By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 1 2025 – The Trump administration’s ground-rules are dangerously clear—and devastating.

If you are a pro-Palestinian demonstrator, denouncing Israeli atrocities in Gaza, you are either a supporter of the “terrorist organization” Hamas or you are described as anti-Semitic veering on hate crimes liable for prosecution.

The US is planning to cancel over 300 visas and has threatened to deport students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations in-and-outside university campuses—and also warned it would revoke the green cards of permanent residents.

The New York Times March 31 quoted Stephen Walt, a professor of international relations at Harvard University, as saying, the Trump administration is following a familiar playbook towards strongman rule.

“First the judges, then the universities, then the press, then the lawyers—there are no rules Trump is not willing to break.”

So, is the United Nations far behind? —And are the privileges and protection provided to UN diplomats and staffers in the 1947 UN-US headquarters agreement in jeopardy?

The new ground rules, meanwhile, have prompted the UN to send a memo to staffers cautioning about their activities outside the UN premises.

The memo, released last month, reads: “We must be mindful at all times of our rights and duties as international civil servants, which require us to act independently and impartially.”

“Please take a moment to familiarize yourselves with the policies on the Status, basic rights and duties of United Nations staff members; outside activities; and the guidelines for the personal use of social media”.

Accordingly, “we should frame any public communications, including through the personal use of social media, in a manner that is consistent with the position of the Organization and the statements of the Secretary-General.”

Dr Palitha Kohona, a former Chief of the UN Treaty Section, told IPS: “To begin with, UN staffers must comply with their legal and moral obligations to act consistent with the Charter, including in making statements”.

There is no room, he pointed out, to give expression to personal prejudices in this context. “Their responsibility is to ensure that the Charter mandated requirements are satisfied in all their actions”.

“If the host authorities were to take offence at a UN staffer discharging his/her responsibilities consistent with the Charter, then we have a problem,” he said.

One would expect that the host state, which always cites chapter and verse of the law to justify its actions, would also act within the perimeters set by treaties and other legal norms.

“But it is also a fact that we live in challenging times”, said Dr Kohona, a former Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, and most recently Ambassador to China.

A second UN memo to staffers is equally cautious in its warning.

Titled “Proof of Identity if Stopped by Authorities in New York,” the memo reads: “We would like to remind all staff members and their families of the importance of carrying a form of identification at all times. This may include your United Nations identification card (UN Grounds Pass) or a copy of your national passport with G-4 visa (paper copy or digital copy on your phone).”

“While the likelihood of a situation requiring you to produce such documents to confirm your identity/employment remains low, we want to ensure that everyone is prepared. Should you be detained and require immediate support in this regard, please contact the UN Security & Safety Service Control Center at (212) 963-6666 (available 24/7)”.

Asked if there were any threats to diplomats or staffers, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters: “’t think, there is no indication that there is a targeting of UN staff or diplomatic staff. I think some colleagues were probably a little nervous. And I think, it’s basic advice.

And if you’re not a citizen of a country and you’re in that country, carry some ID to prove your status. And that was what the advice given to our colleagues”, he said.

Asked about revoking 300 visas, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters last week: “No, no, no, you guys – you asked – the question was, was there 300? I know that number’s been cited. I said it might be more because we’re doing them every day, primarily student visas, and some visitor visas.”

“I don’t know actually if it’s primarily student visas. It’s a combination of visas. They’re visitors to the country. If they’re taking activities that are counter to our foreign – to our national interest, to our foreign policy, we’ll revoke the visa”, he warned.

Are all of those related to pro-Palestinian protests?

“I’m trying to remember – there’s a lot of them now, because I’ve gone through every one of them. I think there might be a few that are not, that are related to other groups that are – of people – we’ve also identified – but this actually is – it should be automatically revoked. We’ve also identified people that have criminal charges and even while in the country, and still have active visas. Some are unrelated to any protests and are just having to do with potential criminal activity,” he declared.

Meanwhile, in a memo to staffers, Narda Cupidore, President of the UN Staff Union (UNSU) said the Union recognizes that these are incredibly challenging times, with anxiety and uncertainty being experienced due to the organization’s current financial situation.

The global situation only adds to this stress, and the lack of consistent and timely information is frustrating, she argued, especially with the frequent negative media coverage. It is important to be discerning with information received and be mindful of its source and accuracy of content.

Social media, as a source of information about the United Nations, often creates unnecessary fear, she pointed out. “I take this opportunity to remind all to exercise personal safety and be aware of your surroundings, always remain vigilant and alert. Practice good judgment when engaging with local law enforcement in the Host Country using courtesy and respect as a general principle.”

As international civil servants and foreign nationals, she pointed out, “we are guests in the Host Country, and we are expected to comply with local laws. Should you experience or encounter any issues (during travel or otherwise), report these incidents to your respective Executive Office and copy the Staff Union and Staff Representative in your reporting”.

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 Rafiqul Islam
BEIJING, Apr 1 2025 – Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser, Professor Muhammad Yunus’s state visit to China, where he met Chinese President Xi Jinping, was seen as an opportunity to reaffirm old diplomatic and economic ties between the two countries.

During the meeting, Xi recalled Chinese-Bangladesh’s long-standing history of friendly exchanges, saying the ancient Silk Road closely linked the two countries.

Terming Bangladesh a good neighbour, good friend and good partner of mutual trust, he said China maintains a high degree of stability and continuity in its good-neighbourly and friendly policy toward Bangladesh, as this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of China-Bangladesh diplomatic relations.

“China is ready to work with Bangladesh to bring China-Bangladesh cooperation to new heights and deliver greater benefits to the two peoples, Xi said, stressing that China and Bangladesh should continue to deepen political mutual trust and firmly support each other on issues related to mutual interests.

Yunus said Bangladesh and China share a profound friendship and have always understood, respected and trusted each other.

Claiming China is a reliable partner and friend of Bangladesh, he said Bangladesh firmly supports the one-China principle.

The Chief Adviser said Bangladesh is willing to use the 50th anniversary of the establishment of Bangladesh-China diplomatic relations as an opportunity to enhance bilateral relations.

Bangladesh sought more Chinese investment, which will help it promote its economic transition.

Political analysts assert that Yunus’s visit to China has catapulted Bangladesh-China relations to unprecedented heights, with Bangladesh securing a commitment of USD 2.1 billion in Chinese investments, loans, and grants during his historic China tour.

Chinese Ambassador in Dhaka Yao Wen said nearly 30 Chinese companies have pledged to invest USD 1 billion in Bangladesh.

China has also planned to lend some USD 400 million in the Mongla port modernisation project, USD 350 million in the development of the China Industrial Economic Zone and another USD 150 million as technical assistance. The rest of the amount would come as grants and other forms of lending.

“It is a milestone visit,” Yao Wen said.

During the bilateral meeting, Yunus asked Xi to approve the investment of Chinese private companies in Bangladesh.

The Chinse President affirmed that he would encourage Chinese firms to set up manufacturing plants in Bangladesh.

The talks between Yunus and Xi were comprehensive, fruitful and constructive, marked by warmth, Chief Adviser’s Press Secretary, Shafiqul Alam, said.

Chart Roadmap for Shared Prosperity

On March 27, Yunus addressed the Boao Forum for Asia (BFA) Annual Conference in Hainan, asking the Asian nations to chart a clear roadmap for a shared future and shared prosperity.

“In this changing world, the fates of Asian countries are intertwined. We must chart a clear roadmap for a shared future and shared prosperity,” he said.

The Chief Adviser also focused on creating a sustainable financing mechanism for Asian countries. “We need reliable funds that address our challenges and meet our growing demands.”

About trade cooperation, he said Asia remains one of the least integrated regions and this weak integration stifles investment and trade.

“We must work to boost trade cooperation immediately,” he said.

Referring to food and agriculture cooperation, Yunus said the Asian countries should promote resource-efficient farming and domestic production must be enhanced for food security.

“We need to reduce import reliance and achieve self-sufficiency. Expanding tech-based sustainable agricultural solutions and innovation in regenerative and climate-smart farming is key,” he said.

The Bangladesh Chief Adviser stressed building a strong tech ecosystem, sharing knowledge and data and investing in technology incubation and innovation in Asia.

About social business to solve social problems, he said every young person should grow up as a three-zero person: zero net carbon emissions, zero wealth concentration, and zero unemployment through entrepreneurship in social business.

“This is the shared future we in Asia must create together,” he added.

In his speech, Yunus underscored shifting toward sustainable economic models prioritising people and the planet over profits.

“We must shift toward sustainable economic models that prioritise people and the planet over profits,” he said.

Besides, the Chief Adviser focused on the long-pending Rohingya crisis, calling upon the Asian leaders to come forward towards ensuring safe and dignified repatriation of displaced Rohingyas to Myanmar.

“Bangladesh has been hosting over 1.2 million Rohingyas, who are Myanmar nationals, for over seven years. We continue to bear significant social, economic, and environmental costs,” he said.

On the sidelines of the conference, Yunus held meetings with Chairman of the Boao Forum for Asia and former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Overchuk and FAO Director General Qu Dongyu, among others, too.

Imagine Change in the World

On March 29, 2025, at a function at Peking University (PKU) in Beijing, Yunus urged students to think broadly and strive to transform the world.

“A university or educational institution is not only a place to learn what happens but to imagine,” he said.

Terming imagination the greatest power of the earth, Yunus said, “If you imagine, it will happen. If you do not imagine, it will never happen.”

The Bangladesh Chief Adviser said imagination is more powerful than anything “we can bring together”.

“Human journey is about making the impossible possible. That is our job. And we can make it happen,” Yunus said.

He said people become poor due to wrong economic systems, as all people are not given a fair chance in such systems.

He stressed promoting human beings to become entrepreneurs, not to be job seekers, saying, “All human beings are entrepreneurs.”

Yunus received an honorary doctorate degree from Peking University.
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 Manuel Manonelles
BARCELONA, Spain, Apr 1 2025 – “…I am convinced that Greenland’s importance to U.S. interests will grow. Thanks to geography, historical ties (…), the United States has the inside track when competing for influence in Greenland (even as the Chinese have now started making regular visits)…” This quote from a diplomatic cable sent by the U.S. embassy in Copenhagen to Washington might seem recent, perhaps just before President Trump’s abrupt announcement of his intentions to “buy” or “annex” Greenland from Denmark, but that is not the case.

This message is actually seventeen years old, dating back to May 16, 2008. It is one of several Greenland-related cables that came to light with WikiLeaks, highlighting the fact that U.S. interest in Greenland is nothing new. It has been a consistent theme in U.S. foreign policy for at least the last 150 years.

The first documented discussion within the U.S. Government about acquiring Greenland dates back to 1867, the same year the U.S. purchased Alaska from the Russian Empire for $7.7M.

After so many failed attempts by the U.S. to purchase Greenland over the past 150 years, what makes Trump believe that he will succeed? Is the current White House policy—so aggressive and public—really the best way for the U.S. to regain influence, or even secure a new role in Greenland?

Around that time, internal consultations took place in the U.S. Federal Government regarding the possibility of buying Greenland (along with Iceland) for around $5.5M. In fact, the State Department even published a report on the matter in 1868. However, as we know, this proposal never materialized.

More fruitless discussions followed in 1910, and then, suddenly, another purchase occurred in 1916. This time, the U.S. government bought not Greenland but the Danish West Indies in the Caribbean (now known as the U.S. Virgin Islands) from Denmark for $25M.

The relevance of this purchase in the Greenland case is substantive because one provision in the international treaty that formalized the deal—known as the Treaty of the Danish West Indies—stated that the U.S. Government “will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.”

Because in 1916 Denmark controlled significant portions of Greenland but not the entire island. However, following the West Indies deal with the U.S., and with Washington’s consent, Denmark began a series of diplomatic movements that eventually allowed it to declare full sovereignty over all of Greenland. Only Norway contested this claim but lost in the International Court of Justice in 1933.

In April 1940, Nazi Germany occupied Denmark, and following that, the U.S. occupied Greenland, in order to prevent its seizure by Germany or eventually by Canada or even by the UK.

After WWII, the Danish government expected the U.S. to withdraw its troops. However, to their surprise, in 1946, the U.S. made a new proposal to purchase Greenland, this time offering $100M. Once again, the deal did not go through, and despite Copenhagen’s diplomatic efforts, the U.S. military stayed.

With the creation of NATO—and Denmark being one of its founding members—Copenhagen changed its policy, accepting the status quo. In 1951, Denmark signed an agreement allowing the U.S. to continue its military and defense activities in Greenland. In 1955, new serious discussions within the U.S. government about another potential offer emerged, and there is evidence that Vice President Nelson Rockefeller was behind another unsuccessful attempt in 1970.

With the end of the Cold War, U.S. interest in Greenland dramatically decreased, and most U.S. military bases on the island were dismantled, except for the one in Pituffik (then known by the Danish name of Thule).

With the start of the new millennium, the increasing effects of climate change and the escalation of geostrategic interest in the Arctic region, Washington reactivated its interest in the largest island on the planet.

However, this time rather than proposing another purchase to Denmark—after so many failed attempts—the U.S. opted for a more subtle policy, indirectly supporting Greenland’s pro-independence movement. The idea was that a newly independent and potentially weak Greenland could be more easily influenced by the U.S.

The surprise came in 2019 when President Trump reignited public debate on the issue and even cancelled an official trip to Copenhagen at the last minute after the Danish Prime Minister publicly rejected the possibility of selling Greenland.

With Biden in office, the issue was largely forgotten—until recently, when Trump brought it back, adopting an even more aggressive approach. It is no coincidence, then, that the U.S. opened a Consulate in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, in 2020, despite the country’s small population of around 50,000 people and a negligible number of U.S. residents, aside from the few U.S. military personnel stationed at Pituffik.

The key questions here are: after so many failed attempts by the U.S. to purchase Greenland over the past 150 years, what makes Trump believe that he will succeed? Is the current White House policy—so aggressive and public—really the best way for the U.S. to regain influence, or even secure a new role in Greenland? Could this approach, in fact, jeopardize U.S. interests in the region in the long term? And last but not least, beyond the Danish Government, the Greenlanders may have something to say, and judging by the results of the recent elections, it seems they are not really in the mood to accept Trump’s expansionism.

Manuel Manonelles is Associate Professor of International Relations at Blanquerna-Ramon Llull University in Spain

By Charles Mpaka
BLANTYRE, Mar 31 2025 – In Malawi, being a forest guard isn’t a glamorous, sought-after job. And it has often been quiet, enjoying almost no publicity – until recently amid the worsening crashing down of the country’s forests, which is making the occupation increasingly perilous.

In 2024 alone, a total of eight forest rangers got killed in separate incidents while in the line of duty, according to the Ministry of Natural Resources, which is responsible for the management of 88 forest reserves and 11 plantations across the country.

Malawi has not recorded such a high number of forest guard killings before, says the ministry, admitting that the hostility towards its frontline staff by illegal charcoal producers and loggers is getting alarming.

“People who are destroying our forests are on the loose. They are killing our forestry officials,” says Minister of Natural Resources Owen Chomanika.

He said this at a meeting his ministry had convened in January 2025 to discuss with other forestry sector players strategies to stem the tide of forest destruction in Malawi.

What prompted the meeting was a brazen operation on a government plantation on Zomba Mountain in the east of the country.

Over several weeks, young men armed with machetes, saws and axes, moving in groups numbering between 50 and 100, according to local media, invaded the plantation every morning, cutting down pine trees and carrying away the contraband through the streets of the city below in full public spectacle.

With government forest guards overwhelmed, the ministry had to engage the Malawi Defence Force and Malawi Police Service to crack down on the illegal operation.

Data from the Global Forest Watch show that between 2001 and 2023, Malawi lost almost a quarter of a million hectares of its 1.5 million hectares of tree cover. In 2023 alone, the country lost almost 23,000 hectares of tree cover, the highest forest loss Malawi has suffered in a single year since 2001.

This devastation is falling even on protected forests where the government deploys forest guards. As  deforestation mounts – driven by worsening poverty, ever-rising demand for charcoal for cooking and farmland expansion – these forest security staff have the unenviable task of pushing back the avalanche.

They are risking their lives by doing this.

On February 14, 2025, three forest rangers sustained various degrees of injuries after being attacked by people from villages around Kaning’ina forest in Mzimba District in northern Malawi. The incident happened when the guards intercepted eight people who were illegally cutting down trees in the forest.

Three days later, five forestry officers were wounded when community members around Chikala forest in Machinga District in the east pelted stones at them, their crime being that they had arrested some men from the village who they had found producing charcoal illegally in the reserve.

From being stoned to death to being hacked in the face to being chased and beaten by irate mobs, forest guards in Malawi are increasingly coming into the firing line as they go out to enforce the law. Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Natural Resources, Yusuf Nkungula, attributes the trend partly to internal challenges.

“The challenges may be structural and operational. Structural challenges may be grouped as the number of guards that are available at one particular time versus the number of offenders,” he says.

Operationally, he says, lack of proper equipment like guns means that the guards are unable to suppress the pressures they face from the offenders.

“Commonly, guards are attacked by offenders because they are not fully equipped to fight back. Because of this, in 2024 alone, eight forest guards were killed in the line of duty,” Nkungula tells IPS.

Sometimes, the ministry engages the Malawi Police Service, the Malawi Defence Forces and national parks and wildlife rangers to help with patrols in deforestation hotspots, but these are short-term interventions.

“These engagements are always very expensive; as such, they don’t happen continuously, hence still creating spaces for offenders to do illegal activities,” he says.

Currently, the forestry department has 806 guards deployed to forest reserves and plantations, way below the 4,772 forest guards which the department requires now, he says.

The department also struggles to equip even these few guards due to inadequate funding. Since 1998, not in a single year has the department received half of its budget requirement. According to Nkungula, the 2024-25 financial year was the worst, as Treasury disbursed only 30 percent of the budget for the department.

“On average, 40 percent of the budget has been accessed annually in the previous 5 years. The shortfall adversely affects the operations of the department at all levels, resulting in failure to achieve some important targets,” he says.

Notable challenges resulting from such financial shortfalls include failure to properly develop plantation forestry, fight increased forest fires, bust increased illegal charcoal production and exacerbate corruption, the ministry says.

Environmental activist Charles Mkoka says the attacks on forest guards and the inadequate funding paint a gloomy picture of forest governance in Malawi as some groups of people exploit the institutional weaknesses to become a law unto themselves.

“As a result, the future of the country’s forest resources is at great risk—an issue that should concern all Malawians,” says Mkoka, who is also Executive Director for the Coordination Union for the Rehabilitation of the Environment, a local organisation.

Mkoka says these hostile communities can be instruments of forest restoration, drawing lessons from other communities that have become agents of forest recovery and understanding the devastating impacts of forest destruction on people’s lives.

“We have forestry resources in some areas that have successfully recovered through natural regeneration and are now thriving. What this points to is the need for concerted efforts among communities and authorities in managing these resources.

“We also need to learn from the devastating effects of the recent cyclones that caused mayhem as a result of widespread ecosystem degradation,” he says.

The rapid rate of deforestation undermines Malawi’s 2063 aspiration of becoming a developing country that has more than 50 percent of forest cover and a deforestation rate below 0.22 percent a year.

In the agenda, Malawi sees environmental sustainability as key to sustainable development and advances development programming that minimises depletion of natural resources.

“Our underlying concern as a people is that while we might enjoy the spoils of the environment today, we owe it to future generations of Malawians to do so responsibly and sustainably with an ethic of care,” reads the blueprint.

As both forests and forest guards fall, putting Malawi’s development goals in jeopardy, the Ministry of Natural Resources is rolling up its sleeves for a fight.

Hoping for improved funding, it plans to recruit 2,466 more forest guards in the 2025-26 financial year. The process will continue until the target of 6,000, the number the ministry believes will be adequate for effective policing of Malawi’s forests.

Government is also focusing on deepening community participation to plug the shortages in forest security staff and enhance local stewardship in forest management.

In addition, since forest invaders are becoming more militant, unleashing armed terror on forest rangers, the department is bolstering the military capacity of its frontline staff.

“The winning formula in terms of tackling the offenders is to make sure that the department becomes paramilitary, as in parks and wildlife.

“To this effect, 205 forest guards have completed training in weapon handling. These trainings will continue until all officers are trained,” Nkungula says.

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 Alison Kentish
Mar 31 2025 – 2025 marks the tenth anniversary of the Paris Climate Agreement. One of its chief architects, Christiana Figueres, says the world is heading in the right direction but warns that urgent action is needed to close critical gaps.

The pact, adopted in 2015 by 195 nations, set out to limit global warming to “well below 2°C” above pre-industrial levels, striving for 1.5°C. But in 2024, the world shattered records as the hottest year ever, surpassing that crucial threshold.

Speaking at a press briefing with the Oxford Climate Journalism Network on March 27, Figueres said while technology and investment are advancing, the world is not moving fast enough.

“We’re far behind,” she said. “We have very clear data points of all of the technologies that are exponentially growing on both sides of the market – the supply side as well as the demand – and we can see that all of that is moving, as well as investment. That definitely defines the direction of travel and the decarbonisation of the global economy is by now irreversible with or without the craziness in the United States. What still is not at the level that we should have is speed and scale.”

A co-founder of Global Optimism, an organisation focused on hope and action in the face of climate change, Figueres emphasised the urgency of the crisis while highlighting the global capacity to address it.

While one in five people globally already experience climate impacts daily, and climate-related costs rose to $320 billion last year, investment in clean technology is outpacing fossil fuels, she noted.

“We had last year two times the level of investment into clean technology versus fossil fuels and the prices continue to fall. Every year they fall even more and more. Solar prices last year fell by a whopping 35%. Electric vehicle batteries fell by 20%,” she said.

Figueres also spoke about the disproportionate burden placed on small island nations, which are already importing fossil fuels at the cost of up to 30% of their national budgets. “These islands are importing the poison that is directly threatening their survival,” she argued, stressing the need for renewable energy solutions like wind and hydro to replace fossil fuels.

The former head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) also praised the role of small island states in maintaining the integrity of international climate agreements. “It’s not the size of the nation but the integrity of their position that matters,” she said, noting how these nations have consistently held larger emitters accountable.

Asked about the Paris Agreement’s architecture, Figueres defended its approach.

“The Paris Agreement is really strange in its legal bindingness. It is legally binding to all countries that have ratified it, but what is binding is the overall trajectory of decarbonisation to get to net zero by 2050. What is not binding is the level of the NDCs which are the nationally determined contributions that every country has to submit every 5 years and be held accountable against that,” she said, likening the agreement’s style to running a marathon, “the goal is clear, but the pace is up to each runner.”

Figueres says the COP process was designed in the early 1990s as a multilateral platform for countries to negotiate agreements aimed at addressing climate change collectively – something that was critical for establishing frameworks like the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. She stressed that with agreements in place to guide global decarbonisation until 2050, the next phase of climate talks should focus on implementation rather than new negotiations.

“The implementation is mostly on the part of the private sector and the financial sector. Do  they need governments to support them? Absolutely, so what governments need to do is to put regulations, incentives, and tax credits in place to accelerate investment in the sectors that we know are going to address climate change and to give long-term certainty to the private sector so that they can do their planning, but those regulations, those incentives, and those tax breaks are not to be negotiated between countries. They are to be enacted nationally, domestically.”

With COP 30 approaching, Figueres urged countries to take a long-term view in their climate planning. “NDCs should align government and private sector ambitions with the next decade’s possibilities, not just the current technologies,” she said.

As host country Brazil prepares for the 2025 UN Climate Talks, Figueres called for a holistic approach to climate policy, linking energy, industry, and nature. She also cautioned against framing COP 30 as a “last chance”, emphasising that it should be seen as a milestone in a longer journey toward global climate goals.

2025 marks the tenth anniversary of the Paris Climate Agreement. One of its chief architects, Christiana Figueres says the world is heading in the right direction but warns that urgent action is needed to close critical gaps.

The pact, adopted in 2015 by 195 nations, set out to limit global warming to “well below 2°C” above pre-industrial levels, striving for 1.5°C. But in 2024, the world shattered records as the hottest year ever, surpassing that crucial threshold.

Speaking at a press briefing with the Oxford Climate Journalism Network on March 27, Figueres said while technology and investment are advancing, the world is not moving fast enough.

“We’re far behind,” she said. “We have very clear data points of all of the technologies that are exponentially growing on both sides of the market – the supply side as well as the demand – and we can see that all of that is moving, as well as investment. That definitely defines the direction of travel and the decarbonisation of the global economy is by now irreversible with or without the craziness in the United States. What still is not at the level that we should have is speed and scale.”

A co-founder of Global Optimism, an organisation focused on hope and action in the face of climate change, Figueres emphasised the urgency of the crisis while highlighting the global capacity to address it.

While one in five people globally already experience climate impacts daily, and climate-related costs rose to $320 billion last year, investment in clean technology is outpacing fossil fuels, she noted.

“We had last year two times the level of investment into clean technology versus fossil fuels and the prices continue to fall. Every year they fall even more and more. Solar prices last year fell by a whopping 35%. Electric vehicle batteries fell by 20%,” she said.

Figueres also spoke about the disproportionate burden placed on small island nations, which are already importing fossil fuels at the cost of up to 30% of their national budgets. “These islands are importing the poison that is directly threatening their survival,” she argued, stressing the need for renewable energy solutions like wind and hydro to replace fossil fuels.

The former head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) also praised the role of small island states in maintaining the integrity of international climate agreements. “It’s not the size of the nation but the integrity of their position that matters,” she said, noting how these nations have consistently held larger emitters accountable.

Asked about the Paris Agreement’s architecture, Figueres defended its approach.

“The Paris Agreement is really strange in its legal bindingness. It is legally binding to all countries that have ratified it, but what is binding is the overall trajectory of decarbonisation to get to net zero by 2050. What is not binding is the level of the NDCs, which are the nationally determined contributions that every country has to submit every 5 years and be held accountable against that,” she said, likening the agreement’s style to running a marathon, “the goal is clear, but the pace is up to each runner.”

Figueres says the COP process was designed in the early 1990s as a multilateral platform for countries to negotiate agreements aimed at addressing climate change collectively – something that was critical for establishing frameworks like the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. She stressed that with agreements in place to guide global decarbonisation until 2050, the next phase of climate talks should focus on implementation rather than new negotiations.

“The implementation is mostly on the part of the private sector and the financial sector. Do  they need governments to support them? Absolutely, so what governments need to do is to put regulations, incentives, and tax credits in place to accelerate investment in the sectors that we know are going to address climate change and to give long-term certainty to the private sector so that they can do their planning, but those regulations, those incentives, and those tax breaks are not to be negotiated between countries. They are to be enacted nationally, domestically.”

With COP 30 approaching, Figueres urged countries to take a long-term view in their climate planning. “NDCs should align government and private sector ambitions with the next decade’s possibilities, not just the current technologies,” she said.

As host country Brazil prepares for the 2025 UN Climate Talks, Figueres called for a holistic approach to climate policy, linking energy, industry, and nature. She also cautioned against framing COP 30 as a “last chance”, emphasising that it should be seen as a milestone in a longer journey toward global climate goals.

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 CIVICUS
Mar 31 2025 –  
CIVICUS discusses recent protests in Serbia with Alma Mustajbašić, researcher at Civic Initiatives, a Serbian civil society organisation that advocates for democracy, human rights and citizen engagement.

Alma Mustajbašić

Following the deaths of 15 people in the collapse of the roof of a newly reconstructed railway station in November 2014, student-led protests have swept across Serbia, uniting diverse social groups against governance failures and government corruption. Despite harsh crackdowns including arrests and violence, the movement has employed direct action and effective social media strategies to demand systemic reforms. The movement has even made a rare impact in rural areas through long protest marches, breaking the government-imposed climate of fear and inspiring renewed political engagement.

What triggered the current protests?

Protests started following a tragedy that occurred in Novi Sad, Serbia’s second-largest city, on 1 November last year. That day, the canopy of a newly reconstructed railway station collapsed, killing 15 people. The station had already had two official inaugurations, one in 2022, attended by President Aleksandar Vučić, and another in 2024, in the presence of other high-ranking officials.

The reconstruction contracts, signed with a consortium of Chinese companies, were kept secret, leading many to blame corruption for the collapse. People’s immediate reaction was to protest, holding 15-minute commemorative traffic blockades under the slogan ‘Serbia must stop’, to pressure the authorities to identify and punish those responsible for the tragedy.

At one of the commemorative gatherings outside the Faculty of Dramatic Arts in the capital, Belgrade, protesters including students and professors were attacked by ruling party members and supporters. This was the immediate reason that the students of this faculty, and then from other state universities and some private ones, decided to blockade their institutions and suspend classes until their demands were met. They demanded the publication of all documents related to the station’s reconstruction, which still remained confidential, the dismissal of charges against those arrested and detained during the protests, the identification, prosecution and removal from public office of those responsible for the attacks on students and other protesters, and a 20 per cent increase in the higher education budget.

The tragedy in Novi Sad was a tipping point, but public frustration had been building up for years. Deep-seated corruption, secretive government contracts and ruling party-based recruitment practices have eroded trust in public institutions. With biased media, unfree institutions, unresolved government affairs and consistently unfair elections, many people feel voiceless. The daily targeting of political opponents and Vučić’s increasingly repressive rule only add to the anger.

How has the protest movement evolved?

The Novi Sad station collapse sparked a powerful student movement that united diverse parts of society, quickly gaining support from cultural figures, educators, farmers, industry workers and lawyers. For months, there have been protests almost every day, growing in size and intensity, with tens of thousands participating in road blockades, silent vigils and long marches across Serbia.

In early March, hundreds blockaded the public broadcaster, Radio Television of Serbia, in Belgrade, accusing it of biased coverage favouring Vučić. Vučić had appeared on the main news bulletin condemning the movement, accusing protesters of carrying out a ‘colour revolution’ and being supported from abroad and warning they could ‘end up behind bars’. Clashes erupted as riot police used batons in an attempt to disperse the crowd.

The government has cracked down hard. It has arrested students and orchestrated violent attacks, including serious assaults on female students. There have been reports of phone hacking and smear campaigns in pro-government media. People who support the protests, including teachers and civil society organisations, have also faced intimidation and retaliation.

One of the latest in a series of incidents happened at a protest held in Belgrade on 15 March, which was the largest in decades, with several hundred thousand people joining, according to independent observers. The 15-minute silence was broken, according to eyewitnesses, by a loud noise and a feeling of heat, which led to a stampede. More than 3,000 people had symptoms that included nausea, headaches, rapid heartbeat, hearing loss, anxiety, panic, tremors, disorientation and a sense of losing control. The authorities deny they used a sound cannon against protesters, although one such device was photographed on a police vehicle close to the protest site.

How do these protests compare to previous movements?

Serbia has a long history of civic movements, from student protests in the 1990s to the ‘1 of 5 Million’ protests following an attack on an opposition leader in 2018 and 2023 ‘Serbia Against Violence’ protests following two mass shootings. But these protests have lasted much longer and have received support from wider social groups.

The 2024 student movement is also different from previous ones in several ways. It uses direct democracy, discussing plans and making decisions in plenary meetings. Each faculty has working groups that manage accommodation, logistics, media communication, security and overall coordination. There are no formal leaders. The movement operates as a collective.

As part of Generation Z, protesters use social media effectively, blending creativity and humour to reach a broad audience, which is crucial in a country where media freedom is limited. Their messaging also reaches beyond Serbia’s borders.

This student movement is also different in that its demands are not focused on changing the government for an alternative political option. Protesting students refuse to align with opposition political parties and instead seek to strengthen cooperation with trade unions. They want deeper systemic changes to establish the rule of law and independent institutions. These are calls for profound social change in a society burdened by corruption.

Significant judicial and political reforms will be needed to respond to students’ demands. This won’t be easy, but the momentum suggests people are ready to fight for it.

What are the biggest obstacles to change?

There are numerous obstacles. The biggest are corruption, the lack of independent institutions and the absence of conditions for free and fair elections.

Right now, it’s hard to predict where these protests will lead. Just a few months ago, a movement of this scale, led by young people, seemed unlikely. Yet students have managed to break the climate of fear imposed by the regime and inspire more people to engage in political life.

Students have held long protest marches, walking hundreds of kilometres to support mass demonstrations in other cities and stopping in small towns and villages along the way, reassuring people in rural areas that they are not forgotten. They’ve sparked solidarity, empathy and a renewed belief in collective action. Their determination has sent a powerful message: perseverance can lead to real change.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Email
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube

SEE ALSO
Serbia: ‘We live in a system that’s allergic to pluralism, with a government hostile to critical voices’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Tamara Branković 02.Jul.2024
Serbia’s suspicious election CIVICUS Lens 26.Jan.2024
Serbia: ‘People are concerned that a critical tool to hold political elites accountable is being taken away’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Raša Nedeljkov 19.Jan.2024

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’);