Africa

The content is contrary to the nation's "laws, culture, customs, and traditions", the information minister says.

Kassym-Jomart Tokayev paid tribute to the victims with a minute of silence. Credit: Akorda

By Katsuhiro Asagiri
TOKYO / ASTANA , Jun 4 2025 (IPS)

On the windswept steppe west of Astana, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev led a solemn ceremony this week to mark Kazakhstan’s Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Political Repressions and Famine—an annual reflection on one of the nation’s darkest chapters.

The ceremony was held at the ALZHIR Memorial Complex, a former Stalin-era camp where nearly 8,000 women—wives of those declared “enemies of the state”—were once imprisoned.

“The lessons of history must never be forgotten,” Tokayev declared, referring to the Stalin-era policies that left deep scars on Kazakhstan’s cultural and intellectual life.

Credit: Map of Gulag locations in Soviet Union, Public Domain

Kazakhstan’s experience forms part of the broader story of Stalinist repression, which extended well beyond Russia’s borders. After Japan’s surrender in 1945, an estimated 560,000 to 760,000 Japanese prisoners of war and civilians were forcibly relocated and detained across Soviet territory. Among them, about 50,000 were sent to camps in what was then the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic (now Kazakhstan). In camps such as Spassky near Karaganda, many perished under harsh forced labor and brutal conditions.

Kazakh citizens suffered even greater losses. In the early 1930s, famine caused by Stalin’s agricultural collectivization policies and the forced destruction of the traditional nomadic way of life claimed as many as 2.3 million Kazakhs. This was followed by purges in which countless intellectuals and landowners were executed or exiled.

Migration of Kazakh People due to theFamine in 1932 – 33.

Since gaining independence in 1991, Kazakhstan has sought not only to confront this painful legacy but also to embrace the vision of a multiethnic and multifaith society rooted in tolerance. Its constitution guarantees equality for all ethnic and religious groups, and more than 300,000 victims have been officially rehabilitated. Declassified archives continue to shed new light on this era.

But Kazakhstan’s progress is not merely about reconciliation with the past. It has also chosen to make tolerance and dialogue central pillars of its national identity.

As I wrote in a 2023 INPS Japan article, Kazakhstan’s leadership has placed global interfaith dialogue at the heart of its foreign engagement. The Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions, launched in 2003, has become a signature platform bringing together leaders from Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths for sustained dialogue.

7th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions Group Photo by Secretariate of the 7th Congress

Palace of Peace and Reconciliation. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri

The upcoming 8th Congress, scheduled for September 17–18, 2025, in Astana, is expected to draw religious leaders, scholars, and policymakers from around the world.

Hosted at the iconic Palace of Peace and Reconciliation, the Congress reflects Kazakhstan’s role as a bridge between East and West and its commitment to promoting peaceful coexistence, mutual respect, and dialogue.

This approach holds particular relevance in a world increasingly fractured by sectarian conflict and geopolitical tensions. Kazakhstan’s efforts to transform a history marked by division and repression into a model of inclusion and cooperation offer valuable lessons for the global community.

Such values were echoed by Pope Francis, who attended the 7th Congress in 2022. In his closing address, the pontiff stated, “Religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility or extremism, but instead become a beacon of hope for peace.” He emphasized the importance of interreligious dialogue and coexistence.

Semipalatinsk former Nuclear test site. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri

Kazakhstan is also confronting another grievous injustice from its Soviet past. From 1949 to 1989, 456 nuclear tests were conducted at the Semipalatinsk Test Site, exposing more than one million people to radiation—an enduring tragedy. In response, post-independence Kazakhstan chose to voluntarily renounce the world’s fourth-largest nuclear arsenal, making nuclear disarmament a cornerstone of its foreign policy.

This commitment to nuclear disarmament also extends to interfaith diplomacy. Since the 6th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions in 2018, Kazakhstan has worked closely with Soka Gakkai International (SGI) of Japan and the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), advancing a shared vision of peace, dialogue, and the abolition of nuclear weapons, grounded in the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons use and the testimonies of Hibakusha, while promoting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and deepening international cooperation.

A Group photo of participants of the regional conference on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and nuclear-free-zone in Central Asia held on August 29, 2023. Credit: Jibek Joly TV Channel

The ALZHIR Memorial itself continues to bear witness to the injustices of the past. Its preserved barracks and “Arch of Sorrow” leave a powerful impression on visitors.

Yet as this week’s remembrance ceremony and Kazakhstan’s ongoing interfaith efforts make clear, the country is determined to build a future grounded in tolerance, justice, and peace.

“Such injustices must never be repeated,” Tokayev affirmed—a principle that now informs both Kazakhstan’s domestic policies and its multi-vector diplomacy aimed at fostering dialogue and harmony on the international stage.

Katsuhiro Asagiri is the President of INPS Japan and serves as the director for media projects such as “Strengthening awareness on Nuclear Weapons” and SDGs for All” In 2024, he was honored with the “Kazakhstan Through the Eyes of Foreign Media” award, representing the Asia-Pacific region.

This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Outlets who breach the ban could face suspension, the media regulator warns.

Credit: MarcoVector/shutterstock.com

By Lisa Schirch
Jun 4 2025 (IPS)

 
A better internet that supports democracy rather than undermines it is possible.

In 2025, we stand at a crossroads in the digital era. Our platforms have become the new public squares, but rather than fostering democracy and dignity, many are optimized for manipulation, division, and profit. The Council on Technology and Social Cohesion’s “Blueprint on Prosocial Tech Design Governance” offers a systems-level response to this crisis.

Digital harms are not accidental. They stem from deliberate choices embedded in how platforms are built and monetized. Infinite scroll, addictive recommendation systems, and deceptive patterns are not technical inevitabilities—they are design policies that reward engagement over truth, attention over well-being, and outrage over dialogue. These antisocial designs have proven devastating: eroding mental health, fuelling polarisation, spreading disinformation, and concentrating power in a handful of corporate actors.

Tech companies blame users for harmful content online. But this avoids their own responsibility in how they design platforms. The Blueprint shifts the focus from downstream content moderation to upstream focus on platform design.

No technology has a neutral design. Companies make choices about what a platform will allow you to do, prevent you from doing, and what the design will persuade, incentivise, amplify, highlight, or manipulate people to do or not do online.

Prosocial Building Codes

Like building codes in architecture, the report proposes a tiered certification system for prosocial tech, outlining five levels of increasing ambition—from minimum safety standards to fully participatory, socially cohesive platforms. This is not window-dressing. It’s a structural intervention to address the root causes of harmful tech designs.

Tier 1 begins with establishing baseline protections: Safety by Design, Privacy by Design, and User Agency by Design. These aren’t abstract ideals but concrete practices that give users control over what they see, how they’re tracked, and whether manipulative features are opt-in rather than default. Tier 2 scales up with low-barrier user experience tools like empathy-oriented reaction buttons, friction to slow down impulsive posting, and prompts to reflect before sharing.

Iin Tier 3, prosocial algorithms that highlight areas of common ground and diverse ideas replace engagement-maximising recommender systems that offer news feeds skewed toward polarising topics. Tier 4 introduces civic tech and deliberative platforms explicitly built for democratic engagement, and Tier 5 pushes for middleware solutions that restore data sovereignty and interoperability.

Research Transparency and Protections

The report highlights the need for research to understand how platform design impacts society, safe harbour laws to protect independent researchers, and open data standards for measuring social trust and cohesion. The paper calls for mandated platform audits, researcher safe harbours, and public infrastructure to enable independent scrutiny of algorithmic systems and user experiences. Without these safeguards, crucial insight into systemic harms—such as manipulation, bias, and disinformation—remains inaccessible.

The paper offers a set of prosocial metrics on three areas of social cohesion. This includes individual agency and well-being, or the ability of users to make informed choices and participate meaningfully; social trust and intergroup pluralism referring to the quality of interaction across diverse social, cultural, and political groups; and public trust or the strength of relationship between users and public institutions.

Shifting Market Forces

The report concludes with a set of market reforms to shift incentives toward prosocial tech innovations. Market forces drive antisocial and deceptive tech design. Venture capital (VC) funding is the main source of financing for many major tech platforms, especially in their early and growth stages. It significantly entrenches antisocial tech design, expecting rapid scaling, high returns, and market dominance—often at the expense of ethical development.

Market concentration inhibits innovation and confines users within systems that prioritise profit over well-being. Numerous large technology companies function as monopolies, employing opaque strategies and dominating value chains. Such technology monopolies pose significant challenges for smaller, prosocial platforms seeking growth. When a limited number of tech giants control infrastructure, data, and user attention, smaller platforms with ethical, inclusive, or democratic designs encounter difficulties in achieving visibility and viability.

The report recommends shifting market forces by codifying liability for platform-induced harms, enforcing antitrust to level the playing field for ethical alternatives, and identifying a range of options for funding and monetising prosocial tech startups.

Too often piecemeal tech regulation has failed to show the flood of toxicity online. Using a system’s approach, the report offers a comprehensive plan to make prosocial tech not only possible, but competitive and sustainable. Just as we expect bridges to be safe and banks to be audited, the Blueprint insists we treat digital infrastructure with the same seriousness. Platforms should not be allowed to profit from harm while hiding behind the myth of neutrality.

At its core, the Blueprint argues that platform design is social engineering. Platforms that currently amplify outrage could, with the right design and incentives, foster empathy, cooperation, and truth.

Now the question is political will. Will regulators adopt tiered certifications that reward responsibility? Will investors fund platforms that prioritise well-being over profit? Will designers centre the needs of marginalised communities in their user experience decisions? The Blueprint gives us the tools. The next step is collective action for governments, technologists, and civil society alike.

Download the report here.

Related articles:
How technology can build trust in the Israeli-Palestinian context
Mapping tech design regulation in the Global South
Deliberative technology: Designing AI and computational democracy for peacebuilding in highly-polarized contexts
Building tech “trust and safety” for a digital public sphere

Dr. Lisa Schirch is Research Fellow with the Toda Peace Institute and is on the faculty at the University of Notre Dame in the Keough School of Global Affairs and Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies. She holds the Richard G. Starmann Sr. Endowed Chair and directs the Peacetech and Polarization Lab. A former Fulbright Fellow in East and West Africa, Schirch is the author of eleven books, including The Ecology of Violent Extremism: Perspectives on Peacebuilding and Human Security and Social Media Impacts on Conflict and Democracy: The Tech-tonic Shift. Her work focuses on tech-assisted dialogue and decision-making to improve state-society relationships and social cohesion.

This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and is being republished from the original with their permission.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Charlene Ruto accused the author of "misusing" her name by writing the book without seeking her permission.

Noor Mukadam at a protest outside the Islamabad Press Club, holding a poster demanding justice for a rape survivor. The photo was taken on September 12, 2020. She was murdered by her partner on 20 July 2021. Credit: Shafaq Zaidi

By Zofeen Ebrahim
KARACHI, Pakistan, Jun 4 2025 (IPS)

“It’s brought me some closure,” said Shafaq Zaidi, a school friend of Noor Mukadam, reacting to the Supreme Court’s May 20 verdict upholding both the life sentence and death penalty for Noor’s killer, Zahir Jaffer.

“Nothing can bring Noor back, but this decision offers a sense of justice—not just for her, but for every woman in Pakistan who’s been told her life doesn’t matter,” Zaidi told IPS over the phone from Islamabad. “It’s been a long and painful journey—four years of fighting through the sessions court, high court, and finally, the Supreme Court.”

Echoing a similar sentiment, rights activist Zohra Yusuf said, “It’s satisfying that the Supreme Court upheld the verdict,” but added that the crime’s brutality left little room for relief. “It was so horrific that one can’t even celebrate the judgment,” she said, referring to the “extreme” sadism Noor endured—tortured with a knuckleduster, raped, and beheaded with a sharp weapon on July 20, 2021.

Yusuf also pointed out that the “background” of those involved is what drew national attention.

Noor Mukadam, 27, was the daughter of a former ambassador, while Zahir Jaffer, 30, was a dual Pakistan-U.S. national from a wealthy and influential family. Her father and friends fought to keep the case in the public eye, refusing to let it fade into yet another forgotten statistic.

Still, the response has been muted—many, including Yusuf, oppose the death penalty.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan recorded at least 174 death sentences in 2024—a sharp rise from 102 in 2023—yet not a single execution was reportedly carried out. The last known hanging was in 2019, when Imran Ali was executed for the rape and murder of six-year-old Zainab Ansari.

However, Noor’s father, Shaukat Ali Mukadam, has repeatedly stated that the death sentence for Zahir Jaffer was “very necessary,” emphasizing, “This isn’t just about my daughter—it’s about all of Pakistan’s daughters,” referencing the countless acts of violence against women that go unpunished every day.

The HRCP’s 2024 annual report painted a grim picture of gender-based violence against women in Pakistan.

According to the National Police Bureau, at least 405 women were killed in so-called honor crimes. Domestic violence remained widespread, resulting in 1,641 murders and over 3,385 reports of physical assault within households.

Sexual violence showed no sign of slowing. Police records documented 4,175 reported rapes, 733 gang rapes, 24 cases of custodial sexual assault, and 117 incidents of incest-related abuse—a chilling reminder of the dangers women face in both public and private spaces. HRCP’s media monitoring also revealed that at least 13 transgender individuals experienced sexual violence—one was even killed by her family in the name of honor.

The digital space offered no refuge either. The Digital Rights Foundation recorded 3,121 cases of cyber-harassment, most reported by women in Punjab.

Justice Remains Elusive

But numbers alone can’t capture the brutality—or the deep-rooted disregard for women that drives it.

“We recently took a man to court and secured maintenance for twin baby girls,” said Haya Zahid, CEO of the Karachi-based Legal Aid Society (LAS). “The father divorced their young mother while she was still in the hospital—just because she gave birth to daughters.”

LAS offers free legal aid to those who can’t afford it, handling cases like rape, murder, acid attacks, forced and child marriages, and domestic violence.

Bassam Dhari, also from LAS, recalled Daya Bheel’s gruesome murder, which took place after Noor Mukadam’s but failed to stir national attention because it happened in a remote village in Sindh’s Sanghar district.

“She was skinned, her eyeballs removed, her breasts chopped off, and her head severed from her body,” said Dhari.

He said the postmortem report confirmed that she was neither raped nor sexually assaulted, and the attack did not appear to be driven by rage or revenge.

While Mukadam’s family may have found closure, justice remains elusive for thousands of Pakistani women.

“Noor Mukadam’s case is indeed a rare instance where justice was served,” said Syeda Bushra, another lawyer at the LAS.

“It’s not that there aren’t enough laws to protect women and children—far from it,” said Bushra. “There are plenty of laws, but what good are they if investigations are weak?” According to her, only a small percentage of women can seek redress. “Justice is denied or delayed every single day,” she added.

“The problem is that these laws are crafted in a social vacuum,” observed Fauzia Yazdani, a gender and governance expert with over 30 years of experience working with national governments, the UN, and bilateral development partners in Pakistan.

She acknowledged that although many progressive, women-friendly laws have been passed over the years, they’ve failed to resonate in a society resistant to change. “Laws are essential, but no amount of legislation can end violence against women if the societal mindset remains misogynistic, patriarchal, and permissive of such crimes,” she said.

Buying Justice Through Blood Money

At the same time, Dahri highlighted critical flaws in the justice system.

In Pakistan, where the death penalty remains legal under its Islamic status, such sentences can be overturned through the diyat (blood money) law, which allows perpetrators to buy forgiveness by compensating the victim’s family.

“In our country, money can buy anything,” said Dahri. “This blood money law is routinely abused by the rich and powerful to literally get away with murder.”

He stressed the urgent need to reform these laws. “Many families initially refuse compensation, but intense pressure and threats—especially against the poor—often force them to give in.”

In 2023, 10-year-old Fatima Furiro’s death might have gone unnoticed if two graphic videos—showing her writhing in pain, then collapsing—hadn’t gone viral. The resulting public outcry led to her body being exhumed. Her employer, a powerful feudal lord in Sindh’s Khairpur district, who appeared in the footage, was swiftly arrested.

He spent a year in prison before the case was closed, after Fatima’s impoverished family accepted blood money—despite forensic evidence confirming she had been raped, beaten, and tortured over time.

Shafaq Zaidi—Noor Mukadam’s school friend—stood outside the Islamabad Press Club on July 25, 2021, at the very spot where Noor had once protested. This time, Zaidi was seeking justice for Noor herself, who had been killed just days earlier, on July 20, 2021. Courtesy: Shafaq Zaidi

Law vs Prejudice

Alongside a flawed justice system, women must battle deep-rooted social taboos—amplified by relentless victim-blaming and shaming.

“In such an environment,” said Bushra, “it’s no surprise that many women, worn down by the long and exhausting process, eventually withdraw their complaints.”

“A woman’s trial begins long before she ever enters a courtroom,” said Dahri.

In Noor Mukadam’s case, the claim of a “live-in relationship”—real or fabricated—was used by the convict’s lawyer to downgrade his death sentence for rape to life imprisonment.

“A boy and girl living together is a misfortune for our society,” remarked Justice Hashim Kakar, who led the three-member bench hearing Mukadam’s case.

“Her reputation was sullied—even in death,” said Yazdani, adding that judges should refrain from moralizing and preaching.

“A judge’s verdict should rest solely on an impartial reading of the law,” said Bushra.

But as Dahri pointed out, few lawyers in Pakistan dare to say this openly. “Judges can take it personally,” he said, “and we risk facing repercussions in our very next case.”

According to Yazdani, even a few targeted reforms—like faster hearings, clearing case backlogs, setting up GBV and child protection courts, and training judges, lawyers, and police on the realities of misogyny and gender-based violence—could cut victim-blaming in half.

But she also offered a word of caution: reforms alone don’t guarantee empathy, which she called the cornerstone of real justice.

“Social change doesn’t happen overnight,” Yazdani said. “Anthropologically speaking, it takes five years for change to take root—and another ten for it to truly take hold.”

Gender balance matters in justice

Judicial gender inequality worsens the situation. Some experts argue that increasing the number of women judges and lawyers could lead to a more fair, dynamic, and empathetic justice system.

A 2024 report by the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan (LJCP) reveals that women make up less than 20 percent of the country’s judges, lawyers, and judicial officers—an alarming gap in a nation of over 117 million women. Of the 126 judges in the superior judiciary, only seven are women—just 5.5 percent. In the Supreme Court, that number drops to two.

Meanwhile, the 26 judges of the apex court (including the chief justice) are burdened with a backlog of more than 56,000 cases—not all related to violence against women.

Bushra believes more women must be encouraged to enter the justice sector—particularly as prosecutors, police officers, and judges. “I’ve seen how distressed victims become when forced to repeat their ordeal to male officers—often multiple times,” she said.

But she emphasized that simply increasing the number of women won’t end victim-blaming or guarantee survivor-centric justice. “Everyone in the system—including women—must be genuinely gender-sensitized to overcome personal biases and deep-rooted stereotypes,” said Bushra.

Special Courts

In 2021, the government passed the Anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) Act, leading to the formation of an anti-rape committee by the Ministry of Law and Justice to support victims, including setting up special courts nationwide. “Special investigation units with trained prosecutors now handle 77 percent of complaints, and 91 percent of cases go to special courts,” said Nida Aly of AGHS, a Lahore-based law firm offering free legal aid and part of the committee.

By 2022, Sindh had set up 382 such units. Aly noted that a survivor-centered, time-bound, and coordinated approach raised conviction rates from 3.5 percent to 5 percent. A national sex offenders registry, managed by police, was launched in 2024. In Punjab, all 36 districts now have crisis and protection centers offering legal and psychosocial support, though some face resource limitations.

Nearly five years after gender-based violence courts were established in Karachi, she sees a promising shift in how judges handle such cases. “Prosecutors now take time to prepare women complainants—something that never happened before,” she said.

However, she added, the number of such courts and sensitized judges remains a drop in the ocean compared to the overwhelming number of violence committed against women and such cases flooding the system across Sindh.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• India-Pakistan: On the Brink—But Is There a Way Back?
• Pakistan: Freedom of Expression at Stake With New Cybercrime Law
• Malala: ‘Honest Conversations on Girls’ Education Start by Exposing the Worst Violations’

South Africa is trying to extradite pastor Shepherd Bushiri from Malawi on fraud charges, which he denies.

UNDP and Sweden working together under the Green Innovative Finance in Latin America and the Caribbean initiative. Credit: UNDP Costa Rica

By Lyes Ferroukhi and Karin Metell
PANAMA CITY, Panama, Jun 4 2025 (IPS)

In a world marked by armed conflict, threats to democracy, technological disruptions, and geopolitical tensions, many people are asking: Why should we prioritize environmental crises when there are other, more visible or perceived as more urgent challenges?

From the perspective shared by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Sweden, through the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), the answer is clear: there is no prosperous economy, stability, peace, or development possible on a degraded planet.

The so-called “triple planetary crisis”—climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution—is not an isolated environmental problem: it is a multiplier of social and economic risks. It disrupts markets, weakens food security, drives forced migration, and erodes community resilience.

However, this crisis also represents a historic opportunity to rethink current development models and explore possible solutions. Latin America and the Caribbean could lead this paradigm shift by example. The region is home to 40% of the planet’s biodiversity and key ecosystems for climate regulation.

Karin Metell

Yet, it faces a paradox: its enormous natural capital stands in stark contrast to insufficient funding to protect it. The Paulson Institute, The Nature Conservancy, and Cornell University estimated in 2020 that the international biodiversity financing gap is between US$598–$824 billion annually.

At the same time, international resources for climate action fall far short of what is needed. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), the region needs to multiply its climate finance flows by 8 to 10 times to meet the commitments countries outlined in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which are essential for reducing emissions and adapting to climate change.

Faced with this challenge, green finance becomes a strategic tool. Achieving this requires ambitious public policies, solid regulatory frameworks, real commitment from major productive sectors, and, above all, large-scale resource mobilization.

Here, the private sector can and must be a key player, especially if it has an enabling framework that reduces investment risk, supported by governments and their public and financial institutions.

UNDP and Sweden are working together through the Green Innovative Finance for Latin America and the Caribbean (GIF 4 LAC) initiative. This partnership supports countries in mobilizing climate and environmental finance by strengthening their regulatory frameworks, generating data to improve transparency, and facilitating collaboration with the private sector. The goal is clear: to make sustainability a viable, scalable, and replicable investment.

Lyes Ferroukhi

We are already seeing results. Thanks to a course organized by UNDP and INCAE Business School as part of the initiative, a government team in El Salvador strengthened the case for an electric bus project in San Salvador. The project secured a $5 million loan from the Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean (CAF) and has the potential to mobilize up to an additional $300 million to transform the country’s public transport system.

We are also collaborating with leading companies such as Devcco, which promotes clean technologies for district cooling systems in Latin American cities, and Avfall Sverige, the Swedish Waste Management Association, which promotes the zero-waste model. It is indeed possible to align profitability with sustainability.

Additionally, this initiative seeks to maximize the potential of the UNDP Environment and Energy team’s portfolio in Latin America and the Caribbean, which includes a large portfolio of projects financed by international environmental funds and platforms supporting public policy and finance like the Climate Promise and the Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN). These represent the largest offer of support for NDCs and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs).

We can say with certainty that protecting the planet is promoting economic and social development in a sustainable way. There will be no growth without healthy ecosystems, and no competitiveness without sustainability.

This is a goal that should inspire us to work together. We are facing a historic and decisive opportunity that requires the participation of more and more stakeholders. Investing in nature is investing in the future.

Lyes Ferroukhi is Regional Team Leader, Environment and Energy in Latin America and the Caribbean, UNDP.

Karin Metell is Head of Regional Cooperation for Latin America, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA)

IPS UN Bureau

 

The BBC tracks down people close to the alleged crime kingpin who escaped custody while awaiting trial.

The BBC tracks down people close to the alleged crime kingpin who escaped custody while awaiting trial.

The BBC speaks to the mother and brother of a man wanted in connection with illicit gold mining.

World Boxing apologises for naming Olympic champion Imane Khelif in the governing body's announcement of mandatory sex testing.

A female suicide bomber and an accomplice were "intercepted and neutralized", the army says.

The UN says it is "devastating" that the aid did not reach civilians in "famine-stricken" el-Fasher.

Boniface Mwangi says he has decided to speak despite the "shame and guilt" of being "sexually tortured".

Houses damaged during Pakistani shelling in India's Jammu region. Credit: Handout

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR, India, Jun 3 2025 (IPS)

In the war-worn borderlands of Jammu and Kashmir, the silence that followed the May 10 ceasefire between India and Pakistan is not the comforting kind—It is uneasy.

After a week of heavy cross-border firing that left at least 16 civilians dead and thousands homeless, the ceasefire brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump brought a fragile halt to the violence. But for people living along the Line of Control (LoC)—in villages like Uri, Kupwara, Rajouri, and Poonch—the damage goes far beyond broken homes.

The official statement, calling for an “immediate and full cessation of hostilities,” might have quieted the guns, but the psychological and material scars remain deep and fresh. Funeral fires still burn. Children refuse to sleep. Schools remain shut. The trauma lingers like smoke in the air.

‘We Buried her Before the Ceasefire’

Twenty-four-year-old Ruqaya Bano from Uri was meant to be married this week. Instead, she stood over her mother’s grave, clutching the embroidered dupatta of her bridal dress. Her mother, Haseena Begum, was killed by a mortar shell that landed in their courtyard.

“She was helping me pack my wedding clothes,” Ruqaya says, her voice thin. “She smiled that morning and said, ‘Soon this house will be full of music.’ Hours later, we were digging her grave.”

Four others died in the same barrage in Uri, all civilians. Many more were wounded—some critically. As the schools remain shuttered, the young are left to process trauma with no support.

For some, words have vanished entirely.

Eight-year-old Mahir sits on a thin mattress at a relief camp in Baramulla, his eyes fixed on a blank wall. He hasn’t spoken since the shelling began.

“He watched his cousin, Daniyal, die when a shell landed near their cowshed,” says Abdul Rasheed, Mahir’s uncle and a farmer from Kupwara. “Now, if a dog barks or a door slams, he hides under the bed.”

His reaction is not unique. Dozens of children along the LoC have reported symptoms of acute stress: sleeplessness, mutism, bedwetting, and panic attacks. Trauma is not just for soldiers. In Kashmir, it enters homes with shrapnel.

The region’s chief minister, Omar Abdullah, consoles the family of a government official who was killed due to Pakistani shelling on May 10 in Kashmir.

The violence began in the wake of the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam that killed 26 people, including 13 soldiers. In retaliation, the Indian Air Force carried out strikes on militant camps across the LoC. Pakistan responded with heavy artillery fire, forcing an exodus from border villages.

In towns like Rajouri and Samba, panic set in quickly. Families packed into cars in the dead of night. Long queues formed outside fuel stations. ATMs were emptied. Grocery shelves went bare. Government schools and public buildings turned into temporary shelters overnight.

Relief workers describe chaotic scenes. “There were mothers with babies and nothing to feed them,” said Aamir Dar, a volunteer from a Srinagar-based relief NGO. “The fear was absolute.”

After two days of frantic diplomacy by Washington, President Trump announced on Truth Social that India and Pakistan had agreed to halt the fighting.  “Statesmanship has prevailed,” he wrote.

Within hours, the rumble of artillery ceased. Indian fighter jets returned to base. A tense quiet settled along the LoC. But for those who had lost homes, limbs, or loved ones, it was too little, too late.

Government officials, including Jammu and Kashmir’s Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha, toured the worst-hit districts. Relief operations began slowly, and criticism mounted over the sluggish response. “We haven’t received even tarpaulin sheets,” said Rahmat Ali from Mendhar. “The help is not matching the need.”

Grief Among the Ruins

In Poonch’s Salotri village, 70-year-old Naseema Khatoon stands before the blackened remains of her two-room home. Her husband died in 2019 during a similar flare-up.

“Now the house is gone,” she says, barefoot on scorched earth. “How many times do we begin again?”

Despite their grief, villagers are trying to help one another. Young men form lines to pass down sacks of rice. Medical volunteers have set up makeshift clinics. University students from Srinagar have launched online campaigns to crowdsource food and medicine.
Hope, though faint, endures.

The Night Fear Took Over Jammu

Even Jammu city, far from the immediate border, was not spared the anxiety. On the night of May 9, alarms blared about an alleged missile threat to the Jammu airport. Panic swept the city. Mobile networks briefly collapsed. Families crowded into bunkers.

“It reminded me of the Kargil War,” said Rajesh Mehra, a retired teacher. “We slept in our clothes with bags packed, ready to leave.”

Though the threat turned out to be a false alarm, public confidence was badly shaken.
The Indian Air Force flew in emergency supplies. Special trains were arranged for those stranded. As the dust began to settle, some families returned home—only to find them in rubble.

In Tangdhar, a school functions now under a torn army tent. The air smells of diesel and fear. Thirteen-year-old Laiba, a student, holds a pencil but stares at the floor. “I want to be a child again,” she murmurs. “Not someone who remembers bombs.”

The shelling left behind more than memories. Fields are littered with unexploded ordnance. Houses have cracks from shockwaves. Local hospitals are stretched to the brink.

The army has cordoned off danger zones. But until the shells are cleared, a casual step can mean disaster.

Back in Uri, Ruqaya Bano lays a garland on her mother’s grave, freshly dug beside their walnut tree. “She always said peace would return. Ruqaya whispers, “No guns, no fear. Maybe that day is still far off. But I hope it comes. For everyone.”

She wipes her tears, then picks up a hammer to help rebuild their shattered home.

The ceasefire, while welcome, is merely the first step toward lasting peace. In these villages, peace is not just the absence of war. It’s the presence of dignity, safety, and memory. This is the kind of peace in which children can laugh again. Where weddings are celebrated, not postponed by gunfire. Where people sleep without fear and wake without sorrow.

A Long Shadow

Kashmir has remained a flashpoint between India and Pakistan since 1947, with both nations claiming it in full. The region has seen at least three wars and countless skirmishes. Since the start of the insurgency in the late 1980s, over 100,000 people have been killed.

In August 2019, the Indian government revoked the region’s special constitutional status and bifurcated it into two union territories. Since then, Delhi has claimed a return to normalcy, but local voices tell another story—one of militarized quiet, silenced dissent, and growing fear.

Last October, for the first time in over five years, local municipal elections were held. It was a step toward restoration, but a small one.

For now, the ceasefire is holding. But like the mortar scars on the walls of these villages, the emotional damage remains etched deep. The silence that follows war is never just silence—it carries the weight of every scream, every loss.

Note: Names of survivors have been changed at their request to protect their privacy.
IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Kashmir Reels After Pahalgam Attack, Fear Long Term Impacts on Livelihoods
• India-Pakistan: On the Brink—But Is There a Way Back?

Nigeria boss Eric Chelle expects Europe's top sides to show interest in Victor Osimhen after the striker helped Galatasaray to claim the Turkish title.

Nigeria boss Eric Chelle expects Europe's top sides to show interest in Victor Osimhen after the striker helped fire Galatasaray to the Turkish title.

Chido Mpemba at a townhall meeting. Credit: Victor Audu/Office of the Youth Envoy

By Chido Mpemba
HARARE, Zimbabwe, Jun 3 2025 (IPS)

History rarely remembers those who waited quietly. In Africa, it is those who dare to act, to resist, to lead, and to dream aloud who have shaped the continent’s most defining moments.

As we marked Africa Day 2025 last week (May 25), under the African Union’s theme “Justice for Africans and People of African Descent Through Reparations”, we are reminded that justice is not a destination; it is a continuous demand for truth, for dignity, and for leadership that reflects the realities of our people.

Now more than ever, that demand must be inclusive.

The Africa We Want, as envisioned in Africa’s Agenda 2063, cannot be built without the full power of its majority: its women and youth. Yet these very groups, the bearers of innovation and agents of transformation, remain disproportionately underrepresented, underfunded, and undervalued.

Credit: Victor Audu/Office of the Youth Envoy.

Statistically, Africa is young and female. Over 60% of the population is under 25, and women make up more than half of the continent [according to UNFPA’s ‘World Population’ report]. Yet, in 2024, only 7 African countries had parliaments with more than 35% of female representation. Youth-led initiatives receive less than 1% of global development financing.

Across many member states, youth continue to be excluded from policy co-creation. This is not by accident. It is the residue of a history that placed power in the hands of a few and promised progress sometime in the distant future.

But even history has its rebels.

Chido Cleopatra Mpemba

Special Advisor on Youth and Women to African Union Chairperson.

African women like Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti, Albertina Sisulu, Miriam Makeba, and Wangari Maathai redefined protest, politics, and the planet. These were not just cultural icons; they were architects of resistance.

In post-independence Africa, women did not wait for seats at the table—they built their own. They organised, campaigned, and led, long before policy frameworks began to mention “gender parity.”

At the multilateral level, African women have broken barriers too. Ms. Amina J. Mohammed, the second African woman to serve as UN Deputy Secretary-General after Ms. Asha-Rose Migiro of Tanzania reshaped the narrative. At the African Union, Ms. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma became the first female Chairperson of the AU Commission, setting institutional standards for gender parity that continue to influence today’s leadership structures.

In politics, the story is equally powerful.

Ms. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the first elected female President in Africa led Liberia and ignited a movement. Through the African Women Leaders Network (AWLN), she continues to ensure that leadership is no longer viewed as exceptional for women, but essential. A ripple effect followed.

Credit: Victor Audu/Office of the Youth Envoy

Since then, women have led as president in countries like Ethiopia, Tanzania, Central African Republic, Mauritius and Namibia. Slowly, a new normal is taking shape—one that includes us.

However, leadership is not only about occupying these positions. It is about shifting paradigms.

Ms. Bineta Diop, the former AU’s Special Envoy on Women, Peace and Security, exemplifies this shift. Her work in championing the Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls in Africa, which was a landmark policy recently adopted by Member States, centres on women’s safety as a continental priority. It is also a powerful act of justice and repair, because no reparation is complete without safety, freedom, and dignity for women.

This vision is now being reinforced at the highest level of the AU. The newly elected Chairperson of the AU Commission, Mr. Mahmoud Youssouf, brings not only political experience, but a deeply personal understanding of gender equity.

A father of six daughters, he has spoken openly about the importance of championing the rights and leadership of young women and girls across the continent. His vision, rooted in fairness, generational inclusion, and institutional reform, signals a new era of AU leadership that reflects the aspirations of everyday Africans.

Credit: Victor Audu/Office of the Youth Envoy

At the same time, Africa’s youth are also rising, and doing so boldly and loudly. From climate action movements in the Sahel to tech innovation hubs in Kigali and Nairobi, young Africans are leading the way and not just waiting for invitations.

They are digitally savvy, socially conscious, and politically engaged. They are demanding more than just words. They are tired of rhetoric. They want access. They want capital. They want power.

We must respond not with more panels and promises, but with structural change. That means enshrining youth quotas in public office. It means directly funding grassroots, youth and women-led organisations. It means rethinking leadership, not as something one can only get after age 40, but as something one grows into through mentorship, access, and vision.

It also means acknowledging that reparations are about the past and restoring the future, the future stolen through systemic exclusion. This includes the exclusion of women and youth from economic, political, and social space. If we are serious about justice for Africans and people of African descent, we must be committed to redistributing opportunity and power.

As we marked Africa Day, let us move beyond celebration. Let us commit to reclamation of history, of voice, and of leadership. Let us tell the stories of what we have survived and what we are building, which is a continent where girls can lead revolutions, where youth can set national agendas, and where justice is actionable.

We are not waiting to be included. We are here to transform!

Chido Mpemba, until recently the AU Special Envoy on Youth, is now the Special Advisor on Youth and Women to African Union Chairperson.

Source: Africa Renewal, United Nations

IPS UN Bureau

 

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Jun 3 2025 (IPS)

With two-fifths of the world economy, East Asia can inspire others by creatively responding to the US President’s tariff challenge by promoting fair, dynamic and peaceful regional cooperation.

No winners in economic war
Trump’s Liberation Day tariff announcement on April 2nd poses a common challenge that everyone needs to take seriously. Dismissing it as crazy or stupid for rejecting conventional policy wisdom is useless.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Politics and economics have been said to be war by other means. This old insight helps make sense of our times. His announcement emphasised it is about world domination, not just tariffs.

His first shot was arguably fired when Canada arrested Huawei’s founder’s daughter at the behest of the first Trump administration. Others suggest different starting points.

Obama announced the US ‘pivot to Asia’ to contain China. The Nobel Peace Laureate also undermined the multilateral World Trade Organization (WTO)’s ability to settle disputes by blocking arbitration panel appointments.

Trump’s approach is termed transactional. It presumes ‘zero-sum games’ and ignores cooperative ‘win-win’ solutions. Its implications mean we live in perilous times.

His penchant for ‘shock and awe’ is well-known. As if demanding instant gratification, Trump seems uninterested in the medium-term, let alone the long-term.

He insists on bilateral one-on-one transactions – weakening ‘the other’ by refusing collective bargaining. He rejects plurilateral and other collective arrangements but embraces cooperation to share costs. China is different but exceptionally so.

ASEAN
The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) did not include all in the region when it was formed in 1967.

Malaysia had recently had conflicts with all other founding members. Indonesia and the Philippines both opposed the new British-sponsored Malaysian confederation established in 1963, and in 1965, Singapore seceded from it.

Like the European Union, ASEAN helped resolve recent conflicts. But ASEAN soon got its act together, even before the Vietnam, Cambodian and Laotian wars ended in 1975.

In 1973, ASEAN leaders agreed that Southeast Asia should become a zone of peace, freedom, and neutrality (ZOPFAN). But its progress has been mixed.

The Philippines removed all US military bases before the end of the 20th century, but now has eleven, with four new ones in the north, facing Taiwan.

ZOPFAN is especially relevant now as several Global North powers have a military presence in the South China Sea. Worse, several Asian leaders have made generous concessions to ‘circumvent’ personal legal ‘problems’ with US authorities.

The recent ASEAN summit will be followed by a second one later in 2025. Two ASEAN precedents, established in response to earlier predicaments, remain relevant.

Bandung
The 1955 Bandung conference of Asian and African leaders of newly emerging nations, which led to the birth of the Non-Aligned Movement, remains relevant.

Europe recently celebrated the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany. Now rejecting peaceful coexistence with its erstwhile liberator, Europe insists on fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian.

Military interventions after the first Cold War now exceed the number during it! Despite its rhetoric, the Global North seems uninterested in freedom and neutrality.

Western pundits deemed the world unipolar after the 1980s. However, many now see it as multipolar, with most in the Global South preferring not to be aligned with any particular world power.

Major Western powers have increasingly marginalised the UN, undermining its capacity for peacemaking. Few in the West, especially in NATO, remain seriously committed to the UN Charter despite giving much lip service.

But realistically, ASEAN cannot really lead international peacemaking. It can only be a pro-active, pro-UN voice of reason for peace, freedom, neutrality, development and international cooperation.

East Asia
Meanwhile, the world economy is stagnating, mainly due to Western policies since 2008. ASEAN+3 (including Japan, South Korea, and China) is especially relevant now with its Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

The earlier ASEAN+3 Chiang Mai Agreement responded to the 1997-98 Asian financial crises. After years of Northeast Asian encouragement, ASEAN nations agreed to move from bilateral to multilateral swap arrangements.

Meanwhile, the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) has progressed little since its creation over three decades ago.

More recently, the governments of Japan, China, and South Korea met without ASEAN in late March to prepare for Trump’s tariffs.

Sadly, key ASEAN leaders can hardly envision regional economic cooperation beyond yet another free trade agreement.

Trump has declared he wants to remake and rule the world to make America great again. His tariffs and Mar-a-Lago proposals should be seen as long overdue wake-up calls that ‘business as usual’ is over.

Will East Asia rise to the challenge and go beyond defensive actions to offer an alternative for the region’s economies and people, if not beyond?

The UN-led multilateral system still largely serves the US, but not enough for Trump. Thus, the US still invokes multilateral language self-servingly, e.g., it claims its unilateral tariffs are ‘reciprocal’.

Hence, despite his blatant contempt for them, Trump is unlikely to withdraw from all multilateral organisations and arrangements, especially those which serve him well.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Related Articles

• Will Europe Wage Peace?
• Trump Accord Sows Discord in US Empire
• Trump Wants World to Subsidise US Empire
• Trump’s ‘Shock and Awe’ Tariffs
• New Geopolitics Worse for Global South
• The Global South in the New Cold War
• How NOT to Win Friends and Influence People
• Reject CPTPP, Stay out of New Cold War
• Nothing to Learn from East Asia?
• Trade, Currency War Weapons Double-Edged
• What’s different about Trump’s tariffs?
• Trump’s Trade War in Perspective