the polycrisis and has suggested concrete solutions. However, despite strong speeches, country leaders have taken weak action. What we have witnessed is a lack of commitment to life and the planet,” says Henrique Frota, executive director of Abong, the national NGO platform of Brazil, and C20 Chair.

In past summits, we have seen pledges that looked good on paper but failed to translate into systemic changes. The whole Agenda 2030 is increasingly considered “non-binding” with several governments failing to uphold their commitments. In Argentina, newly elected president Javier Milei decided not to pursue a Voluntary National Review in 2024, reversing the previous administration’s commitment. In Colombia, for the first time, the government reviewed only one SDG in 2024—SDG 2 (zero hunger) —a move that raised concerns about the increasing risk of cherry-picking.

These examples reflect a broader global trend: international agendas, including the SDGs, may not be prioritised, raising concerns about potential rollback of commitments. Without clear accountability mechanisms, these global agreements risk remaining aspirational rather than actionable.

“We are at an inflection point that will largely determine what outcomes we harvest by December 2030- the year governments have committed to bringing an end to many of the challenges and crises facing our world today. At the current rate the global goals remain elusive as they were when those commitments were made some 8 years ago. The world needs bold leadership, moving from rhetoric to action. Never again can we wait for another summit before the world sees the changes it so much deserves. That clock stopped ticking already!” says Oyebisi, B. Oluseyi, Executive Director at NNNGO, the national NGO platform in Nigeria.

He adds, to move forward, instead of rushing backwards, governments need to make clear, measurable commitments and introduce robust accountability mechanisms to ensure international agreements lead to real, inclusive outcomes for a better future for people and planet.

Strengthening inclusive governance

While civil society continues to push for a stronger focus on equity, solidarity, inclusion and participation, the final framework for the Summit of the Future is still under negotiation.

The lack of consistent engagement opportunities remains a barrier for civil society to contribute effectively. Each accredited civil society organisation has been allowed to send two representatives to the Summit. However, we recently learned that, due to high demand, civil society representatives may only be able to attend one of the two days of the Summit.

“The Agenda 2030 starts by stating that “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan.” This is not possible if civil society is excluded from deliberations and negotiations. Crucially, it also prevents the pledge to leave no one behind from being fulfilled, as civil society is unable to bring to the table the voices of those facing societal and structural discrimination,” says Silla Ristimäki, Advocacy Lead at FINGO, the national NGO platform of Finland.

Ndey Sireng, Executive Director of Gambia’s national NGO platform TANGO, echoes this concern, stressing “the importance of inclusive participation, especially for youth and women”, and urging governments to create an enabling environment for civil society.

“For global governance to truly deliver for both people and planet, civil society must be at the core of decision-making processes. Civil society’s engagement ensures that policies are not only crafted in conference rooms but are rooted in the lived realities and aspirations of the people they aim to serve. Given the closed nature of the consultations leading up to the Summit of the Future, it’s likely that the aspirations of the majority of global citizens have not been fully captured,” says Chris Nkwatsibwe, Policy, Governance & Civic Engagement lead at UNNGOF, the national NGO platform in Uganda.

On the need to protect civil society

While the Summit’s agenda focuses on human rights, it does not emphasize the shrinking civic space worldwide and the lack of an enabling environment for civil society organisations. Civil society organisations encounter increasing restrictions, with freedoms of association, peaceful assembly, and expression being curtailed in many countries.

In Honduras, as shared by the national NGO platform Asonog, in 2023 and 2024 over 18 defenders have been killed for defending their territories – including Honduran environment and anti-corruption activist Juan López, just last week, for his struggle against extractive industries. International solidarity is very important at this time of such impunity and defenselessness – with several countries unable to “defend the defenders” and to provide justice to victims.

Additionally, a wide cross-section of civil society from national NGO platforms to grassroots groups – continues to face various forms of “bureaucratic” and administrative barriers, as reported by members across the Forus network. In vulnerable political contexts, including post-electoral contexts, civil society bears the brunt of repercussions from “civic violence”, despite advocating for peaceful dialogue. A recent Forus study showed that only 4% of our Global Majority members experienced no barrier from current laws and regulations for their activities. Just 7,5% of all Forus members representing more than 24,000 NGOs, worldwide reported receiving effective support from their governments in terms of capacities and resources.

Forus is advocating for reforms that protect civic space and the promotion of an enabling environment for civil society, ensuring that civil society can play its role in holding governments accountable and championing the needs and asks of communities. Without these protections, the ability of civil society to contribute to the implementation and monitoring of global agreements, including the SDGs, will remain severely compromised.

“One cannot imagine inclusive growth and vibrant global institutions without space for civil society,” says Harsh Jaitly, Director of VANI, the national NGO platform of India.

“As civil society actors, we stand on the shoulders of grassroot actors, social movements, human rights defenders and many others who have pushed for civil rights, gender equality, and climate action, in a manner that has indeed changed the world. When looking to the future, we need an inclusive global policymaking to ensure positive change and that the needs of the most vulnerable are kept at the heart of the solutions,” says Mette Müller Kristensen, Director at Global Focus, the national NGO platform of Denmark.

Kathrine Skamris of Global Focus reinforces this, emphasizing that civil society brings “valuable knowledge and diverse perspectives, which are crucial to the discussions at the UN”. She stresses the importance of including these voices at both the Summit of the Future and throughout the follow-up process.

What Comes After the Summit of the Future?

The Summit of the Future is just one stage of the journey towards “the future we want”. It is just one step. Attention will then shift to key events in 2025, including the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), the World Social Summit, UNFCCC COP 30 in Brazil, and the World Urban Forum. These events will contribute to discussions on shaping the post-2030 Agenda, ensuring that future global cooperation remains focused on sustainability, equity, and inclusion.

In the words of Zia Ur Rehman, of the Asia Development Alliance, a regional NGO platform, the Summit is a beginning, bringing “hope for the commencement of integrated efforts.” Similarly, Arjun Bhattarai from Nepal’s NFN, the national NGO platform of Nepal, highlights the need for civil society to continue advocating for better “global governance, accountability, and a financial architecture that prioritizes the well-being of people and saves the planet. If the Pacts and promises of the Summit of the Future are implemented properly and timely, they could fulfil the hopes and aspirations of youth and future generations.”

We need more than just Summits and events – we need a vision that addresses immediate crises while shaping truly inclusive global cooperation, and more than anything, we need bolder action that doesn’t shy away from putting the rights of people and the planet first.

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’);  

Excerpt:

Sarah Strack is Forus Director

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 20 2024 – This year has been the worst for the Amazon rainforest in almost two decades. Although there has been a measured decline in deforestation when compared to 2023, forest fires have ravaged acres of critical ecosystems. For the first eight months of this year, the Amazon has seen routine forest fires, totalling to over 53,000 recorded instances.

According to the Rainforest Foundation US, so far this year, forest fires have consumed over 13.4 million acres of the Amazon, which is roughly equivalent to the size of Costa Rica or Denmark. Additionally, according to the Amazon Watch, forest fires in the Amazon were limited to only the Brazilian and Bolivian regions in previous years. In 2024, these fires have spread to the Peruvian regions, something which has never been seen before.

The recent fires are partly a result of the El Niño drought, which has lowered the annual levels of rainfall in the Amazon. They are also a consequence of climate change and human exploitation, signaling trouble for the planet if not controlled.

“Combined, the effects of climate change, forest degradation and more forest fires could result in 60 percent of the Amazon rainforest disappearing by 2050”, stated the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

The Amazon is crucial for overall planet health for a multitude of reasons. For one, it is one of the biggest carbon sinks in the world, second only to the Earth’s oceans. According to Greenpeace International, the Amazon absorbs nearly 90 to 140 billion metric tonnes of greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere. Without it, there would be a significant exacerbation of the greenhouse effect.

Dr. Elena Shevliakova, a Princeton University scientist, estimates that if the Amazon were to burn completely, Brazil and eight of its neighboring sovereignties would become “virtually uninhabitable”. Shevliakova adds that the planet would see a 25 percent decrease in rainfall and a 4.5°C increase in global temperatures.

Regions that border the Amazon are already seeing adverse effects due to the fires. Figures from IQAir state that the air quality in Manaus, the capital of the Brazilian state, Amazonas, has reached unhealthy levels. Natalia Gil, an atmospheric science expert and member of the Air Quality and Emissions Department at the Technological Laboratory of Uruguay, also observed an increase in particulate matter found in the air of surrounding nations.

Additionally, the Amazon is one of the most biodiverse ecosystems on the planet, fostering over ten percent of all of Earth’s plant and animal species. Losing this would have disastrous impacts on the world’s ecosystems as food chains would be severely disrupted, leading to widespread food insecurity. Furthermore, plant species that have significant medicinal use would go extinct, endangering the entire human population. The U.S. The National Cancer Institute estimates that 70 percent of all plants integral to cancer medications originate from the Amazon.

The livelihoods of several indigenous communities depend on the ecological health of the Amazon rainforest. According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), approximately 40 million people reside in the forest, including 2.2 million indigenous peoples. The Amazon Conservation Association states, “Over 400 tribes, each with a distinct culture, language, and territory, continue to live in a largely traditional manner, relying on these forests for their survival…Local people rely on Amazonian forests for daily needs such as food, water, fiber, and traditional medicine”.

For the overall wellbeing of the environment and humanity, it is imperative that there are efforts put into mitigating the impacts of human practices. UNEP is currently launching initiatives that focus on sustainable practices, biodiversity preservation, and support for indigenous communities.

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 Kester Kenn Klomegah
MOSCOW, Sep 20 2024 – After two symbolic African leaders’ summits, Russia’s trading is steadily increasing but significantly in exports of military weapons and equipment. According to Kremlin reports, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the trade turnover between Russia and African countries had increased by almost 35% in the first half of 2023 despite international sanctions.

During the first summit, Putin promised to double trade with African states within five years as he sought to win new friends with offers of nuclear power plants and fighter jets. He fixed the expected figure at $40 billion, which he repeated in several speeches until the last summit held in July 2023 in St. Petersburg.

According to the Russia Today (RT) report, under the headline “Russia expanding African defence partnerships” issued 5th Sept. 2024, Russia’s arms exporter Rosoboronexport has outlined plans for joint ventures regarding military equipment with the continent. That report indicated that the Russian arms export agency Rosoboronexport has been advancing multiple cooperation projects with African countries, quoted Aleksandr Mikheev, the agency’s head.

Mikheev, speaking on the sidelines of the Egypt International Airshow, further said his agency was working on several industrial cooperation projects with African countries, focusing on the licensed production of small arms, ammunition, armoured vehicles, and fast combat boats.

The head of the Russian arms export agency also noted the increasing importance of Africa and the Middle East in the company’s overall business. “The combined share of Middle Eastern and African countries in Rosoboronexport’s order portfolio exceeds 50%, which translates to over $25 billion,” he said.

Mikheev revealed that over 40 African nations are actively engaged in military-technical collaboration with Russia. “There is a very significant share of signed and executed contracts in the order portfolio. Mostly, of course, it is equipment, air force, air defence, helicopters, small arms, electronic warfare.”

Last December for instance, the Rosoboronexport head said that African countries bought more than 30% of the weapons systems exported by Russia in 2023. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reported last year that Russia had overtaken China as the leading arms seller in sub-Saharan Africa, with market share growing to 26% as of 2022. According to the report, Algeria, Angola, Egypt, and Sudan were the top importers of Russian weapons on the continent.

Business& Financial Times also reported that Putin had promised to double trade with African states within five years as he sought to win new friends with offers of nuclear power plants and fighter jets. Moscow remains the biggest exporter of arms to Africa.

The most successful pillar of Russia’s conventional trade with Africa is arms, managed mainly by state-controlled Rosoboronexport. Between 2010 and 2021 Russian arms exports to Africa dwarfed those of every other supplier and were three times greater than those of China, the second-biggest over the period, according to SIPRI.

Other Russian companies with significant operations in Africa include Alrosa, which operates diamond projects in Angola and is exploring in Zimbabwe; Rusal, which mines bauxite in Guinea; and Rosatom, which is building a nuclear power plant in Egypt.

As years move on, few of those promises have concretely materialized and yet Russian influence on the continent is growing faster than at any point since the end of the Cold War. But this trend has fallen short of the Kremlin’s promise to African leaders.

African exporters are not trading in Russia’s market due to multiple reasons including inadequate knowledge of trade procedures, rules and regulations as well as the existing market conditions. Until now, African entrepreneurs have struggled pathways to explore Russia’s market as trade preferences also mentioned several times failed to be implemented.

Multiple challenges still grossly remain and stand in the pathways to ultimately realize the economic cooperation goals set by the two summits. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov plans to hold the first Foreign Ministerial Conference in November 2024 to strategize some aspects of strengthening economic cooperation between Russia and Africa.

Some experts think that the ongoing crisis between Russia and the West is stimulating Russia’s leadership to look for new markets, and besides Asia-Pacific countries, Africa has become its choice. Quite recently, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov wrote in his article: “We attach special significance to deepening our trade and investment cooperation with the African States. Russia provides African countries with extensive preferences in trade.”

The minister went on: “At the same time, it is evident that the significant potential of our economic cooperation is far from being exhausted and much remains to be done so that Russian and African partners know more about each other’s capacities and needs. The creation of a mechanism for the provision of public support to business interaction between Russian companies and the African continent is on the agenda.”

Reports further showed that Russia has started, after the second summit in July 2023, strengthening its economic cooperation by opening trade missions with the responsibility of providing sustainable business services and plans to facilitate import-export trade in some African countries.

But these Russian trade centres can also embark on a ‘Doing Business in Africa’ campaign to encourage Russian businesses to take advantage of growing trade and investment opportunities, to promote trade fairs and business-to-business matchmaking in key spheres in Africa.

China, India and Russia are members of the BRICS association with the common goal of fighting against Western domination in Africa. However, the three have different distinctive individual economic interests in Africa. China entered Africa immediately after Russia created the vacuum following the Soviet’s collapse, China has developed its economic tentacles across Africa.

For some time, Russia has been concerned with China’s growing presence in Africa. And that points to the fact that Moscow has to step up its activities, whether between governments or private enterprises, more strategically in African countries.

Many Russian and African analysts and policy observers believe that a public-private partnership (participation) strategy in promoting trade will help significantly to polish part of the soft power image both in Russia and Africa.

According to the African Development Bank, Africa’s economies are growing faster than those of any other continent. Nearly half of African countries are now classified as middle-income countries, the number of Africans living below the poverty line fell to 39 per cent in 2023 as compared to 51 per cent in 2021, and around 380 million of Africa’s 1.4 billion people are now earning good incomes – rising consumerism – that makes trade profitable.

Of course, there are various ways to open the burgeoning market for Africa. One of the surest ways is to use the existing rules and regulations. The preferential tariffs for agricultural products exist but only a few African exporters use them, mainly from South Africa, Kenya, Morocco and Egypt. Russian authorities should make it possible for more individual African countries to negotiate for their products to enter the market.

The African regional economic blocs can be useful instruments for facilitating trade between Africa and Russia. In addition, the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry posted an official report on its website that traditional products from least-developed countries (including Africa) would be exempted from import tariffs. The legislation stipulates that traditional goods are eligible for preferential customs and tariff treatment.

Most of the experts interviewed for this story expressed skepticism and wondered if Russian authorities were seriously prepared to open the market for Africa, while others suggested, that with the context of current global competition, Russian authorities have to provide trade incentives.

An academic researcher at the African Studies Institute in Moscow told me the trade preferential for only traditional African goods would really not promote a large scale trade, unfortunately, Russia’s trade with Africa has mostly concentrated in weaponry and military hard-wares. Simple products such as African tea and coffee trade would face keen competition from other global brands.

As China and India are currently doing, Russia should similarly embark on trade facilitation measures, including simplifying import-export procedures (customs, warehousing and transportation) to encourage trade with African countries.

Some say it’s probably both a mix of negative perception and inadequate knowledge about the emerging business potentials that might have an impact on trade development between Russia and Africa. Trade facilitation focusing on lowering the cost of doing business by minimizing regulations and procedures required to move goods and services across borders.

Russia can change the equation that way, and the authorities can even shift focus and transfer their technology to agriculture, and oil and gas in Africa which is booming these days. The experts believe that new trade alliances are emerging and have great potential for growth amid the economic sanctions. Russia has to capitalize on the historical connection between Moscow and those African elites who had been educated in the Soviet Union.

As it was during the Soviet times, Russia could only offer a few manufactured goods that would successfully compete with Western-made products. African nations will probably continue to acquire Russian-made arms, but otherwise, there are a few prospects for diversification of cooperation in the near future.

While Russia’s trade still straddles with Africa, China and other external players are navigating the single African Continental Trade Area (AfCFTA) which offers huge opportunities, an initiative by the African Union (AU). Russia can build on the historical and time-tested friendly ties with Africa but has to review and take concrete measures to work jointly with African countries in strengthening economic and trade cooperation, an essential pillar of the multipolar world.

A complete departure away from mere rhetoric will be an encouraging step forward, and enhance economic relations between African States and the Russian Federation. With the current geopolitical situation, Russia and African countries could now use the chance to strengthen their trade relations and take further decisive actions from both sides to drive foreign policies in a more qualitative manner in this emerging multipolar world.

Kester Kenn Klomegah focuses on current geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development-related questions on Africa with external countries. Most of his well-resourced articles are reprinted in several reputable foreign media.

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 Catherine Wilson
SYDNEY , Sep 20 2024 – Parliamentary representation by women in Pacific Island countries remains stubbornly low at 8.4 percent. Yet women leaders across the region have been meeting every year for the past four decades to discuss goals and drive action to address gender inequality and the most pressing development challenges in the Pacific.

One of the critical issues discussed at the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women, convened recently by the regional development organisation, Pacific Community, in Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands, was endemic levels of violence against women. Up to 68 percent of women in Pacific Island countries have suffered physical or sexual violence by a partner, more than double the global average of 30 percent, reported by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The conference is an invaluable opportunity for government, civil society and donor stakeholders to monitor progress on addressing this issue and identify action plans. And, for many Pacific women leaders, an important part of the long-term vision is preventing violence against women in the next generation. Educating the youth of today to change attitudes and behaviours that are perpetuating these human rights violations, and the severe socioeconomic repercussions is a critical strategy that the Pacific Community is working to roll out across the region.

“Young men and women can be impactful agents for change on the ground,” Mereseini Rakuita, Principal Strategic Lead for Pacific Women and Girls in the SPC executive team, told IPS. “The root cause of gender-based violence is unequal power relations between men and women. This necessitates the engagement of young men and women in advocacy work to enhance their understanding about this violence and its link to inequality.”

Group photo of delegates to the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women held in Majuro, RMI. Credit: SPC

Growing the seed of change in young people is the vision behind the Pacific Girl project, managed by Pacific Women Lead at SPC, and also the Social Citizenship Education (SCE) program, which is part of the multi-partner Pacific Partnership to End Violence Against Women. The SCE program is supported by the European Union. It employs a ‘whole of School’ approach by training teachers in four Pacific Island countries, namely Kiribati, Vanuatu, Tuvalu and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, to embed education about human rights, gender equality and gender-based violence into the formal curriculum. And, also, informally, through the cultivation of respectful behaviours and supportive advocacy.

“In Kiribati, the SCE programme has rolled out nationally across all schools, whereas in Vanuatu it’s focused on six schools in the capital, Port Vila. In Tuvalu, it reaches four schools and 22 in the Marshall Islands across urban and rural locations,” Rakuita explained. “It successfully reaches many rural and remote communities; however, there are so many more to reach given the challenges of transport and resources, remembering that several Pacific Island countries have more than 300 islands.”

Senator Daisy Alik-Momotaro (left) with young Marshallese women sing prior to the first session on the third and final day of the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women. Credit: SPC Chewy Lin

It is a strategy that resonates strongly with national leaders in Pacific Island countries. “I fully support this initiative,” Sokotia Kulene, Director of the Gender Affairs Department in Tuvalu’s Office of the Prime Minister, told IPS. “This is the mandate of the Tuvalu National Gender Equity Policy objective and plan of action, and it will make a difference by changing attitudes, behaviours and mindsets.”

Despite decades of awareness raising and international donor support for reducing the entrenched rates of violence against women, its prevalence remains stubbornly high across the region. The proportion of women who have experienced physical or sexual violence by a partner, ranges from 68 percent in Kiribati and 66 percent in Fiji to 62 percent in Samoa, reports UN Women. Globally, the Pacific Islands ranks the worst in the world for this form of violence. Fifty one percent of women in Melanesia have ever suffered physical or sexual violence, compared to 33 percent in Sub-Saharan Africa and 25 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean, according to WHO.

Marshall Islands’ Minister for Culture and Internal Affairs, Jess Gasper Jr. Credit:

“There is a need for greater investment in addressing the root causes of violence, such as tensions over economic insecurity in a family, which is exacerbated by climate change impacts and loss of livelihoods, and misinterpretation of the bible needs to be supported with transformative approaches to biblical teachings. And media content needs to be produced through various platforms to reach audiences in a way that educates men and boys, as well as women and girls,” Sharon Bhagwan Rolls, Programme Manager for the Pacific Women Mediators Network in Fiji, told IPS.

Gender inequality is the central cause of violence against women and girls. Making tangible progress to address this issue is hampered by additional barriers, including low levels of education in remote areas, perceptions of women’s lower social status, abuse of alcohol and financial abuse within families. And now, in the twenty-first century, the issue is further exacerbated by technology-facilitated gender-based violence.

It is also a major challenge to overcome the strong stigma of domestic and sexual violence in communities that influences the reluctance of survivors of gender-based violence to report these crimes to the police, resulting in a high level of impunity for perpetrators.

“In Fiji, only half of women living with violence have ever told anyone about it and only 24 percent of survivors of violence in Fiji have ever sought help from an agency or formal authority,” Rakuita claims.

From L to R: RMI Senator Daisy Alik-Momotaro, Tuvalu Prime Minister and Minister of Gender Equity and Women Empowerment, Feleti Teo, and Marshall Islands’ Minister for Culture & Internal Affairs, Jess Gasper Jr. Credit: SPC/Chewy Lin

Survivors are, therefore, often trapped in a continuous cycle of abuse when spouses or partners control women’s access to financial resources and the means to independence. And the effects on women’s lives are devastating. Beatings and injuries from violent attacks leave deep physical and mental wounds, including disability, while sexual violations expose women to sexually transmitted diseases. The damage to a woman’s mental health ranges from depression and post-traumatic stress disorder to a high risk of suicide.

The broader costs of domestic violence to island societies and nations are immense. In Fiji, 43 women are physically maimed by domestic assaults every day and, in Papua New Guinea, up to 90 percent of all injuries presented by women to health facilities are due to gender-based violence, reports the Pacific Community. Studies in Vanuatu show that children with mothers who suffer domestic violence are far more likely to drop out of school. And it impacts national economies, such as Fiji, where violence contributes to 10 days of lost work time per employee per annum.

The support of Pacific Island governments and male leaders, in partnership with women, is essential to any meaningful progress.

“If most leaders in the Pacific are men, then their engagement is critical,” Rakuita explained. “We have some great examples in the Pacific of male leaders taking on this critical developmental challenge. The PNG National Parliament has a Standing Committee on gender-based violence as an oversight mechanism on the country’s response to GBV efforts. This was driven by male leaders and led by them—male leaders who recognise the deep impacts GBV is having on their communities and have had enough. They have rightly exercised their power whilst in office to create something sustainable.

There are now signs that the SCE programme, Pacific Girl and other initiatives are triggering leadership in young islanders. At SCE there are after-school clubs for students, organised to directly engage boys and girls in more than 150 primary and secondary schools in the four participating countries. “Students who have participated in the clubs are now demonstrating leadership roles in their schools, such as leading school assemblies, building positive and healthy relationships among their peers and conducting awareness sessions about violence against women in schools and communities,” Rakuita said.

For Kulene, there are major long-term gains of reducing gender-based violence, which would significantly “contribute to Tuvalu’s sustainable development goals,” whether it is improving good health, diminishing poverty, or strengthening peace, justice and economic development.

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’);