By Catherine Wilson
BUCHAREST, Romania , Dec 23 2024 – The days are short with bitterly cold rain in Bucharest, the capital of Romania, the largest Balkan country located south of the Ukraine. Over the border, temperatures in Kyiv will plummet to a daily average of zero in December as the Ukraine war grinds on.

Wars are bringing suffering and heightened insecurity to millions around the world, and food is not only a casualty of bombing and devastation but also being used as a weapon against civilians by warring parties.

Conflict is now the greatest driver of major food crises in the world, says the World Food Programme, and the situation is acute in the Ukraine, which continues to defend itself against Russian invasion, and Gaza, still under siege by Israel. And the threat of severe hunger for civilians caught in hostilities will only rise as winter sets in during the coming months.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, an escalation of tensions since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, triggered massive human displacement, with many fleeing into neighbouring countries. By 2023, Romania, with a population of 19 million, had witnessed more than 3 million Ukrainians arrive at its border, the vast majority being women and children.

“The bombs fell down near my house. I woke up; my 13-year-old daughter woke up. I got up my son and said, ‘You have five minutes; grab your things, and we are going to the metro station.’ We found a car to pick us up with the children and to the house of my sister, her newborn baby, and two more children of her husband. It was crazy. Everywhere there were queues. You couldn’t get money from the ATM, you couldn’t get fuel—nothing.” Iryna Sobol, a 45-year-old Ukrainian who fled her Kyiv home in 2022 and now resides in Bucharest, recounted to IPS. And, as the conflict spread, food prices rose.

As with other basic needs, food systems face collapse when military attacks destroy agricultural land and crops, forcing farmers to flee and damaging the critical infrastructure for transporting, storing, and selling food. Since 2022, the agricultural industry in the Ukraine has been hit with losses of USD 80 billion. And as people under siege face increasingly scarce food supplies, prices rise for what is available, making basic sustenance an even greater struggle for those who have lost their income.

Since mid-year, Russian forces have made aggressive advances into the east and Donetsk region of Ukraine, where more than 137,000 people have been forced to flee since August.

Ukraine refugees receive food provisions from the Romania Red Cross in Bucharest. Credit: Filip Scarlat/Romanian Red Cross

“The humanitarian situation is further exacerbated now that winter has set in. Russia’s targeted destruction of critical energy infrastructure has led to massive losses in Ukraine’s energy generation capacity, and the attacks continue, disrupting electricity, heating, and water supply and already affecting millions of households,” Elisabeth Haslund, spokesperson for the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in the Ukraine, told IPS. Food is also a critical need, with 7.3 million Ukrainians, or 20 percent of the population, facing food insecurity this year, reports the United Nations.

In Bucharest, Andrei Scarlat, Manager of the Romanian Red Cross Humanity Concept Store, said he had witnessed a recent increase of newly arrived Ukrainian refugees registering for humanitarian supplies, such as flour, sugar, rice, canned foods, and hygiene products.

The Romanian Red Cross, which has assisted more than 1.3 million displaced Ukrainians with food, water, shelter, and health, is one of many humanitarian organizations that are partnered with the Romanian government in its acclaimed state response to the Ukraine refugee crisis. Within days of its neighbour coming under attack, the Balkan state coordinated an emergency operation at border crossings with the provision of shelter, food, and medical care to those fleeing. And it offers temporary protection to refugees with access to services such as health, education, housing, and employment.

An Action Against Hunger aid worker measures a baby girl’s arm using a MUAC band to assess nutritional health in Gaza, August 2024. Credit: Action Against Hunger

But, more than 2,000 kilometres to the southeast, conflict in the besieged Palestinian enclave of Gaza has already brought it to the brink of famine. In the tiny 365-square-kilometer territory, sandwiched between the Mediterranean Sea to the east and Israel to the west, 2.23 million Palestinians have endured years of suffering under an Israeli blockade. Now the military onslaught by the Israeli Defence Force in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack inside Israeli territory on 7 October last year, which left 1,200 Israelis dead, has killed more than 44,000 Palestinians.

And the destruction of basic infrastructure for habitation, including water, sanitation, health and medical facilities, and food systems, with the elimination of 70 percent of Gaza’s crops, has created unbearable living conditions for the more than 90 percent of Gazans who are displaced. In October, the World Food Programme warned that famine was imminent.

“The Gaza Strip is currently in a human-made famine. We are long past the point of ‘imminent famine.’ The first child was killed by Israeli-imposed famine many months ago and many more since,” Yasmeen El-Hasan of the Palestinian Union of Agricultural Work Committees in Ramallah, Palestine, told IPS. “The use of food and essential resources as weapons of war is a hallmark of Israeli systematic violence against Palestinians… aimed at starving Palestinians into elimination.”

In Northern Gaza, the focus of Israeli air and ground assaults over the past two months, more than 65,000 people are barely surviving in overcrowded tent shelters with no water and sanitation. The dire lack of food is causing severe malnutrition, especially in mothers and children.

And since October, Israeli border authorities have blocked and delayed food and humanitarian deliveries into the territory through the Kerem Shalom crossing. Consequently, in October only 5,000 metric tons of food succeeded in reaching Gaza, or one fifth of what was required, claims the World Food Programme.

“There has been no significant easing of restrictions on the entry of food and humanitarian aid into Gaza… and we were only able to deliver aid to half as many distribution points in North Gaza over the past month,” the spokesperson for Action Against Hunger, a humanitarian organization addressing hunger and malnutrition around the world, told IPS.

El-Hasan added that “the minimal food that is available is not accessible. The food consumer price index has increased 312 percent; aid that does enter is concentrated in small areas, and the Israeli occupation forces often attack Palestinians as they seek aid.”

A child in northern Gaza drinks water provided by Action Against Hunger to support displaced communities, October 2024. Credit: Action Against Hunger

A scene of destruction in northern Gaza shows demolished buildings and scattered debris, with a lone tree standing amidst the ruins, October 2024. Credit: Action Against Hunger

As the winter months unfold, the people of Gaza will face catastrophic conditions, with 90 percent of Gazans likely to experience severe hunger. “Cold and rainy weather is already affecting those in makeshift shelters, which are often constructed from tarpaulins, blankets, and cardboard, offering little protection. Children and the elderly are particularly at risk,” said Action Against Hunger.

On 12 December, the UN General Assembly voted for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza. But the survival of Gazans during the coming months will depend on the untrammelled passage of humanitarian aid. “There must be an immediate reopening of all border crossings, a substantial increase in the influx of aid into Gaza, and a guarantee of safe, unobstructed access for humanitarian organizations to deliver aid to all areas,” the spokesperson for Action Against Hunger continued. El-Hasan added that “the international community must also abide by their legal obligations and hold Israel accountable for its violations of international law, including the use of starvation as a weapon of war.”

In the Ukraine, the UNHCR and its humanitarian partners are responding to those who continue to flee fighting and need support as weather conditions deteriorate. But, as in Gaza, only an end to the conflict will provide the conditions for reconstructing Ukraine’s agricultural industry and food production, a goal that will take years and an investment of at least USD 56 billion.

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 Timothy A. Wise
CAMBRIDGE, MA., Dec 23 2024 – A tribunal of trade arbitrators has ruled in favor of the United States in its complaint that Mexico’s restrictions on genetically modified corn violate the terms of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement (USMCA). The long-awaited ruling in the 16-month trade dispute is unlikely to settle the questions raised by Mexico about the safety of consuming GM corn and its associated herbicide.

Indeed, the pro-U.S. ruling raises questions about the fairness of the USMCA itself, which has now legitimized the use of the agreement’s dispute process to challenge a domestic policy that barely affected trade. U.S. president-elect Donald Trump is now openly threatening Mexico with 25% tariffs on all Mexican exports, a blatant violation of the USMCA that Trump himself renegotiated and signed in 2018. Yet the treaty appears impotent to challenge such unilateral U.S. trade measures just as its tribunal slaps Mexico’s hand for its public health policies.

According to the U.S. government, the final report from the tribunal, announced December 20, ruled that “Mexico’s measures are not based on science and undermine the market access that Mexico agreed to provide in the USMCA.” In fact, the trade panel’s ruling was more limited, demanding that Mexico comply with the trade agreement’s procedures for carrying out risk assessments based on “relevant international scientific principles.”

The Mexican government defended its position but vowed to comply with the ruling. “The Government of Mexico does not share the Panel’s determination, as it considers that the measures in question are in line with the principles of protection of public health and the rights of indigenous peoples, established in national legislation and in the international treaties to which it is a party,” read a statement following the ruling.

The ruling will not settle the debate over the health and environmental risks of GM corn and its associated herbicides, In the course of the dispute, Mexico produced extensive peer-reviewed scientific evidence that showed ample cause for precaution given the risks associated with both GM corn and its associated herbicide glyphosate. Recent studies have shown negative health impacts to the gastrointestinal tract and potential damage to the liver, kidneys, and other organs.

“[We] did an exhaustive review of the scientific literature,” explained María Elena Àlvarez-Buylla, the molecular geneticist who led Mexico’s national science agency, CONAHCYT, until October. “We concluded that the evidence was more than sufficient to restrict, out of precaution, the use of GM corn and its associated agro-chemical, glyphosate, in the country’s food supply chains.”

That evidence was presented in great detail to the tribunal in Mexico’s formal filings during the process, and it has now been published as a “Science Dossier.” It represents one of the most comprehensive reviews of the scientific evidence of the risks of GM corn and glyphosate to public health and the environment.

For its part, the U.S. government declined to present evidence that its GM corn with glyphosate residues is safe to eat in Mexico, where corn is consumed at more than ten times the levels as in the United States and in minimally processed forms such as tortillas, not in processed foods.

“The research on the part of the U.S. was quite poor,” says Dr. Álvarez-Buylla, noting that U.S. research was outdated, ignored many recent studies, and depended on science that is “full of conflicts of interest.”

The U.S. government also failed to produce any evidence that Mexico’s February 2023 presidential decree had any meaningful impacts on U.S. exporters. U.S. corn exports have increased since the decree was enacted, not shrunk. The measures restricted only GM white corn use in tortillas, less than 1% of the U.S. corn exported to Mexico.

Early on in the dispute, Mexican Economy Minister Raquel Buenrostro stated that the U.S. needed to show “quantitatively, with numbers, something that has not occurred: that the corn decree has commercially affected” U.S. exporters. The U.S. has yet to produce any such evidence.

Meanwhile, president-elect Trump’s threatened tariffs are blatantly illegal under the USMCA and promise to inflict massive economic harm on Mexican exporters, and on U.S.-based firms that produce in Mexico.

The pro-U.S., pro-agrochemical industry ruling will ripple far beyond this dispute. Mexico’s documentation of the evidence of risk from GM corn and glyphosate should prompt consumers and governments the world over to take a closer look at these controversial products, and at the lax U.S. regulatory processes exposed by Mexico.

Countries considering entering into trade agreements with the United States may now be more reluctant to do so if their domestic policies can be challenged in a trade court. Kenya has been negotiating a trade agreement with the United States. Kenyans are already concerned the agreement will open Kenya to GM animal feeds, says Anne Maina of the Kenya Biodiversity and Biosafety Association. If the agreement can be used to challenge domestic policies, she says, it will be even less palatable.

It remains to be seen how the Mexican government will comply with the ruling. It has 45 days to respond. Already, President Claudia Sheinbaum has reiterated her support for a constitutional amendment to enshrine a ban on GM corn cultivation and consumption in tortillas. A “Right to Food” law passed last year mandates labeling of foods containing GMOs. No tortilla seller wants such a label on its products, because Mexican consumers are clear that they do not want GM corn in their tortillas.

The tribunal’s ruling will not undo the fact that Mexico’s precautionary policies are indeed justified by a wealth of scientific evidence. By allowing the trade agreement to undermine a domestic policy that barely affects trade, it will further tarnish the legitimacy of an agreement already seen as favoring multinational corporations over public health and the environment.

Timothy A. Wise is a senior research fellow at Tufts University’s Global Development and Environment Institute.

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 Maina Waruru
NAIROBI, Dec 23 2024 – Climate and environmental activists from Japan have criticized the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) for financing the controversial Mozambique Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) project to the tune of USD 3 billion in a loan signed in July.

The project has been associated with the displacement of thousands of people and is in violation of Japan’s G7 commitment to end direct public support for overseas fossil fuel projects.

The bank’s action is also projected to have far-reaching effects on climate and the environment, further negatively impacting the livelihoods of communities in the restive Cabo Delgado province in the north of the county, a report says.

Conflict in the region has been linked to insurgency and human rights abuses by the country’s security forces.

In the report “Faces of Impact: How JBIC and Japan’s LNG Financing Harm Communities and the Planet” by Friends of Earth (FOE), Japan activists find that in Mozambique, at least 550 families were displaced for the Rovuma LNG project, exposing them to risk as it is situated in a conflict-torn region and has been linked to human rights abuses of civilians.

The project is further backed by the Japanese bank through a loan of U$536 million to Mitsui, a Japanese corporate group, also one of the owners of the project, and which describes the project as “one of the largest natural gas reserves discovered anywhere in the world in recent years.”

The money will finance the development and production of LNG in a region where thousands of civilians have been displaced by both violence and the gas development activities since 2012, some without compensation for their land.

The LNG project intends to extract 65 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which will be done offshore in the Rovuma Basin and piped to an onshore LNG processing plant on the Afungi Peninsula.

“The project began its onshore construction activities in 2019 but was suspended in 2021 as a result of violent conflict. It has not officially resumed, but some of its activities have been restarted since 2023,” the report explains. The insurgency remains active, and human rights infringements resulting from the project activities remain unresolved, it further cautions.

“The Mozambique LNG project is linked to violent conflict, has resulted in social injustices on Mozambican citizens, and is a potential source of massive carbon emissions. It has already cost the country productive lands, local economies, and valuable natural areas,” it warns.

Should the project proceed as planned and despite becoming the biggest gas project in Africa, it will deliver low revenues to the host country and place the country at risk of liability if it fails, the report opines.

Owned by a consortium of seven companies, including the Mozambique state company Empresa Nacional de Hidrocarbonetos (ENH). All except ENH control their shares through offshore companies, with TotalEnergies being the majority owner and operator.

It finds that there is a “pattern of harm and destruction” in JBIC-financed gas projects, and communities have conveyed to the bank that it is violating its own “Guidelines for Confirmation of Environmental and Social Considerations.”

According to Kete Fumo of the advocacy group Justiça Ambiental and Friends of Earth Mozambique, the project is indirectly contributing to the insurgency that has plagued the region for years.

“People in at least 17 districts are exposed to terrorist attacks. Some families in Palma district, for example, have been displaced but have not been offered any compensation yet. They had lots of extensive land, but not anymore; they have lost their only source of sustenance,” she said during a webinar to launch the report hosted by FOE Japan.

By 2018, when the census of affected communities in Palma was updated, some 616 families were identified, and another 1,847 families were found to be “economically affected” by the loss of their farmland handed over to the project, added Fumo.

“The environmental issues surrounding the project are already very visible, with accentuated erosion, increased weather events, and the fact that it is considered one of the six carbon bombs in the world, with Mozambique being one of the African countries most vulnerable to climate change,” she told IPS in an interview.

Failure to comply with compensation agreements entered between the affected and TotalEnergies posed a big problem for communities that, due to the lack of land for cultivation, now produce much less food than they did before the project arrived.

This has left them exposed to food insecurity, with fishing communities lacking access to fishing areas contributing to hunger in the villages.

“The insecurity scenario in Palma also makes accessibility to the district deficient, which makes the price of basic necessities more expensive in a community where families’ sources of income have been cut off by the project. People need to reinvent themselves to be able to support their families, but this is a scenario where not everyone has the capacity or conditions to do so,” the activist added.

She called for the abandonment of the project, saying that “not implementing the project and leaving people living in their homes with their livelihoods, culture, and traditions has been the call made by Justica Ambiental since the beginning of this process.”

“In the history of Mozambique and in our experience with mega projects, no resettlement has had positive results. The call continues to be that this project should not be implemented, since even before a drop of gas had been exploited, the impacts were already negatively affecting the communities,” Fumo appealed.

In one of the affected villages of Macala, 50 kilometres off the Indian Ocean coastline, residents claimed they had lost not less than 7,000 hectares of land alienated for LNG exploration and development, with no compensation so far.

One of the victims, Omar Amise, said, “We have received no compensation so far, and our lands have been destroyed by new infrastructure, including roads. Our children are starving because our lands have been taken by roads.”

According to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), by January 2024, over 582,000 were still displaced in Cabo Delgado province, due to recurring attacks on civilians and governmental forces by “Non-State Armed Groups” since 2017. The numbers grew to over one million at the height of the conflict in 2021 and 2022, adds the UN agency.

From the end of December 2023, over 8,000 people have also been newly displaced as a result of attacks by insurgents in the province’s Macomia, Mecufi, Metuge, Mocímboa da Praia, Muidumbe, and Quissanga districts, adds the UNHCR.

An article published in September 2024 by the magazine Politico alleged that a Mozambican army unit operating near the Mozambique LNG project site carried out a series of atrocities, including rape, torture, and the murder or disappearance of at least 97 people.

It claimed that TotalEnergies was aware of the atrocities by the army in the wider area, while it paid a Joint Task Force made up of army soldiers, commandos, and paramilitary police for its LNG site protection.

Back to the FOE report, it claims that since 2016, JBIC has provided a staggering UD18.6 billion to fossil gas expansion—four times more than Japan’s contribution to the Green Climate Fund.

The bank is also blamed for supporting similar fossils energy projects amounting to USD18.5 billion in the Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Thailand, Australia, Vietnam, and the United States

Our enquiries on the claims made by FOE were answered by either the French Energy multinational or JBIC.

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 Madhurima Sarkar-Swaisgood and Sanjay Srivastava
BANGKOK, Thailand, Dec 23 2024 – In December 2024, Vanuatu experienced yet another harrowing reminder of its vulnerability to disasters—a powerful 7.4 magnitude earthquake struck the Pacific nation’s capital, Port Vila, leaving 14 dead, over 200 injured, and thousands more affected.

The devastating earthquake, compounded by overnight aftershocks and disrupted essential services, highlights the precarious situation faced by countries already grappling with the impacts of climate change and natural disasters.

Vanuatu is emblematic of the cascading disasters that Pacific Island nations increasingly endure, where frequent earthquakes intersect with the escalating impacts of climate-induced hazards such as cyclones, rising sea levels, and coastal erosion accompanied by staggering loss and damage experienced by vulnerable populations and ecosystems.

With every fraction of a degree of warming, the region’s diverse subregions—from the icy peaks of the Third Pole to the low-lying islands of the Pacific—are encountering unparalleled climate risks.

Recognizing these unique challenges, ESCAP launched the 2024 Asia-Pacific Subregional Disaster Reports to customize the insights and recommendations from the flagship Asia-Pacific Disaster Report 2023 to the distinct vulnerabilities and opportunities within each subregion.

Transformative insights: Shaping climate resilient futures

The 2024 subregional reports reveal escalating disaster risks across Asia and the Pacific, stressing that incremental actions are insufficient against intensifying climate impacts. East and North-East Asia has faced $2 trillion in economic losses and nearly half a million fatalities over five decades, with 2°C warming expected to exacerbate droughts, heatwaves, and floods in China, Mongolia and Korea, threatening urban centers and critical systems.

North and Central Asia faces growing multi-hazard risks in the Aral Sea Basin, where droughts, heatwaves, and floods will endanger agriculture and energy systems. In South-East Asia, nearly 100 per cent of the population is at risk of floods under 2°C warming, with the Mekong River Basin emerging as a persistent multi-hazard hotspot.

Pacific island nations face rising seas and stronger cyclones that erode coastlines, threaten biodiversity, and force communities to relocate, while South and South-West Asia grapples with glacial melt from the Third Pole, jeopardizing water security for 1.3 billion people.

Economic and social costs are mounting, with average annual losses (AAL) projected to rise under warming scenarios. East and North-East Asia’s AAL of $510 billion could increase further under 2°C warming, while the Pacific’s AAL exceeds $20 billion, with small island developing states like Vanuatu and Tonga suffering losses of over 21 per cent of GDP.

Despite these dire projections, the reports emphasize that investments in transformative adaptation—such as early warning systems, resilient infrastructure, and integrated climate policies—can mitigate risks and protect livelihoods across the region.

Early warning systems: A lifeline for resilience

A critical takeaway from the subregional reports is the transformative role of early warning systems (EWS) in disaster risk reduction. By providing timely and actionable information, these systems save lives and reduce economic losses. In South-East Asia, effective EWS could prevent $8.7 billion to $13.1 billion annually, while in the Pacific, they could avert $4 billion to $6 billion in damages each year.

EWS are especially vital in regions with complex multi-hazard risks, such as the Pacific small island developing States, where cyclones, floods, and sea-level rise intersect, and in South-East Asia, where urban flood risks are rapidly escalating.

For EWS to be fully effective, they must encompass four key pillars: risk knowledge, detection and monitoring, dissemination of warnings, and preparedness. Investments in these areas, combined with robust regional cooperation, can ensure that warnings reach the most vulnerable populations in time to act.

The reports highlight examples like impact-based forecasting in South and Southwest Asia and AI-powered risk assessments in China and Japan as transformative advancements in EWS implementation. These systems not only save lives but also help governments and communities reduce disaster recovery costs and safeguard economic stability.

Transboundary solutions: Collaborative action for shared risks

Transboundary risks like ocean-based hazards, inland water stress, and desertification demand collaborative solutions across regions.

1. Ocean-Based Climate Action:

Rising sea levels, intensified cyclones, and coastal erosion require collective efforts such as mangrove restoration and integrated coastal management. In the Pacific SIDS, ASEAN, and South-West Asia, platforms like the Pacific Resilience Partnership and Mekong Basin initiatives foster nature-based solutions to protect ecosystems and livelihoods.

2. Inland Water Systems:

The drying of the Aral Sea Basin in North and Central Asia highlights the importance of transboundary water-sharing agreements to combat drought and degradation. For Third Pole glacial melt, collaboration through the Third Pole Climate Forum is vital to safeguard water security for 1.3 billion people in South, South-West, and East Asia.

3. Desertification and Sand and Dust Storms:

Desertification and sand and dust storms (SDS) are accelerating across Asia. Countries like China, Mongolia, and Iran are advancing afforestation and land restoration, while regional frameworks promote sustainable land management to mitigate downstream impacts.

By prioritizing transboundary cooperation, countries can tackle shared risks, protect vulnerable communities, and build scalable solutions for resilience.

A call for transformative change

The 2024 subregional reports make it unequivocally clear: transformative, not incremental, adaptation is needed to combat the growing threats of climate change and disasters. This means embedding climate resilience in every sector—agriculture, energy, urban planning, and biodiversity conservation—while fostering regional cooperation to address transboundary risks.

By aligning local action with global frameworks like the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Paris Agreement, the Asia-Pacific region has an opportunity to lead the way in building a sustainable and resilient future. As ESCAP’s subregional reports demonstrate, the tools and knowledge are at hand. The time to act is now—before the risks become irreversible and the costs unmanageable.

Madhurima Sarkar-Swaisgood is Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP & Sanjay Srivastava is Chief of Disaster Risk Reduction Section, ESCAP. Other co-authors include Leila Salarpour Goodarzi, Associate Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP, Rusali Agrawal, Consultant, ESCAP, Naina Tanwar, Consultant, ESCAP, Madhurima Sarkar-Swaisgood, Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP and Sanjay Srivastava, Chief of Disaster Risk Reduction Section, ESCAP.

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, Dec 23 2024 – The United States and Western allies have jointly provided a staggering $260 billion in aid, mostly weapons and military assistance, to Ukraine as the long-drawn-out conflict continues following Russia’s invasion in February 2022.

Speaking to reporters at NATO headquarters in Brussels early December, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “All told, the United States has provided $102 billion in assistance to Ukraine, and our allies and partners, $158 billion”.

“And as I said many times before, this may be the best example of burden-sharing that I’ve seen in the 32 years that I’ve been doing this”, he said.

Last week, the New York Times reported the Pentagon will be sending an additional $725 million in arms from its stockpiles, “amid deep concerns in Ukraine that the incoming Trump administration might cut off military aid to the country”.

Meanwhile, as the UN continues its losing battle against world poverty, the UN University’s World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), says to end extreme poverty and absolute monetary poverty worldwide by 2030, it would cost about $70 and $325 billion per year.

Dr. Natalie Goldring, who represents the Acronym Institute at the United Nations on conventional weapons and arms trade issues, told IPS as outgoing US President Joe Biden approaches the end of his presidency in mid-January, “he continues to keep the arms transfer spigot to Ukraine wide open”.

Credit: US Department of Defense (DoD)

In early December 2024, she quoted Blinken as saying, “The United States has been surging our own resources and security assistance to continue to help build up Ukraine’s air defenses, its artillery, its armored vehicles.”

“We are determined – and it’s fully my intent and the President’s intent – to spend every cent that we have available from the $61 billion that were authorized by Congress in the supplemental appropriation.”

“The current situation in Ukraine is fraught and filled with uncertainty. There are many potential risks, including the risk of a broader war in Europe if this conflict continues, and the risk of Russia claiming more and more Ukrainian territory, either through conflict or as a result of negotiations to end the war,” said Dr Goldring.

“The continued flows of weapons from the United States also risk diversion to terrorists and combatants far outside the region. This, in turn, increases the likelihood that US military service members could face our own weapons in conflict. This suggests — yet again — that US arms transfer policy lacks appropriate focus on the potential long-term negative effects of these transfers,” she pointed out.

In his interview with Time magazine, which voted him “Person of the Year” last week, President-elect Trump said: ”I disagree vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles to Russia. Why are we doing that? We are just escalating this war and making it worse.”

Trump also said he would use US support for Ukraine as leverage against Russia in negotiating an end to the war.

Dr Goldring said perhaps the most dangerous action the outgoing Biden Administration has taken, with respect to Ukraine, is its decision to transfer antipersonnel land mines to Ukraine in November and December 2024.

This decision, she said, reverses the Obama and Biden Administrations’ commitments not to deploy antipersonnel landmines anywhere other than the Korean peninsula.

This decision also endangers civilians, will make post-war recovery massively more difficult, and stands in stark opposition to the 164 countries that have committed not to produce, sell, or stockpile antipersonnel landmines under the Mine Ban Treaty.

“During his most recent presidential campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly claimed that he would end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of his inauguration. In all likelihood, this is yet another example of his consistent practice of vastly overestimating his capacity to achieve change unilaterally and making exaggerated claims that aren’t backed up by analysis or implementable policies.”

But it does raise the question of what he might be willing to give up to Russian President Putin in order to move toward that possibility, she said.

At his press briefing, Blinken also said the United States has been “surging our own resources and security assistance to continue to help build up Ukraine’s air defenses, its artillery, its armored vehicles. We are determined – and it’s fully my intent and the President’s intent – to spend every cent that we have available from the $61 billion that were authorized by Congress in the supplemental appropriation.”

With the G7, we’re finalizing moving out the door $50 billion secured by frozen Russian assets. At the same time, NATO Allies and partners of NATO are sharing the burden and shouldering even more of the responsibility. Germany, for example, just made a pledge of $680 million in new military aid. Bulgaria, Czechia, Sweden, others providing personnel to this new NATO command.

According to the US State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, the heavy flow of US arms to Ukraine include:

• Three Patriot air defense batteries and munitions; • 12 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) and munitions; • HAWK air defense systems and munitions; • AIM-7, RIM-7, and AIM-9M missiles for air defense;

• More than 3,000 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles; • Avenger air defense systems; • VAMPIRE counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (c-UAS) and munitions; • c-UAS gun trucks and ammunition; • Mobile c-UAS laser-guided rocket systems;

• 20 Mi-17 helicopters; • 31 Abrams tanks; • 45 T-72B tanks; • 109 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles; • Over 1,700 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs);

• Anti-aircraft guns and ammunition; • Air defense systems components; • Equipment to integrate Western launchers, missiles, and radars with Ukraine’s systems; • Equipment to support and sustain Ukraine’s existing air defense capabilities; and • 21 air surveillance radars.

Over 8,000 Javelin anti-armor systems; Over 52,000 other anti-armor systems and munitions; • Over 700 Switchblade Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems; • 160 155mm Howitzers and over 1,000,000 155mm artillery rounds; • Over 6,000 precision-guided 155mm artillery rounds;

• Over 10,000 155mm rounds of Remote Anti-Armor Mine (RAAM) Systems; • 100,000 rounds of 125mm tank ammunition; • 45,000 152mm artillery rounds; • 20,000 122mm artillery rounds; • 50,000 122mm GRAD rockets; • 72 105mm Howitzers and 370,000 105mm artillery rounds; • 298 Tactical Vehicles to tow weapons;

• 34 Tactical Vehicles to recover equipment; • 30 ammunition support vehicles; • 38 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems and ammunition; • 30 120mm mortar systems and over 175,000 120mm mortar rounds; • 10 82mm mortar systems; • 10 60mm mortar systems; •

And much more.

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 Emilio Godoy
MERIDA, Mexico, Dec 23 2024 – When he promoted the Maya Train (TM) in 2019, then-President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who ruled Mexico between 2018 and October this year, stated that the railway line would be an engine of development for the southeastern Yucatan peninsula.

The three states of the peninsula – Campeche, Quintana Roo and Yucatan – were offered spaces for craftspeople and ecotourism in the stations, as well as the transfer of thousands of tourists, the promotion of alternative tourism and the creation of jobs.

But one year after three of the five established routes began operating, there is little evidence of the promised benefits.

It is true that more international tourists have arrived at airports in Merida, the capital of the southeastern state of Yucatan, or tourist destinations such as Cozumel in neighbouring Quintana Roo, between January and September, compared to the same period in 2023.



However, in Cancun, the peninsula’s tourist hotspot, with one station, those arrivals fell 1.5%, making it difficult for experts to attribute the higher overall tourist arrivals to the TM.

Between December 2023 and last August, the TM carried 340,622 passengers, at a rate of 1,425 per day, according to official figures. Cancun, Merida, Playa del Carmen, Valladolid and Palenque, which has an archaeological site, account for 80% of the passengers.

Mayan craftsperson Alicia Pech does not know the railway, says she has no money to travel, that more people have not arrived and that sales are low.

The train, intended for tourists, curious users and the local population, among whom it arouses little enthusiasm, is empty at the larger stations, Merida or Cancun, and fares are low at the smaller ones.

As in other stations, Maxcanu, part of section 3 that runs between Calkini (Campeche) and Izamal (Yucatan) has eight empty shops with signs such as ‘Food’, ‘Community Tourism’ and ‘Mayan Handicrafts’.

The same thing happens in Valladolid, part of section 4 that connects Izamal with Cancun, and in the Merida-Teya station, also on route 3, there are two food shops, one that offers TM souvenirs, a car rental place, and another one that advertises a future bakery.

José Rodríguez, originally from Cancn, was disappointed because the difference in cost compared to land transport is low and because of a one-hour delay he had on his commute to Merida.

Of the 34 planned stations, only 26 are operating, as Sedena is still tending the last two sections between Felipe Carrillo Puerto, in Quintana Roo, and Centenario, in Campeche.

To increase revenues and minimise losses, President Claudia Sheinbaum, who took office on 1 October, plans to expand it to Puerto Progreso, on the Yucatan coast north of Merida, to move cargo.

The Mexican government has known since 2022 that the mega-project would increase the budget. The Cost-Benefit Analysis Update, prepared that year by a private Mexican consulting firm, concluded that the cost would go from two to four times its original cost.

But the TM will continue to consume money, as the 2025 budget proposal includes a budget of US$2,173 million, added to the delay of the project and a total cost overrun that already exceeds US$15 billion.