By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Jan 21 2025 – Corporate-dominated food systems are responsible for widespread but still spreading malnutrition and ill health. Poor diets worsen non-communicable diseases (NCDs), now costing over eight trillion dollars yearly!

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Unhealthy food systems
A recent UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) study of 156 countries found that such food systems account for unsafe food and diet-related NCDs.

FAO estimates related ‘hidden costs’ at about $12 trillion annually, with 70% ($8.1 trillion) due to NCDs such as heart disease, strokes and diabetes. Such costs significantly exceed these food systems’ environmental and social costs.

FAO’s annual State of Food and Agriculture 2024 (SOFA) investigated hidden costs worldwide. These were primarily health-related, followed by environmental degradation, mainly in more ‘industrialised’ agri-food systems in upper-middle and high-income countries.

SOFA 2024 builds on the 2023 SOFA. The two-year study uses true cost accounting to estimate significant costs and benefits of food production, distribution and consumption.

The study estimates “hidden costs and benefits”, including those not reflected by market prices. The latest SOFA updates cost estimates, classifies them by agrifood system, and proposes solutions.

The report identifies 13 dietary risks with health implications, with significant differences among various food systems. Inadequate consumption of whole grains (the leading dietary risk in most food systems), fruits, and vegetables is the worst, while excessive sodium and meat consumption cause significant health risks.

Hidden costs
SOFA 2024 identifies historical transitions from traditional to industrial agrifood systems, their outcomes, and hidden costs. It distinguishes six food systems worldwide – traditional, expanding, diversifying, formalising, industrial, and protracted crisis – and links each to hidden costs.

This approach enables a better understanding of each system’s unique features and the design of more appropriate policies and interventions.

However, inadequate fruit and vegetable intake is the main concern during protracted crises – e.g., prolonged conflicts, instability, and widespread food insecurity – and in traditional systems with low productivity, limited technology adoption, and shorter value chains.

Excessive sodium consumption is another significant health concern, rising as food “systems evolve from traditional to formalising, peaking in the latter and then decreasing in industrial systems”.

Meanwhile, processed and red meat intake rises with the shift from traditional to industrial systems. Meat is one of industrial food systems’ top three dietary risk factors. Adverse environmental impacts of unsustainable agronomic practices contribute significantly to hidden costs.

Such costs – due to greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen runoffs, land-use changes, and water pollution – rise with diversifying food systems. Rapid growth typically involves changing food production and consumption, costing $720 billion more yearly.

Formalising and industrial food systems also incur significant environmental costs. However, countries facing protracted crises face the highest environmental costs, equivalent to a fifth of their output.

Social costs, including poverty and undernourishment, are most significant in traditional food systems and more vulnerable to protracted crises, incurring around 8% and 18% of GDP, respectively.

Such high social costs emphasise the urgent need for integrated efforts to improve livelihoods and well-being, reflecting stakeholder priorities and sensitivity to local circumstances.

Collective action
SOFA 2024 seeks to promote “more sustainable, resilient, inclusive, and efficient” food systems. It uses true cost accounting to identify hidden costs, going well beyond traditional economic measures such as the gross domestic product (GDP).

Using realistic and pragmatic approaches, policymakers make better-informed decisions to enhance food systems’ social contributions. More comprehensive approaches should acknowledge the crucial contributions of food systems to food security, nutrition, biodiversity, and culture.

Such transformations require transcending conceptual divides, ensuring health, agricultural, and environmental policy coherence, and fairly sharing costs and benefits among all stakeholders.

The report stresses that this requires collective action involving diverse stakeholders, which is difficult to achieve. Such stakeholders include consumers, primary producers, agribusinesses, governments, financial institutions, and international organisations.

Addressing hidden costs affects various stakeholders differently. Appropriate frameworks, supportive policies, and regulations ease implementation and minimise disruption by adopting sustainable practices early and protecting the vulnerable.

Recommendations
Recognising food systems’ adverse consequences for diets and health, the report makes several key recommendations quite different from those of the Davos World Economic Forum-compromised 2021 UN Food Systems Summit. It urges:
• incentivising the promotion of advancing sustainable food supply chain practices and balancing among food system stakeholders.
• promoting healthy diets by making nutritious food more affordable and accessible, reducing adverse health consequences and costs.
• using labelling, certification, standards, and due diligence to reduce greenhouse gas and nitrogen emissions, harmful land-use changes, and biodiversity loss.
• empowering society with comprehensive, clear, accessible, and actionable food and nutrition education and information about food choices’ health, environmental, and social impacts.
• using collective procurement’s significant purchasing power and influence to improve food supplies and the environment.
• ensuring inclusive rural transformations while reducing hidden health, environmental and social costs.
• strengthening civil society and governance to enable and accelerate sustainable and fair food system innovations and enhance social well-being, especially for vulnerable households.

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 External Source
Jan 21 2025 – Afghan women are enduring perhaps their most challenging time. Since the Taliban regained power four years ago, restrictions on women and girls have escalated, beginning with bans on education and paid employment.

Recently, the Taliban closed the few remaining employment opportunities for women, including positions in domestic and foreign NGOs. Women are now entirely barred from domestic or foreign NGO work. Unemployment among women is rising with the same frequency as new decrees are issued banning women form taking up various jobs.

Din Mohammad Hanif, the Taliban’s Minister of Economy, has warned non-governmental organizations against violating the decree banning women from being hired. Any breaches, he stated, would lead to the suspension of activities and revocation of licenses.

For the second time on December 28, 2024, the ministry sent out a letter, a copy of which was released to the media: “All non-governmental organizations are directed to strictly consider the decree banning women from working in NGOs and take the necessary actions accordingly”, cried the ministry.

Former female NGO employees describe the Taliban’s measures as “discriminatory, cruel, and inhumane.” United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volter Türk, also described the Taliban’s decree as deeply concerning and extremely discriminatory.

Stories of Loss and Devastation

The impact on women has been devastating. Razmaa Sekandari, 32, is one of the women who was forced out of her NGO job by the Taliban and ordered to stay at home.

“The head of our office, she says, forced all female employees to resign immediately, saying that if they don’t resign, the office will be closed indefinitely to everyone”. They had no option but to comply.

“I lost hope, says Ms. Razmaa, “I had no strength left and I couldn’t pick myself up on my feet”.

“And as the women and their colleagues were crying and hugging each other, the voice of the head of office thundered in a harsh tone”, ‘Hurry up, pack up your things and leave’

Continuing her narration Ms. Razmaa said, “In one of the foreign NGOs where I worked, we disbursed out small investment loans to women in Parwan province. It enabled some to raise chickens, and others reared cows. They had some income from the eggs, milk, and produced yogurt for themselves and their families”. But with the termination of their employment it has left Ms Razmaa wondering what to do next.

She shares a fate similar to hundreds of other women, some of who do not even have access to public information to learn of the new Taliban decree. As with all her colleagues, they have lost all hope and can hardly set foot outside the home.

“I had thought I could create jobs for women”, says, Ms Razmaa, who graduated in economics from Parwan University, “it didn’t happen”.

She became a stay-at-home woman after the Taliban decreed that she could no longer work.

“There are five of us in the family”, she says, “my mother is sick and my father is elderly, both of who stay at home with no income”.

About the other members of the family, Razmaa says her brother is a first-year law student. Her brother’s wife attended school up to the 11th grade when the Taliban banned females from having further education.

“In other words, we are all unemployed. I was the only one in the family who brought in income from my job, but the Taliban for no fault of ours, snatched it from us. We are at a loss as to what to do”, she sighed, out of frustration.

Working in NGOs was once a lifeline for Afghan women and girls. Now, it has been completely taken away, leaving them without hope or opportunity. Credit: Learning Together.

A Bleak Future for NGOs and Women

To Asad Wali, (not her real name) head of a foreign NGO in Parwan Province, the Taliban decree came as a surprise.

“We used to work in secret for the last two years”, Wali says. “Whenever our female employees went on field visits, they faced severe problems such as interrogation by the Taliban for not traveling with a mahram” (a male guardian).

In spite of such challenges, the women did pass through Taliban checkpoints using various pretexts, and were happy that, at least, they still maintained their jobs.

Asad Wali narrated the sad story, thus: “At the end of 2024, the project in which women were involved ended. We got a new donor. The proposal and all the documents were ready. The next day, we went to the Department of the Ministry of Economy in Parwan province, and they directly told us that due to the new Taliban decree, women’s activities had been completely banned.”

Terminating the activities of foreign and domestic non-governmental organizations in Afghanistan will only make the already harsh conditions worse for women.

These organizations play a key role in meeting the people’s basic needs and supporting the country’s infrastructure.

In the absence of these organizations, women would suffer severe consequences because NGOs were the main source of crucial social, economic and health services. Without them, poverty leading to forced marriages would rise among women.

All of the activities that the NGOs provided, such as skills, vocational training, and small holding agriculture, which improved the lives of women, are now being taken away. With unemployment and poverty rising, most of Afghan families are bracing themselves for a bleak winter.

Excerpt:

The author is an Afghanistan-based female journalist, trained with Finnish support before the Taliban take-over. Her identity is withheld for security reasons

By Simone Galimberti
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Jan 20 2025 – The last few weeks of 2024 were a disappointment for those who strongly believed that planet Earth is in need of bold actions.

First, there were the frustration stemming from what could be defined at minimum as unconvincing outcomes of both COP 16 on Biodiversity and COP 29 on Climate.

Then all hope was resting on a successful conclusion of the 5th and final round of negotiations held in Busan to reduce plastic pollutions, at the Inter-governmental Negotiating Committee INC-5. (25 November -1 December 2024)

Instead also in this case, at the end, it was a letdown because no consensus had emerged on some of the key elements of the negotiations. Yet, flopping this more gloomy and dark view, I am learning that activists for a strong treaty are not giving up.

They are not ready to concede defeat and, rightly so. The fight must go on.

At least at Busan, the gap between the parties involved in the discussions came at the fore, providing clarity on their own desired outcomes, this time, each showing their cards, without hesitancy. On the one hand, a diverse coalition of more progressive nations.

Within it, both members of the Global South and a part of the Global North worked very hard to press for the best possible outcome, a treaty that would also include targets to reduce plastic production, especially the most nefarious type of it.

On the other hand, governments representing strong petro-chemical establishments had the overt mission to trample and block any attempts of reducing plastic production. Their mantras were conveniently focused on recycling and circularity as the best remedy to reduce plastic pollution.

To have a better assessment of INC-5, I approached the Plastic Pollution Coalition, a US civil society organization advocating an ambitious treaty. The group has also pressurized Washington to take a bolder stance in the fight against plastic pollution.

The resulting conversation with members of the Coalition, carried out via e-mails, was also an opportunity to identify the next goalposts for future negotiations and what scenarios might emerge in the months ahead.

They key messages are that, despite the final outcomes of the negotiations were not what many had hoped for, those, who want bold actions towards reducing plastic pollution, should not despair.

First of all, my interest was on assessing the level of disillusionment among activists advocating for a strong and ambitious treaty.

“Plastic pollutes throughout its existence, and a strong globally binding treaty is critical for a healthy future for humanity. While we are disappointed with the outcome of INC-5—little to no progress on the treaty text—we remain hopeful and are very inspired by the growing collaboration and efforts of a majority of ambitious countries” said Dianna Cohen, Co-Founder and CEO of the Plastic Pollution Coalition.

The commitment from the members of the Coalition is not diminished but rather it is growing ad with it also a sense of optimism.

“The fight is far from over. Talks will resume in 2025, and Plastic Pollution Coalition and allies continue to call on the US government to adopt a stronger position in the treaty negotiations” said Jen Fela, Vice President, Programs and Communications at the Plastic Pollution Coalition.

“The work won’t be easy. While necessary to protect the planet and human health, there will likely be even less support for a strong and legally binding global treaty by the incoming US administration”.

“The good news is that the talks in Busan demonstrated that more and more countries are willing to be bold and tell the world to get on board with what UN Environment Programme Executive Director Inger Andersen called a ‘once-in-a-planet opportunity’ for a treaty that will end the plastics age once and for all”, Fela further stressed.

But what next? Balancing realism with ambition, what activists should aim in the next negotiations?

“We will keep pushing for a treaty that caps plastic production and prioritizes health, centers frontline and fence-line communities, acknowledges the rights of Indigenous Peoples and rights holders, restricts problematic plastic products and chemicals of concern, and supports non-toxic reuse systems”, Cohen, the Co-Founder and CEO of the Coalition told me.

“We are proud to stand with our incredible community of allies and continue our work toward a more just, equitable, regenerative world free of plastic pollution and its toxic impacts”,

Indeed, signs of hope are not misplaced”.

“Despite Member States being unable to reach a deal at INC-5, there was promising ambition and growing collaboration among the majority of countries, and we’re hopeful for the additional round of talks at INC-5.2 next year”, she further added.

“Ultimately, a delay is better than settling for a weak agreement that fails to meaningfully address the problem now, and the silver lining is that in the meantime, we can gain even more support for a strong treaty that cuts plastic pollution”.

Moreover, it is important to remember that despite there was no agreement, a new consensus is emerging.

“Despite pressure from a handful of petrostates, the majority of countries are rallying together for a strong treaty, with more than 100 countries backing Panama’s proposal to reduce plastic production, 95 supporting legally binding targets to regulate harmful chemicals, and over 120 nations calling for a treaty with robust implementation measures” reads a summary of INC-5 published by the Coalition.

A new coalition got cemented in Busan with countries like Panama and Rwanda working with European nations and others in the so called High Ambition Coalition to end Plastic Pollution.

I also wanted to better understand the key elements that can either make a future treaty at least acceptable for those advocating for plastic reductions and which are the “red lines” for them.

“Signs of a weak Plastics Treaty include voluntary measures to address plastic pollution, failure to commit to a significant global reduction in the total production of plastics, failing to identify and cease production of “chemicals of concern” known to harm frontline communities—a major environmental justice issue, a focus on recycling plastic as a solution, and omitting a full and strong range of actions that address plastic pollution throughout its endless toxic existence—from the extraction of its fossil fuel ingredients through plastic and plastic chemical production, shipping, use, and disposal” explained Erica Cirino, Communication Manager at the Coalition.

“The key is a mandated and significant reduction in plastic and plastic chemical production”.

“Signs of a strong treaty include mandatory caps on plastic and plastic chemical production, identification and further regulation of especially hazardous chemicals of concern, and including a full and strong range of actions that work to end plastic pollution throughout its endless toxic existence, starting with the extraction of its fossil fuel ingredients through plastic and plastic chemical production, shipping, use, and disposal” she further said.

“A binding commitment that reduces especially “problematic” plastic products and chemicals of concern would not be acceptable without a cap in overall production. All plastics pollute, and all plastic production must be reduced”, Cirino further explained.

The point raised by Cirino is one of the most contentious. “Those of special concern must especially be eliminated and regulated, but taking action to mitigate their harm should only be expedited—and not stand in place of mitigating harm of all plastics”.

Would it be still acceptable, in case there will be no breakthrough at all in the next round of negotiations, the most progressive nations, say the members of The High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution, would come up with their own, alternative binding agreement, even if not a fully-fledged global treaty as we are envisioning now?

Could this “extreme” and until now unimaginable ‘last” option make sense even if plastic polluters would continue with their “business as usual approach”?

“It’s certainly not an ideal solution, as plastic pollution is a global issue perpetuated by a global set of governments; investors; and industrial players, activities and infrastructure. That said, it potentially would be better than nothing if more progressive nations were to devise their own binding agreement, so long as it focused on curbing plastic pollution”, Cirino shared.

“The main issue is, many of the biggest plastic producers in the world (namely, the US and China) are absent from the high-ambition talks for now. It’s crucial that levels of plastic production drop globally. It would be all for naught if some countries reduce production, only for other nations to increase it”.

Meanwhile having some countries going “solo” carries risks and these they are crystal clear.

Indeed, there are palpable concerns in places like Europe on this regard.

There, the plastic lobbying is worried that a decline of plastic production in Europe means that other nations like China are taking advantage by ramping up their production.

We are in a conundrum. At this moment, I can’t imagine how the petro states will change their key negotiating positions. “If passed, hopefully an agreement among progressive nations would push other nations to also reduce their plastic production or, such an agreement may not help at all” concluded Cirino.

Simone Galimberti writes about the SDGs, youth-centered policy-making and a stronger and better 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 Kizito Makoye
PEMBA, Tanzania , Jan 20 2025 – As the cool morning breeze sweeps across the Indian Ocean beach in Tanzania’s Pemba archipelago, Salma Mahmoud Ali begins her day. With her brightly coloured Kikoi cinched tightly around her waist and a dark blue scarf framing her face, she walks barefoot toward her salt ponds. The humid air hangs, but Ali wades through ankle-deep water with courage.

Armed with a shovel, rake and pick, she methodically drags sparkling crystals under the rising sun. Each stroke pulls salt from the brine—a hard process born of necessity.

“It’s a tough job,” says Ali, a 31-year-old mother of three. “The heat is too much—no matter how much water you drink, the thirst won’t go away. But it’s how I feed my family and send my children to school.”

For Ali and dozens of female artisanal salt farmers in Pemba, salt production is both their livelihood and their struggle. In this deeply patriarchal Muslim community, the gleaming piles of white salt represent survival—a craft demanding patience, precision and grit.

Hamida Mohamed prepares a projector to train salt farmers on climate resilience. Credit: Kizito Shigela/IPS

Hamida Mohamed talks to salt farmers. Credit: Kizito Shigela/IPS

On Pemba Island, where farms yield 2,000 tons of salt annually, prosperity feels like a mirage. Experts believe output could triple with better tools, but resources remain scarce. Families and cooperatives divide the land, with an average of four owners per plot, leaving wealth unevenly distributed. Farm owners collect the bulk of the earnings, while the workers—who toil under the weight of every harvest—are left to scrape by, their paychecks barely carrying them through the season.

Most families rely on coarse, untreated salt, with only one in four affording iodized varieties. “It’s our life,” said Halima Hamoud Heri, a laborer, kneeling under the blazing sun. “Hard, but it keeps us going.”

Gruelling Craft

Salt farming has always tested endurance, but climate change conspires against the women who depend on it. Rising temperatures accelerate evaporation, often causing salt to crumble before it can be harvested. Unpredictable rainfall—once a seasonal certainty—now arrives without warning, flooding the ponds and washing away weeks of labor back into the sea.

“We used to know when the dry season would start and end,” says Khadija Rashid, who has worked the ponds for 10 years. “Now the rain surprises us. Sometimes it’s too hot, and the salt dries too fast. Other times, the rain ruins everything before we can collect it.”

Salma Mahmoud Ali and fellow salt farmers inspect harvested salt. Credit: Kizito Shigela/IPS

Salt farms are affected by high evaporation, temperature and erratic rains. Credit: Kizito Shigela/IPS

For families like Ali’s, whose alternative livelihoods like fishing and farming have also been battered by erratic weather, salt production is a lifeline. It is work that demands accuracy and perseverance, and it leaves its mark on those who perform it. The sun cracks skin and the salt cuts into hands.

“By the time you carry the seawater, clear the mud, and harvest the salt, you’re so tired you can barely stand,” says Ali. “But you still have to do it again tomorrow.”

A Fragile Ecosystem

Standing at the edge of a salt farm in Pemba, Batuli Yahya, a field marine scientist from the Institute of Marine Sciences at the University of Dar es Salaam, gestured toward the silvery expanse.

“Salt production depends on delicate environmental conditions,” she says. “But those conditions are changing faster than ever due to climate pressures.”

The salt ponds, once reliable sources of livelihood for coastal communities, are increasingly at risk as rising sea levels, erratic rainfall, and intensifying heat disrupt their fragile balance.

“Sea level rise causes seawater to spill over into areas where salinity levels are meticulously controlled,” Yahya explains. “It’s a growing threat that turns productive farms into unusable pools.”

The challenges don’t end there. Rainfall patterns have become more unpredictable, she said, with sudden downpours diluting the brine or destroying salt pans altogether.

“Too much rain at the wrong time can ruin months of preparation,” Yahya notes. “And when it’s coupled with longer dry spells, it creates a cycle that’s hard to manage.”

Higher temperatures are also exacerbating the situation.

Pemba male and female salt farmers gather in a hut. Credit: Kizito Shigela/IPS

Female salt farmers plant mangrove trees along the coast to protect their farms from sea rise. Credit: Kizito Shigela/IPS

“Evaporation is critical to the salt production process, but extreme heat pushes salinity levels beyond what the ecosystem can handle,” Yahya says. “The microorganisms that play a key role in salt crystallization struggle to survive in such conditions.”

For many coastal communities, the implications are severe. “This is not just an environmental issue,” says Ali.

The challenges extend beyond weather. The reliance on manual labor to carry seawater to the ponds, clear mud, and harvest salt leaves many women exhausted and prone to injuries. The physical toll is compounded by the economic pressure to produce enough salt to sustain their families.

Finding Solutions

Amid challenges, Pemba’s salt farmers find strength in unity. Through local women’s associations, they adopt innovations to protect their work and improve production. One such breakthrough has been the introduction of solar drying covers—transparent sheets that shield ponds from sudden downpours while concentrating heat to speed up evaporation. “Before, if the rain came, we lost everything,” says Heri, demonstrating how she spreads the covers over her pond. “Now, we can save our salt, even during the wet season.”

The association also promotes knowledge-sharing among the women. Techniques to harden soil, efficiently distribute seawater, and package salt for market are taught collectively.

“Working alone, I would have given up,” says Ali. “But together, we find solutions. If one of us learns something new, she teaches the rest of us.”

Empowerment Through Enterprise

The women’s collective efforts improve livelihoods. Salt once sold in unmarked bags at local markets now reaches buyers in shops across Tanzania.

“I used to sell just enough to buy rice for the day,” says Ali. “Now I sell in bulk, and I’ve now saved Tanzanian shillings 455,000 (USD 187.)”

With the additional income, Ali has been able to feed her family and send children to school. “My daughter tells me she wants to be like me,” she says. “But maybe with a little less sunburn.”

The success has begun shifting perceptions in their community. Men who once dismissed salt farming as “boring work” now recognize its value, and some even assist with heavier tasks.

“We’re not just salt farmers anymore,” says Rashid. “We’re businesswomen.”

Hope Amid Challenges

Despite their progress, barriers remain. Access to financing is limited, and tools like solar covers and pumps are still too expensive for many women. Climate change continues to push them to innovate faster.

“We need more support,” says Ali. “Better tools, more training, and access to loans,”

Still, the women soldier on. Ali drags the day’s harvest into piles while pausing to wipe her brow.

“I hope the situation will improve and we will succeed even more,” she says.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Note: This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.

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 Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR, India, Jan 20 2025 – India’s average temperature has risen by 0.7°C since 1901, bringing more frequent and intense heat waves, erratic rainfall patterns, and a marked decline in monsoon consistency since the 1950s.

With projections suggesting a 2°C global temperature increase, India faces the risk of even greater instability in summer monsoon patterns. Extreme weather events such as floods, droughts, and cyclones are already becoming more common, placing the country as the seventh most affected globally by climate change-related weather events in 2019.

In Kashmir, the impacts are just as stark; the average maximum temperature in Srinagar rose by 1.05°C between 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, and the winter of 2023–2024 was the driest on record, marking the hottest winter in 18 years.

With climate change reshaping the region, the importance of climate-resilient architecture has become crucial.

In this photo essay, IPS explores the ingenious climate-responsive architecture of Kashmir, developed during the 19th and early 20th centuries, which showcases how traditional techniques created structures capable of withstanding the region’s extreme weather patterns.

Deodar wood, locally sourced and resistant to cold and moisture, is the backbone of Kashmir’s climate-resilient architecture. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Double-glazed windows trap warmth indoors while letting sunlight in, making them a modern staple in Kashmir’s evolving architecture. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Older homes in Srinagar’s downtown demonstrate the success of traditional design, staying warm and cozy even in mid-winter. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Thick layers of mud plaster cover many homes, trapping warmth inside and blocking the winter cold from entering. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Using stone or concrete, modern designs absorb daytime heat and release it gradually at night, enhancing comfort. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Verandas and balconies, or Deodis, act as barriers against the cold, helping maintain warmth inside. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Hakim Sameer Hamdani, senior architect and project coordinator with the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage. Hamdani is the author of Syncretic Traditions of Islamic Religious Architecture of Kashmir. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

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 Ifeanyi Nsofor
WASHINGTON DC, Jan 20 2025 – Every year, January 20 is celebrated as Martin Luther King Jr. Day. He was a leader in the Civil Rights Movement who fought for equality and justice, especially for Black people, through peaceful protests and powerful speeches. The day is observed annually on the third Monday of January, close to his birthday on January 15. It is a time to remember his work, reflect on his message of fairness and nonviolence, and engage in acts of service to help others in our communities.

As a global health equity advocate, MLK Day holds special significance for me as a day to remember him as a health equity champion. He rightly identified health inequity as the worst form of social injustice. In his 1966 speech at the Second National Convention of the Medical Committee for Human Rights, MLK stated, “Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and inhuman”. I couldn’t agree more.

Globally, health inequities are numerous and mostly preventable. Neglected Tropical Diseases, maternal deaths, and malnutrition vividly reflect the global health injustices MLK foresaw

Growing up in Nigeria as a high school student in the 1980s, I was introduced to MLK through reading editions of Ebony magazine. I remember with nostalgia how I walked to roadside book sellers to buy old copies of the magazine.

These magazines introduced me to Black American social justice debates, including the works of MLK and Thurgood Marshall. It was an opportunity to connect spiritually with Africans in the diaspora – Black Americans – and their struggles. What struck me most as a child was MLK’s nonviolent demand for racial justice.

After high school, I went on to medical school in Nigeria to begin my training as a doctor. By the time I graduated in 1998, it was clear to me that patients’ rights must be respected in healthcare delivery. As health workers, we must prioritize preventive care while providing the care our patients need.

At the time, I did not know the right term for my convictions. Decades into my work in global health, I came to understand the term for my beliefs: health equity. In 2018, I delivered my first TEDx talk titled “Without Health We Have Nothing”. This is why MLK’s assertion that health injustice is the worst form of inequality resonates deeply with me. Healthcare – or its absence – is truly a matter of life and death.

Globally, health inequities are numerous and mostly preventable. Neglected Tropical Diseases, maternal deaths, and malnutrition vividly reflect the global health injustices MLK foresaw.

Neglected Tropical Diseases

Want to see a perfect example of diseases that disproportionately affect poor people? Look no further than Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs). These diseases affect 1.6 billion people globally, primarily in Africa and Asia. Many people do not realize some, like those mentioned in the Bible, still exist today.

A prime example is leprosy – a slow-growing bacterial infection that affects the skin, nerves, and sometimes the eyes and nose. Surprisingly, in 2024, the U.S. saw a significant rise in leprosy cases, particularly in the southeastern region, with central Florida identified as a hotspot.

Data reveals that approximately 34% of new cases reported between 2015 and 2020 were locally acquired. Without treatment, leprosy causes numb patches and potential deformities. Fortunately, leprosy is completely curable with antibiotics when caught early.

Other NTDs include river blindness, trachoma, and noma. Noma, in particular, is heartbreaking – it predominantly affects children between and six years who are malnourished, live in unhygienic conditions, or have weak immune systems.

Noma starts as a sore in the mouth but can destroy facial tissues, leaving severe deformities if untreated. Proper hygiene, nutrition, and healthcare can prevent noma, but it remains a reality in the poorest parts of the world.

Maternal Mortality

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) captures the essence of safe motherhood with its statement: “No woman should die while giving life”. Tragically, for many women in low- and middle-income countries, and even wealthier nations, this isn’t the case.

In Nigeria alone, over 80,000 women die annually during pregnancy, childbirth, or shortly afterward. A professor once likened Nigeria’s high maternal mortality to filling a commercial jet with pregnant women every day and letting it crash – a haunting image. This huge injustice should not be allowed to continue.

In contrast, the United States of America has a higher maternal mortality rate compared to other wealthy countries, largely due to the disproportionately high maternal death rate among Black women. Black women are still 2 to 3 times more likely to die from pregnancy and childbirth than White women, regardless of their education level or socioeconomic status.

The solutions to stopping maternal deaths are not rocket science. Prenatal care must identify high-risk pregnancies, and women need access to proper nutrition to reduce the risks of postpartum hemorrhage, the leading cause of maternal deaths. With proper planning and preparation, including access to cesarean sections and emergency services, these deaths are preventable. Addressing these gaps would save countless lives.

Malnutrition

Malnutrition is a double-edged sword – it manifests as undernutrition (not enough nutrients) or overnutrition (eating too much). Both forms can be deadly, especially for children under five. Undernourished children fail to grow properly (wasting) and suffer impaired brain development, leading to stunting.

Globally, 22% of children are stunted, with 90% of cases occurring in Africa and Asia. On the other hand, overnutrition causes obesity, increasing the risk of non-communicable diseases like diabetes.

The solutions are simple: Support mothers to breastfeed exclusively for six months, educate communities on using affordable, local foods to prepare nutritious meals, and invest in school feeding programs. These steps would dramatically reduce malnutrition’s toll.

MLK’s vision for health justice shapes my global health equity journey. On MLK Day, let us reflect on global health injustices and commit to ending them. Identify one health issue you are passionate about and take meaningful action to address it.

MLK was right – health injustice is the worst form of inequality because without health we have nothing.

Happy MLK Day!

Dr. Ifeanyi M. Nsofor, a public-health physician, global health equity advocate and behavioral-science researcher, serves on the Global Fellows Advisory Board at the Atlantic Institute, Oxford, United Kingdom. You can follow him @Ifeanyi Nsofor, MD on LinkedIn

By Nancy Karigithu and Pascal Lamy
DAVOS, Switzerland, Jan 17 2025 – Deep-sea mining may not be on the official agenda next week at the World Economic Forum in Davos (January 20-24), but restoring public trust in international cooperation is.

Perhaps the most significant commitment African and European leaders can make here to restore trust in their ability to solve complicated problems, and one that safeguards our planet’s health and interconnected ocean, is to call for a pause on deep-sea mining in international waters.

As co-chairs of the Africa-Europe Strategy Group on Ocean Governance, an initiative of the European Commission, in partnership with the African Union Commission, and facilitated by the Africa-Europe Foundation, we have already begun discussing how both continents could benefit from greater collaboration in fisheries management, marine pollution, and habitat protection, especially in the face of climate change.

Now, with Global North mining corporations pushing the International Seabed Authority (ISA) to approve commercial deep-sea mining in 2025 with no agreed regulations and no environmental safeguards, we must urgently turn our attention and global influence to the ocean floor.

Already, permits have been granted to prospect for potato-sized polymetallic nodules that contain elements like cobalt and nickel. Unfortunately, the mining process amounts to dragging bulldozers across the seafloor thousands of meters below the surface and vacuuming the nodules back up to ships where they are cleaned with high-pressure hoses, leaving vast clouds of silt in their wakes.

Scientists have increasingly been sounding the alarm about the potential impacts of the operations on fragile marine habitats, with the likelihood that deep-sea mining could irreversibly destroy species and ecosystems.

Once thought to be nearly devoid of life, and contrary to the traditional knowledge of indigenous and coastal communities, new research has revealed an environment teeming with numerous species of fish, squid, and crustaceans (many only recently discovered) that play an essential role in the wider global ocean system, including African and European fisheries.

Other research suggests that disturbing seabed sediments could disrupt our planet’s largest carbon sink and potentially release carbon into the atmosphere and compound the climate crisis when we can least afford it.

Both continents depend on a healthy marine environment for fisheries, tourism and food security. Yet, even as they struggle to manage unprecedented pressures from over-exploitation, rapidly warming waters, pollution and acidification, deep-sea mining looms as a potentially catastrophic threat with far-reaching impacts that do not recognize national borders.

Proponents of the mining, possibly even some in Davos, argue that it is necessary to satisfy growing demand for batteries used in the burgeoning electric vehicle market. But with research suggesting that deep-sea metals are not needed to fuel the green transition, including the astronomical costs and growing liabilities with the industry, companies have already begun moving away from the industry to invest in alternatives, including innovative battery chemistries and recycled materials.

It is unlikely that deep-sea mining would ever be profitable without large government subsidies that could be better spent on improved refining and processing capacity, renewable technologies and energy efficiency.

Given these enormous risks (and questionable benefits), an Africa-Europe led pause on deep-sea mining is simply a prudent application of the precautionary approach that has guided marine conservation and international environmental treaties for decades. It would also align with key principles set out in the UN High Seas Treaty, such as conservation, sustainable use and benefit sharing.

Moreover, it would lay the groundwork for even greater collaboration, including ocean research initiatives, marine genetic resources found in the deep ocean, ocean planning, applied local community and indigenous knowledge, and the establishment of dedicated research institutions that draw on the immense talent and experience available in both continents.

Political momentum against deep-sea mining is building. Today, 32 countries have announced their support for a moratorium, a precautionary pause, or an outright ban, joined also by scores of indigenous and civil society groups, major companies, financial institutions, science and policy experts from around the world. .

If we have learned one lesson from working on global challenges over the past few decades it is how enormously difficult it is to bring about change once powerful interests become entrenched. This year, deep-sea mining corporations are pressuring the ISA to approve full-scale commercial operations.

Without immediate action from world leaders at Davos, deep-sea mining and its destruction, could become entrenched for decades. Africa and Europe have a unique opportunity to demonstrate the value of international cooperation by stopping this harmful practice before it starts.

Pascal Lamy, Co-chair of the Africa-Europe Strategy Group on Ocean Governance, Vice-President of the Paris Peace Forum, Former Director-General of the World Trade Organisation, and Former European Commissioner on Trade Commissioner; and Ambassador Nancy Karigithu, Co-chair of the Africa-Europe Strategy Group on Ocean Governance, Kenya’s Ambassador and Special Envoy & Advisor to the President on Maritime and Blue Economy and former Principal Secretary for Shipping and Maritime Affairs for the Government of Kenya.

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 17 2025 – The year 2024 has been one of the most devastating for journalists covering conflicts worldwide– with 361 behind bars, the second highest since the global record of 370 imprisoned back in 2023.

According to a new report released January 16, by the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), China, Israel, and Myanmar were the leading jailers of reporters, followed by Belarus and Russia.

The main drivers of journalist imprisonment in 2024 were ongoing authoritarian repression, war, and political or economic instability. Many countries, including China, Israel, Tunisia, and Azerbaijan, set new records for imprisonment.

“These numbers should be a wake-up call for us all,” said CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg. “A rise in attacks on journalists almost always precedes a rise in attacks on other freedoms – the freedom to give and receive information, the freedom to assemble and move freely, the freedom to protest.”

“These journalists are being arrested and punished for exposing political corruption, environmental degradation, financial wrongdoing – all issues that matter to our day-to-day lives.”

Asia remained the region with the highest number of journalists behind bars in 2024, accounting for more than 30% (111) of the global total.

In addition to the leading jailers – China, Myanmar, and Vietnam – journalists were also behind bars in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, and the Philippines.

A total of 108 journalists were imprisoned in the Middle East and North Africa, almost half of those detained by Israel.

Last year, U.N. legal experts determined that Israel violated international law in its detention of three Palestinian journalists. CPJ has previously called on Israel to investigate the cases of these and others held in Israeli custody for lengthy periods without charge, hold accountable those responsible for these rights violations, and provide compensation to journalists who have been arbitrarily detained.

Dr Ramzy Baroud, an author, a syndicated columnist, editor of Palestine Chronicle & a Senior Research Fellow at Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA), told IPS while the report by the CPJ highlights the alarming state of global press freedom, it doesn’t fully capture the scale of the situation.

Israel’s treatment of Palestinian journalists is particularly egregious. Over 200 journalists have been killed, hundreds more injured, and many have been jailed and tortured. This makes Israel one of the leading violators of press freedom in the world, he pointed out.

“It’s important to recognize that the targeting of journalists is part of a broader pattern of repression against freedom of expression. These actions reflect a systemic denial of basic human and civil rights.”

What is especially disturbing in the case of Israel is the lack of accountability. Unlike other countries where press freedom is violated, Israel faces little scrutiny or consequence for the murders, detentions, and torture of journalists. Many Western political leaders continue to hold Israel up as a model of freedom and democracy, despite these serious violations, he argued.

Such reports must go beyond mere documentation and demand real accountability. Pressure must be placed on all relevant parties to hold those responsible for violating press freedom accountable, ensuring this issue isn’t confined to occasional press releases but leads to tangible action, declared Dr Baroud.

Dr James Jennings, President, Conscience International, told IPS dictators and tyrannical governments use disinformation as their stock in trade. They realize that controlling newspapers, television, and the Internet are vital to their survival.

“That makes it dangerous to be a journalist in such countries for simply telling the truth”.

He pointed out honest reporting can get you arrested in Russia, kicked out of Israel, and jailed in China, Egypt, Belarus, and many other countries. Telling the true story sometimes means that journalists are liable to be killed as has happened frequently in Gaza over the past 15 months.

“It’s a great time to be an autocrat. Savvy politicians realize that they can reach the hearts and minds of people directly through their hand-held communication devices. “Flooding the Zone” with lies is easy. Searching for and prying out the truth in a messy situation is much more difficult, but that’s exactly the job of reporters.

If, as is often said, journalism is the first draft of history, then every country will benefit by honoring and protecting journalists. Instead, today they may get lengthy punishments, said Dr Jennings.

According to CPJ, pervasive censorship in China, for years one of the world’s top jailers of journalists, makes it notoriously difficult to determine the exact number of journalists jailed there.

However, jailings are not limited to the mainland, traditionally considered highly repressive. Those jailed include British citizen and Hong Kong-based entrepreneur Jimmy Lai, founder of the pro-democracy Apple Daily newspaper, who has been held in solitary confinement in Hong Kong since 2020 and is currently on trial on retaliatory charges of collusion with foreign forces.

Outside of Belarus (31) and Russia (30), Azerbaijan’s (13) continued crackdown on independent media made it one of the leading jailers of journalists in Europe and Central Asia in 2024. Turkey (11) is no longer among the top jailers of journalists but pressure on independent media remains high.

This is also the case in Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean, where the number of jailings is lower than in other regions but where threats against journalism persist. Mexico, for example, has no journalists in jail but is one of the most dangerous places to be a journalist outside a war zone.

In Nigeria, with four journalists behind bars on December 1, dozens of journalists were attacked and detained as they sought to cover protests and civil unrest. Senegal, which held one journalist in prison on the 2024 census date, also arrested and assaulted journalists covering political protests.

Globally, CPJ found that more than 60% – 228 – of the imprisoned journalists faced broad anti-state charges, including often-vague charges of terrorism or extremism in countries including Myanmar, Russia, Belarus, Tajikistan, Ethiopia, Egypt, Venezuela, Turkey, India, and Bahrain. These accusations were commonly leveled against reporters from marginalized ethnic groups whose work focused on their communities.

Tackling journalist imprisonment is a key focus for CPJ, which provides journalists with financial support to cover the cost of legal fees, as well as resources to help journalists and newsrooms better prepare for or mitigate threats of legal harassment and action. The organization also makes concerted efforts to advocate for the release of journalists whose cases could revert or stem the tide of criminalization.

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 Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jan 16 2025 – In anticipation of Donald Trump’s inauguration his gold-studded Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago, is at the heart of political power games, where influential businessmen like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk are positioning themselves as key players in his orbit. Apparently unfazed by legal controversies and scandals, Trump is preparing for his return in collusion with already powerful men, who in their pursuit of personal gain and political influence reflect a disturbing trend of billionaire oligarchy merging with politics. A worrying development that might have significant consequences for the future of free speech and women’s rights.

Mark Zuckerberg

Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Meta Platforms (which controls Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp), has increasingly aligned himself with right-wing politics. In recent months, Meta has dismantled its fact-checking program, fuelling concerns about the rise of misinformation and hate speech on its platforms. Zuckerberg justifies these changes by emphasizing “free speech” and critiquing what he calls “excessive” censorship. However, this shift has raised alarms that the company is enabling the spread of fake news and extremism. Zuckerberg’s decision to move Meta’s content moderation to Texas, a state known for its conservative politics, and appoint Joel Kaplan, a prominent conservative political advisor, to oversee global affairs further suggests a tilt toward Trump’s sphere.

These actions are particularly troubling given Zuckerberg’s recent comments about gender equality during an interview with Joe Rogan, a podcaster known for promoting conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. Zuckerberg revealed his newfound admiration for a “positive view of masculinity,” emphasizing the need to balance support for women with the celebration of “aggressive energy.” Drawing on his martial arts experience, Zuckerberg described masculinity as a necessary and positive force in global culture. While such views might be dismissed if voiced by lesser-known figures, they are deeply concerning coming from one of the world’s most powerful tech magnates.

Equally troubling is Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, whose controversial views often spill over into his social media platform, X (formerly Twitter). Musk, with over 212 million followers, frequently makes headlines with his divisive opinions. In one instance, he reposted a tweet from 4chan, a notoriously unmoderated platform, which suggested that “women and low-T [testosterone] men” are incapable of free thought because they cannot defend themselves physically. The tweet stated that only “high-T alpha males and neurotypical people” are capable of making decisions, insinuating that men with higher testosterone levels are more fit for leadership. Musk’s comment to his re-tweet of such nonsense was that it was an “interesting observation,” thus signalling his tacit endorsement of pseudoscientific, misogynistic rhetoric. A discourse that plays into a growing conservative backlash against gender equality, is not only scientifically unfounded but deeply harmful.

Elon Musk

Musk’s comments echo a wider narrative within certain circles that sees testosterone levels as a determinant of a person’s political or intellectual capabilities, further perpetuating toxic masculinity. The misogyny expressed by both Zuckerberg and Musk is particularly dangerous when considering their vast influence over global discourse. Their platforms enable the spread of harmful ideas, and their actions risk undermining the progress made in advancing women’s rights.

The global context further complicates the picture. Worldwide important strides have been made toward gender equality, though there are places where women’s rights remain circumscribed and others where they have experienced a backlash. Gender-based violence remains a tool of war, used to terrorize and displace entire populations. The United Nations’ upcoming Commission on the Status of Women in March 2025 will focus on the progress and setbacks regarding the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, a groundbreaking framework for advancing women’s rights. The commission will address the fact that no country has so far achieved full gender equality, and that threats to women’s rights are in some areas becoming ever more evident.

In this context, the views of Zuckerberg and Musk take on greater significance. Their platforms amplify regressive, misogynistic ideas that not only harm women but threaten to undo years of hard-won progress. Their influence could fuel a broader cultural shift toward the normalization of sexism, as their comments provide cover for a growing global movement against gender equality. Musk’s recent confessions about his drug use—he admitted to using ketamine, a powerful anaesthetic—further cast doubt on the rationality behind some of his statements. Columnist Arwa Mahdawi humorously suggested that Musk’s bizarre musings could be attributed to ketamine use or, more likely, his deeply ingrained misogyny – “perhaps he’s just high on misogyny: it’s one hell of a drug.”

The reckless and dangerous views espoused by Zuckerberg, Musk, and other members of Trump’s inner circle are far from benign. They threaten to worsen the already precarious position of women and girls globally, whose rights and safety continue to be under siege. We must confront the role these men play in spreading dangerous ideologies. Their influence is vast, and if left unchecked, it could further erode women’s rights worldwide, leading to a future in which gender equality is relegated to the past.

Ultimately, the rhetoric of Zuckerberg and Musk is not just a matter of personal opinion; it is a reflection of a broader societal problem. As these billionaires gain political power and control over public discourse, we must remain vigilant. The dangers they pose are not just theoretical; they are real and have real-world consequences for women’s lives. The world cannot afford to let their misogynistic views go unchecked. It is time to hold these men — and the systems that enable them — accountable before their reckless influence causes even more harm.

Main sources: Mahdawi, Arwa (2024) “Elon Musk is intrigued by the idea women can’t think freely because of ‘low T’,” The Guardian, 7 September; and Remnik, David (2025) “The Inauguration of Trump’s Oligarchy,” The New Yorker, 12 January.

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 Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 16 2025 – A ceasefire agreement between the states of Israel and Palestine was reached on 15 January, 2025 , effectively putting an end to hostilities in the Gaza Strip. This comes after nearly 15 months of conflict, which has caused immense damage to Palestinian infrastructure, development, and civilian life. The three-phase plan proposed for the ceasefire agreement consists of the return of Israeli hostages, Palestinian refugees returning home, and the reconstruction of Gaza. Additionally, the ceasefire is expected to essentially put an end to the Israel-Hamas War and significantly mitigate the humanitarian crisis occurring in the Gaza Strip.

In the days preceding the ceasefire agreement, U.S. officials have opined that the possibility of a ceasefire was more likely than ever before. According to U.S. national security adviser Jake Sullivan, Israel and Hamas have been close to securing a ceasefire agreement several times in the past but they had always fallen through. Sullivan stated that on January 13, talks between officials had the “general sense that this (ceasefire negotiations) is moving in the right direction.”

I think the pressure is building for Hamas to come to yes, and I think Israel also has achieved a huge amount of its military objectives in Gaza, and therefore, they are in a position to be able to say ‘yes’.The question is now, can we all collectively seize the moment and make this happen?” said Sullivan.

On January 14, the United States Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, delivered a speech at the Atlantic Council headquarters that detailed imminent post-war plans for Gaza as the ceasefire approaches. Blinken stated that the war is “ready to be concluded” and that the ceasefire is ready to be implemented. He also addressed the criticism over the Biden administration’s response to the 15-month conflict, saying, “I wish I could stand here today and tell you with certainty that we got every decision right. I cannot.”

Although neither Israel nor Hamas have officially confirmed the news of a ceasefire as of yet, senior Hamas spokesperson Basem Neim informed reporters that Hamas has agreed to it. Other sources with direct knowledge of diplomatic talks between Israeli officials confirmed the news to reporters as well. On January 15, U.S. President-Elect Donald Trump confirmed that the ceasefire agreement had been reached on a social media post shared to the platform Truth Social

According to U.S. diplomatic sources, only a draft version of the deal has been approved by Hamas and Israel, with a revised version to be discussed and finalized in the coming days. The implementation of the ceasefire could begin this weekend.

As President Biden’s term comes to an end, President-elect Donald Trump is expected to oversee the implementation of the ceasefire agreement. The first phase of the ceasefire consists of the 33 Israeli hostages in Gaza being freed and returned to Israel within the first 42 days of the agreement being implemented. In return, Israel has agreed to release as many as 1,000 Palestinian refugees from Israeli prisons. Furthermore, Israel will begin withdrawing its troops from Gaza. Once the deal has been finalized by both parties, it is expected that thousands of displaced Palestinians will begin returning to northern Gaza, the most militaristically restricted region of the enclave, and humanitarian aid will begin to flow in regularly.

Additionally, Israel would begin withdrawing its troops from densely populated centers in Gaza while maintaining access to the buffer zone on the Gaza-Egypt border, also known as the Philadelphi Corridor.

The second phase of the ceasefire is believed to be the official marker of the end of the Israel-Hamas War. In this phase, Hamas is expected to release all remaining male Israeli civilians or soldiers while Israel returns an agreed upon number of prisoners.

Although the ceasefire is not guaranteed to be upheld following the completion of the first phase, Israel has indicated in ceasefire documentation that its officials are committed to negotiating the next two phases , which would entail a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian territory.

In the third phase of the ceasefire agreement, Hamas would return the remains of all deceased Israeli hostages while Israel returns those of the deceased Palestinian captives. Israel would then conclude the blockade of the Gaza Strip and will not rebuild military operations targeting Palestine.

Despite officials from the U.S., Israel, and Palestine expressing optimism for the ceasefire agreement, many have expressed concern over the uncertainty of the ceasefire being fully implemented. “I’ve just been advised that there’s been a ceasefire announced in Gaza. Before we all celebrate, though, obviously we’re all going to want to see how well that executes,” said U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman James Risch .

With this agreement, the humanitarian situation in Gaza is expected to improve. Airstrikes from the Israeli Defense Forces are expected to end and the cessation of the blockade in northern Gaza is expected to allow humanitarian aid organizations to access the people that are in dire need of assistance. Abdallah al-Baysouni, a Palestinian citizen residing in Gaza, informed reporters that he and his family are “very happy that this crisis — this sadness, bombing and death that happened to us — is finally over. And that we will return to our hometowns and return to our families in Beit Hanoun [in northern Gaza] … and return to our old lives and be happy and live like we used to.”

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’);