Africa

By Naïma Abdellaoui
GENEVA, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

In an era defined by the gig economy and pervasive job insecurity, advocating for permanent contracts within the United Nations might seem anachronistic, even counterintuitive.

Yet, clinging to a culture of short-term, precarious contracts is not just detrimental to staff well-being; it’s a strategic and financial misstep that undermines the UN’s core mission.

Simultaneously, while internal restructuring under the banner of “UN 2.0” or “UN80” absorbs significant energy, the world burns with geopolitical fires demanding urgent, credible multilateral action. It’s time to re-focus: prioritize quality hires with stability AND make multilateralism genuinely effective, starting where it matters most – preventing mass atrocities.

The False Economy of Job Insecurity

The argument for limiting permanent contracts often hinges on perceived flexibility and cost savings. However, the reality is starkly different:

1. The High Cost of Turnover: Constantly recruiting, onboarding, and training staff for short-term roles is immensely expensive. Studies consistently show replacing an employee can cost 50-200% of their annual salary. For complex UN roles requiring deep institutional knowledge, context-specific understanding, and intricate diplomatic networks, these costs are amplified exponentially. Permanent staff represent a long-term investment whose value compounds over time.

2. Loss of Institutional Memory & Expertise: The UN tackles the world’s most complex challenges – climate change, pandemics, conflict resolution. Success requires deep historical understanding, nuanced relationships, and specialized expertise. A revolving door of staff erodes this vital institutional memory. Permanent contracts foster the accumulation and retention of irreplaceable knowledge critical for navigating protracted crises.

3. Diminished Loyalty & Engagement: Job insecurity breeds anxiety and disengagement. Staff on short-term contracts, constantly worried about renewal, are less likely to invest fully in long-term projects, challenge inefficient practices, or build the deep cross-departmental collaborations essential for UN effectiveness. Permanent status fosters commitment, psychological safety, and the courage to speak truth to power – vital assets for any organization, especially this one.

4. Quality Over Contract Length: The focus should shift decisively from “how long”someone is hired to “how well” they are selected and perform. Rigorous recruitment processes aimed at securing the best talent, coupled with robust performance management and accountability mechanisms, are the true guarantors of efficiency and effectiveness.

Permanent contracts for highly qualified, competitively selected, high-performing staff provide the stability needed for excellence, not complacency. It’s penny-wise and pound-foolish to sacrifice long-term capability for illusory short-term budget flexibility.

UN80 Reforms: A Distraction from Existential Challenges?

While streamlining processes and modernizing tools under initiatives like UN80 has merit, it risks becoming a consuming internal exercise that diverts attention from the UN’s fundamental crisis: the erosion of effective multilateralism in the face of escalating global turmoil.

The world confronts a resurgence of conflict, climate catastrophe accelerating faster than responses, democratic backsliding, and a fragmenting international order. Yet, the UN Security Council, the body charged with maintaining peace and security, remains paralyzed by the very tool meant to ensure great power buy-in: the veto.

The ghost of the League of Nations haunts us – an institution fatally weakened by its inability to act decisively against aggression because powerful members could simply block consensus.

Reform Must Prioritize Action, Especially Against Genocide

True UN reform cannot be confined to internal restructuring. It must courageously address the structural flaws that prevent the organization from fulfilling its primary mandate:

1. Veto Restraint on Atrocity Crimes: The most urgent starting point is suspending the use of the veto in Security Council resolutions aimed at preventing or stopping genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.

When a permanent member wields its veto to shield perpetrators of these most heinous crimes, it betrays the UN’s foundational purpose and renders collective security a mockery. This specific, targeted reform is not about abolishing the veto wholesale but about preventing its most morally indefensible application. It is a litmus test for the credibility of UN reform.

2. Effectiveness Over Bureaucracy: Reforms must demonstrably enhance the UN’s ability to deliver tangible results on the ground – mediating conflicts effectively, delivering humanitarian aid unhindered, holding human rights abusers accountable, and implementing climate agreements with urgency. This requires empowering agencies, improving coordination, and ensuring mandates are matched with resources and political backing.

3. Reinvigorating Multilateralism: The UN must become a platform that fosters genuine dialogue and compromise, not just a stage for grandstanding. Reform should seek ways to better integrate emerging powers, strengthen the role of the General Assembly where feasible, and rebuild trust among member states around shared principles of the Charter.

Conclusion

Advocating for permanent contracts is not a retreat into comfort; it’s a strategic investment in the UN’s human capital – the bedrock of its effectiveness. It fosters the expertise, loyalty, and long-term perspective needed to tackle generational challenges.

Simultaneously, obsessing over internal restructuring while the mechanisms for global peace and security remain fundamentally broken is a dangerous distraction.

The UN was born from the ashes of catastrophic failure. Its reformers must have the courage to confront the structural impediments – including the unchecked veto enabling atrocity and the erosion of staff stability – that threaten to lead it down the same path.

Let’s prioritize permanent expertise and permanent purpose. The world, beset by crisis, demands nothing less than a United Nations capable of fulfilling its promise.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Naïma Abdellaoui, Concerned International Civil Servant and Staff Representative. Member of the Executive Bureau of UNOG Staff Union

By CIVICUS
Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses autonomous weapons systems and the campaign for regulation with Nicole van Rooijen, Executive Director of Stop Killer Robots, a global civil society coalition of over 270 organisations that campaigns for a new international treaty on autonomous weapons systems.

Nicole van Rooijen

In May, United Nations (UN) member states convened in New York for the first time to confront the challenge of regulating autonomous weapons systems, which can select and engage targets without human intervention. These ‘killer robots’ pose unprecedented ethical, humanitarian and legal risks, and civil society warns they could trigger a global arms race while undermining international law. With weapons that have some autonomy already deployed in conflicts from Gaza to Ukraine, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has set a 2026 deadline for a legally binding treaty.

What are autonomous weapons systems and why do they pose unprecedented challenges?

Autonomous weapons systems, or ‘killer robots’, are weapons that, once activated by a human, can select and engage targets without further human intervention. These systems make independent decisions – without the intervention of a human operator – about when, how, where and against whom to use force, processing sensor data or following pre-programmed ‘target profiles’. Rather than using the term ‘lethal autonomous weapons systems’, our campaign refers to ‘autonomous weapons systems’ to emphasise that any such system, lethal or not, can inflict serious harm.

The implications are staggering. These weapons could operate across all domains – air, land, sea and space – during armed conflicts and law enforcement or border control operations. They raise numerous ethical, humanitarian, legal and security concerns.

The most troubling variant involves anti-personnel systems triggered by human presence or individuals or groups who meet pre-programmed target profiles. By reducing people to data points for algorithmic targeting, these weapons are dehumanising. They strip away our inherent rights and dignity, dramatically increasing the risk of unjust harm or death. No machine, computer or algorithm can recognise a human as a human being, nor respect humans as inherent bearers of rights and dignity. Autonomous weapons cannot comprehend what it means to be in a state of war, much less what it means to have – or to end – a human life. Enabling machines to make life and death decisions is morally unjustifiable.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has noted it is ‘difficult to envisage’ scenarios where autonomous weapons wouldn’t pose significant risks of violating international humanitarian law, given the inevitable presence of civilians and non-combatants in conflict zones.

Currently, no international law governs these weapons’ development or use. As the technology advances rapidly, this legal vacuum creates a dangerous environment where autonomous weapons could be deployed in ways that violate existing international law while escalating conflicts, enabling unaccountable violence and harming civilians. This is what prompted the UN Secretary-General and the ICRC president to jointly call for urgent negotiations on a legally binding international instrument on autonomous weapons systems by 2026.

How have recent consultations advanced the regulatory agenda?

The informal consultations held in New York in May, mandated by UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 79/62, focused on issues raised in the UN Secretary-General’s 2024 report on autonomous weapons systems. They sought to broaden awareness among the diplomatic community and complement the work around the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), emphasising risks that extend far beyond international humanitarian law.

The UNGA offers a crucial advantage: universal participation. Unlike the CCW process in Geneva, it includes all states. This is particularly important for global south states, many of which are not a party to the CCW.

Over two days, states and civil society explored human rights implications, humanitarian consequences, ethical dilemmas, technological risks and security threats. Rich discussions emerged around regional dynamics and practical scenarios, examining how these weapons might be used in policing, border control and by non-state actors or criminal groups. While time constraints prevented exhaustive exploration of all issues, the breadth of engagement was unprecedented.

The Stop Killer Robots campaign found these consultations energising and strategically valuable. They demonstrated how UN processes in Geneva and New York can reinforce each other: while one forum provides detailed technical groundwork, particularly in developing treaty language, the other fosters inclusive political leadership and momentum. Both forums should work in tandem to maximise global efforts to achieve an international legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons systems.

What explains the global divide on regulation?

The vast majority of states support a legally binding treaty on autonomous weapons systems, favouring a two-tier approach that combines prohibitions with positive obligations.

However, roughly a dozen states oppose any form of regulation. Among them are some of the world’s most heavily militarised states and the primary developers, producers and likely users of autonomous weapons systems. Their resistance likely stems from the desire to preserve military superiority and protect economic interests, and the belief in inflated claims about these weapons’ supposed benefits promoted by big tech and arms industries. Or perhaps they simply favour force over diplomacy.

Whatever their motivations, this opposition underscores the urgent need for the international community to reinforce a rules-based global order that prioritises dialogue, multilateralism and responsible governance over unchecked technological ambition.

How do geopolitical tensions and corporate influence complicate international regulation efforts?

It is undeniable that geopolitical tensions and corporate influence are challenging the development of regulations for emerging technologies.

A handful of powerful states are prioritising narrow military and economic advantages over collective security, undermining the multilateral cooperation that has traditionally governed arms control. Equally troubling is the expanding influence of the private sector, particularly large tech companies that operate largely outside established accountability frameworks while wielding significant sway over political leaders.

This dual pressure is undermining the international rules-based order precisely when we most need stronger multilateral governance. Without robust regulatory frameworks that can withstand these pressures, development of autonomous weapons risks accelerating unchecked, with profound implications for global security and human rights.

How is civil society shaping this debate and advocating for regulation?

Anticipating the challenges autonomous weapons systems would pose, leading human rights organisations and humanitarian disarmament experts founded the Stop Killer Robots campaign in 2012. Today, our coalition spans over 270 organisations across more than 70 countries, working at national, regional and global levels to build political support for legally binding regulation.

We’ve played a leading role in shaping global discourse by highlighting the wide-ranging risks these technologies pose and producing timely research on weapons systems evolution and shifting state positions.

Our multi-level strategy targets all decision-makers who can influence this agenda, at local, regional and global levels. It’s crucial that political leaders understand how autonomous weapons might be used in warfare and other contexts, enabling them to advocate effectively within their spheres of influence for the treaty we urgently need.

Public pressure is key to our approach. Recent years have seen growing weapons systems autonomy and military applications, particularly in ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, alongside rising use of technologies such as facial recognition in civilian contexts. Public concern about the dehumanising nature of these technologies and the lack of regulation has grown online and offline. We frame these concerns along the whole spectrum of automated harm, with autonomous weapons representing the extreme, and highlight the critical need to close the gap between innovation and regulation.

We also collaborate with experts from arms, military and technology sectors to bring real-world knowledge and credibility to our treaty advocacy. It is crucial to involve those who develop and deploy autonomous weapons to demonstrate the gravity of current circumstances and the urgent need for regulation.

We encourage people to take action by signing our petition, asking their local political representatives to sign our Parliamentary Pledge or just spreading the word about our campaign on social media. This ultimately puts pressure on diplomats and other decision-makers to advance the legal safeguards we desperately need.

GET IN TOUCH
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Twitter
Nicole/Bluesky
Nicole/LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Facial recognition: the latest weapon against civil society CIVICUS Lens 23.May.2025
Weaponised surveillance: how spyware targets civil society CIVICUS Lens 24. Apr.2025
Technology: Human perils of digital power CIVICUS | 2025 State of Civil Society Report

 

Credit: United Nations

By Stephanie Hodge
NEW YORK, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

I’ve spent much of my life in the machinery of international development, navigating acronyms, crises, and committee rooms with stale coffee. Through it all—amid war zones, climate summits, and remote island consultations—one institution has remained constant: the United Nations.

Revered, ridiculed, relied upon.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth: the UN, in its current form, is not fit for purpose.

That’s not a call to abandon it. It’s a call to fix the house the world built before the roof collapses entirely. Because while the UN remains the only institution with near-universal legitimacy, its structures are badly outdated.

The world it was built for in 1945 no longer exists. Today’s threats—climate collapse, mass displacement, AI-driven inequality—demand a smarter, leaner, more inclusive United Nations. Reform is no longer a luxury. It’s an obligation.

So, how do we get there?

Start with Governance.

The Security Council is the UN’s most glaring anachronism. It reflects post-WWII power, not today’s multipolar reality. But full-scale reform has failed for decades. So let’s be pragmatic. Expand the Council to include regional permanent seats without veto, allowing Africa, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and SIDS a permanent voice.

Introduce term-based rotation for new seats, and bind permanent members to veto restraint in the face of mass atrocities. These reforms won’t fix everything, but they’ll chip away at the legitimacy deficit.

Follow the Money.

One of the UN’s biggest problems isn’t policy—it’s how it’s funded. Over 70% of UN development work is paid for by earmarked, donor-driven funds, creating a patchwork of pet projects and weakened country ownership. The solution? Cap earmarked funding. Reinvest in core funding mechanisms.

Introduce a Global Solidarity Contribution—a small levy on air travel or financial transactions—to create independent funding for global public goods. Because right now, the people who suffer most from climate collapse or pandemics have the least say in how UN funds are spent.

Empower the Country Level.

Ask any government where the UN matters most, and the answer is the country office—not New York. Yet the UN Development System remains fragmented and turf-driven.

It’s time to give Resident Coordinators real authority across agencies, consolidate back-office functions, and scrap duplicative structures. One-UN should mean one plan, one budget, one voice. Let’s stop pretending otherwise.

Reclaim Technical Integrity.

The UN’s comparative advantage was never its bureaucracy. It was its expertise. But too often, technical roles are politicized or handed to parachuted consultants with little country context. We need a Global Technical Corps—a pool of deployable UN experts drawn from all regions, especially the Global South.

We need to enforce merit-based hiring and ensure at least 30% of senior posts go to nationals from least developed countries. Diversity shouldn’t be window dressing—it should drive decisions.

Make It Democratic.

The UN Charter begins with “We the peoples”—not “We the diplomats.” Yet citizens have little say in the institution that governs global rules. We need a UN Parliamentary Assembly—an advisory body elected or nominated by regional blocs.

We need to formally include civil society in decision-making and ensure transparency in how leaders are chosen and money is spent. If the UN doesn’t reflect people’s voices, it risks irrelevance.

These aren’t utopian dreams. They are strategic, staged, and long overdue reforms. Start small. Pilot in willing countries. Build coalitions across the Global South and reform-minded donors. Anchor reform in crisis moments, when political will opens a window for change.

Because the next time there’s a war the UN can’t stop, a climate emergency it’s too slow to respond to, or a famine it’s too bureaucratic to prevent—people won’t ask why the system failed. They’ll ask why we didn’t fix it when we had the chance.

The UN doesn’t need to be perfect. It just needs to work. For everyone.

Let’s get to work.

Stephanie Hodge is an international evaluator and former UN advisor who has worked across 140 countries. She writes on governance, multilateral reform, and climate equity.

IPS UN Bureau

 

The United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG), housed at the historic Palais des Nations, is the second largest United Nations centre after the UN Headquarters in New York. The facility, an outstanding testimony to twentieth century architecture, is situated in the Ariana Park in Geneva, Switzerland.

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

In the US, the success of a business enterprise or the value of real estate is reflected in a repetitive and alliterative phrase: “LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION”.

As the UN continues its plans for system-wide restructuring– amidst a growing liquidity crisis– one of the key issues on the negotiating table is the re-location of UN agencies: a choice between high-cost and low-cost duty stations.

The two major UN locations, New York and Geneva, are described as “among the most expensive cities in the world”, making it challenging for the UN to operate within its current budget.

Besides the UN headquarters, New York city is also home to several UN agencies, including the UN Development Programme (UNDP), the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), UN Women and the UN children’s agency UNICEF.

The city of Geneva, considered “a hub for global diplomacy”, is hosting more than 40 international organisations and UN agencies, including the World Health Organisation, the World Trade Organisation, the International Labour Organization (ILO), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), among others.

Reacting to a possible partial UN pullout from Geneva, the Swiss Government last week announced “a generous financial package of support to the United Nations presence in Geneva.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he is “very much appreciative of the Swiss Federal Council for this decision”. The United Nations is determined to continue working in partnership with Switzerland to advance the cause of multilateralism.

“Our presence in Geneva remains an integral part of the UN system. The Swiss support is crucial for this continued endeavour”, said Guterres.

According to a report from Reuters, Switzerland will spend 269 million Swiss francs ($329.37 million) to support Geneva as a hub for international diplomacy.

The 269 million francs covers the period from 2025 to 2029, with the government requesting a credit of 130.4 million francs from parliament later this year, a 5% increase from the previous period. The government has already approved 21.5 million francs for urgent measures to help Geneva-based organisations.

Asked for his comments, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters: “You know, we see it as an act of generosity on the part of the Swiss Federal Government to support the United Nations’ work in Geneva. The UN’s presence in Geneva is critical. It is also historical, and we very much welcome the efforts of the Swiss Government in that regard.”

Somar Wijayadasa, formerly Director and Representative of UNAIDS at the United Nations in New York (1995-2000), told IPS “It is a generous move– but to dole out about $60 million extra each year is “peanuts” for the Swiss Govt. considering the billions of dollars that the 40 UN Agencies in Geneva contribute annually to its coffers.”

In the “UN80” initiative to audit and merge overlapping bureaucracies across all UN agencies, it can move some programs to more affordable locations around the world.

A good example, he said, is the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) that was created in 1995, in the height of the AIDS pandemic (with 3.3 million people with HIV and almost a million died) has successfully curtailed the spread of the HIV/AIDS pandemic – from a death sentence to a manageable disease with proven treatments.

“UNAIDS can be easily re-merged with WHO, and located in countries in the Global South – with lower operational costs – where the burden of behavioral transmission challenges of HIV/AIDS remain highest. A leaner, regional, behavior-focused program could maintain awareness, and continue essential work without the legacy overhead.”

Another example, he pointed out, is the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) in New York and its branch in Geneva. The UN cannot, or has failed, to disarm or reduce the annually-increasing military budgets of the US, Russia, India or China.

For example, the UN finally adopted the now legally binding TPNW Treaty but which country has given up its nuclear weapons or stopped other countries’ urge to create a nuclear weapon to protect themselves from hegemonic warmongers?

In this modern age of communications, there are many bloated UN departments in costly New York and Geneva that can effectively, and cost efficiently, function from any developing country, declared Wijayadasa.

Meanwhile, as part the UN’s relocation plans, there are reports that the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and UN Women may be moved out of New York and relocated to the Kenyan capital of Nairobi, described as the fourth-largest UN headquarters and the only one in the Global South.

Currently Nairobi serves as the global headquarters for UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) and UN-Habitat. Besides these, several other UN agencies have offices in Nairobi, including UNICEF, UNDP, FAO, UNIDO, UNODC, UNV, and WHO.

But Kenya is currently embroiled in a political crisis. If the turmoil continues, the UN may have second thoughts on relocating more of its offices in Nairobi.

A New York Times report June 26 and titled “Kenyans Battle the Police a Year After Deadly Tax Protests” says at least 8 people were killed and hundreds injured amid nation-wide protests “laid bare the anger at President William Ruto’s government”

On June 26, the UN Human Rights Office said: “We are deeply concerned by reports of several deaths of protesters and many more injuries – of protesters and police officers – during demonstrations in Kenya on Wednesday.”

“We are concerned by reports that some protesters had gunshot wounds. Under international human rights law, lethal force by law enforcement officers, such as firearms, should only be used when strictly necessary in order to protect life or prevent serious injury from an imminent threat.”

Asked about the death toll and injuries in Nairobi, Dujarric told reporters June 26 said: “We’re obviously concerned about the violence that we’ve seen in Kenya. We’re closely monitoring the situation, very saddened by the loss of life”

“We look forward to an independent and transparent investigation. And it bears reminding that under international law, under human rights law, lethal force by law enforcement such as firearms should only be used when strictly necessary in order to protect life or prevent serious injury of an imminent threat,” declared Dujarric.

Additionally, some of the other European countries hosting UN agencies include:

• Austria: Vienna hosts the United Nations Office at Vienna (UNOV), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
• Netherlands: The Hague is the seat of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), one of the principal organs of the UN.
• France: Paris hosts the headquarters of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
• Italy: Rome is home to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Brindisi hosts the UN Global Service Centre (UNGSC), including the UN Humanitarian Response Depot.
• Germany: Bonn hosts several UN organizations, including the Secretariat of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the United Nations Volunteers (UNV) program, and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR).
• Denmark: Copenhagen houses the headquarters of the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS).
• United Kingdom: London is home to the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
• Spain: Madrid hosts the World Tourism Organization (UN Tourism).
• Belgium: Brussels hosts the United Nations Regional Information Centre (UNRIC), a Regional Office for Europe of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and a Liaison Office of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

Besides Nairobi, the UN is also exploring three other possible relocation sites: Doha, Qatar Kigali, Rwanda and Valencia, Spain.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Cases of repression in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania have fuelled concerns about possible collaboration.

Cases of repression in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania have fuelled concerns about possible collaboration.

Cases of repression in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania have fuelled concerns about possible collaboration.

Community orchard in Ribeirão, a neighbourhood in Florianopolis, the capital of the southern Brazilian state of Santa Catarina. There are more than 150 such orchards in the city, which serve as a final destination for the compost produced from their organic waste. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

By Mario Osava
FLORIANOPOLIS, Brazil, Jun 26 2025 (IPS)

Living with her neighbours, getting to know them and chatting with them is what Lucila Neves enjoys most in the community orchard of Portal de Ribeirão, a neighbourhood in the south of Florianopolis, considered the most sustainable of Brazil’s 27 state capitals.

The biodegradable packaging entrepreneur chose to live in the capital of the southern state of Santa Catarina, where she came from Ribeirão Preto, 950 kilometres to the north.

She is one of the people who voluntarily take care of the huge variety of vegetables, medicinal plants and fruit trees planted on about 1000 square metres.

The neighbourhood’s residents accepted the planting started 15 months ago, because it cleaned up the area where a private company used to compost organic waste for the municipality, without the necessary care.

Gone are the mice, mosquitoes, cockroaches and the bad smell that had infested the place, said biologist Bruna do Nascimento Koti, a primary school teacher and permanent volunteer in the garden, where she was together with Neves on the day IPS visited the space.

Now the state-owned Capital Improvement Company (Comcap) also makes clean compost there, with organic waste collected by the population in closed plastic buckets distributed by the Florianopolis city government.

In addition to providing inexpensive and healthy vegetables without agrochemicals, the orchard promotes conviviality, with a Thursday tea gathering and sometimes collective cultivation on Saturdays, Koti said.

Bruna do Nascimento Koti is one of the volunteers who tends the garden at Portal de Ribeirão, in the south of the Brazilian city of Florianopolis, where community life is promoted and healthy food is provided to neighbours and volunteer gardeners. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

The Florianopolis municipality has chosen composting and recycling as the main alternatives for managing the solid waste generated by the city’s 537 000 people, to which many tourists and seasonal residents are added during the southern summer.

It is estimated that of the 700 tonnes of daily waste, 43% is dry recyclable waste and 35% organic waste, the use of which is to be increased in order to reduce the proportion of waste destined for landfill. There is 22% of non-recyclable waste left over.

Currently only 13% of the total is recycled, while the remaining 87% goes to the landfill in the neighbouring municipality of Biguaçu, 45 kilometres from Florianopolis, which receives waste from 23 cities, Karina de Souza, director of solid waste at the Florianopolis Secretariat of Environment and Sustainable Development, told IPS.

But official statistics point to significant progress. Food waste used in composting increased more than four times, from 1175 tonnes in 2020 to 5126 tonnes in 2024, according to Souza’s records.

Green organics, as waste from tree pruning and other vegetation is called, more than doubled during that period. Glass also increased by a factor of 2.5 and materials that arrive mixed and go through separation before recycling almost quadrupled.

The ‘Zero Waste’ programme adopted by the mayor’s office in 2018 sets a target of recycling 60% of dry waste and 90% of organic waste by 2030, a goal that seems far off.

Waste already separated for recycling, in this case glass. Tyres, plastics and cardboard are other materials collected for recycling at the Waste Recovery Centre near the city centre of Florianopolis in southern Brazil. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

Waste has value

The Comcap Waste Recovery Centre, located in the Itacorubi neighbourhood, near the city centre and next to the Botanical Garden, is at the heart of the municipal policy to solve the waste challenge.

It concentrates the city’s large composting yard, a central facility for separating recyclable waste and another for transferring disposable waste and compacting it into larger trucks for transport to the landfill.

It also includes a Waste Museum, especially for environmental education, and an ecopoint where residents deposit their recyclable waste, such as wood, electronics, paper, plastics and glass.

There are nine ecopoints distributed throughout the city, which receive around 11 000 tonnes of recyclable waste per year for sorting and handling.

This waste, also collected from other sources, is transferred to warehouses where glass, packaging cartons, corrugated paper, plastics and tyres are collected separately for recycling. But they arrive mixed with rubbish and have to go through human separation and sorting, called triage.

This is the area of the Association of Collectors of Recyclable Material, which, hired by Comcap, separates the waste for the buyers, generally the recycling industry.

Of the 75 members, about 40% are immigrants, mostly Venezuelans, but also Peruvians, Haitians and Colombians, according to Volmir dos Santos, the association’s president, during IPS’ visit to the facility.

Founded in 1999, the group was initially made up of street waste collectors. With the advance of municipal management, selective collection in residences, industries and commerce, in addition to the ecopoints, they became ‘triadores’, those who separate, classify and sell the waste ready for recycling.

“We suffered prejudice, discrimination and shame, now we gain respect,” Dos Santos celebrated.

Two young Venezuelans who immigrated to Brazil and found employment at the Waste Valorisation Centre in Florianopolis. Haitian and Peruvian migrants also work at the facility. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

No incineration of waste

But the broad movement of recycling workers, from various associations and cooperatives, seeks to influence municipal plans. It opposes, for example, the burning of non-recyclable waste for energy generation, an alternative that is growing among industrial countries.

There are at least 3035 solid waste combustion plants in the world, known as Waste-to-Energy, said Yuri Schmitke, president of the Brazilian Association of Energy from Waste (Abren), which brings together 28 companies in the sector.

It is the way to achieve the goal of ‘zero waste’ or the elimination of landfills, since recycling has limits –there is always a percentage that cannot be reused and incineration replaces fossil fuels, he argued.

Countries such as Germany, Switzerland, Austria and the Nordic European nations have managed to use 100% of their waste, he said, by eliminating these landfills or final solid waste deposits.

Restrictions and allegations of environmental and even sanitary damage have been dispelled in several European countries, Japan and Korea, with the implementation of these plants even in central parts of large cities, without such negative effects, he pointed out.

Paris already has three of them in its so-called extended city centre, where the population density reaches 15 000 people per square kilometre, he said.

“Incineration puts an end to the cycle, it excludes recycling definitively, and Brazil is very different from Europe, it has already had failed experiences,” countered Dorival Rodrigues dos Santos, president of the Federation of Associations and Cooperatives of Waste Pickers of Santa Catarina, which claims to represent 28,000 workers.

It calls for a broad debate between technicians and collectors on the subject, given that this alternative is beginning to gain followers in Brazil. The municipality of Joinville, with 616 000 inhabitants and 170 kilometres from Florianopolis, has plans to install a plant to generate electricity by burning waste.

Florianopolis is looking to send non-recyclable waste to the cement industry, which is interested in using it as fuel instead of fossil fuels, said De Souza, Florianopolis’ director of solid waste.

Aparecida Napoleão leads a waste collection movement in her building, an example of the benefits of separating and recycling different materials in the southern Brazilian city of Florianopolis. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

Recycling first

“We defend the primacy of recycling over incineration. The goal is to improve recycling, we have not exhausted the advances,” according to Karolina Zimmermann, the engineer who works with the collectors.

Progress in recycling depends not only on new technologies, such as those that separate mixed or even melted materials, dyes and chemical elements in plastics or paperboard. The environmental education of consumers in order to separate waste is key to increase reuse.

Aparecida Napoleão is an example of how recycling monitoring has taken hold. In her building of 126 luxury flats, she spearheads a movement to separate all waste, from the small glass containers she sends to artisanal jelly producers to special papers that can be turned into notebooks, plastics and even bottle caps.

A retired social worker from the Florianopolis municipality, she has organised a chain of shelves and bins on the ground floor of the building for dozens of different types of materials. She tries to guide her neighbours, but recognises that even so, there are always those who put rubbish in the wrong place.

“It’s a lot of work, you have to be patient, explain, ask repeatedly until they understand the importance of separation,” she says.

Kenya's Faith Kipyegon fails in her attempt to become the first woman to run a sub-four-minute mile at Nike's 'Breaking4' event in Paris.

A family in Der Al Balah, in the Gaza Strip, who received clothing from UNICEF. Communities in the Gaza Strip were affected by the recent exchange of strikes between Israel and Iran, as well as the ceasefire announced on June 23. Credit: UNICEF/Mohammed Nateel

By Naomi Myint Breuer
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 26 2025 (IPS)

The Trump administration announced on June 23 that a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Iran had been reached following 10 days of conflict between the two nations and the United States’ bombardment of three nuclear sites in Iran. The establishment of the ceasefire will return focus back to the conflict between Israel and Palestine and the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

The United Nations estimates that 610 Iranians and 28 Israelis were killed due to the exchange of strikes between Israel and Iran. With the cessation of the conflict, the region can recover from these damages, as well as come closer to stability, peace and a chance to focus on their already existing humanitarian crises.

Amid fears of an escalating global conflict, humanitarian organizations expressed concern about the far-reaching humanitarian implications in regions such as Gaza and the West Bank, where conditions are already dire. With the ongoing blockade in Gaza, civilians are unable to acquire food, clean water, humanitarian aid, healthcare and fuel. These regions have also been subject to routine bombardment by Israel, and conditions worsened after some communities were impacted by the strikes between Israel and Iran, according to American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA).

“Nothing since WWII can equal it, with bombs deliberately targeting hospitals and civilians and UN agencies like the World Food Program and World Health Organization being blocked,” James E. Jennings, president of Conscience International and Executive Director of U.S. Academics for Peace, told IPS.

The 10 day conflict between Israel and Iran led to increased military raids, arrests, violence and damage to infrastructure. The period shifted focus away from Palestinians, reducing donations and advocacy.

The ceasefire and potential de-escalation of tensions between its neighbors should bring the international focus back to Palestine’s humanitarian crisis.

With Iran severely weakened, former New York University (NYU) international relations professor Dr. Alon Ben-Meir says the country will not be able to support its Axis of Resistance in the near future. He predicts Iran will attempt to come to an agreement with the U.S. in regard to its nuclear program. Israel, on the other hand, is now in a powerful position as it has diminished Hamas’, Hezbollah’s, and now Iran’s threat against them, according to Ben-Meir.

“Sadly, Israel’s triumphant assault on Iran may further embolden Netanyahu to try to attain his ‘total victory’ in Gaza, which, in my view, is elusive at best,” Ben-Meir said.

Israel seemed to confirm this prediction.

“Now the focus shifts back to Gaza—to bring the hostages home and to dismantle the Hamas regime,” Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, the Israeli military chief, said.

With Iran and Hamas temporarily out of the equation, Ben-Meir said Trump has a chance to demand an end to the conflict between Israel and Palestine and “to think in terms of changing the dynamic” of the conflict.

Ben-Meir said that only if Trump pushes for an end to the war can a resolution be reached. Yet, he said that while Netanyahu remains in power, it is unlikely that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will end, which will still leave the region in an unstable state.

“Although this will not lead to a regional peace that would include all the players, it has created a more positive regional atmosphere,” he said.

Ben Meir also predicts that the cessation of tensions with Iran is unlikely to change the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

“Netanyahu is riding high and will relent only if Trump tells him to stop using humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians in Gaza to pressure Hamas to release the remaining hostages,” he said.

The UN Security Council held an emergency meeting on June 22 after the U.S. struck Iranian nuclear sites. Following pushing for peace in the region, the UN Secretary-General António Guterres praised the ceasefire.

“I urge the two countries to respect it fully,” Guterres wrote on X. “The fighting must stop. The people of the two countries have already suffered too much.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

The explosion occurred at an electrical transformer near where students were taking final exams.

The government argues that the new system should help poorer families as well as boost revenue.

The government argues that the new system should help poorer families as well as boost revenue.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres addresses the debate at the UN on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine. The debate marked the 20th anniversary of its adoption at the 2005 World Summit. Credit: Jennifer Xin-Tsu Lin Levine

By Jennifer Xin-Tsu Lin Levine
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 26 2025 (IPS)

United Nations member states this week reiterated their commitment to the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity—at a time when world powers are failing to meet these obligations.

On the 20th anniversary of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, the UN held a Plenary Meeting to discuss the landmark commitment to the doctrine. Although many speakers praised the policy’s work on prevention capacity, members largely criticized the inconsistency and hypocrisy of states that have failed to adhere to the doctrine’s guidelines.

The representative from Slovenia criticized the Security Council permanent members’ veto power on issues addressing genocide and human rights violations, arguing that the veto slows the quick response needed for such issues when people’s dignity is threatened. She further suggested that there should be no veto power from Permanent Members in cases where R2P is involved.

This statement, although not explicitly, calls out the United States and the Russian Federation, the two Permanent Member states who have exercised their veto power in the past year—for the US, in regard to the Middle East and Palestine specifically, and for Russia, in regard to Sudan and South Sudan.

This critique is not new; the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) coalition of small and medium-sized states proposed a “Code of Conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes,” which, according to the R2P website, “calls upon all members of the Security Council (both permanent and elected) to not vote against any credible draft resolution intended to prevent or halt mass atrocities.” As of 2022, 121 member states and two observers have signed.

By reframing the protection of civilians from mass atrocities as a governmental duty and responsibility, R2P was created after inadequate responses to genocide in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.

Although the initiative has been successful for mediating in regions like The Gambia and Kenya, as Secretary-General António Guterres noted in his report entitled “Responsibility to Protect: 20 years of commitment to principled and collective action,” R2P has failed to push the UN towards action in places like Syria or Myanmar, where veto deadlock prevented aid or policy change.

Another hindrance to R2P’s efficacy, as both Slovenia and a representative from Australia noted, is what the latter referred to as general impunity and lack of accountability for many states.

Criticizing sanctions and dismissal of international court rulings such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), this statement may have been in response to US sanctions towards four ICC judges after the court opened investigations concerning both the US and Israel’s military actions.

Neither nation recognizes the ICC’s authority, making them not subject to ICC rulings.

In a statement from the White House, President Donald Trump said, “The United States will impose tangible and significant consequences on those responsible for the ICC’s transgressions, some of which may include the blocking of property and assets, as well as the suspension of entry into the United States of ICC officials, employees, and agents, as well as their immediate family members, as their entry into our Nation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

Multiple representatives reaffirmed their respect for impartial judicial rulings and international courts and tribunals in the General Assembly meeting despite verbal and economic pushback from some of the most influential member states.

The R2P’s most glaring inconsistency between principle and implementation lies in the conflict in Gaza. The representative from Indonesia highlighted the genocide against Palestine as “the R2P’s most urgent test,” urging member states to revive the sanctity of international law and restore trust in the UN’s ability to enforce their policy. As trust in the UN has waned, many feel a growing pressure to re-legitimize the institution through their actions, particularly regarding crimes against humanity.

As one representative noted, “History will judge us all.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Khaman Maluach only took up basketball aged 13, but the refugee from South Sudan has been drafted to join NBA side Phoenix Suns.

Khaman Maluach only took up basketball aged 14, but the refugee from South Sudan has been drafted to join NBA side Phoenix Suns.

At least 10 people died in the protests and 400 others injured, including 300 police officers, minister says.

At least 10 people died in the protests and 400 others injured, including 300 police officers, minister says.

A close ally of Paul Biya, in power for four decades, challenges "one-man" rule in the country.

Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) Living in Camp Roe in the Democratic Republic of Congo Credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

By Juliana White
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 26 2025 (IPS)

The demand for cobalt and other minerals is fueling a decades-long humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). In pursuit of money to support their families, Congolese laborers face abuse and life-threatening conditions working in unregulated mines.

Used in a variety of products ranging from vitamins to phone and car batteries, minerals are a necessity, making daily tasks run smoothly. The DRC is currently known as the world’s largest producer of cobalt, accounting for nearly 75 percent of global cobalt production. With such high demands for the mineral, unsafe and poorly regulated mining operations are widespread across the DRC.

The exploitation of workers is largely seen in informal, artisanal, small-scale mines, which account for 15 to 30 percent of the DRC’s cobalt production. Unlike large industrial mines with access to powerful machines, artisanal mine workers typically excavate by hand. They face toxic fumes, dust inhalation, and the risk of landslides and mines collapsing daily.

Aside from unpaid forced labor, artisanal small-scale mines can be a surprisingly good source of income for populations with limited education and qualifications. The International Peace Information Service (IPIS) reports that miners can make around 2.7 to 3.3 USD per day. In comparison, about 73 percent of the population in the DRC makes 1.90 USD or less per day. However, even with slightly higher incomes than most, miners still struggle to make ends meet.

Adult workers are not the only group facing labor abuse. Due to minimal regulations and governing by labor inspectors, artisanal mines commonly use child labor. The U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs reports that children between the ages of 5 and 17 years old are forced to work in mineral mines across the DRC.

“They are unremunerated and exploited, and the work is often fatal as the children are required to crawl into small holes dug into the earth,” said Hervé Diakiese Kyungu, a Congolese civil rights attorney.

Kyungu testified at a congressional hearing in Washington, D.C., on July 14, 2022. The hearing was on the use of child labor in China-backed cobalt mines in the DRC. Kyungu also said that in many cases, children are forced into this work without any protection.

Children go into the mines “…using only their hands or rudimentary tools without protective equipment to extract cobalt and other minerals,” said Kyungu.

Despite the deadly humanitarian issue at hand, the solution to creating a more sustainable and safe work environment for miners is not simple. The DRC has a deep history of using forced labor for profit. Starting in the 1880s, Belgium’s King Leopold relied on forced labor by hundreds of ethnic communities across the Congo River Basin to cultivate and trade rubber, ivory and minerals.

While forced and unsafe conditions kill thousands each year, simply shutting down artisanal mining operations is not the solution. Mining can be a significant source of income for many Congolese living in poverty.

Armed groups also control many artisanal mining operations. These groups use profits acquired from mineral trading to fund weapons and fighters. It is estimated that for the past 20 years, the DRC has experienced violence from around 120 armed groups and security forces.

“The world’s economies, new technologies and climate change are all increasing demand for the rare minerals in the eastern Congo—and the world is letting criminal organisms steal and sell these minerals by brutalizing my people,” said Pétronille Vaweka during the 2023 U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) award ceremony.

Vaweka is a Congolese grandmother who has mediated peace accords in local wars.

“Africans and Americans can both gain by ending this criminality, which has been ignored too long,” said Vaweka.

One way to mitigate the crisis is through stricter laws and regulations. Many humanitarian organizations, such as the United Nations (UN) and the International Labour Organization (ILO), strongly advocate for such change.

The UN has deployed a consistent stream of peacekeepers in the DRC since the country’s independence in 1960. Notable groups such as the UN Operation in the Congo (ONUC) and the UN Organization Mission in the DRC (MONUC) were established to ensure order and peace. MONUC later expanded in 2010 to the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the DRC (MONUSCO).

Alongside peace missions, the UN has made multiple initiatives to combat illegal mineral trading. They also created the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), which is dedicated to helping children in humanitarian crises.

The ILO has seen success through its long-standing project called the Global Accelerator Lab (GALAB). Its goal is to increase good practices and find new solutions to end child labor and forced labor worldwide. Their goal markers include innovation, strengthening workers’ voices, social protection and due diligence with transparency in supply chains.

One group they have set up to coordinate child protection is the Child Labour Monitoring and Remediation System (CLMRS). In 2024, the ILO reported that the program had registered over 6,200 children engaged in mining in the Haut-Katanga and Lualaba provinces.

Additionally, GALAB is working on training more labor and mining inspectors to monitor conditions and practices.

While continued support by various aid groups has significantly helped the ongoing situation in the DRC, more action is needed.

“This will require a partnership of Africans and Americans and those from other developed countries. But we have seen this kind of exploitation and war halted in Sierra Leone and Liberia—and the Africans played the leading role, with support from the international community,” Vaweka said. “We need an awakening of the world now to do the same in Congo. It will require the United Nations, the African Union, our neighboring countries. But the call to world action that can make it possible still depends on America as a leader.”

IPS UN Bureau Report