By Cecilia Russell and Busani Bafana
NAIROBI, Apr 11 2025 – This week presented a beacon of hope for young people so that the “girl from the South and the boy, of course” could stay in the developing world, Dr Ismahane Elouafi, Executive Managing Director of CGIAR, said during a press conference on the final day of the CGIAR Science Week.

Science and innovation could whet their appetites, especially as research and innovation can change the perception that it is a drudgery-filled occupation to one where there is room for ambition – and it made business sense.

“In the face of slow productivity and rising risks, the case is clear. Investing in agricultural research is one of the smartest and most future-proof decisions that anyone can make,” she said.

Elouafi, along with the other panellists Dr Eliud Kiplimo Kireger, the Director General of KALRO and Eluid Rugut, a youth agri-champion at the Ban Ki-moon Centre, alluded to the broad value chain of agriculture, which will make it attractive to young people.

Dr Eliud Kiplimo Kireger, the Director General of KALRO. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Kireger commented that people say, “Agriculture is not sexy, and so we need to make it sexy,” and encourage young people into science. Apart from encouraging young kids into science, there was a space in it for young people who don’t want to see returns on their investments in years but in months.

Rugut’s personal experience backs the claim up; he told the press conference that he first had to convince his father to give him a little land – and this wasn’t an easy task. Rugut, who represents both the youth and a smallholder, said it was only once his father saw the benefits of the new technologies that he was prepared to give his son the benefit of the doubt.

“It was very hard to convince my dad to give us land, but over time, these technologies that I was trying to bring to the farm – like drip irrigation, water pumps and drought-tolerant seeds,” Rugut said, but in the end, “I was able to convince him. Also, my mom was able to convince him.”

Kireger said the week-long conference had shown the power of collaboration, especially because research was expensive and the need was great. However, digitisation had meant that a lot of the research was no longer stuck in the labs and was now in the hands of farmers.

Eluid Rugut, a youth agri-champion at the Ban Ki-Moon Centre. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

He encouraged farmers (and the journalists at the conference) to take a look at the Google Play store, where there are KALRO apps.

“So, if you go to Google Play Store, you will find many KALRO apps which you can download onto your phone. So, if you’re a coffee farmer, for example, you can download a guide on your phone.”

This digitisation is key to scaling research and making it accessible.

Elouafi, too, said investment in agribusiness was crucial to transforming the sector There was a need for public-private partnerships so farmers were no longer only involved in production but down the value chain too.

“So strategic investment in agricultural research isn’t just necessary; it is economically smart. We have seen a USD 10 return on every dollar spent on research and development in the agriculture sector.”

She provided several examples. Participating in the value chain could transform USD 300 of wheat into USD 3000 through pasta production. Likewise with quinoa, millet and sorghum, which cost USD 4 in the market, with production, can fetch USD 50 to USD 100 per kilogram in the market.

This opportunity is where policies and subsidies come in, to put this potential into the hands of the farmers. “This is a gap we need to bridge,” Elouafi said.

Elouafi reported significant progress this week, particularly in addressing food insecurity. The achievements included the launch of the CGIAR research portfolio, the International Potato Centre (CIP) and KALRO biotech agreement, the IWMI water security strategy for East Africa, and the publication of CGIAR’s flagship report, Insight to Impact: A decision-maker’s guide to navigating food system science.

“Science week  has demonstrated the strength of partnerships. How together we can generate powerful tools, innovation, technologies, knowledge, institutions, policies – all of it – to deliver real-world impact for the communities that we serve.

“In the era of fake news and misinformation, our work, our impact, our partnership, and our commitment to the communities we serve are real, and our impact is real, and we need to have a much louder voice. We cannot let it up because the gap will be filled by misinformation.”

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 IPS Reporters and Guy Dinmore
MANDALAY, YANGON, LONDON, Apr 11 2025 – Two weeks after a devastating earthquake hit central Myanmar, the military junta is directing flows of international aid to urban centres it controls while bombing civilians in areas held by resistance forces, breaking a ceasefire.

With the confirmed death toll from the March 28 quake approaching 4,000 people, foreign aid efforts are picking up, led by regime ally China and joined by other neighbouring countries, including India, Bangladesh and Thailand, as well as major relief agencies and the European Commission.

But the extent of the disaster, affecting an estimated two million people, has revealed the junta’s limits of resources and manpower after four years of civil war and with state structures around health and education severely weakened by the non-violent Civil Disobedience Movement.

“We have not received any assistance from the authorities. Assistance is almost non-existent. The authorities’ capability for rescue is very limited. Rescue groups reached affected communities very late, and so we’re seeing more losses than should have happened,” said Ko Soe, whose two-storey house in Myit Thar town in Mandalay Region is no longer habitable.

The ruins of a residential building in Pyinmana Township near the capital Nay Pyi Taw. Credit: IPS

“We’re hit with a huge financial burden because we cannot afford the money to repair our house. It hurts me to see other people who have lost their loved ones and their houses, and I feel guilty not being able to help,” he told IPS.

He and other survivors have accused the regime of not allowing healthcare workers who quit the state sector in protest against the 2021 coup to treat the injured. Private clinics and hospitals staffed by former state doctors and nurses had been shut down before the quake and are not allowed to reopen.

Prices of food, fuel and other essentials are rising, and people fear crime and looting. “With all these challenges, the military is also conscripting people against their will,” Ko Soe said.

In many areas the relief effort is driven by local individuals and charities, helped by donations and also money sent by the parallel National Unity Government (NUG), which was set up by lawmakers ousted in the coup and partly operates from outside Myanmar.

Destroyed bridges, roads, power supplies and telecommunications have already hampered relief efforts and the junta is exercising what controls it can.

Deputy military chief Soe Win declared on April 5 that aid organisations were not allowed to operate independently and required the regime’s authorisation. Many have been forced to abandon their missions. Unknown numbers of volunteers have been arrested, and some conscripted.

By April 6, with no hope of digging out more survivors, foreign search and rescue teams were leaving, including those from Singapore, Malaysia and India. Some donated equipment to the Myanmar fire service. Red Cross societies in various countries, including the UK, are mostly working through the Myanmar Red Cross, which is effectively a wing of the junta.

The regime’s State Administration Council, led by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, has prioritised relief and aid efforts in Nay Pyi Taw, the military stronghold and showcase city declared the capital in 2005, and Mandalay, the country’s second largest city, as well as Buddhist temples and monasteries.

Soldiers clear rubble from Mahamuni Buddha Temple, a symbol of Mandalay. Credit: IPS

“I lost my aunt and four-year-old niece when their house collapsed. Only one wall is left standing. Our town has many ancient buildings and many collapsed in the quake,” said Thin Thin from Yamethin town in Mandalay Region.

“The government [junta] is not offering us any help. Only people around the neighbourhood are assisting in clearing the debris. Everything we need to rebuild the house is now so expensive. What we need is cash assistance,” she told IPS.

David Gum Awng, deputy minister of international cooperation for the NUG, which is trying to coordinate relief efforts where possible, said the regime was restricting access to areas beyond the junta’s control, particularly in Sagaing Region, the epicentre of the 7.7 magnitude quake and where conflict has been acute for several years. Regime air strikes have continued there.

He told IPS that the NUG was collaborating with UN agencies and international relief groups to help expand their reach by providing safety, clearing routes and sharing information.

“The prospects for peace are in limbo as the junta hasn’t exhibited any sign or willingness for a lasting and positive peace,” he said.

“SAC [junta] troops are still engaged in active combat and offensives and drone attacks, making the relief efforts even more difficult,” he said. “If the junta is serious about sustainable peace, they can easily release all the political prisoners first and cease all their offensives. That would be a very good start, and it hasn’t happened yet.”

The NUG said that from March 28, when the quake struck, to April 8, the junta had carried out 92 air strikes and artillery attacks, killing 72 civilians, including 30 women and six children. Sagaing and Mandalay regions were most targeted.

The junta declared a conditional three-week ceasefire under international pressure on April 2, which it immediately broke, and has accused various ethnic armed groups and People’s Defence Forces of breaking their own ceasefire declarations. In remote western Chin State, an alliance of ethnic armed forces this week captured the military stronghold of Falam after a five-month siege, while there are reports the junta might wrest back control of Lashio, a key town in Shan State.

With the military stretched on multiple fronts and weakened by defections and casualties, the army has had little scope or appetite for quake relief.

“The far better-resourced army has, for the most part, only deployed small bands of soldiers to protect high-profile buildings, escort visiting generals and clear up debris at major Buddhist sites. Mandalay locals say the soldiers have failed to prevent looting in the city,” Frontier Myanmar, an independent media outlet, reported.

In the midst of war and post-quake chaos, the regime – which holds the main cities but only about one third of the territory – reiterated its intention to hold elections in four weeks spanning late 2025 and early 2026. A deadline of May 9 was set for the formation of new political parties. Many parties, including the National League for Democracy (NLD), which won the 2020 elections annulled by the military, have been outlawed already and are sure to boycott the polls. NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi remains in prison in the capital.

Min Aung Hlaing, who has been able to make just a few foreign trips since he seized power, took time to attend a regional summit hosted by Thailand in Bangkok on April 4.

On the sidelines, the 68-year-old general met Muhammad Yunus, head of Bangladesh’s transitional government who has pressed Myanmar to start repatriating some of the 1.3 million Rohingya Muslim refugees, most forced into Bangladesh in a wave of ethnic cleansing in 2017.

That same day, the Bangladesh government’s press office said Myanmar had confirmed that 180,000 Rohingya refugees were eligible to return.

The repatriation process has been stalled for years. Many refugees refuse to return as long as they are denied citizenship and other rights. In the meantime, the Myanmar regime has lost control over much of the border state of Rakhine to the mainly Buddhist nationalist Arakan Army, throwing into doubt the viability of any large-scale repatriation operation.

“While the people of Myanmar mourn the dead, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing is enjoying a bit of diplomatic sunshine,” commented Frontier Myanmar in an editorial, noting his first trip to a Southeast Asian country since early 2021 and his handshakes in Bangkok with Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and India’s Narendra Modi.

Junta-controlled media have highlighted the 20 or so countries sending aid to Myanmar, particularly how Min Aung Hlaing met Elliott Tenpenny, a US doctor running a field hospital in Zabuthiri Township near the capital for the International Disaster Response Unit of Samaritan’s Purse, a US evangelical Christian charity.

Min Aung Hlaing was quoted as thanking the US government and the American people for their help. No mention was made of US sanctions on his regime.

The Trump administration said it had allocated an initial $3m only for Myanmar quake relief. Reuters news agency reported that a three-person USAID team was notified while on the ground that they had been sacked under the administration’s dismantling of its official aid network.

The European Union has responded with 13 million euros of aid and called on “all parties” to grant unimpeded access. It said it had 12 European experts and two EU Liaison Officers on the ground to coordinate with “humanitarian partners”.

OCHA, the UN coordinating agency, estimates the quake added 2.0 million people to the 4.3 million in that central area already in need of humanitarian assistance. The agency estimated funding requirements of $375 million.

The NUG says it has supplied cash assistance of 1.6 billion kyat (about US$760,000 at the open market rate) to five quake-hit areas: Sagaing, Mandalay and Bago regions, southern Shan state and Nay Pyi Taw.

Even before the quake, the UN estimated that a total of nearly 20 million people in Myanmar were in need of humanitarian assistance and that 3.5 million were internally displaced by conflict.

International Crisis Group analyst Richard Horsey estimated that reconstruction costs will run into “tens of billions of dollars” – sums that impoverished and war-torn Myanmar can only dream of.

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 Michele LeVoy
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Apr 11 2025 – Europe must understand that the only reasonable and humane way to tackle migrant smuggling is to open regular routes for people to reach Europe in safety and dignity.

Europe’s approach to migrant ‘smuggling’ is harmful and absurd.

Instead of tackling the lack of regular pathways, thereby forcing people to embark in dangerous migration journeys, European countries are targeting migrants, human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers and ordinary citizens — all while injecting billions into the border surveillance industry.

People rely on smuggling because there are no better ways to get to Europe. But cracking down on alleged ‘smugglers’ – often migrants themselves – does not create better options. On the contrary, it pushes more people onto ever more dangerous routes, while threatening those who help them — and the EU’s new Facilitation Directive is likely to make things worse.

Criminalising solidarity

Proposed by the European Commission at the end of 2023, this Directive is meant to update previous rules to counter migrant smuggling (the 2002 Facilitators Package). However, in reality, it follows the same old broken pattern.

The current text, largely validated by the EU Council last December, expands the definition of what can be considered ‘migrant smuggling’ and ups prison sentences across the board.

The European Parliament is set to start debating its own position on the Directive this month, with a final vote expected in the summer, before entering final negotiations with the Commission and Council towards the end of the year.

What’s more, the text fails to clearly protect solidarity with people in an irregular situation from criminalisation. There is no ‘humanitarian clause’ included among the legally binding provisions; member states are simply invited not to criminalise acts of solidarity.

This generates significant legal uncertainty, as recognised by a recent study requested by the European Commission itself. With far-right and other anti-immigration forces in power in several member states and leading in polls in others, it’s easy to see how such a failure leaves the door wide open to the criminalisation and harassment of family members, NGOs, human rights defenders and ordinary citizens who are helping people in need.

This is not a fantasy scenario. At PICUM we have been documenting a steady increase in the criminalisation of solidarity with migrants in recent years. Between January 2021 and March 2022, at least 89 people were criminalised, in 2022 at least 102 and in 2023 at least 117.

Migrants themselves are also increasingly being prosecuted for simply helping fellow travellers through routes made irregular and dangerous by repressive policies.

These figures are most likely an undercount. Statistical and official data on those accused, charged or convicted of smuggling and related offences are often lacking. Many cases go unreported by the media or because people, especially migrants themselves, fear retaliation.

Behind these numbers are people who have saved lives at sea, given a lift or provided shelter, food, water or clothes. In Latvia, two citizens were charged with facilitating irregular entry simply for giving food and water to migrants stranded at the border with Belarus.

In Poland, five people are facing up to five years in prison for providing humanitarian aid to people stranded at the border with Belarus.

Just a few weeks ago, Italian judges in Crotone acquitted Maysoon Majidi, a Kurdish-Iranian activist and filmmaker, who was arrested in 2023 on human trafficking charges following a landing of migrants in Calabria. Majidi faced a sentence of two years and four months in prison.

The prosecutor in Crotone had accused her of being ‘the captain’s assistant’ because, based on the unverified testimonies of two people on board, she distributed water and food on the vessel. The ‘witnesses’ later retracted their statements, but Majidi still spent 300 days in pre-trial detention.

In Greece, an Egyptian fisherman and his 15-year-old child were charged with smuggling, simply because the father reluctantly agreed to pilot their boat in order to afford the journey. The father was placed in pre-trial detention and sentenced to 280 years in prison. Not only has the child been separated from his father, but he is now facing the same charges in a juvenile court.

Who benefits?

Counter-smuggling policies clearly fail to make migration safer. As migration expert Hein De Haas has written: ‘It is the border controls that have forced migrants to take more dangerous routes and that have made them more and more dependent on smugglers to cross borders.

Smuggling is a reaction to border controls rather than a cause of migration in itself.’ So, who actually benefits from these policies — besides politicians chasing short-term electoral gains?

Between 2021 and 2027, the EU’s budget dedicated to the management of borders, visa and customs controls increased by 135 per cent compared to the previous programming period, from €2.8 billion to €6.5 billion.

Europe must understand that the only reasonable and humane way to tackle migrant smuggling is to open regular routes for people to reach Europe in safety and dignity.

Much of this budget increase is driven by private corporations, including major defence companies such as Airbus, Thales, Leonardo and Indra, which have a vested economic interest in border surveillance.

According to research by the foundation porCausa, the Spanish government awarded over €660 million for the control of Spain’s southern border between 2014 and 2019. Most of this money went to 10 large corporations, mainly for border surveillance (€551 million), detention and deportation (€97.8 millions).

In the negotiation phase of the Facilitation Directive, the Council has already adopted a position that would leave the door open to the criminalisation of migrants and the provision of humanitarian aid.

The European Parliament still has the opportunity to adopt an ambitious mandate. MEPs should understand what is at stake if a binding clause to protect migrants and solidarity from criminalisation is not introduced.

Beyond this Directive, Europe must understand that the only reasonable and humane way to tackle migrant smuggling is to open regular routes for people to reach Europe in safety and dignity.

Michele LeVoy is Director, Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), a network of organizations working to ensure social justice and human rights for undocumented migrants.

Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), Brussels.

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 Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Apr 11 2025 – In the heart of Istanbul, a remarkable transformation is underway. What began as student protests following the politically motivated arrest of Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu has evolved into Turkey’s most significant pro-democracy mobilisation in years. The streets that once pulsed with the routine of daily life now throb with the energy of millions demanding a return to democratic governance.

The timing of İmamoğlu’s arrest – just a couple of weeks after he announced his presidential candidacy – betrayed the political calculation behind it. It was the latest effort by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to use judicial means to eliminate potential challengers. But this time, the response caught him off guard.

Generation Z is the vanguard of this movement. Young people who’ve known only Erdoğan’s increasingly authoritarian rule are now at the forefront of resistance. Their rallying cries – ‘This is just the beginning’ and ‘No salvation alone’ – signal something deeper than conventional political opposition. They seek not just a change of leadership but a fundamental reconstruction of Turkey’s democratic institutions.

The government’s response has been predictable yet revealing. Unconstitutional bans on public gatherings, facial recognition surveillance, social media throttling and mass detentions are all proof the government recognises the existential threat these protests pose. The arrest of over 2,000 protesters, including journalists, and the jailing of hundreds pending trial show the lengths to which Erdoğan will go to maintain his grip on power.

Turkey’s democratic decline under Erdoğan offers a textbook case of how democracies die. The early years of his Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule showed promise, with reforms that aligned with European Union (EU) accession requirements. But following the AKP’s third election victory in 2011, the mask began to slip.

The 2013 Gezi Park protests against urban development marked a turning point when the government’s harsh response revealed its growing intolerance of dissent. Following a failed coup attempt in 2016, Erdoğan seized the opportunity to declare a state of emergency, purging perceived opponents across state institutions. More than 150,000 civil servants, academics, judges and military personnel were suspended or dismissed, while over 50,000 people were arrested on terrorism charges with minimal evidence.

A constitutional referendum in 2017 transformed Turkey’s political system from parliamentary to presidential, granting Erdoğan unprecedented powers. The judiciary, once a check on executive power, became its servant. Independent media was systematically dismantled, with Turkey becoming one of the world’s leading jailers of journalists. Civil society organisations faced closure, takeovers, or constant harassment.

Throughout this backsliding, democratic states have largely looked the other way. Turkey’s strategic importance as a NATO member with the alliance’s second-largest armed forces, a key energy transit hub and a bridge between Europe and the Middle East has trumped concerns about its democratic erosion. The EU’s migration deal, which paid Turkey billions to stem refugee flows to Europe, epitomised the cynical bargains Erdoğan has been able to strike.

But the impressive scale and sustained nature of these protests show that Turkish people haven’t surrendered to authoritarianism.

İmamoğlu represents a formidable challenge to Erdoğan. His 2019 victory in Istanbul demonstrated his ability to build broad coalitions across a polarised electorate. That the government ordered a rerun of the election, only for İmamoğlu to win by an even bigger margin, revealed both the regime’s desperation and the limits of its electoral manipulation.

Economic challenges strengthen the opposition’s case. An inflation crisis and currency devaluation have eroded living standards. Economic discontent, combined with restrictions on basic freedoms, create a potent catalyst for change.

Yet significant obstacles remain. The opposition still struggles with internal divisions and has yet to present a coherent alternative vision. Erdoğan controls key levers of power, including the judiciary, security apparatus and much of the media. His nationalist rhetoric and framing of opposition as foreign-backed conspirators resonate with his conservative base.

For democratic states, the current moment presents a critical choice. For too long, strategic interests have trumped democratic principles in their engagement with Turkey. This calculated indifference can no longer be justified when millions of Turkish people are risking their freedom to defend the same values democratic states claim to champion.

The courage shown by Turkish people – particularly young people experiencing their political awakening – deserves recognition and support. Their struggle offers a reminder that democracy requires constant vigilance and, when necessary, extraordinary courage to defend. The question now is whether the international community will stand with them. The answer will reveal much about the state of global democracy.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact [email protected]

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, Apr 11 2025 – As the Trump administration’s hostility towards the United Nations and other international organizations keeps growing, a New York Times columnist last week proposed what he frivolously described as “something a little incendiary”.

Maybe Trump could follow up on his non-appointment of Elise Stefanik as US Ambassador to the United Nations—who has been virulently anti-UN—by withdrawing the US from the United Nations entirely.

The UN’s 39-storeyed building, the Times columnist remarked, has “amazing views of the East River”—and said, rather sarcastically, it would be a great condo conversion– as a luxury apartment complex.

A White House Executive Order last February was titled “Withdrawing the United States from, and ending funding to certain United Nations organizations, and reviewing United States support to ALL international organizations.”

President Trump, who withdrew the US from the UN Human Rights Council, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Climate Treaty, has threatened to pull out of UNESCO and the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestine Refugees in the Near East– and also to terminate US contracts with the World Food Programme (WFP) in Rome (which was later reversed and described as “a mistake”).

And could Trump reverse his withdrawals from UN agencies –as he did with tariffs? But that seems very unlikely.

Trump’s staggering US tariffs worldwide have not only threatened the longstanding ground rules in world trade but also undermined the Geneva-based World Trade Organization (WTO), described as the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations.

Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, which is focused on trade, was quoted as saying: “I would say the WTO is toast, but what matters now is how other members respond”.

“Do they stand up for the system? Or do they also ignore key principles, provisions and practices?”

In his unpredictable on-again, off-again decision-making, Trump backed down last week on most reciprocal tariffs for a period of 90 days, citing new talks with foreign nations, explaining his reversal. But China, he said, would not be included, and he raised tariffs on its exports to 125 percent.

Perhaps after 90 days, the tariffs will be at play once again, continuing to de-stabilize world trade and the global economy.

The move leaves a universal 10 percent tariff on all other countries except Canada and Mexico, which face separate duties. But it undoes some of the original tariffs — 20 percent on the European Union, 24 percent on Japan, 46 percent on Vietnam.

China has said it will impose reciprocal tariffs on all imports from the United States, escalating a trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Interim Co-Secretary-General CIVICUS, a global alliance of civil society organizations (CSOs), told IPS: “We are entering a dangerous age of values-free transactional diplomacy which is leading to the breakdown of the rules based international order”.

A lot of it, he pointed out, has to do with the rise of authoritarianism and populism over the past few years which has elevated political leaders who spread disinformation and rule by personality cult rather than established norms.

“Civil society and the independent media serve as important checks on the exercise of arbitrary power in the public interest but are being attacked in unprecedented ways,” he declared.

Sadly, humanity has been here before in the period prior to the start of the first and second world wars in the twentieth century, which caused immeasurable death and destruction.

Autocratic and populist regimes, he said, are deliberately undermining international norms that seek to create peaceful, just, equal and sustainable societies.

Notably, civil society organising and citizen action offer the last line of defence against the relentless assault on cherished ideals enshrined in constitutional and international law,” said Tiwana.

Asked if the rash of tariffs would lead to a global economic recession, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told reporters April 8: “I’ve been clarifying my position about this issue time and time again. Trade wars are extremely negative. Nobody wins with a trade war. Everybody tends to lose”.

“And I’m particularly worried with the most vulnerable developing countries, in which the impact will be more devastating. I sincerely hope that we will have no recession, because a recession will have dramatic consequences, especially for the poorest people in the world,” he warned.

Dr Jim Jennings, president of Conscience International and Executive Director of US Academics for Peace, told IPS the widespread “Hands Off” protests in the US threaten to return the country to the decades of debate over tariffs that took place during the 19th Century. The issue then, as now, was protectionism—believed to enrich the manufacturing class.

Whereas the Whigs (today’s Republicans) wanted high tariffs, the idea of free trade as a way to reach prosperity was the mantra of the Democrats, who favored the working class.

President Lincoln favored tariffs, but by 1860 admitted that arguing for a protective tariff was unwise for political reasons—few people at that time favored it. Most Americans had come to realize that high tariffs were protecting the moneyed class and simply raise taxes for everybody. Lincoln knew he was unlikely to be elected President if tariffs were the key to his campaign.

Today’s bewildering day in-day out bluffs and threats by Mr. Trump means that the market will continue to bounce around. “Wall Street likes certainty, but the only certainty we can see is that the US economy is in the hands of amateurs”.

“While the idea of comparing our globalized economy to that of 1840-60 is problematic, with the world already teetering on the verge of WW III, a Trade War is the last thing we need,” declared Dr Jennings.

Andreas Bummel, Executive Director, Democracy Without Borders, told IPS “from the standpoint of democratic checks and balances, it is concerning that the US President apparently can unleash a trade war with most of the world’s countries while the US Congress simply looks on.”

But according to an Associated Press (AP) report April 9, the State Department has rolled back an undisclosed number of sweeping funding cuts to U.N. World Food Program emergency projects in 14 impoverished countries, saying it had terminated some of the contracts for life-saving aid “by mistake”.

“There were a few programs that were cut in other countries that were not meant to be cut, that have been rolled back and put into place,” State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters.

Meanwhile, China has said it will retaliate by imposing reciprocal tariffs on all imports from the United States. “This practice of the U.S. is not in line with international trade rules, undermines China’s legitimate rights and interests, and is a typical unilateral bullying practice,” China’s finance ministry said in a statement.

China has also filed a lawsuit with the World Trade Organization, saying the U.S. tariffs were “a typical unilateral bullying practice that endangers the stability of the global economic and trade order.”

Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the WTO, said the Secretariat is closely monitoring and analysing the measures announced by the United States on April 2, 2025.

“Many members have reached out to us and we are actively engaging with them in response to their questions about the potential impact on their economies and the global trading system.”

The recent announcements, he pointed out, will have substantial implications for global trade and economic growth prospects.

“While the situation is rapidly evolving, our initial estimates suggest that these measures, coupled with those introduced since the beginning of the year, could lead to an overall contraction of around 1% in global merchandise trade volumes this year, representing a downward revision of nearly four percentage points from previous projections”

“I am deeply concerned about this decline and the potential for escalation into a tariff war with a cycle of retaliatory measures that lead to further declines in trade.”

It is important to remember that, despite these new measures, the vast majority of global trade still flows under the WTO’s Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) terms.

“Our estimates now indicate that this share currently stands at 74%, down from around 80% at the beginning of the year. WTO members must stand together to safeguard these gains.”

Trade measures of this magnitude have the potential to create significant trade diversion effects. “I call on Members to manage the resulting pressures responsibly to prevent trade tensions from proliferating,” said Dr Okonjo-Iweala.

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’);