While the Vatican has launched the process for the beatification of King Baudoin I of Belgium in 2024, opinions remain divided on the need for this decision in the DRC, a country that Belgium colonized for 80 years. The country’s Catholic Church has not officially expressed an opinion on the matter, leaving many questions unanswered.

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 23 2025 – Thirteen years of extended conflict, economic downturns, and multiple earthquakes, has left Syria in the midst of a severe humanitarian crisis. Hostilities remain abundant across all of Syria’s governorates, with each facing widespread civilian displacements and damage to critical infrastructures. Following the change of government in December of 2024, Syrian refugees have begun returning from neighbouring countries. However, this return has been marred with insecurity due to the sheer scale of unexploded ordnance, which has resulted in numerous civilian casualties.

December 2024 saw the end of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime due to a series of offensive missions coordinated by the Syrian opposition. Subsequently, the Syrian Transitional Government, headed by Prime Minister Mohammed al-Bashir, has facilitated the transfer of power and will act as the head of state until 1 March 2025.

According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the end of Assad’s rule led to an eruption of hostilities across Syria, mainly concentrated in eastern Aleppo, Al-Hasakah, Ar-Raqqa, Quneitra, and regions along the Tishreen Dam. Between January 16 and 18, at least three civilians were killed and 14 injured from extensive shelling in Menbij, Ain al-Arab, and surrounding areas. On January 17, a bombing led to the damaging of several civilian infrastructures, including shops, ambulances, and healthcare centers.

Intensified violence had also led to the Tishreen Dam becoming damaged and non-functional for the past six weeks, depriving 413,000 people in Menbij and Ain-al Arab of water and electricity. The Menbij National Hospital has also been compromised due to lootings, with medical equipment, ambulances, and generators being at low stock, making healthcare efforts increasingly difficult. Repair efforts have been impeded due to persisting insecurity.

Heightened insecurity and displacement has plunged Syria into a state of economic emergency. Devaluation of Syrian currency and inflation have made the cost of food and other basic goods nearly inaccessible for the vast majority of the Syrian people. Poverty in Syria has been described as “near universal” by the International Rescue Committee (IRC), with approximately 90 percent of Syrians being financially insecure.

Living conditions for the majority of Syrians have exacerbated significantly in the past two months. The World Food Programme (WFP) estimates that approximately 13 million people struggle with extreme hunger. Additionally, IRC estimates that over 100,000 children under five years old suffer from acute malnutrition.

636 displacement shelters have had their water, sanitation, and hygiene services suspended due to underfunding, leaving approximately 636,000 people without access to clean water. OCHA states that the situation is particularly dire in northeast Syria, with 24,600 internally displaced persons (IDPs) residing in 204 collective shelters in dire need of water, latrine service, heating, winter clothing, and mental health support.

Poor sanitation and overcrowding in displacement shelters has led to the emergence of a cholera outbreak in Syria. Disease outbreaks have been a persistent threat in Syria since the eruption of hostilities and have significantly worsened in late 2024. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), there have been over 200 confirmed cases of cholera in Syria.

WHO, in collaboration with UNICEF, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and local health authorities, launched a 10-day oral cholera vaccination campaign in Syria and managed to reach 100 percent vaccine utilization. However, due to compromised water systems and inadequate sanitation infrastructure, Syrians remain particularly vulnerable to future outbreaks. Humanitarian organizations such as UNICEF and WHO have begun winterization efforts to protect Syrians in displacement shelters from the spread of influenza-like illnesses.

According to a 2025 situation overview from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), there are currently about 7.2 million internally displaced people in Syria, as well as 6.2 million refugees, primarily based in Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Türkiye, and Jordan. Additionally, rates of displacement have increased significantly since the transition of power, with approximately 627,000 people, including 275,000 children, having been displaced across the country, especially in Idlib and Aleppo.

In a situation report from the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), it has been confirmed that over 125,000 Syrian refugees have returned from neighbouring countries as of December 2024, with most of these returnees being concentrated in the Aleppo, Ar-Raqqa and Dara’a governorates.

Returnees and displaced Syrians are particularly vulnerable to unexploded ordnance. According to estimates from UNICEF, there are over 300,000 mines spread across the country. In December of 2024 alone, there have been at least 116 instances of children being killed or injured by unexploded ordnance, averaging about 4 cases per day. According to the humanitarian organization Humanity & Inclusion, approximately 14 million people are at risk of being injured or killed by explosive munitions.

“Girls and boys in the country continue to suffer the brutal impact of unexploded ordnance at an alarming rate. It’s the main cause of child casualties in Syria right now and has been for many years, and will continue to be. Every step they take carries the risk of an unimaginable tragedy,” said Ricardo Pires, UNICEF Communication Manager for Emergencies.

The United Nations and its partners remain on the frontlines of this crisis to assist vulnerable populations in Syria as they navigate this transitional period. UNICEF’s Syria Humanitarian Action for Children (HAC) appeal for 2025 seeks 488 million dollars in funding in order to scale up responses. So far, only 11 percent of this fund has been secured.

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 Luke Cooper
LONDON, Jan 23 2025 – Trump’s trade policy blends aggressive tariffs, legal manoeuvring and transactional diplomacy. But could he really blow up the global trade system?

The Trump team make the mistake of thinking about the global economy as a series of bilateral trade relationships when it is actually a complex and highly integrated system of connections.

President Donald Trump won his re-election on the promise of fighting an unprecedented trade war against the rest of the world.

He has proposed a universal tariff on all goods imports to the United States of between 10-20 per cent, rising to 60 per cent for shipments from China and even higher in some areas. After winning the election, Trump initially doubled down further on this rhetoric, threatening a 25 per cent tariff on goods from Mexico and Canada.

The Trump transition team are divided over these proposals but appear to be sticking to the idea of some form of universal tariff. Reports suggest though that they plan to target strategic industries such as defence manufacturing and metallurgy, medical supplies and pharmaceuticals, and energy production.

This would still amount to a radical disruption of the global trading system. It would also lead to retaliatory action from the United States’ larger trading partners and violate the terms of the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

America cannot simply ‘decouple’ from China

Economic and geopolitical competition with China has become an obsession of the American political elite. The Trump administration first introduced tariffs on China in 2018, and these were kept by his successor and extended further in 2024.

One of the reasons that the Trump administration are edging towards the idea of using universal tariffs is the failure of China-focused tariffs to bring down the overall US trade deficit in goods, which has exceeded $1 trillion each year from 2021 to 2024.

The Trump administration’s focus on Mexico and Canada reflects the fact that they, along with China, are by some distance America’s major source of goods imports, each accounting for in excess of $400 billion in 2023.

But the Trump team make the mistake of thinking about the global economy as a series of bilateral trade relationships when it is actually a complex and highly integrated system of connections.

The decline and plateauing of the US-China trade relationship since 2018 disguises how supply chains adapted with Chinese components routed into final line assembly in Southeast Asian states. American industry is itself embedded in such networked production.

Richard Baldwin and Rebecca Freeman calculate that ‘Chinese inputs into all the inputs that American manufacturers buy from other foreign suppliers… is almost four times larger than it appears to be’ in trade statistics.

In a still highly integrated world economy, China’s competitive production and its dominance of goods exports make it an unavoidable partner — and its sluggish domestic economy increases its dependency on its export strength. For the United States to tackle the rerouting of goods through third countries to avoid tariffs would require complex rules of origin tests that would be challenging and expensive to implement.

The imbalance that the Trump administration highlights is certainly real. It has long been recognised that the United States economy is heavily skewed towards consumption over production — and that the opposite is the case for China.

The gross savings rate – the proportion of national income not spent on consumption – in China is more than double the level of the US. China’s low consumption and high savings provide the basis for huge investments in production with the goods then needing to be consumed elsewhere.

This relationship shapes the world economy: the US consumes an enormous amount of goods, and China provides many of these goods. By 2030, China is expected to account for an astonishing 45 per cent of all global industrial production — an increase from just six per cent a quarter of a century ago. Trade imbalances on this scale pose a problem for the global economy.

For many years, lonely voices on the left argued that the goal of trade efficiency – e.g. the plentiful cheap industrial products China offers – should be balanced against other objectives like supporting jobs and environmental protection.

But today, the idea that trade should not be ‘free’ but conditional on the political choices we make enjoys much wider support. Numerous conservatives that are hawkish on competition with China now agitate very loudly against American economic dependency on its supply chains.

While this American turn has raised important questions about supply chain resilience, the relationship between trade and human rights, and how to design industrial policies that deliver the outcomes we want, Trump’s brand of ‘strongman’ nationalism offers no serious answers.

Trump’s heterogeneous coalition

The Trump administration would like to lower the price of the dollar to boost US goods export performance, but the blunt single instrument that they favour – tariffs – will not bring this about. As David Lubin argues, while tariffs increase the cost of imported goods in the American market, this in no way equates with weakening the dollar.

The general strength of the US economy and the importance of its market for global exporters mean that tariffs will create downward pressure on the currencies of states that are subject to them. Added to this is the inflationary effect of tariffs and Trump’s expansive fiscal policy – i.e. his huge tax cuts – which will incline the Federal Reserve to increase interest rates.

So, rather than a weakened dollar the result would be the opposite: a dollar with even more buying power. Unless the Trump administration start from an analysis that the trade deficit is closely related to the combination of two internal imbalances, the American imbalance towards consumption over investment and the reverse in China, their policies will simply not work.

To bring about the kind of rebalancing in global trade that the Trump administration claims to want would require multilateral cooperation — the antithesis of ‘America first’. It points to thinking holistically about the global economy and its rules — addressing not only goods trade but also services, finance and capital movements.

Some in the Republican Party are asking these questions. The conservative think tank American Compass has identified financial liberalisation as the critical source of trade imbalances. Vice President J. D. Vance has even argued that the role of the dollar as a global reserve currency is a ‘massive subsidy to American consumers but a massive tax on American producers’.

However, any move to greater control of capital movements would put the Trump administration on a collision course with Wall Street, which seems unlikely. The Trump camp includes a coterie of far-right-moving billionaires like Elon Musk who see his authoritarianism as a vehicle for their brand of economic libertarianism, which conveniently supports subsidies and government spending when it benefits their interests.

These backers would recoil at the idea of capital controls. Trump has also threatened huge tariffs on any states that pursue de-dollarisation and his Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Bessent has confirmed the administration will maintain the dollar’s position as a global reserve currency. A more moderate proposal is to reach out to Beijing to agree on a plan for dollar devaluation.

Shahin Vallée suggests Trump could launch a multilateral initiative to strike a deal on a package of coordinated measures. However, this would require reducing the US budget deficit — an effort that becomes much harder in the context of the administration’s plans for huge tax cuts.

The Trumpian method of politics

All of these proposals assume, however, that the Trump administration is capable of developing policies with some sense of the general interest in mind. Trump’s own statements provide little grounds for anticipating this.

Consider how his team have previously hinted at exploiting ideological divisions within the European Union. Trump’s propensity to link trade policies with non-trade issues, such as immigration and drug enforcement, could be applied to European states to offer quid pro quos that seek to circumvent the EU institutions.

While EU states share a Common External Tariff, Trump may be inclined to offer unilateral tariff reductions to his far-right co-thinkers in exchange for deals that benefit his networks and have nothing to do with a trade. As Viktor Orbán’s Hungary is a landlocked state, it could not match any US tariff concession (given that all goods it received would have to pass through another EU member state), but he may have something else to offer team Trump.

In the United States, it is also highly likely that the tariffs would be riddled with exemptions and opts-outs, providing obvious avenues for kleptocratic deal-making with corporate lobbyists.

Trump should not be read then as a champion of ‘Main Street against Wall Street’. Or as the head of a political faction aimed at mobilising the powers of American statecraft to redesign its domestic economy and external trade relations.

Instead, it might be better to analyse Trumpism – and the ideologically heterogeneous networks and actors that constitute it – as representing an oligarchisation in which institutions are captured to secure sectional advantages for supporters, exchanging political for economic power and vice versa.

The transactionalism fundamental to this approach to politics seems likely to carry over into the administration’s trade policy with potentially chaotic and contradictory effects.

Luke Cooper is an Associate Professorial Research Fellow in International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science and the Director of PeaceRep’s Ukraine programme. He is the author of Authoritarian Contagion (Bristol University Press, 2021).

Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), published by the Global and European Policy Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin.

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 Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO, Jan 23 2025 – Aliko Dangote, Africa’s richest man, carries his frustration as visibly as he carries his passport.

To travel across the continent he calls home, he needs 35 visas—each a bureaucratic hurdle and a reminder of the barriers to free movement and trade in Africa.

“As someone who wants to make Africa great, I have to apply for 35 different visas,” Dangote lamented at a recent Africa CEO Forum in Kigali, Rwanda. His words echo the larger frustration of a continent grappling with the paradox of cementing regional integration while battling closed borders.

Nearly a decade after African leaders envisioned a borderless continent, the dream is largely unfulfilled.

Visa Woes

The 2024 Africa Visa Openness Index, launched recently in Botswana, is revealing: only four countries—Benin, The Gambia, Rwanda, and Seychelles—offer visa-free access to all Africans. Ghana has joined the list after it announced visa-free travel to all Africans in January this year.

Published by the African Development Bank and the African Union, the visa-openness index measures how open African countries are to citizens of other African countries based on whether or not a visa is required before travel and if it can be issued on arrival. There has been some progress since the first edition of the report, with several African countries instituting reforms to simplify the free movement of people across the continent.

About 17 African countries have improved on their visa openness, while 29 are instituting reforms on the issuance of visas for Africans, the Index shows. In 28 percent of country-to-country travel scenarios within Africa, African citizens do not need a visa to cross the border, a marked improvement over 20% in 2016

However, the cost of inaction is clear. Intra-Africa trade is at a low 15 percent of total trade, compared to 60 percent in Asia and 70 percent in Europe, according to research by the Economic Commission for Africa. Visa openness could boost intra-Africa trade and tourism while facilitating labour mobility and skills transfer and propel Africa to economic growth. For now, closed borders remain Africa’s stop sign to free movement.

Zodwa Mabuza, Principal Regional Integration Officer at the AFDB, noted during the launch of the 2024 Index on the sidelines of the 2024 Africa Economic Conference that visa openness was not about permanent migration but the facilitation of tourism, trade and investments.

“This is the sort of movement that we are promoting, in particular because we are promoting the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA),” Mabuza said.

Stop In the Name of Crime

Fears of illegal migration, terrorism, and economic disruption keep borders closed, despite evidence that such fears are often overblown, said Francis Ikome, Chief Regional Integration and Trade at the Economic Commission for Africa.

Ikome warned that without free movement of African people across the continent, AfCFTA is ‘dead on arrival’.

“We cannot discuss the concerns of security again, even though I think there is over-securitization of migration. When we talk about migration, we see security,” said Ikome. “When you are a foreigner and an African moves to the immigration officer, they see problems even before they look at your passport. Migrants are job creators; there are a lot of university dons, accountants and other skills that migrants bring to the table.”

Free Passage Paradox

Since the launch of the AfCFTA, a majority of African countries have not ratified the Free Movement of Persons Protocol launched in 2018 by the African Union and signed by 33 member states. Only four countries have ratified the Protocol.

Migration researcher Alan Hirsch highlighted that some richer African countries are more protective of their borders and several of the most open countries are island states or poor countries that do not expect immigration or can control it more easily. He said trust is needed between countries, which takes time and effort.

“The reluctance of some countries is related to their concerns about the quality of documentation and systems in some countries, fears relating to security issues as there are terrorist organisations in some parts of Africa, and fears that the visitors are economic migrants in disguise and will not leave,” Hirsch told IPS.

“There is a lot of progress in the regional communities in Africa. Borders are opening frequently on a bilateral or multilateral basis, as the visa openness index shows,” said Hirsch, an Emeritus Professor at The Nelson Mandela School of Public Governance at the University of Cape Town.

Sabelo Mbokazi, Head of Employment, Labour and Migration at the African Union Commission, suggests that countries that promote free movement must be incentivised to do better.

“Who are we serving with all these visa restrictions? Are we serving the people or the politics of the day? Are we serving populations or our popularity? Are we serving the people around the continent or for profit? These are the paradoxes we see in Africa,” he said, citing that intra-African migration was at 80 percent, with 20 percent going to Europe or America but Europeans who came to Africa moved more easily than Africans.

That some Africans do not have passports and some are nomads, visa-free travel could be a logistical nightmare that many countries would do without. Africa has toyed with the concept of an African passport, which was launched in 2016. The passport has been issued only to African heads of state, foreign ministers and diplomats accredited by the AU.

“Regional passports, such as the ECOWAS passport for the large West African community and the EAC passport for the growing East African community, were developed in recent times and are doing very well. It was probably too soon for an all-African passport, “ Hirsch said.

In analysis, stopping African travellers in their tracks is counter to regional integration aspirations, argues Joy Kategekwa, Director, Regional Integration Coordination Office, at the AfDB.

“The paradox of integration in Africa is we talk about pan-Africanism; we have a passion for it but we keep Africans closed out of it behind the visa.”

Tied to the free movement of persons has been the poor implementation of the Yamoussoukro Decision to liberalize air transport. Air connectivity in Africa is a nightmare.

Hirsch is optimistic that Africa can boost its development through trade and migration, admitting that opening African skies takes time.

“In addition to the African ‘free skies’ initiative and the free movement of persons protocol, there is the AfCFTA,” he said. “All three initiatives were agreed to in 2018. The AfCFTA is making some progress and could help pave the way for the other two initiatives.”

The stakes are high. The AfCFTA, meant to unite 1.3 billion people under a single market, risks failure. With closed borders and skies, a visa-free Africa is a dream deferred.

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 Jo Becker
NEW YORK, Jan 23 2025 – The International Day of Education, January 24, reminds us of the power of education to transform children’s lives, and to build vibrant, sustainable societies.

One of the most important—and simplest—things that governments can do to ensure children’s education is to make it free. In the 1990s, when many countries began to eliminate school fees at the primary level, they saw dramatic results.

Malawi, for example, abolished primary school fees in 1994, and within a year, enrolment had surged by 50 percent, with 1 million additional children enrolled. After Kenya abolished primary school fees in 2003, 2 million new children enrolled.

The sudden influx of new students strained education systems, challenging countries to train additional teachers, build more schools, and to ensure quality. But today, virtually all of the world’s children enjoy free primary education, and nearly 90 percent of children globally complete primary school.

Fewer than 60 percent of the world’s children complete secondary school, and about  half miss out on pre-primary education, which takes place during the early years when children’s brains are rapidly developing, and provides profound long-term benefits. Existing international law—dating back more than 70 years—only guarantees free education for all children at the primary level

But it’s a different story for children at the pre-primary and secondary level, where cost often remains a significant barrier to schooling.

Fewer than 60 percent of the world’s children complete secondary school, and about  half miss out on pre-primary education, which takes place during the early years when children’s brains are rapidly developing, and provides profound long-term benefits. Existing international law—dating back more than 70 years—only guarantees free education for all children at the primary level.

In Uganda, for example, our recent investigation with the Initiative for Social and Economic Rights found that most children miss out on pre-primary education entirely, because the government provides no funding for early childhood education, and families are unable to afford the fees charged by private preschools.

Without access to pre-primary, children typically don’t perform as well in primary school, are twice as likely to repeat grades, and are more likely to drop-out. Many of these children never catch up to their peers, exacerbating income inequality.

According to the World Bank, every dollar invested in pre-primary education can yield up to $14 in benefits. Early education boosts tax revenues and GDP by improving children’s employment prospects and earnings, and enables parents—especially mothers—to increase their income by returning to work sooner.

In Uganda, a recent cost-benefit analysis found that 90 percent of the cost of government-funded free pre-primary could be covered just through the expected reduction of repetition rates and inefficiencies at the primary school level. It concluded that “investments in early childhood have the greatest rate of return of any human capital intervention.”

As part of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), all countries have agreed that by 2030 they will provide access to pre-primary education for all, and that all children will complete free secondary education. But political commitments to free education are simply not enough, and progress is too slow.

A growing number of countries see the expansion of free education beyond primary school as an essential investment.

Ghana, for example, became the first country in Sub-Saharan Africa to expand free education to the kindergarten years in 2008, guaranteeing two years of free and compulsory pre-primary education.

In 2017, it committed to full free secondary education, and according to the latest statistics, now has the third-highest enrolment rate in Sub-Saharan Africa in both pre-primary and secondary school. Its free secondary education policy has reduced poverty rates nationally, particularly for female-headed households.

It’s no surprise that UNESCO reports that countries with laws guaranteeing free education have significantly higher rates of children in school. When Azerbaijan adopted legislation providing three years of free pre-primary education, for example, participation rates shot up from 25 percent to 83 percent in four years.

Given the proven benefits of free education, it’s baffling that approximately 70 percent of the world’s children live in countries that still do not guarantee free pre-primary and free secondary education by law or policy.

In July 2024, the UN Human Rights Council approved a proposal from Luxembourg, Sierra Leone, and the Dominican Republic to consider a new international treaty to explicitly guarantee free public pre-primary (beginning with one year) and free public secondary education for all children

To be sure, a new treaty will not immediately get every child in school. But it will provide a powerful impetus for governments to move more quickly to expand access to free education and an important tool for civil society to hold them to account.

Negotiations for the proposed treaty are expected to begin in September. Governments should seize this moment to advance free education for all children, without exception.

Jo Becker is children’s rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.

By Sulan Chen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 22 2025 – The global plastics negotiation process, launched in 2022 under a resolution by the UN Environment Assembly, represents an unprecedented effort to combat the escalating plastic pollution crisis.

Despite progress, negotiations stalled at the end of 2024 due to diverging views on the scope, measures, financing, responsibilities and other issues. This impasse highlighted the challenge of balancing economic interests, development disparities, and planetary sustainability.

As 2025 begins, it brings with it a renewed sense of purpose and the opportunity to gather fresh energy for the critical task ahead. The turning of the calendar offers the global community a chance to reset, reimagine, and reignite the momentum needed to achieve a plastics treaty that meets the scale of the crisis.

Winston Churchill’s words; “Kites rise highest against the wind, not with it,” remind us that resilience and determination can turn obstacles into opportunities. Despite the headwinds, this treaty holds the promise to drive systemic change, protect our planet, and secure a sustainable future for all.

Sulan Chen

Life is short, art is long

A global plastics treaty is not just a policy document—it is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape humanity’s relationship with plastics and redefine our stewardship of the planet. To achieve this, we need bold global leadership that rises above short-term interests and embraces a vision of shared prosperity for generations to come.

Continuing the current trajectory of linear production, consumption and disposal systems will leave an indelible mark on the planet—a legacy of pollution, environmental degradation, and missed opportunities for innovation. It is a legacy that future generations will inherit, one that we have the power to prevent.

The treaty must drive us toward a more sustainable and conscientious path, where plastics are not just reduced but reimagined within circular economies, balancing economic growth with environmental responsibility.

As we navigate this critical juncture, it is worth reflecting on the timeless wisdom of Hippocrates: “Life is short, art is long.” Our lives and leadership are fleeting, but the decisions we make today will ripple far into the future, shaping the lives of generations to come.

This treaty, if crafted with courage and foresight, can stand as a testament to human ingenuity and unity. Let us choose to leave a legacy that embodies regeneration, not regret.

Rising against the winds

The path to a global plastics treaty is not without its obstacles. Divergent perspectives, economic dependencies, and varying levels of development among nations often create friction.

However, these winds of resistance should not be seen as insurmountable barriers but rather as opportunities to soar higher. Difficult moments like these demand vision, courage, and collaboration to find common ground.

This is the moment for global leadership to rise above narrow self-interest and short-term gains to embrace the transformative potential of this treaty. Bold compromises and courageous decisions are needed to prioritize the long-term health of our planet and its people. Leaders must consider the far-reaching impact of their actions on ecosystems, human health, and global stability.

The success of this treaty will hinge on our ability to navigate these challenges together. It requires that countries approach the negotiations with a sense of shared purpose, recognizing that plastic pollution transcends borders. With determination and collective action, we can turn resistance into momentum, obstacles into opportunities, and agreements into tangible change.

A call to action

The urgency of finalizing a robust and enforceable global plastics treaty by 2025 cannot be overstated. The world cannot afford further delays. With every passing moment, the problem grows more complex and costlier to address.

To the negotiators, leaders, and advocates shaping this treaty: Let the kite of ambition fly high. Rise above immediate obstacles, chart the course for systemic change, and seize this historic opportunity to leave a legacy of resilience and regeneration.

As we approach the pivotal milestones of 2024 and 2025, let us draw inspiration from history, where humanity has risen above divisions to achieve transformative milestones, such as the Montreal Protocol, which safeguarded the ozone layer, and the Paris Agreement, which united nations against climate change.

These successes remind us that strength, unity, and vision can overcome even the most daunting challenges. Together, we can channel this spirit of international cooperation to turn the tide on plastic pollution and ensure a cleaner, healthier, and more sustainable planet for generations to come.

Sulan Chen is Principal Technical Advisor and Global Lead on Plastics Offer, UNDP.

Source: UNDP

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’);  

A new war memorial in Cape Town, South Africa, remembers the close to 2,000 casualties who served in Africa during World War 1, between 1914-1918 and who have no known graves and because they were Black, they were never remembered in the official narratives of history.

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 21 2025 – On January 15, 2025, the long-awaited ceasefire proposal between Israel and Hamas was approved, bringing the first bout of relief for the people of the Gaza Strip after 15 months of conflict. This has allowed for the exchange of prisoners and hostages between the two nations as well as a greater flow of humanitarian aid to be directed to Gaza. Although this only accounts for the first phase out of the three phase plan, it is uncertain if Israel will continue to uphold the negotiations of a truce after the first phase is completed.

On January 20, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) issued a press statement in which it was confirmed that they facilitated the first transfer of hostages and prisoners between Israel and Hamas. In the statement, the ICRC stated that three Israeli hostages had been returned to Israel from Gaza and 90 Palestinian prisoners had been returned to the occupied Palestinian territory.

The ICRC described exchange operations between the two nations as “complex” and requiring “rigorous” safety measures to be upheld. The hazards of unexploded artillery, large crowds, and destroyed infrastructure made these operations particularly meticulous. Specialized ICRC staff, including doctors, were on the frontlines and provided medical care as the exchanges took place.

“We are relieved that those released can be reunited with their loved ones. Ensuring their safe return and providing the necessary care at this critical moment is a great responsibility. More families are waiting anxiously for their loved ones to come home. We call on all parties to continue to adhere to their commitments to ensure the next operations can take place safely. Our teams are ready to continue to implement the agreement so that more hostages and detainees are released, and more families reunited,” said ICRC President Mirjana Spoljaric.

In the statement, the ICRC reiterated the urgency of the humanitarian situation that has amounted in Gaza since October 7, 2023. Gazans have struggled for over one year for access to food, clean water, electricity, fuel, and shelter. In addition, access to most basic services, such as sanitation, education, and healthcare, have been significantly reduced.

Concurrent with the exchanges of detainees between Israel and Palestine, the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, António Guterres, addressed the Security Council on the current situation in Gaza. Guterres stated that the UN remains dedicated to facilitating a peaceful transitional period for both nations, adding that both parties must “make good” on the terms of the ceasefire agreement. This includes a complete cessation of hostilities and an uninterrupted flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza.

“I urge the Security Council and all Member States to support all efforts to implement this ceasefire, bring about a permanent cessation of hostilities, ensure accountability, and create the conditions for recovery and reconstruction. The international media must also be allowed into Gaza to report on this crucial story on the ground. We must seize the opportunity presented by the ceasefire deal to intensify efforts toward addressing governance and security frameworks in Gaza,” said Guterres.

Guterres adds that the UN must have safe and unimpeded access through all available access points in Gaza to deliver essential resources and basic services and to rebuild critical infrastructures in the enclave. On January 19, the World Food Programme (WFP) released a press statement in which they confirmed that aid trucks have begun crossing into Gaza. WFP seeks to facilitate the daily delivery of 150 trucks of aid material into Gaza from all available border crossings. Trucks from Jordan and Israel aim to reach civilians in the north of the enclave and trucks from Egypt aim to reach people in the south.

Additionally, WFP has delivered 5,000 litres of fuel, as well as food parcels, bottled water, winter clothes and vaccines. Furthermore, 33 patients, nearly a dozen doctors, and 16 administrative staff remain in the Al Awda Hospital. Access remains extremely challenging due to continuing security concerns.

On January 20, The Palestinian Non-Governmental Network (PNGO) and the Association of International Development Agencies (AIDA) released a joint statement in which they welcomed the implementation of the ceasefire agreement and highlighted the vast scale of needs facing the people of Gaza. The two organizations urged all parties involved to monitor the full implementation of the ceasefire agreement and investigate all violations of international humanitarian law.

“They must ensure accountability through investigations, support international legal bodies, and establish an international mechanism to address ongoing violations. Ending impunity is crucial to breaking cycles of violence, for Palestinians, the region and all of humanity. We call on all parties to the conflict and the guarantors to honor and ensure the full implementation of the ceasefire agreement. This ceasefire must only be the beginning of a crucial process toward justice, peace and dignity for all. Palestinian voices must be centred in all rebuilding negotiations for a meaningful solution to end the suffering of the Palestinian people,” said a spokesperson for the two organizations.

On January 18, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a televised statement, informed reporters that the ceasefire is temporary and that Israel reserves its right to resume its offensives with the support of the United States if Hamas doesn’t comply with their end of the deal. “If we need to resume fighting, we will do that in new ways and we will do it with great force,” said Netanyahu.

The statements by Netanyahu have generated much concern among political analysts and humanitarian organizations that the ceasefire may not be implemented fully. Marc Lynch, the director of the Middle East Studies programme at George Washington University, opined that the ceasefire will likely not move past phase one and permanent peace will not be achieved.

“There are endless openings for spoilers on both sides, and serious disagreements remain about the details of the agreement’s next steps. In Israel, there are many people who would like to see this war prosecuted indefinitely,” said Lynch.

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 Franck Kuwonu
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 21 2025 – To achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Agenda 2063 aspirations, Africa requires an additional $1.3 – 1.6 trillion in financing.

According to a new report ‘Unpacking Africa’s Debt: Towards a Lasting and Durable Solution’ by the UN Special Advisor on Africa launched on 14 November 2024, borrowing remains a necessary tool to navigate the compounding crises of financial distress, climate change, food insecurity, and persistent conflict.

The report emphasizes the need to re-examine Africa’s historical reliance on debt instruments to address structural constraints and unlocking economic opportunities. By fostering economic growth and ensuring debt sustainability, debt can become a tool for progress rather than a hindrance.

Debt is an important mode of financing. While many countries are in debt distress, we must not treat Africa as a completely debt-distressed continent.
–Under-Secretary-General Cristina Duarte, Special Adviser on Africa to the United Nations Secretary-General.

This shift requires aligning debt strategies with long-term development priorities.

“Debt is an important mode of financing. While many countries are in debt distress, we must not treat Africa as a completely debt-distressed continent,” said Cristina Duarte, Under-Secretary-General and Special Adviser on Africa to the UN Secretary-General, at the launch of the report in New York.

“Debt, when managed effectively, can help us invest in achieving development goals,” added Ms. Duarte. The need to reform the global financing system to ensure predictable and affordable financing, prioritize development outcomes over private finance interests, and create fiscal space to fund SDG investments, is also emphasized in the report.

Existing frameworks, including debt restructuring arrangements like the Common Framework, the Report says, are insufficient to meet Africa’s development needs. The Common Framework for Debt Treatments beyond the DSSI (Debt Service Suspension Initiative) is an initiative launched by the G20 in November 2020 to help low-income countries address unsustainable debt levels.

Developed by the G20 and the Paris Club (a group of major creditor countries), the Common Framework aims to streamline debt restructuring and provide more comprehensive debt relief options for countries struggling with high debt burdens, particularly following the economic impact of COVID-19.

At the national level, African countries can deepen domestic debt markets to incentivize local investment and effectively engage with the private sector.

Strengthening regional financing architecture can support transboundary infrastructure projects, complementing national efforts. Enhancing debt management and reform capacity across the continent will also play a critical role in addressing the development financing gap.

The report envisions debt as a means to support a more sustainable economic model. Moving beyond resource extraction for export, African economies can leverage debt to build value-added industries, fostering resilience and self-reliance.

By rethinking debt, fostering domestic investment, and pushing for global financing reforms, Africa can bridge its development gap and achieve its aspirations sustainably.

Key recommendations
Some of the recommendations proposed by the report aimed at addressing Africa’s financing challenges, include:

Increasing access to affordable finance:
Fulfill Official Development Assistance (ODA) pledges, allocating 10% to capacity building and digitization for domestic resource mobilization (DRM)systems.

Reform Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) to prioritize long-term (30-50 years) concessional lending, increase capital, and lend in local currencies to reduce currency risks.
Prioritize sustainable development by ensuring predictable, large-scale climate adaptation financing.

Reducing borrowing costs:
Restructure high-interest, short-term debt into long-term, low-cost loans to ease fiscal pressure.
Strengthen the G20 Common Framework by expanded eligibility, clarifying processes, and ensuring debt service suspension during negotiations.

Enhancing debt sustainability:
Introduce debt service suspension linked to SDG progress.
Establish a Sovereign Debt Authority to prioritize development in debt treatment.

Leveraging Financing Innovations:
Use state-contingent clauses to suspend debt payments during crises.
Employ debt-for-development, debt-for-nature, debt-for-climate swaps to free resources for SDG investment.

Strengthening regional cooperation:
Boost regional development banks and accelerate Pan-African institutions like the African Investment Bank.
Promote cross-border financing for infrastructure and deepen regional financial markets.

Source: Africa Renewal, United Nations

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, Jan 21 2025 – Perhaps one of the UN’s most ambitious and longstanding projects – the launching of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)– is aimed, among other things, at helping developing nations eradicate extreme poverty by 2030. But that elusive goal has made little or no significant progress.

And now comes a new report from Oxfam, “Takers Not Makers” which finds that in 2024 alone, billionaires amassed $2 trillion in wealth, and nearly four new billionaires were minted every week.

“Not only has the rate of billionaire wealth-accumulation accelerated ―by three times― but so, too, has their power. The failure to stop billionaires is now spawning soon-to-be trillionaires. At this pace, we won’t see one trillionaire in a decade, but at least five”.

Meanwhile, the number of people living in poverty (around 3.5 billion) has barely changed since 1990, says Oxfam.

And, according to the UN, if current patterns persist, an estimated 7% of the global population – around 575 million people – could still find themselves trapped in extreme poverty by 2030, with a significant concentration in sub-Saharan Africa.

Nabil Ahmed, Oxfam America’s director of economic and racial justice, told IPS the achievement of the global goals—and efforts to end poverty—are being crushed by extreme levels of economic inequality.

“Our world, in which the top 1% own more than the 95% combined, in which we’re on course for five trillionaires within a decade, is not on course to end poverty soon, nor to meet the scale of the climate crisis”.

The number of people living under the $6.85 poverty line today is in fact close to what it was in 1990, he said.

Meanwhile, the World Bank calculates that if current growth rates continue and inequality does not decrease, it will take more than a century to end poverty.

“There can no longer be any avoiding what was clear at the onset of the SDGs: governments, and all of us, have to address the power and unimaginable wealth of the ultra-rich and mega-corporations to have any chance of succeeding”.

“We need action that includes taxing the ultra-rich, investing in public goods and not privatizing them, breaking up monopolies and rewriting global rules from sovereign debt to patents. As the World Bank itself shows, if we reduce inequality, poverty could be ended three times faster,” declared Ahmed.

In 2024, the number of billionaires rose to 2,769, up from 2,565 in 2023. Their combined wealth surged from $13 trillion to $15 trillion in just 12 months. This is the second largest annual increase in billionaire wealth since records began, according to Oxfam.

The wealth of the world’s ten richest men grew on average by almost $100 million a day —even if they lost 99 percent of their wealth overnight, they would remain billionaires.

Last year, Oxfam predicted the emergence of the first trillionaire within a decade. However, with billionaire wealth accelerating at a faster pace this projection has expanded dramatically —at current rates the world is now on track to see at least five trillionaires within that timeframe.

This ever-growing concentration of wealth is enabled by a monopolistic concentration of power, with billionaires increasingly exerting influence over industries and public opinion.

Ben Phillips, author of “How to Fight Inequality”, told IPS the promises made in the Sustainable Development Goals, including to end extreme poverty, can be met. But doing so depends on leaders making the decision to challenge extreme wealth. They need to tax and regulate the superrich, not only to raise essential revenue, but also to reshape the economy so that it works for everyone.

“The money is there, and the policies are known, to ensure that no one is held down in extreme poverty. Expert economic analysis that the G20 has commissioned shows that wealth taxes would unlock billions of dollars to tackle poverty”.

It also shows that taxing the wealth of the super-rich, and reining in the power of the oligarchs, would make the economy fairer and more secure. Furthermore, public opinion research shows that taking on the power of the super-rich, including by taxing them, would be hugely popular with voters from across the political spectrum.

“There is no mystery about what needs to be done about the twin evils of extreme poverty and extreme wealth. The difficulty is to get leaders to do it,” he pointed out.

The challenge is this: the extreme concentration of wealth has brought about an extreme concentration of power, and so to get political leaders to break with the super-rich requires public pressure that overwhelms the pressure of the oligarchs.

“There is hope, but that hope needs to be active. A fair economy that overcomes extreme poverty and extreme wealth won’t be given to people, but it can be won by people power”, said Phillips.

Daniel D. Bradlow, Professor/Senior Research Fellow, Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship at the University of Pretoria, told IPS according to the One Campaign, Africa’s total external debt in 2023 was $685.5 billion, equal to about 25% of the continent’s total GNP and its total debt service in 2024 was about $102 billion.

African countries are spending more on debt service than on health and education. This means that the world’s approximately 2500 billionaires, could spend less than half their $2 trillion increase in wealth in 2024 to pay off the total African external debt.

“Given this situation, it is highly unlikely that Africa can meet the SDGs without some correction in the gross maldistribution of wealth— and the power and influence that goes with it,” predicted Prof Bradlow.

Meanwhile, Oxfam has released its new study during a week (January 20-24) when business elites are gathering in the Swiss resort town of Davos, and billionaire Donald Trump was inaugurated Monday as President of the United States, backed by the world’s richest man Elon Musk.

The Oxfam report shows how unmerited wealth and colonialism —understood as not only a history of brutal wealth extraction but also a powerful force behind today’s extreme levels of inequality— stand as two major drivers of billionaire wealth accumulation.

Some of the findings include:

*60 percent of billionaire wealth now comes from inheritance, monopoly power or crony connections.

*The wealth of the world’s ten richest men grew on average by almost $100 million a day in 2024 —even if they lost 99 percent of their wealth overnight, they would remain billionaires.

*The richest 1 percent in Global North countries like the US, UK and France extracted $30 million an hour from the Global South through the financial system in 2023.

*Global North countries control 69 percent of global wealth, 77 percent of billionaire wealth and are home to 68 percent of billionaires, despite making up just 21 percent of the global population.

Oxfam is calling on governments to act rapidly to reduce inequality and end extreme wealth.

Radically reduce inequality
Governments need to commit to ensuring that, both globally and at a national level, the incomes of the top 10 percent are no higher than the bottom 40 percent. According to World Bank data, reducing inequality could end poverty three times faster. Governments must also tackle and end the racism, sexism and division that underpin ongoing economic exploitation.

Tax the richest to end extreme wealth
Global tax policy should fall under a new UN tax convention, ensuring the richest people and corporations pay their fair share. Tax havens must be abolished. Oxfam’s analysis shows that half of the world’s billionaires live in countries with no inheritance tax for direct descendants. Inheritance needs to be taxed to dismantle the new aristocracy.

End the flow of wealth from South to North
Cancel debts and end the dominance of rich countries and corporations over financial markets and trade rules. This means breaking up monopolies, democratizing patent rules, and regulating corporations to ensure they pay living wages and cap CEO pay.

Restructure voting powers in the World Bank, IMF and UN Security Council to guarantee fair representation of Global South countries. Former colonial powers must also confront the lasting harm caused by their colonial rule, offer formal apologies, and provide reparations to affected communities.

The full report is available at: https://oxfam.box.com/s/v8qcsuqabqqmufeytnrfife0o1arjw18

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’);