Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Lake Chad isn’t really a lake any more. Most of it is islands and inlets. Credit: UNHCR/A. Bahaddou

By Lakshi De Vass Gunawardena
UNITED NATIONS, Aug 5 2019 (IPS)

As Lake Chad enters its 10th year of conflict, millions of young girls are being used and manipulated in grotesque ways.

Maria Sole Fanuzzi, Lake Chad Child Protection Specialist at Plan International, said: “New York City has 8.25 million people, so when we talk about the girls in the Lake Chad crisis, you have to imagine the whole city where we are now is completely filled by children, and half of that would be girls.”

She was speaking at an event co-hosted last week by the Permanent Mission of Belgium, the Government of Niger, and Plan International.

Spanning across Nigeria, Cameroon, Niger, and Chad, the Lake Chad crisis is a complex one, attributed to extreme poverty, climate change, underdevelopment, and attacks by the jihadist group Boko Haram, which garnered international attention with the kidnapping of 276 girls from a school in Nigeria in 2014.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), says the Lake Chad region (specifically in northeast Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger) is struggling with “the compounded impact of climate change, deep poverty, and violent extremism.”

A report by Plan International has revealed that over 15% of girls aged 10-19 had been married at least once or were currently married. As a result, the levels of girls’ education have drastically decreased.

With this, there is a severe lack of information concerning sexual and reproductive health. The Lake Chad basin has one of the highest rates of maternal deaths anywhere in the world, with about 773.4 deaths for every 100,000 successful births.

“Conflicts and disasters amplify this relative powerlessness of girls,’” said Sole, pointing out that the crisis affects girls disproportionately, where they are faced with situations, such as the deprivation of basic needs, sexual and gender-based violence and harmful practices such as trafficking, forced as suicide bombers and child marriages.

Those that survive and do manage to return home are confronted with discrimination and stigmatization from their communities and are even accused of witchcraft, she said.

“They are considered to have somehow absorbed the demon of the enemy- to have somehow given their consent,” she explained.

“And for the children in there that might have conceived during their captivity are unwanted, unrecognized and chased away.”

Credit: World Bank

Sole went on to narrate the story of a girl from Cameroon who stated that “If a girl gets pregnant out of wedlock, and no matter if we consent or not, it is a sign of terrible doom, that will fall on her house.”

She then described a case two months ago where a girl had been abused, and thus conceived out of wedlock returned home only to be rejected for “bringing shame to her house.”

Still, “some important initiatives have been taken,” Sole announced.

These initiatives include strengthening of social and emotional learning; building confidence; fostering relationships; harmonizing with their communities to build safe environments; economic empowerment and adequate education. However, it is important to educate the boys as well, she noted.

“The engagement of men and boys is crucial to tackle gendered social norms. the change cannot happen if masculinity continues to be seen as the affirmation of a predominance over the other gender,” Sole told IPS.

Boys and men get raped constantly in the world, and conflict all the more exasperated the exposure and the impact of this phenomenon.

“They are exploited as child workers, they are trafficked, and when they are deprived of sexual and reproductive health rights they are also deprived of their own right to a positive fatherhood,” she added.

“After all, the gendered norms that prescribe masculinity as an aggressive form of domination deprive also men and boys of that peaceful coexistence that eventually turn into the many males dominated wars we see worldwide. So, no wonder that statistics show that more equal societies are also more peaceful ones.”

“Boys and girls do share a common destiny and as much as we recognize the different perspectives of one and the other our ultimate goal is to empower both of them to live free from oppression and free to express their own human personality to the fullest and greatest extent,” she declared.

“We need to look at adolescents for what they are- humans.”

Asked what role Plan International will have going forward, Jessica Malter, Senior Communications and Advocacy Advisor at Planned International, told IPS: “Plan International is committed to working together with international partners and local entities to advance girls rights in the Lake Chad Basin and worldwide”

She further noted that they are working on developing integrated programs “that address the complex and interconnected issues affecting adolescents, such as lack of education, child marriage, early pregnancy, child labour and sexual exploitation and that

“We cannot continue to address these issues with single-sector responses or ad-hoc interventions.”

She also stressed the importance of incorporating the young generation stating that “including young people in the decision making that impacts their lives is absolutely critical, and note that

“We still do not sufficiently listen to young people, and particularly not adolescent girls who are often invisible”, said Malter.

“It is rare though, that girls are given the opportunity to express their views.
That said, they do have a way of tackling the issue.

Malter said “one way we are addressing this is with the Girls Get Equal, which is a global campaign that provides girls and young women the tools and resources they need to demand power, freedom and representation. age disaggregated data, to strengthen evidence and better inform programmes.”

Asked about what surprised her the most about the survivors she encountered, Sole said: “The most striking thing in almost every encounter is to see how incredibly resilient girls and boys are. They face the unspoken, some of them have witnessed the slaughter of their own parents, almost all of them are mothers to their younger siblings, and yet you can see a strength to restart and to rebuild their lives that is uncommon in most of our wealthier societies.

“Girls agency is something that can be at times challenging, but the recognition of this factor is the only way to trace back the logical, historical and societal meaning into the events that we witness and within which we move.”

“Girls and women cannot be confined to the role of the victims and need to play a major role into the rebuilding of their own lives whenever conflicts have broken the flow of their existence and shaken their previous foundations.”

With this is mind, it will be a victory to watch the growth and success of these children if/ when it happens.

“They are the beginning and the end of their own history making.” Sole concluded.

The post Protect, Support and Empower Girls in Lake Chad Region appeared first on Inter Press Service.

President Uhuru Kenyatta meets young Kenyan artists at the State House-Photo State House

By Francis Owino and Siddharth Chatterjee
NAIROBI, Kenya, Aug 2 2019 (IPS)

August 12, marks International Youth Day, and the theme for this year is ‘making education more relevant, equitable and inclusive’, is particularly apt for Africa. Consider this. Every 24 hours around 35,000 African youth are looking for work.

The youth make up 37% of the working-age population in Africa, but 60% of the unemployed. Though Africa continues to post impressive gains in education enrolment rates, challenges of access, quality and relevance of education in the continent remain formidable.

The region has the highest number of out-of-school children; four in ten learners score poorly in literacy and numeracy; and the systems are producing many graduates whose skills do not meet the workforce requirements. Estimates indicate that a dollar invested in an additional year of schooling, particularly for girls, generates earnings and health benefits of $10 in low-income countries and nearly $4 in lower-middle income countries.

By 2050, Africa will be home to about 830 million young people, meaning that at current trends, the challenge will only become tougher.

Francis Owino

In Kenya, President Uhuru Kenyatta pushed for education reforms to prepare the youth for a new era. The National Policy on Curriculum Reforms, whose vision is “nurturing every learner’s potential” is anchored on the African Union’s Agenda 2063, which includes education aspirations to catalyze an education and skills revolution with a greater role assigned to the Private Sector.

Clearly, the road towards achieving SDG 4 – to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all – requires bold and innovative action. This is why education must be at the heart of private sector engagement in the journey towards the SDGs.

It is also in line with the UN Secretary-General, Mr Antonio Guterres’s call for the reformed UN to make a “strategic pivot from ad-hoc, transactional partnerships to longer-term, ‘transformational’ partnerships designed for scale”. This will involve collaboration between the UN Global Compact and UN country teams to better mobilize local business communities.

To prepare Kenya’s young people to face the challenges of a rapidly changing world and to build on existing national leadership on young people, the country has joined Generation Unlimited as one of its key partners. President Uhuru Kenyatta, a global champion of Generation Unlimited, has established a high-level steering committee co-chaired by the Government and the UN to guide the implementation of Generation Unlimited in the country, as well concrete steps to attract public and private partnerships in support of its goals.

Siddharth Chatterjee

To set the Youth Agenda on a transformative trajectory, the Government approved and is set to roll out the Kenya Youth Development Policy (KYDP) (2019). This Policy is an expression of the collective commitment of concerned stakeholders to harness and optimize the strengths and opportunities that the youth present while addressing the personal and structural barriers that affect their productivity

More significantly, the policy is an outcome of a broad based consultative process that is designed to robustly address eight (8) Priority areas namely: realize a healthy and productive youth population; build qualified and competent youth workforce for sustained social economic development (farming, manufacturing); create opportunities for youth to earn decent and sustainable livelihood; develop youth talent, creativity and innovation for wealth creation; nurture value, moral, ethical generation of patriotic youth for transformative leadership; effective civic participation and representation among the youth; promote a crime free, secure, peaceful and united Kenya where no young Kenyan is left behind; and support youth engagement in environmental management for sustainable development.

This has been successfully done by the setting up of safe spaces for youth through the establishment of the 152 Youth Empowerment Centers (YECs) across the country as One Stop Shop for the youth services. They feature myriad of services to the youth such as a counselling center, an ICT Hub, indoor recreation facilities, affirmative fund desks/focal points, and outdoor game facilities. The Government’s efforts have been fully complemented by both the County Governments, the Private Sector and UN Agencies by adoption and enhancing the variety of services offered in the YECs.

The YECs provide youth friendly services intended to address their physical, psychological and socio-economic needs.

The One Stop Youth Center concept, which is a product of partnerships between the UN and the Government, utilizes an integrated approach to youth development by providing youth with safe spaces in urban settings where they can meet and access information and resources critical to youth-led development including peace building, research and policy development. The model is in line with the Kenya Vision 2030 blue-print and the Big4 agenda which emphasizes on opportunity creation.

The UN in Kenya is scaling up its partnership with the Government in efforts to reform education, as reflected under the UN Development Assistance Framework’s, Pillar 2- Human Capital Development. The outcome is to ensure the continent’s education systems for future economic, technological and demographic trends.

Dr Francis O.Owino, PhD is the, Principal Secretary, Public Service and Youth. Siddharth Chatterjee is the United Nations Resident Coordinator to Kenya.

The post Boom or Bust -Education Will Determine Africa’s Transformation appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By António Guterres
UNITED NATIONS, Aug 2 2019 (IPS)

First August. It is the middle of summer in the northern hemisphere. We are witnessing not only record global warming but global political tensions are also heating up.

Both are dangerous and both are avoidable. Let me begin with the climate emergency.

We have always lived through hot summers. But this is not the summer of our youth. This is not your grandfather’s summer.

According to the very latest data from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and its climate centre– – the month of July at least equaled if not surpassed the hottest month in recorded history.

This follows the hottest June ever. This is even more significant because the previous hottest month, July 2016, occurred during one of the strongest El Niño’s ever. That is not the case this year.

All of this means we are on track for the period from 2015 to 2019 to be the five hottest years on record.

This year alone we have seen temperature records shatter from New Delhi to Anchorage – from Paris to Santiago – from Adelaide to the Arctic Circle.

If we do not take action on climate change now, these extreme weather events are just the tip of the iceberg. And that iceberg is also rapidly melting.

Indeed, the heatwave which affected Europe in the last month has now raised temperatures in the Arctic and Greenland by 10-15 degrees Celsius.

This at a time when Arctic Sea ice is already near record low levels.

Preventing irreversible climate disruption is the race of our lives and for our lives. It is a race we can – and must — win.

The urgent need for climate action is precisely why I am convening the Climate Action Summit on September 23rd.

This will be preceded by a Youth Climate Summit on September 21st. I look forward to welcoming young leaders like Greta Thunberg and so many others.

I have told leaders — from governments, businesses and civil society – that the ticket to entry is bold action and much greater ambition.

The world’s leading scientists tell us we must limit temperature increases to 1.5C if we are to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

We need to cut greenhouse emissions by 45% by 2030. We need carbon neutrality by 2050.

And we need to mainstream climate change risks across all decisions to drive resilient growth, reduce vulnerability and avoid investments that could cause greater damage.

That is why I am telling leaders don’t come to the Summit with beautiful speeches.

Come with concrete plans – clear steps to enhance nationally determined contributions by 2020 – and strategies for carbon neutrality by 2050.

There is fortunately some good news. Around the world, governments, businesses and citizens are mobilizing to confront the climate crisis.

Technology is on our side — delivering renewable energy at far lower cost than the fossil-fuel driven economy.

Solar and onshore wind are now the cheapest sources of new power in virtually all major economies.

Norway’s Parliament has voted to divest the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund – worth $1 trillion – from fossil fuels.

Many countries — from Chile to Finland, and from the United Kingdom to the Marshall Islands — have concrete and credible plans to achieve carbon neutrality by mid-century.

And many others — from Ethiopia to New Zealand to Fiji to Pakistan — are planting hundreds of millions of trees to reverse deforestation, buttress climate resilience, and remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Credit ratings agencies are moving to better account for the widespread perils of climate disruption — and more banks and financial institutions are pricing carbon risks into financial decisions.

Asset managers representing nearly half the world’s invested capital – some $34 trillion – are demanding urgent climate action, calling on global leaders in a letter recently published and I quote “to phase out fossil fuel subsidies … and thermal coal power worldwide”, and “put a meaningful price on carbon”.

Leading businesses around the world are also recognizing that moving early from the grey to the green economy will deliver competitive advantages, while delaying will lead to huge losses.

Here at the United Nations, the Global Compact has launched a campaign calling on businesses to join the fight to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.

Already, businesses with a combined value of more than $1.3 trillion are on board and that number is growing fast.

We need rapid and deep change in how we do business, generate power, build cities and feed the world.

And – having endured what is possibly the hottest month in recorded history – we need action now. In addition to heat waves, we are also confronting many political hot spots.

Allow me to touch on three.

First, I am worried about rising tensions in the Persian Gulf. A minor miscalculation could lead to a major confrontation.

I stress the need to respect the rights and duties relating to navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and its adjacent waters in accordance with international law.

I have consistently conveyed a clear message to leaders both publicly and privately in numerous meetings and calls. That message can be boiled down to two words: maximum restraint.

I once again urge all parties to refrain from any actions that will escalate tensions further.

The last thing the world needs is a major confrontation in the Gulf that will have devastating implications on global security and the global economy.

Second, I am troubled by growing friction among the two largest global economies. We need to learn the lessons of the Cold War and avoid a new one.

Looking into the not so distant future, I see the possibility of the emergence of two competing blocs — each with their own dominant currency, trade and financial rules, their own internet and artificial intelligence strategy, and their own contradictory geopolitical and military views.

We still have time to avoid this. As I said in my address to the General Assembly last year, with leadership committed to strategic cooperation and to managing competing interests, we can steer the world onto a safer path.

Third, I am concerned about rising tensions between nuclear-armed States.

The Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty — the INF — is a landmark agreement that helped stabilize Europe and end the Cold War.

When it expires August 2, the world will lose an invaluable brake on nuclear war. This will likely heighten, not reduce, the threat posed by ballistic missiles.

Regardless of what transpires, the parties should avoid destabilizing developments and urgently seek agreement on a new common path for international arms control.

I strongly encourage the United States and the Russian Federation to extend the so-called ‘New Start’ agreement to provide stability and the time to negotiate future arms control measures.

I also call on all State Parties to work together at the 2020 Review of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to ensure the NPT remains able to fulfil its fundamental goals – preventing nuclear war and facilitating the elimination of nuclear weapons.

In the context of non-proliferation, I also reiterate that any use of chemical weapons is abhorrent and impunity for their use is inexcusable. It is imperative to identify and hold accountable all those who have used chemical weapons.

The heating of the global political atmosphere complicates all our efforts to resolve troubling situations – from Libya to Syria, from Yemen to Palestine and beyond.

We will do everything to intensify our surge in diplomacy for peace.

We will never give up our efforts to secure peace, reduce human suffering and build a sustainable world for people and planet.

The post Extreme Weather Events are Just the Tip of Rapidly Melting Icebergs appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, in an address to the world body.

The post Extreme Weather Events are Just the Tip of Rapidly Melting Icebergs appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Aug 2 2019 (IPS)

The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which has been undermined by a sharp cut in US contributions, has been embroiled in a scandal that threatens to jeopardize its very future.

A report from the Ethics Office has found “credible and corroborated” evidence that the senior management of UNRWA engaged in “sexual misconduct, nepotism, retaliation, discrimination and other abuses of authority, for personal gain, to suppress legitimate dissent, and to otherwise achieve their personal objectives.”

As a result, two of the donors, Switzerland and the Netherlands, have suspended payments to UNRWA, with the possibility of others to follow.

In January 2018, the Trump administration announced it was withholding $65m out of a $125m aid package earmarked for UNRWA, a veritable lifeline for more than five million registered Palestinian refugees, for nearly 70 years.

That move was prompted primarily for political reasons.

Paula Donovan and Stephen Lewis, co-directors of AIDS-Free World and its Code Blue Campaign, which seeks to end impunity for sexual abuse by UN personnel, told IPS the incriminating report was received in the Secretary-General’s office eight months ago.

“He should immediately have suspended the principals involved and replaced them with interim appointments. Had he done so, Switzerland and the Netherlands would not have suspended payment to UNRWA and the indispensable work of the agency would not have been compromised.”

“If the UNRWA story had not been broken by the media, the Secretary-General would not have acted. Alas, that’s the pattern,” they added.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told reporters August 1: “I have been acting quite significantly to make sure that we strengthen UNRWA and UNRWA’s capacity to deliver”.

“I’ve been appealing for the support to UNRWA to all countries of the world as I think we should distinguish what are the revelations made, or accusations made, in relation to members of the management of UNRWA, from the needs to preserve UNRWA, to support UNRWA, and to make UNRWA effective in the very important action in relation to the Palestine refugees, and I’ve been acting consistently to support that.”

As you know in the present situation, he pointed out, the deputy of UNRWA has resigned, and “so I decided that it would be important to immediately appoint a new deputy as acting deputy and, as I said, in relation to any intervention that might [be] justified, I will wait, according to due process, for the results of the inquiry and, based on the results of the inquiry, I will act accordingly.”

According to UNRWA, the UN agency is funded almost entirely by voluntary contributions.

The only exception is a very limited subsidy from the Regular Budget of the United Nations, which is used exclusively for administrative costs.

“The work of UNRWA could not be carried out without sustained contributions from state and regional governments, the European Union and other government partners, which represented 93.28 per cent of all contributions in 2018.”

In 2018, said UNRWA, 50 per cent of the Agency’s total pledges of $ 1.27 billion came from EU member states, who contributed $643 million, including through the European Commission.

The EU (including the European Commission), Germany and Saudi Arabia were the largest individual donors, contributing a cumulative 40 per cent of the Agency’s overall funding. The United Kingdom and Sweden were also among the top five donors.

The Trump administration said last August it has carefully reviewed the issue and determined that the United States will not make additional contributions to UNRWA.

“When we made a US contribution of $60 million in January, we made it clear that the United States was no longer willing to shoulder the very disproportionate share of the burden of UNRWA’s costs that we had assumed for many years,” according to the US State Department.

“Beyond the budget gap itself and failure to mobilize adequate and appropriate burden sharing, the fundamental business model and fiscal practices that have marked UNRWA for years– tied to UNRWA’s endlessly and exponentially expanding community of entitled beneficiaries– is simply unsustainable and has been in crisis mode for many years,” it continued.

“The United States will no longer commit further funding to this irredeemably flawed operation.”

UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told reporters July 30 that Guterres believes it’s essential that UNRWA gets the support it needs and “so we will be looking to make sure that all of the countries that have been generous in donating to UNRWA will continue to be able to support that, and will look at engaging with them to see what can be done to satisfy them”.

“Clearly, this is an agency – as we have been saying in the last few years, when, as you know, it faced a financial crisis – this is an agency whose work is critical to the lives, to the health, to the education of millions of people, millions of Palestinians across the region, and they have been a vital source of stability, not just for those people but for the region itself,” he added.

Asked for a response about the charges against UNRWA, Haq said there is an ongoing investigation on the allegations contained in the report.

“Until this investigation is completed, the Secretary General is not in a position to make any further comments on this matter. As he has shown in the past, the Secretary General is committed to acting swiftly, as appropriate, upon receiving the full report. The Secretary General continues to consider the work undertaken by UNRWA as absolutely essential to Palestinian refugees,” he added.

Asked who was conducting the investigation, Haq said: “This is happening by our Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). Now, I’ll leave it for you to evaluate the sufficiency of the steps that are taken once we take them; but, like I said, I’ve assured you the Secretary General is ready to take action upon receiving this… the full report”.

In a statement released August 1, Code Blue said the ethics report asserts that the alleged conduct of UNRWA’s senior leaders—Commissioner-General Pierre Krahenbuhl, Deputy Commissioner-General Sandra Mitchell, Chief of Staff Hakam Shahwan, and Senior Adviser to the Commissioner-General Maria Mohammedi—presents “an enormous risk to the reputation of the UN” and “their immediate removal should be carefully considered.”

The ethics report was leaked to the media this week. But it was completed and delivered to the UN Secretary-General in December 2018. That was eight months ago. Mitchell and Shahwan have since left the agency of their own accord. Both Krahenbuhl and Mohammedi remain in their posts, said the statement.

Code Blue also said the Secretary-General has ignored the ethics report’s recommendation that Krahenbuhl and Mohammedi be removed with “immediate” effect.

Instead, the UN has responded to the report by ordering yet another internal investigation, this time by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), which is ongoing. In effect, the UN has taken no substantive action to address the crisis at UNRWA.

The Netherlands and Switzerland have responded to the revelations by suspending funding to UNRWA. The United Kingdom is considering such a step. It should go without saying that the work of UNRWA is too important to be sacrificed to the UN’s willingness to allow the crisis to worsen, Code Blue added.

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@ips.org

The post UNRWA Faces Donor Backlash Due to Charges of Sexual Misconduct & Nepotism appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Adam Tooze
NEW YORK, Aug 1 2019 (IPS)

In the grand European political reshuffle of 2019, it turned out that Christine Lagarde was the answer to the conundrum of who should replace Mario Draghi at the European Central Bank. But her move opens another question. Who succeeds Lagarde at the International Monetary Fund?

The question is a European question because, as part of the founding compromise of the Bretton Woods institutions in 1944, the United States nominates the head of the World Bank and the position of managing director at the IMF is taken by a European.

America’s interest at the IMF is secured by its blocking position as the largest individual shareholder and since the 1990s by the nomination of the first deputy managing director. Today that role is occupied by David Lipton, who is currently filling in for Lagarde.

So far, even in an age of growing international tension, that basic distribution of spoils has held up. When Jim Yong Kim abruptly announced his departure from the World Bank in January 2019, the Trump administration nominated David Malpass as his successor. Despite his reputation as a critic of the bank, in April, Malpass was elected unanimously and unopposed. No one wanted to add to the simmering tension with the White House.

Now, having rolled out the red carpet for Lagarde, the Europeans are mobilising to complete the reshuffle by nominating one of their own for the IMF.

Indefensible and anachronistic

Though they have tradition on their side, the fact that the Europeans feel entitled to proceed in this way is indefensible and anachronistic. It is bad for the legitimacy of the IMF and unhealthy for Europe as well.

The eurozone crisis created a toxic codependency between the eurozone and the IMF which needs to be dissolved once and for all. The fact that the Europeans are treating the leadership of a global institution as a bargaining counter in an intra-European political deal — involving the presidency of the European Parliament, the European Council and the European Commission — adds insult to injury.

Faced with the bullying of the likes of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, the European Union preens itself as an upholder of multilateral order and co-operation. And such institutions as the World Trade Organization and the IMF do embody general principles of global governance.

But the acceptance of those rules in turn depends on the acceptance by the key players of an underlying distribution of power. Given the huge shift in the balance of the global economy in recent decades, the power-sharing agreement hashed out between the Europeans and the Americans in the final stages of World War II looks increasingly threadbare.

The fact that the emerging-market economies of Asia should have more voice in the Bretton Woods institutions has been acknowledged at least since the Asian financial crises of the late 1990s. In the wake of that crisis, the manner in which the IMF had dealt with countries such as Indonesia and South Korea triggered a major legitimacy crisis. In political terms, borrowing from the IMF became toxic.

Over the protest of several non-EU members of its board, the IMF’s involvement in the eurozone forced the fund to override the basic principles of crisis-fighting it had developed since the 1990s.

By 2007, when the Spaniard Rodrigo Rato casually resigned from the managing directorship and handed the job to the ambitious French socialist Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the fund was in freefall. Its client list had shrunk to Turkey and Afghanistan. Without the fees it earns from lending, the fund’s budget was contracting and ‘DSK’ began his term in office by downsizing its team of economists.

Some would of course wish the IMF good riddance. But the financial crisis of 2008 put paid to that idea. The fund’s client list rapidly expanded, led by desperate eastern-European economies such as Hungary, Latvia and Ukraine. The initiation of the G20 leadership meetings in November 2009 created a new global forum in which the emerging-market economies had more adequate weight.

And it was the London G20 meeting in April 2009 which agreed to adjust the balance of IMF voting rights and to raise its funding to over USD 1 trillion. This restored the IMF as a 21st-century crisis-fighting organisation.

Confidence shaken

But where and how should that firepower be directed? In 2010 global financial confidence was shaken by the outbreak of the eurozone crisis. The thought of involving the IMF in the affairs of the eurozone horrified both the Sarkozy government in France and the ECB.

But Europe’s own crisis-fighting apparatus worked painfully slowly. To stabilise the situation, a bargain was struck between the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the US president, Barack Obama, supported by the ambition of DSK.

The IMF became deeply embroiled in both the national crisis programmes for Greece, Ireland and Portugal and the overall backstop to the eurozone. In May 2010 no less than €250bn of the fund’s resource were earmarked to complement the European Financial Stability Facility, the hastily improvised predecessor of the European Stability Mechanism.

Over the protest of several non-EU members of its board, the IMF’s involvement in the eurozone forced the fund to override the basic principles of crisis-fighting it had developed since the 1990s. From 2010 to 2015 it found itself underwriting debt-restructuring programmes, which the fund’s own economists knew were inequitable and unsustainable.

When DSK’s career began to unravel in 2011, via a series of accusations of alleged sexual offences (charges were eventually dropped or he was acquitted), the Europeans even had the effrontery to argue that his successor must be European because the IMF was now existentially entangled with the eurozone.

And the Obama administration insisted the IMF had to remained involved, for fear that Europe might trigger another ‘Lehman moment’.

To be instrumentalised in this way by its two largest shareholders was bad for the legitimacy of the IMF as a global institution and it was bad for Europe. Not only did the fund, as part of the ‘troika’ with the commission and the ECB, underwrite Europe’s disastrous management of the eurozone debt crisis. The ability to call on the fund meant also that Europe could drag its feet over building its own safety net.

It is to Lagarde’s credit that she has gone a long way towards extricating the IMF from the eurozone, refusing to sign up to its third bailout for Greece in 2015. But the experience only confirms that the fund is not safe in Europe’s hands.

Matter of contention

Meanwhile, the argument for an increase in emerging-market-economy influence over the IMF is stronger than ever. Today the EU27, excluding the UK, has a voting share of 25.6 per cent, compared with 16.5 per cent for the US, China’s 6 per cent, 5.3 per cent for Germany, 4 per cent for France and India’s 2.6 per cent. How exactly quotas should be revised is a matter of contention.

Is the relevant criterion the size of foreign exchange reserves or of gross domestic product? If GDP, then is to be measured at purchasing-power parities or current exchange rates?

In PPP terms China is the largest economy in the world; at current exchange rates it still a long way behind the US. And how should the closed nature of much of the Chinese economy weigh in the balance?

Picking the formula is itself a highly political exercise. But even if one takes the formula for IMF quotas agreed by the existing dispensation, the implications are stark. China’s voting share should double to 12.9 per cent.

The voting share of the EU should fall to 23.3 per cent and that of the US should be adjusted down to 14.7 per cent. The latter change is critical because it would push the US below the 15 per cent of the vote it needs to exercise a veto over the decisions of the board, which require an 85 per cent majority.

We are in a fragile moment in global politics. America is erratic. Tensions with China are mounting. The EU has decisions to make about where it stands.

There is no chance of America accepting such a change. Indeed, there is no realistic prospect of Washington signing off on any quota adjustment. Under Obama, the Republicans in Congress took until January 2016 to approve the modest shift in the balance of voting rights accepted by the US administration in London in the spring of 2009.

For the Europeans to take advantage of this deadlock to once again appoint one of their own to the managing directorship would be a blatant demonstration of bad faith. If Europe is serious about securing the international order by means of progressive accommodation of the legitimate demands of rising powers, it could send an important signal by opening Lagarde’s replacement to well-qualified candidates from emerging markets. There are several obvious possibilities.

Front runners

The three most commonly mentioned front runners would be: Augustin Carstens, formerly of the Mexican central bank and currently running the Bank for International Settlements in Basle; Raghuram Rajan, formerly chief economist at the IMF, head of the central bank of India and now kicking his heels at the Booth School of business at the University of Chicago; and Singapore’s former finance minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, who was the first Asian to chair the IMF’s key policy steering group, the International Monetary and Financial Committee.

The fact that these men come from emerging-market economies does not make them advocates of heterodox views — all are habitués of the Davos circuit. Rajan is the highest profile in intellectual terms. But his preferences run in the redirection of ordoliberalism. Rajan was one of the fiercest critics of the unconventional monetary-policy measures pursued by Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve.

Nevertheless, for any of them to head the IMF would be an acknowledgement of the fundamental shift in the balance of the world economy. And any of them would be a stronger candidate than the short list that the Europeans have so far come up with.

Mark Carney, the (Canadian-born) head of the Bank of England, is the only ‘European’ who could match up to these three in terms of standing in the world of global finance. But, despite his Irish passport, he has been ruled out as insufficiently European. And given its need for support over Brexit, Dublin is not going to force the issue.

Regrettably, the decisive voices in Europe are determined that a representative of the eurozone should have the job. And at this point the familiar European squabbling begins. The southern Europeans have two candidates in the ring: Mário Centeno of Portugal, the current head of the Eurogroup, and Nadia Calviño, the Spanish economy minister and a former senior EU official. Both lack profile and would struggle to find the support of northern Europe.

Deeply implicated

The two candidates who would attract the support of northern Europe are deeply implicated in the disaster of the eurozone. Olli Rehn, the governor of the Finnish central bank, was widely thought of as an alternate for Jens Weidmann in the ECB stakes.

He would no doubt attract support from the new ‘Hanseatic League’, with all that implies: between 2010 and 2014, as commissioner for economic and monetary affairs and the euro in the Barroso commission, Rehn vocally advocated the austerity line.

But even worse would the man who is apparently the front runner, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the former finance minister of the Netherlands. As president of the Eurogroup from 2013 to 2018, he personified the combination of populist northern resentment and fiscal narrow-mindedness that dictated eurozone policy towards Cyprus and Greece. If he were to emerge as the IMF’s managing director, it would be a truly horrible twist in the saga of the fund’s entanglement with the eurozone.

We are in a fragile moment in global politics. America is erratic. Tensions with China are mounting. The EU has decisions to make about where it stands. In the UN and Bretton Woods institutions, created in the final stages of World War II, it has an anachronistic over-representation. There is a risk that Europe’s preoccupation with its own problems will undercut the legitimacy of those institutions.

Instead Europe should put what leverage it retains to good use. It should start by inaugurating a new era at the IMF.

This article is a joint publication by Social Europe and International Politics and Society —IPS-Journal.

The post Europeans Mobilising for New IMF Head appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Adam Tooze is Professor at Columbia University, focusing on the history of economics. In addition, he leads the European Institute at Columbia.

The post Europeans Mobilising for New IMF Head appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Scores of migrants and refugees have been desperately trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea. Credit: Ilaria Vechi / IPS

By Blerim Mustafa
GENEVA, Aug 1 2019 (IPS)

The migrant and refugee crisis has become a serious test for the unity of Europe as a political project. The inflow of destitute migrants and refugees has tested Europe’s political unity to an unprecedented extent. With a long-term solution to the migrant and refugee crisis nowhere in sight, the adverse impact of the current situation has the potential to unfold further and to give rise to a broader crisis with long-term implications, affecting Europe and the MENA region alike.

In his influential essay “The End of History?”, Professor Francis Fukuyama predicted that the universalization of the Western concept of liberal democracy, in the aftermath of the end of the Cold War, would prevail and erase differences between peoples, societies, civilizations and world regions. Nevertheless, the manipulation of despair and the violent destruction of lives and assets in the Middle East have taken their toll in terms of the radicalization of youth. The re-emergence of populism in advanced countries continue to divide their societies. The situation is particularly striking in countries of Central and Eastern Europe that witnessed a surge in nationalist sentiments once the communist era came to an end and that did not have a colonial past. In Western Europe, the adverse impact of globalization and the financial crisis have given rise to the notion of a lost generation in which Europe’s youth experience greater degrees of impoverishment, inequality and unemployment. A political vacuum has therefore emerged, which has given rise to movements that anchor their ideologies on anti-globalization, unilateralism, protectionism and extreme forms of nationalism. Progress is being achieved to come to terms with its deadly sting, but populism in the West and extremism in the Middle East – spilling over into Europe – cannot be set against one another. The former is still – but for how long – predominantly peaceful in nature while the latter is generating political violence.

Populist parties are emerging as credible actors in light of the recent electoral successes in local and national elections. Their recipe for success: spread of fear, anger, hatred and xenophobia towards refugees and migrants in an attempt to confer legitimacy to their political ideologies. Right wing and populist parties in the West are on the offensive and are now threatening the democratic traditions of a continent referred to as the birthplace of democracy, liberalism and Enlightenment. It challenges the legitimacy of national governments and threatens to restore extreme forms of nationalistic reactions that constitute direct threats to peace, reconciliation and international cooperation. It remains a paradox that countries in Central and Eastern Europe – often the most vocal critics of the arrival of migrants and refugees – have one of the lowest percentages of people belonging to Islam. These are the countries that have benefitted most from inter-EU migration and from an open labour market. Populism, however, does not arise out of nowhere. Establishment political parties have catered to the wealthy and failed to address burning social issues, thus creating a vacuum into which political opportunists could move.

Another feature that is ubiquitous is the tendency to externalise responses to address the plight of people on the move. In this regard, fences and walls have been erected and borders sealed off in an attempt to outsource and externalise solutions to address the rise of people on the move. In addition to the notorious wall between US and Mexico, which will be made even more repellent, and to the no less notorious one cutting off the Palestinian Occupied Territories, border fences and wires have been erected between the borders of Spanish enclaves (Melilla, Ceuta)/Morocco, Slovenia/Croatia, Hungary/Croatia, Hungary/Serbia, Macedonia/Greece, Turkey/Greece and Bulgaria/Turkey. Hungary has also considered erecting a fence along the Hungarian/Romanian border in response to the influx of people on the move.

Although it is the sovereign right of every country to implement measures deemed appropriate to protect their national borders, these physical barriers can come in conflict with the right of people to seek asylum as stipulated in article 14, paragraph 1, of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (a right, however, not included in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), and in the 1951 Refugees Convention, which defines a refugee as a person outside his country of nationality who has a well founded fear of persecution if returned to his country of origin. Providing assistance and protection to refugees is, therefore, in line with States’ obligations under international law and not only with their moral duties to respond to the dire situation many desperate people are facing. In this connection, it is worth referring to Pope Francis’s tweet made on 18 March 2017 where he appealed to decision-makers to not “build walls but bridges, to conquer evil with good, offence with forgiveness, to live in peace with everyone.” Pope Francis has likewise urged societies “to welcome, to protect, to promote, and to integrate migrants and refugees”.

The origin of attempts in Europe to “externalize” solutions to the refugee and migrant crisis can be traced back to the 1990 Dublin Convention. The latter stipulates the right to deport migrants and refugees to the first country of arrival, primarily to Greece, Spain and Italy, which are the first European entry points for people on the move owing to their geographical location. Countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea therefore are faced with the burden of absorbing the migrant and refugee inflows from the MENA region. This approach has contributed to an unfair distribution and relocation system of migrants and refugees where countries neighbouring bordering Syria and Iraq and then European countries situated on the Mediterranean Sea coast are the most affected. In the report of the United Nations Secretary-General addressing large movements of migrants and refugees – submitted in April 2016 to the United Nations General Assembly – he regretted that “too often, responsibility for new arrivals lies with the authorities and host communities in the first country of arrival.”

The European Union (EU) has also attempted to work with neighbouring states to defuse the crisis and to externalise solutions to control the flow of people on the move. It appears that the EU has drawn inspiration from the Australian government that have established refugee camps in neighbouring countries such as the island state of Nauru to address the inflow of refugees. In this connection, an agreement was reached between EU and Turkey, in March 2016, which stipulates, inter alia, that Ankara accepts the return of illegal migrants entering Europe. In counterpart, the EU would commit to investing EUR 3 billion to support livelihood projects for returning migrants. A similar position has also been taken vis-à-vis another migratory transit country Libya, in which the EU is committed to supporting the endeavours of the Libyan government to detain migrants and refugees in confinement camps. In response to this practice, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein referred to the detention of migrants and refugees in Libya as “an outrage to humanity”.

Despite these attempts to outsource solutions to the migrant and refugee crisis, inflows of people on the move have not ceased as the main destination regions of migrants and refugees remain the advanced and developed countries in Northern Europe. In this connection, the migrant and refugee crisis is not sustainable in the long run either for Europe or for the Arab region. The rise of populism in Europe – which so far remains political in nature – and the rise of violent extremism in the Middle East – which is an immediate threat – endanger the long-term stability of both regions and has the potential to stir an even bigger migrant and refugee crisis in the future. The root-causes of the unprecedented flow of people on the move have multiple causes, which require a multilevel response. It is imperative that decision-makers recognise the multitude of factors that contribute to the forced displacement of people. Most importantly, peace and stability and a climate conducive to the development of and the respect for human rights must be restored. It is hard to imagine why refugees and migrants would return to their home societies if sustainable and alternative livelihood options are not in place to meet the individual and collective needs of peoples and societies, and if wars and armed conflicts continue unabated.

Blerim Mustafa, Project and communications officer, the Geneva Centre for Human Rights Advancement and Global Dialogue. Postgraduate researcher (Ph.D. candidate) at the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Leicester (UK).

The post Migration and Human Solidarity appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

“A crisis of politics or a “crisis of numbers”?

The post Migration and Human Solidarity appeared first on Inter Press Service.

One month after the attack on Tajoura, Libya which killed 53 detainees and injured more than 87 others, little has been done to help the incarcerated migrants in the turbulent country. Many sub-Saharan Africans migrants go to Libya hoping to make it to Europe and a better life. Credit: Karlos Zurutuza/IPS

By James Reinl
UNITED NATIONS, Aug 1 2019 (IPS)

It is almost one month since an airstrike on a detention centre in Libya killed and injured scores of migrants and refugees locked up inside, many of whom were detained for doing nothing worse than fleeing instability or seeking better lives in Europe.

This week, it looked like world powers were finally making an effort to persuade Libya’s United Nations-backed Government of National Accord (GNA) to come good on its promise to free the thousands of refugees in lockups under its control.

At a U.N. Security Council meeting on Monday, diplomats were “concerned by the situation of refugees and migrants” in Libya, and were poised to take action, last month’s council president and Peruvian envoy Gustavo Meza-Cuadra told reporters afterwards.

Earlier, diplomats heard from the U.N.’s envoy to Libya, Ghassan Salame, who said the Jul. 2 bloodbath at the facility in Tajoura, a suburb of Libya’s capital, Tripoli, should prompt officials to close such centres once and for all.

“What is required is that they be shuttered,” Salame said via a video link from Tripoli.

“I urge the council now to call upon the authorities in Tripoli to take the long-delayed but much-needed strategic decision to free those who are detained in these centres.”

One month after the attack on Tajoura, which killed 53 detainees and injured more than 87 others — mostly sub-Saharan Africans who were seeking better lives in Europe — little has been done to help the incarcerated migrants in the turbulent country.

Despite GNA pledges to close Tajoura, officials instead filled the bombed-out hangar on a military base with some 200 new migrants and refugees since the late-night air strike that caused chaos and carnage in eastern Tripoli.

To make matters worse, new detainees include migrants who were picked up by Libya’s coast guard after their vessel capsized in the Mediterranean on Jul. 26 — a catastrophe that saw as many as 150 passengers drown.

Some 5,000 refugees and migrants are detained in facilities under the control of or linked to the GNA, Salame said. Some 3,800 of these were on the front lines of fighting in the North African country’s civil war.

The Lebanese diplomat also criticised the European Union (EU) for funding a scheme that sees Libya’s coast guard intercept migrant boats at sea before returning them to Libya and detaining them in places like Tajoura. 

Likewise, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and other campaign groups have criticised the 28-nation bloc for bemoaning Libya’s ill-treatment of migrants while at the same time backing schemes that lead to abuse.

Amnesty has decried the “utterly inhumane” conditions inside Libya’s migrant lockups, where detainees have “little access to food, water or medical care” and endure “brutal treatment, torture, rape – and even being sold”.

John Dalhuisen, a regional expert with the European Stability Initiative, a think-tank, said the EU was complicit in abuses by making it harder for refugees and migrants to exit Libya and cross the Mediterranean.

“The EU has backed a policy that essentially amounts to containment. It has invested and trained the Libyan coast guard and reduced its own rescue services in a very successful effort to stop migrants reaching Europe,” Dalhuisen told IPS.

“It made some effort to improve conditions in Libyan detention facilities and secure access to them for international agencies, but with very modest results.”

An EU spokesperson told IPS that it backs Libya’s coast guard in an effort to stop refugees and migrants from perishing at sea, but that the 28-nation bloc was strongly against locking them up back on Libyan soil.

U.N. bodies, including the refugee agency UNHCR and the International Organisation for Migration, have assisted detained migrants and even arranged for some to be released and sent back to their countries of origin.

Some have been assessed and gained refuge in Europe; others have been settled elsewhere, such as Niger. But these schemes have only affected a tiny proportion of the estimated half-million refugees and migrants in Libya.    

Judith Sunderland, an associate director for HRW, said “space is limited” in UNHCR resettlement schemes and there are logjams, with few “longer-term solutions” for settling refugees after temporary stops in Niger.

“The UNHCR’s programme to evacuate asylum seekers and refugees from Libya is severely handicapped by the low number of resettlement pledges by European countries and the slow pace of actual resettlement of the few that are processed,” Sunderland told IPS.

The situation is complicated by turbulence across Libya, which has seen little but violence since the 2011 uprising that killed president Muammar Gaddafi and saw the nation collapse into a civil war that continues today.

The airstrike that devastated Tajoura occurred after renegade military commander Khalifa Haftar and his self-styled Libyan National Army (LNA) launched an offensive in early April to seize control of Tripoli. The GNA blames the LNA for the deaths, which the LNA denies.

Elinor Raikes, a regional director for the International Rescue Committee, an aid group that operates in Libya, said that locking up migrants was not a problem only in North Africa, but part of a global anti-immigrant phenomenon.

“Arbitrary detention is not a just response to seeking safety, but countries across the world, including in Europe and the United States, are taking part in what is a deeply concerning trend,” Raikes told IPS.

“Detention has become a form of border management, and this has meant that thousands of people are intercepted at sea and on land and then detained in inadequate living conditions, often in overcrowded cells at risk of disease and infection.”

Related Articles

• Libya Tragedy: Why Lock up Migrants in the First Place?
• Senegalese Returnees from Libya, Niger Face Uncertain Future
• One Migrant’s Brutal Odyssey Through Libya

The post One Month Since Libya’s Migrant Tragedy, Detentions Continue appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Tarik Gooptu
OXFORD, UK, Jul 31 2019 (IPS)

Tackling inequality in the 21st century requires us to understand and address barriers to upward mobility that segments of people face within countries. In a world with high and increasing levels of urbanization, the conversation on challenges to mobility must start with cities.

By addressing the drivers of inequality in cities, policymakers can alleviate conditions that perpetuate within-country inequality. Efficiently planning public transportation investments to target metropolitan communities with low connectivity is a crucial step to reducing disparities in upward mobility.

Doing this provides low-income residents with improved access to jobs, schools, hospitals, and other benefits of living in an urban area. A smart urban planning framework, enabled by effective partnership between the public and private sector, would enable citizens to enjoy a more level playing field.

As a result, cities can transform into drivers of global economic convergence in living standards.

In the past three decades, the world has experienced a global convergence between countries, mainly due to increased international trade, advancements in technology, and economic integration.

However, these same factors have led to a relatively new phase of inequality seen in the 21st century. Works by Atkinson, Piketty, and Saez (2011) and Lakner and Milanovic (2016) have depicted a world suffering from inequality within countries, characterized by disparities between “gainers” and “losers” in the globalized economy.

People have proposed multiple explanations for this, including skill-biased technological change, increased automation, and outsourcing of jobs to regions with cheaper labor—to name a few. Perhaps somewhat overlooked are the large disparities between people living within the cities themselves.

Why cities? Rapid urbanization and severe intracity inequality are the two primary reasons policymakers should focus on cities when thinking about how to tackle the broader issue of inequality.

According to the World Urbanization Report, 55 percent of the global population resides in urban areas—an increase from 30 percent in 1950. The global urbanized population is projected to increase even further, to 68 percent, by 2050 (UN 2018).

In addition, the UN Population Division reports that “urbanization has been faster in some less developed regions compared to historical trends in the more developed regions” (UN DESA 2018. The convergence in the growth of urbanization, between developing and advanced economies, also suggests that the problems of cities increasingly affect countries at all income levels.

In addition to rapid urbanization, cities have become a locus of the most severe inequality we see today. A 2014 article by Kristian Behrens summarizes the issue of inequality within cities.

Behrens shows that within-country Gini indexes are highest as population densities increase and that under current conditions, cities tend to disproportionately reward people in the top income percentiles (Behrens 2014). In addition, cities draw people primarily from the top and bottom of the income distribution.

The global economic restructuring, outlined above, is expected to create more polarized income distribution within countries. This, combined with Behrens’s evidence, suggests that inequality within cities is expected to worsen, under current conditions.

The countries of the world are simultaneously experiencing unprecedented urbanization and severe inequality. While cities are currently the nexus of the worst inequality, there are opportunities to convert them into means for economic convergence.

The concept of “agglomeration economies” is summarized well by Edward Glaeser as the benefits realized from people and firms locating close to one another, in cities and industrial clusters, which are primarily gained through reduced transportation costs (Glaeser 2010).

But some areas in cities are not as well connected as others. This drives disparities between people in metropolitan localities. In order to address this, policymakers must address inequality of access to jobs and services between communities of different income status.

Underinvestment in roads, buses, train lines, and subways can cut off districts within large cities from jobs, education, and services. Higher mobility costs, in the form of longer commute times and lack of affordable transportation, are barriers to the upward mobility of lower-income people in cities.

Local governments and the private sector can work together to improve access to jobs and services by building a better public transportation infrastructure within cities. However, misallocation of both land and public resources worsens conditions for marginalized communities, contributing to intracity inequality.

The 2016 Rio Olympics, which have been heavily criticized for putting the city in an adverse fiscal situation, is as an example of how misallocation of public resources can actually perpetuate inequality in a city. Rio de Janeiro’s bus rapid transit (BRT) system is a designated-lane integrated bus system planned and funded via a public-private partnership.

City officials said that Rio’s BRT was needed to help transport Olympic spectators and will provide long-term rapid and affordable travel for city residents. While Rio’s BRT successfully reduced average transportation costs, its routes served to aggravate inequality between high- and low-income citizens.

An urban planning study conducted by the Fluminese Federal University shows how Rio’s major daily traffic flows run from lower-income neighborhoods (in the north and west) to downtown Rio (South Zone and part of the North Zone), where 60 percent of Rio’s formal employment is concentrated (Johnson 2014).

But, instead of providing lower-income residents access to the city center, the BRT allocates routes to an upper-income residential area. Jobs here are predominantly in the informal sector: not registered with the government, with lower salaries, and without health or other benefits.

Furthermore, the city government cut spending on health and police as a result of going over budget on Olympics expenditures, which worsened the health and safety of the poor.

Rio’s BRT system exemplifies how public infrastructure can be misallocated, without proper planning and an understanding of citizens’ demand for jobs and services. However, when policymakers implement well-planned public infrastructure, it can combat inequality within cities.

Curitiba’s BRT is a well-known example of effective urban planning yielding positive outcomes for city expansion. Planning of the bus line construction was orchestrated by the Institute for Research and Urban Planning of Curitiba in the 1970s.

Funding and implementation were conducted via a public-private-partnership between the Urban Development Agency of Curitiba, and private bus companies that operate the routes. The partnership model allows policymakers to develop creative ways to ease the cost burden of providing public infrastructure.

The result of Curitiba’s plan was a low-cost, fast, and efficient means of transportation, running on green energy, that has operated successfully for 35 years. A diagram from a 2010 World Resources Institute report shows that the integrated transit system provides a means for citizens in all areas of the expanding city to access all parts of it.

However, despite its initial success, even Curitiba’s sustainable transit system faces difficulties. A 2012 CityLab article says that in recent years, the city has failed to integrate its growing suburbs into its BRT system (Halais 2012).

As a result, low-income residents are cut off while upper-income residents switch to cars—an inconvenience for everyone that harms the poor more severely. Curitiba’s example shows that policymakers require a constant and proactive awareness of cities’ changing needs.

With available economic data and the implementation of origin-destination surveys, we can better understand where populations need to be connected and their demands for particular services.

An efficient way to tackle inequality is to address lack of mobility in cities, which drives unequal access to jobs, education, and services. Improving access to public infrastructure allows people of all income levels to benefit from the agglomeration effects of living in an urban area.

Well-planned public transportation systems bring cities closer to this goal through better access for low-income populations to jobs, schools, and hospitals in the city center. Thus, growing cities can serve as sources of economic convergence rather than divergence.

Public transportation not only helps lower inequality, it also helps reduce cities’ carbon footprint. As many megacities begin to suffer the ill effects of heavy pollution, policy that addresses both inequality and sustainability would be welcome.

*Following a global essay competition for graduate students on how best to tackle inequality, Tarik Gooptu’s submission was selected as the runner-up. To learn of future Finance & Development ( F&D) essay competitions, sign up for the newsletter here. F&D is a publication of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The post Tackling Inequality: A Focus on Cities can Improve Upward Economic Mobility appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Tarik Gooptu is in his second and final year of the master’s of philosophy in economics at the University of Oxford. Originally from Washington, DC, he received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan in economics and political science*.

The post Tackling Inequality: A Focus on Cities can Improve Upward Economic Mobility appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Credit: Yavuz Sariyildiz, 2012 CGAP Photo Contest

By Yasmin Bin-Humam
WASHINGTON DC, Jul 31 2019 (IPS)

How do financial services providers (FSPs) shape gender norms that restrict or expand women’s access to financial services? In more ways than you might think, and there are good reasons why FSPs should be aware of this.

From a business standpoint, social norms shape the demand dynamics of a customer base and determine the effectiveness of marketing campaigns and channels. When norms discourage women from using financial services, they close off a huge potential market for FSPs.

The 2017 Findex shows that in Turkey, where CGAP is researching gender norms that affect women’s financial lives, only 53 percent of women over age 15 have an account at a financial institution compared with 82 percent of men.

That’s roughly 14.6 million women who don’t have accounts, and each one is a potential customer.

Our qualitative interviews of over 90 men and women and a host of providers and NGOs have revealed a number of social norms that likely contribute to this gap, along with some interesting examples of FSPs whose work could help open new female client segments.

One belief that both men and women espoused in many of our interviews is the idea that women are not as financially savvy as men and should consult with their husbands and fathers rather than make financial decisions on their own.

It’s not hard to see how this belief discourages women from having their own financial accounts. When women have safe ways to incrementally demonstrate their financial savvy, it can help shift people away from the belief that there is an innate gender difference.

Ininal is a self-described “bank for the unbanked” in Turkey that is doing interesting work in this regard. Through 20,000 distribution points, including postal outlets and grocery chains, it provides a preloaded payment card that allows customers to store value and shop online, where there are discounts that had been off limits to the unbanked.

The platform has 1.0 million active users who transact at least once per month, 98 percent of whom use an associated mobile wallet to check their balances, transfer money between cards and pay bills.

When we spoke with Ininal CEO Omer Suner, he told us that men compose 73 percent of Ininal’s user base but that the company is working to expand women’s access to its services.

According to Suner, part of the reason why young women have so few accounts is that they are more comfortable relying on their fathers’ accounts. However, transaction data show that women are increasingly obtaining their own cards and topping them off with money from their fathers’ accounts, rather than directly using their fathers’ cards.

Suner wants to encourage more women to obtain their own prepaid cards as a way of managing their finances independently. He hopes that upcoming marketing campaigns targeting women’s financial independence and accountability will deepen women’s engagement with Ininal’s platform and shift perceptions, while broadening the company’s reach.

Another social norm CGAP encountered in our interviews is the belief that women should not run large businesses because doing so interferes with their primary responsibility of managing the household.

A common phenomenon in social norms is that people conform to how they perceive (or misperceive) society at large to behave. For example, if there is a perception that nobody is recycling, people are less likely to recycle.

But if people start seeing others recycle, they are more likely to follow suit. The same principle applies with women’s financial inclusion. If FSPs give visibility to women who are breaking the mold and redefining their roles, they can crowd in more women entrepreneurs and generate new customers in the process.

Some providers are running campaigns that could have this effect. TEB Bank’s Women’s Banking Program recently ran a social media campaign around the popular catch phrase, “What will people say,” to inspire more women to pursue their dreams. It featured ambitious business women who sought to grow their businesses and highlighted how they stood fast despite the doubt others had in them.

KAGIDER, the Women Entrepreneurs Association of Turkey, provides another example. When it paired women entrepreneurs with female mentors, the entrepreneurs’ business grew 68 percent and hired more employees, in large part because mentees were inspired by their mentors’ success.

In addition to perception correction, some private-sector players provide products and services that allow workarounds to norms-based barriers. Opening a brick-and-mortar business requires a lot of capital, and women often struggle to come up with the capital because they don’t own property that they can leverage as collateral.

Running a store also requires particular opening hours and engagement with men outside of the family, which pose additional challenges for women. However, starting an online company requires lower startup costs and opens far-flung markets that were previously inaccessible at flexible hours. It also enables women to work from home and engage less directly with male clients.

Iyzico, a company that provides digital payments solutions to corporate and personal sellers, has seen an increasing proportion of female entrepreneurs using its technology.

The number of female merchants using Iyzico has increased more than 10-fold since 2016 and now constitutes 20 percent of the company’s business. The tools provided by Iyzico also positively impact women-owned businesses.

The average revenue generated by businesses owned by women is roughly double that of businesses owned by men. A quick glance at the Turkish fintech ecosystem map reveals that other firms are providing all manner of services that facilitate access to capital and markets and allow new business models to emerge.

Many providers do not actively take into account the constraints and barriers that women face when designing their financial services because they do not see the business case for serving women.

But as these examples show, some providers are helping to increase women’s demand for financial services and are enabling women to seize new opportunities. The more providers that take such approaches, the more we will see the needle move on women’s financial inclusion.

The post Social Norms & Women’s Access to Financial Services appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Yasmin Bin-Humam is a Financial Sector Specialist, Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP), an independent think tank dedicated to financial inclusion.

The post Social Norms & Women’s Access to Financial Services appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Tanzania police say that investigative journalist Erick Kabendera is being investigated over his citizenship status. Courtesy: Amnesty International

By Committee to Protect Journalists
NAIROBI, Jul 31 2019 (IPS)

The Committee to Protect Journalists today called on Tanzanian authorities to immediately release freelance journalist Erick Kabendera, whom police said is being investigated over his citizenship status.

Dar es Salaam police chief Lazaro Mambosasa said at a press conference today that Kabendera was in custody and that police arrested him after the journalist failed to obey a summons. Mambosasa said that Kabendera was being questioned about his citizenship and that police were working with immigration officials. Police yesterday denied knowledge of Kabendera’s case after the journalist was taken from his home by a group of men who refused to identify themselves, according to reports and CPJ research.

One of the journalist’s relatives, who spoke with CPJ on condition of anonymity because of safety concerns, said that the citizenship investigation was surprising because authorities had investigated his status before and “cleared him.” In 2013 authorities terminated a similar investigation into the journalist and his parents, calling it “ill-advised” and stating that the family’s citizenship was not questionable, according to a report by the privately-owned publication, The Citizen. In a blog post, Kabendera linked the 2013 investigation to attempts to muzzle him. The Citizen reported last year on several cases of authorities investigating the citizenship of government critics.

The relative said that no summons was issued and told CPJ they believe the arrest is in retaliation for Kabendera’s journalism, which has been unflinching in its assessment of President John Magufuli’s government.

“This rehashing of discredited claims about Erick Kabendera’s citizenship appear to be nothing more than a ploy by the Tanzanian authorities to justify their actions after public outcry over the manner in which the journalist was detained,” said CPJ Sub-Saharan Africa Representative Muthoki Mumo. “Kabendera should be released immediately and this sham of an investigation terminated. Tanzanian authorities must stop harassing their critics.”

At the press conference this afternoon, Mambosasa said that Kabendera was being held at Central police station in Dar es Salaam. When family, colleagues, and lawyers tried to visit the journalist this evening, they were told he was not at the station and that they could not see him until tomorrow, Jones Sendodo, a lawyer affiliated with the Tanzania Human Rights Defenders Coalition and who went to the station, told CPJ. The coalition today filed a bail application that will be heard on August 1, according to Watetezi TV, which is associated with the coalition.

Tanzanian Inspector General of Police Simon Sirro and Mambosasa were unreachable on their phones today. CPJ’s messages asking for comment, sent this evening, went unanswered.

Kabendera has reported for several regional and international publications, including the British newspaper The Guardian and the website African Arguments. His most recent reporting in the regional weekly The East African covered alleged divisions in Tanzania’s ruling party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi, amid alleged plots within the party to block Magufuli from running for a second term.

Press freedom has drastically deteriorated in Magufuli’s Tanzania. CPJ has documented the use of suspensions, restrictive legislation, and intimidation to muzzle journalists. The freelance journalist Azory Gwanda went missing in 2017 and the government has yet to provide a credible accounting of his whereabouts. When asked about Gwanda today, Mambosasa told journalists that he could not provide details because it was necessary to keep investigations “secret” to protect evidence before it was brought to a court.

Related Articles

• Unidentified Men Take Erick Kabendera from Tanzanian Home
• **UPDATE**Investigative Journalist Erick Kabendera Arrested

The post Tanzania Detains Freelancer Kabendera over ‘Citizenship’ appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Raibari Bewa standing near the toilet, bathroom unit and collecting water from the third tap in Dudukaguda village, in Thuamul Rampur block, Kalahandi district of Odisha. On the walls, details of Swachh Bharat Mission benefits availed by her in Odia | Picture courtesy: Ajaya Behera

By Liby Johnson
BHUBANESWAR, Odisha, India, Jul 30 2019 (IPS)

Research and experience across more than two decades in rural Odisha, India, show that an effective rural sanitation model requires both financial assistance and an integrated water supply.

There are studies and field reports that have analysed the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) in terms of coverage and use of toilets in rural India. The official government survey, the NARSS 2018-19, shows that 93 percent of rural households have access to a toilet and 96 percent of those having a toilet use them. Critiques of the survey point out the contradictions between NARSS and micro-level assessments in different parts of India. Other studies point out issues related to how comprehensive the approach to sanitation needs to be, if SBM is to truly address the large scale problems of ill-health, malnutrition, and poor quality of life caused by poor sanitation practices.

The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation has already issued guidelines for follow-up components, such as the ‘Advisory on ODF Sustainability interventions‘. It is quite likely that with the Prime Minister and his government taking charge for the second term, the sustainability of the first generation SBM efforts will be given high priority. In this context, it is pertinent to throw light on some micro–level issues, based on more than two decades of experience in rural Odisha.

 

A rural sanitation model that works

Gram Vikas, the organisation I lead, started its work in rural sanitation in the year 1994. Our model of 100 percent coverage of all households in a village, all of them building and using household level toilets and a bathing room with piped water supply, has been recognised as a best practice nationally and globally.

Infrastructure alone is insufficient to sustain health benefits. Additional efforts are needed to motivate people to adopt safe sanitation practices...There are other aspects of personal hygiene and sanitation, including personal habits, disposal of child faeces, and menstrual hygiene; these need to be addressed by demonstrating workable models, accompanied by education

The integrated water, sanitation, and hygiene (WSH) intervention that we support rural communities with, is built on the following principles:

• Participation of 100 percent of the habitation’s households; it is all, or none.
• Cost sharing by the household, partially towards construction of the facilities, and fully for operations and maintenance.
• Ownership and management by a village water and sanitation committee, consisting of representatives of all sections in the village.
• A sanitation corpus fund built from a one-time contribution by all, towards providing cash incentives for future families in the village to build toilets and bathing rooms (ensuring 100 percent coverage at all times).
• A maintenance fund through regular household fee collection, for maintenance of the piped water supply system.

In 25 years (up to March 2019), the Gram Vikas WSH model has been implemented in more than 1,400 villages, covering close to 90,000 households. The villages are financed primarily through the sanitation and rural drinking water schemes of the government, and Gram Vikas has mobilised private resources to fill in gaps.

 

What we learnt

Over the past two decades, working with rural communities of different types, we have realised that bringing about attitudinal and behaviour changes towards safe sanitation is not easy. When we began in the mid-1990s, saying that every house in the village will have toilets, bathing rooms, and piped water, most people laughed.

Between 1994 and 1999, we could cover only 30 villages—this resulted from our own efforts at motivating people, and not any felt desire on their part. Then started the gradual process of change—fathers of unmarried girls motivating future sons-in-laws’ village elders to take up the sanitation project; women taking the lead to convince their men to build toilets, and even stopping cooking for a day or two to make their husbands see reason; migrants who worked outside Odisha coming back to their own villages and motivating their parents, and so on.

 

When it comes to rural sanitation, government financial assistance matters  

Between 1999 and 2007, the government’s support to sanitation, as part of the then newly launched Total Sanitation Campaign, was INR 300 per household, for below poverty line families. Support for community-led, piped water supply projects came much later, in the form of Swajaldhara in 2003.

The prevalent thinking among policy makers in the early 2000s was that financial incentives were not necessary to promote rural sanitation. This was based on the limited success of the subsidy-led Central Rural Sanitation Programme, that ran between 1986 and 1998.

Financial incentives to rural households for building toilets is more than a subsidy, it’s about society meeting part of the costs of helping rural communities build a better life. To compare, urban dwellers who may have built their own household toilets, do not pay anything for removing the human waste from their premises; municipal governments ensure sewage lines and treatment plants. The cost of this (which is borne by the government) is not seen as a subsidy. And yet, the upfront payment made to rural households to help build toilets is looked down upon as wasteful expenditure.

In 2011, the policy moved to a higher level of financial incentives to rural households for constructing individual household latrines, mostly likely in recognition of the fact that rural households needed the financial incentive as motivation to change sanitation behaviours. But today, with statistics showing 93 percent or more coverage of toilets, the policy prescription is likely to move to the pre-2011 phase–big financial incentives are not needed for building rural household toilets.

Our experience has taught us that nothing can be further from the truth. First, actual coverage of usable toilets is likely much less than what the numbers show. Second, households will need support for repairs and upgradation of the already built latrines. In addition, there are two categories for whom the financial assistance must continue: those who, for various reasons, have not constructed latrines so far; and new households that have come up in villages that have already been declared open defecation free (ODF).

 

Availability of water in the toilet is critical to encouraging use and maintenance of the facility 

In most cases, where water is not available in proximity, the load on women to carry water has increased. A pour-flush latrine, the type mostly preferred, requires at least 12 litres of water per use. With 4-5 members in the household, the minimum daily requirement becomes about 60 litres, forcing women to collect at least three times the water they would otherwise collect. We have observed that without water in the household premises, women’s water carrying load increases to more than twice the pre-latrine times.

The addition of a bathing room, affords women more privacy, and a better way to keep themselves clean and hygienic. In most villages we have worked with, women especially, equate this part of their physical quality of life to what people in the city enjoy.

During the last few years, financial allocation for rural water supply has decreased. While the allocation to drinking water has reduced from 87 percent (2009-10) to 31 percent (2018-19), the allocation to rural sanitation has increased from 13 percent to 69 percent in the same period. This is definitely not a desirable situation, as noted by many.

 

Mainstreaming the community-owned and managed method of rural water supply will ensure equitable distribution 

Doing this, rather than pushing for large water supply projects across many villages, will give rural communities and local governments greater control over managing their resources and meeting the needs of every household in an equitable manner. The Swajal programme of the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, which talks about village level, community-based water projects, is a step in the right direction. Much greater push is needed by the central government to ensure that the state-level apparatus moves to a more enabling and empowering approach in addressing rural drinking water needs.

 

A woman collects the drinking water from the third tap in Simlipadar village in Thuamul Rampur, Kalahandi | Picture courtesy: Ajaya Behera

 

Second generation challenges

The water and sanitation infrastructure, when first built, contributes to a substantial decrease in water-borne diseases in villages. These are borne out of several studies conducted in villages in Odisha.

After the initial round of benefits, we find that the infrastructure alone is insufficient to sustain health benefits. Additional efforts are needed to motivate people to adopt safe sanitation practices. The ensuing issues have been highlighted by many. For instance, changing long-standing beliefs and attitudes related to toilet use requires intensive hand holding, particularly for older people. There are other aspects of personal hygiene and sanitation, including personal habits, disposal of child faeces, and menstrual hygiene; these need to be addressed by demonstrating workable models, accompanied by education.

From Gram Vikas’ experience in Odisha, we have been able to enumerate several challenges that need to be addressed. Even when piped drinking water exists, households prefer to store drinking water. We have found that handling of stored drinking water is an area that needs better education.

Disposal of child faeces, especially by mothers who do not think the child’s faecal matter is harmful, is another area of concern. We are also coming across new forms of discrimination in households, where menstruating women are not allowed to use the toilets and bathrooms.

While issues related to personal hygiene and washing hands with soap are already quite widely discussed, the next set of challenges relate to safe disposal and/or managing liquid and solid waste at the household and community level.

 

A charter of demands

We hope that the next iteration of Swachh Bharat Mission will truly lead to a Swachh Bharat. Based on our experience, we would like to draw the following charter of demands:
.

1. Strengthen the ways of providing household sanitation infrastructure

• Add a bathing room component to the design and costing provided in the national guidelines; increase financial support per household to INR 18,000 for new entrants; allow additional funding of INR 6,000 per household for those wanting to add a bathroom to their existing toilets. 
• Create provisions for repair or upgradation of toilets built, till 2018; provide for additional assistance to households whose toilets were built by contractors without involvement of the household. 
• Provide financial assistance for new households in villages already declared ODF. 
• Correct errors in the baseline of deserving households. 

2. Integrate piped water supply with sanitation at the household level, and facilitate greater community control over rural drinking water projects

• Enlarge the scope for Swajal scheme by allocating more funds. 
• Where ground water availability challenges dictate building of larger projects, it will make sense to separate the pumping and supply, from household distribution of water. The former could be done centrally for a large number of villages, while the latter could be managed by the communities at their level.
• Make individual household–level piped water supply the standard design principle for rural water supply projects. 
• Build community capacities to manage groundwater resources and undertake watershed and springshed interventions. 
• Integrate water quality management as a community–level initiative, by demystifying testing technologies, and creating a wider network of testing laboratories. 

3. Deepen and integrate WSH interventions for better health and nutrition outcomes at the community-level

• Incentivise states to achieve stronger schematic and financial convergence between National Health Mission and the Integrated Child Development Services at the intermediate and gram panchayat level.  

4. Create a multi-stakeholder institutional platform to deepen and sustain SBM across rural India

• Incentivise states to enable Panchayati Raj Institutions to play a greater role in the SBM process.
• Allow for more active participation of civil society organisations as facilitators and implementors, to support rural community–based institutions to adopt sustainable sanitation interventions. Provide financial incentives to such organisations based on outputs and outcomes.

 

Liby Johnson is the executive director of Gram Vikas, Odisha

 

This story was originally published by India Development Review (IDR)

The post A Rural Sanitation Model That Works appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM / ROME, Jul 30 2019 (IPS)

Sometime in the summer of 1974, I was leaning against the gunwale of the ferry between Calais and Dover, watching the moonlight streaming dark waters. When I turned to the left I found that a Chinese lady also looked out over the calm sea. What she told me changed my world view.

In 1950, Sweden became the first “Western” nation to acknowledge the People´s Republic of China (PRC) and during the following decades this small country came to enjoy a ”favoured status” among PRC leaders. As a young man, after reading Swedish translations of Tales from the Swamps and The journey to the West, I had become fascinated by Chinese culture. At the time, the Swedish press and many of my teachers spoke enthusiastically about the Cultural Revolution, but I did not as so many of my fellow students join the Swedish-Chinese Friendship Association with the hope of visiting China.

By the gunwale, the Chinese lady now told me: ”Most of you Europeans have a rosy view of China.” I wondered: ”How come? I don´t know much about your country.” She smiled and answered: ”The People´s Republic is not my country. I´m from Hong Kong where we are cosmopolitans, citizens of the world, not like Mainland Chinese who are isolated and indoctrinated. Their Cultural Revolution, which you seem to admire so much, is a complete disaster.” She continued:

We live in a different world, though far too close to Mainland China. My father is in charge of the police´s dog handlers. One of their tasks is to find corpses that have been washed ashore. Hundreds of trussed and mutilated bodies are by the Pearl River brought down to Hong Kong. It was worse in 1968 and 1969, but they still appear. I´ve heard that mainland Chinese are paid 15 Yuan [USD 2.50] or more for each corpse they fish up from the river. People are killed en masse. Education is neglected, cultural heritage smashed to pieces, they burn thousand-years old manuscripts and mock the elderly.

That short meeting made me suspicious of acclaims and condemnations of entire nations. After returning to Sweden I read Simon Ley´s Chinese Shadows and understood that unreserved tributes to the ”Chinese system” offered by most members of the Swedish press and authors like Snow, Myrdal, and Suyin had to be read with caution. Later on, I met Chinese dissidents at Lund University and came to realize that the Chinese lady had told me the truth. It is estimated that between 750,000 and 1.5 million people were killed during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1974).1 Millions more had been persecuted and forcibly displaced, while cultural and religious sites and artifacts were deliberately destroyed.

Much has changed since then, though when I now read about Hong Kong and hundreds of thousands of protesters crowding its streets I am reminded of the meeting at the Calais-Dover ferry. Protests were triggered by a proposed bill allowing for extradition of lawbreakers from Hong Kong to Mainland China, though they are now increasingly addressing concerns about Hong Kong´s independent staus. Hong Kong´s importance within the enormous PRC is shrinking. When Great Britain in 1997 handed over Hong Kong to China it´s GDP constituted around 20 percent of PRC´s economy, while it now is less than 3 percent.2 The economic growth of PRC has been extraordinary and it is now the world´s second-largest economy with a GDP at USD13.6 trillion, after the United States at USD20.4 trillion.3 Such power and wealth inspire PRC´s increasing efforts to make its mark as a sovereign superpower – economically, politically and culturally. When Xi Jinping in 2012 became Secretary-General of China’s Communist Party he launched a vision called The Chinese Dream. During the Party´s 19th Congress in 2017, Xi Jinping declared:

The mindset of the Chinese people has changed, from passivity to taking the initiative.
[…] We should pursue the Belt and Road Initiative as a priority [making] new ground by opening China further through links running eastward and westward, across land and over sea.4

The Belt and Road Initiative has, alongside ecological awareness and anti-corruption, become Xi Jinping’s signature project. Newly constructed, or improved, roads, ports, and railways will benefit China financially and connect it more closely with the rest of the world. A new Silk Road across Asia will be complemented with sea connections via the Malacca Strait, the coasts of Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and East Africa and across the Red Sea, as well as the Arctic Sea.

Hong Kong remains a key hub for investment in and out of China, though it is gradually losing its unique position, both financially and ideologically. Hong Kong has its own legal system and its civil rights include freedom of assembly and free speech. However, not all the 70 members of the territory’s Legislative Council are directly chosen by Hong Kong’s voters, most seats are occupied by pro-Beijing lawmakers.5

When Hong Kong was returned to China it was done under a principle called “one country, two systems”, meaning that it would enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in foreign and defense affairs. Most people in Hong Kong are ethnic Chinese, though a majority of them do not identify themselves as such, at least not in the manner of the Government of PRC, which proclaims that all people of Chinese lineage are Chinese citizens, even after renouncing their Chinese citizenship. In his 2017 speech Xi Jinping declared:

Blood is thicker than water. […]Any separatist activity is certain to meet with the resolute opposition of the Chinese people. […] We will never allow anyone, any organization, or any political party, at any time or in any form, to separate any part of Chinese territory from China! China will never pursue development at the expense of others’ interests, but nor will China ever give up its legitimate rights and interests. No one should expect us to swallow anything that undermines our interests. […] We must rigorously protect against and take resolute measures to combat all acts of infiltration, subversion, and sabotage, as well as violent and terrorist activities, ethnic separatist activities, and religious extremist activities.6

In spite of Bejing´s insistence that it honours “one country, two systems” most Hong Kong citizens now fear that they might lose much of their autonomy. A fear fuelled by, among other concerns, the disappearance of five Hong Kong booksellers/publishers, who eventually re-emerged in custody in China. This affair also affected the hitherto friendly relationship between Sweden and China. One of the booksellers was namely the Swedish citizen Gui Minhai, who in 1988 came to Sweden as a twenty-five-year-old exchange student. After the massacre in Tiananmen Square, he applied for political asylum and eventually became a Swedish citizen. In 2012, Gui Minhai was one of the founders of Mighty Current, which in Hong Kong published serious sociological studies, as well as sensational stories about the debauched private lives of influential Chinese Communist leaders. In 2014, Mighty Current bought a bookstore and began to sell regime-critical literature, attracting customers from mainland China.

17 October 2015, Chinese agents broke into Gui Minhai´s summer residence in Bangkok and brought him to PRC, where he was imprisoned. Gui Minhais´s family alerted Swedish authorities but it took more than four months before Swedish representatives were allowed to visit Gui Minhai in prison. He then declared that he out of his own free will had severed his ties with Sweden and did not need any Swedish support, a statement he repeated four days later on the Hong Kong-based Phoenix Television. Seven months later, Swedish representatives were again allowed to visit Gui Minhai and he once more declined their help. However, after being transferred to house-arrest in his original hometown, Ningbo, Minhai apparently maintained contacts with Swedish authorities and when he by two Swedish diplomats in January 2018 was brought to a medical exam in Beijing (he suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) Minhai was forcibly abducted from the train by plain-clothes police officers.

It has been assumed that Chinese reluctance to release Gui Minhai, even after public confessions and the fact that he suffers from a deadly disease, might be the sensitive content of a book he was writing and planned to publish, The Collapse of Xi Jinping in 2017, which is said to contain damaging information about Xi Jinping´s private life.

Swedish activists accuse their government of a disgraceful submission under PRC´s economic power. In February this year, Sweden´s ambassador to China, Anna Lindstedt, invited Minhai´s daughter Angela Gui – who was born in Sweden, is a Swedish citizen and studies in the U.K. – to Stockholm. Lindstedt told Angela that she was going to meet with Chinese businessmen who had ”a new approach” to her father´s case. At a hotel in Stockholm Angela was offered a Chinese visa and an excellent job opportunty in PRC, apparently a means to silence her advocacy for her father´s release. Angela refused to co-operate7 and when the meeting was exposed in the press it was revealed that Lindstedt had acted without approval from the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and she was eventually replaced as ambassador.

The employment of approximately 60,000 Swedes is currently, directly or indirectly, dependent on Chinese companies. During the first half of 2018, Chinese companies invested USD 3.5 billion in Sweden – the highest foreign investment in a European nation. For obvious reasons, the Swedish Government is cautious when it comes to upsetting the feelings of the rulers in Bejing and it is a pity that such concerns make it reluctant to criticize PRC´s abuse of human rights.8 However, let us hope that PRC´s recent openness to the world, it´s massive investments in the development of poor nations and great interest in ecological issues eventually will be accompanied by an acceptance of free speech and support of human rights, not only globally, but also within PRC and Hong Kong.

1 MacFarquhar, Roderick and Michael Schoenhals (2006) Mao´s Last Revolution. Harvard University Press, p. 262.
2 http://www.ejinsight.com/20170609-hk-versus-china-gdp-a-sobering-reality/
3 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ny.gdp.mktp.cd
4 Xi Jinping (2017) Report delivered at the 19th CPC National Congress, October 18. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/19thcpcnationalcongress/2017-11/04/content_34115212.htm
5 35 representatives are chosen by direct votation in Hong Kong´s five territories, while 35 members are designated by ”trade-based funcional consituencies”, special interest groups who generally have commercial ties with Mainland China.
6 Xi Jinping (2017)
7 https://medium.com/@angela_62804/damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-dont-i-wont-1a09ba853018
8 Much of the information in this article derives from a publication from Swedish PEN: Alfredsson Malmros, Elin (2019) Dygnet runt, årets alla dagar: Gui Minhai i det ofria Kina. Stockholm: Svenska PEN.

Jan Lundius holds a PhD. on History of Religion from Lund University and has served as a development expert, researcher and advisor at SIDA, UNESCO, FAO and other international organisations.

The post Free Speech and the Hong Kong Protests appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The enforcement of the online content regulations has scared people from stating their opinions online in Tanzania. Credit: Erick Kabendera/IPS

By IPS Correspondents
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa, Jul 30 2019 (IPS)

Freelancer Erick Kabendera was reportedly arrested from his home in Mbweni, Dar es Salaam, Tanziana yesterday afternoon by unknown men.

Kabendera who has been a correspondent reporting mostly on development issues for IPS since 2012, freelances as a journalist for local and international media, including The Guardian.

This morning, another colleague, who spoke to IPS on the condition of anonymity stated that while rumours had circulated yesterday that Kabendera had been abducted, this was not the case.

“He is being held by the police for interrogation. It was rumoured on Monday that he had been abducted by unknown people. Police in Dar es Salaam have confirmed that he is being held at the Central Police station. No details so far. Updates will follow.”

A call to Dar es Salaam police chief Lazaro Mambosasa by IPS was cut off this morning and subsequent calls did not connect.

Originally news of his arrest was unclear, with The Citizen newspaper reporting that 6 men claiming to be police officers who the paper reported refused to identify themselves, entered his home wanting to search it. 

Another colleague of Kabendera confirmed to IPS last night that the investigative journalist had been arrested.

“Police confirmed that he is in police custody for interrogation,” the source who did not want to be named stated.

According to @millardayo Kinondoni Regional Police Commander Mussa Taibu confirmed this also. 

Kamanda Jeshi la Polisi Kinondoni Mussa Taibu amesema ni kweli Jeshi la Polisi linamshikilia Mwandishi Erick Kabendera na yupo anahojiwa ila kuhusu kuachiwa itategemea baada ya kumaliza kumhoji.#MillardAyoUPDATES pic.twitter.com/fqMutqAgcf

— millardayo (@millardayo) July 29, 2019

However, the Committee to Protect Journalists reported that, “CPJ could not confirm that the journalist was detained by police. A call late today to the police inspector general Simon Sirro went unanswered.”

Meanwhile Kabendera’s colleague stated he had no knowledge of the charges against Kabendera but said that police have said they would release him after the interrogation and after Kabendera’s residence was searched.

The source said that he was unable to reach Kabendera’s family by phone but had been told by others who had gone to the family home after hearing the news that his family was safe. It was reported by The Citizen that Kabendera’s and his wife’s cell phones were confiscated by the men and that the house line had reportedly been severed.

When asked what he thought the charges against Kabendera are, the source stated, “No one knows. Though it is well known that he is an investigative journalist working as a freelancer both locally and internationally.”

CPJ Sub-Saharan Africa Representative Muthoki Mumo said: “Authorities must immediately disclose if they are holding Erick Kabendera, and for what reason, and ensure the journalist is returned safely to his family.”

On Kabendera’s Twitter feed he reposted a tweet where the BBC’s chief international correspondent Lyse Doucet explained that “journalism is a profession which depends on kindness. The kindness of strangers who open their hearts and their homes to us.”

 

The BBC’s chief international correspondent @bbclysedoucet explains why kindness is so important to journalism.

These aren’t just words I‘ve been lucky to be the recipient of hers first hand. pic.twitter.com/z93AB758RC

— Megha Mohan (@meghamohan) July 29, 2018

In May, he told IPS editor Nalisha Adams that he had returned to school and was completing his MA in International Political Economy at the London School of Economics.

IPS has registered a strong protest against the abduction of one of its journalists. We are expecting the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and human rights organisations worldwide to join us in a joint appeal for Kabendera’s safe return. Meanwhile, the IPS family extends its support for his family in this hour of need.

In solidarity Kabendera’s colleagues at IPS from across Africa and the globe have called for his release and transparency in the process. 

** This story has been updated to include information that Kabendera was arrested by police and not abducted.

Related Articles

• When Being ‘Offensive’ or ‘Morally Improper’ Online Carries an Indeterminate Jail Sentence in East Africa

The post **UPDATE**Investigative Journalist Erick Kabendera Arrested appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Peter Paul van de Wijs
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, Jul 30 2019 (IPS)

We all know that the UN Sustainable Development Goals are ambitious and will take huge collaborative and international effort to achieve. Government action alone is not enough. So how can the private sector actively contribute – and what can be done to ramp up the participation of businesses around the world?

Finding answers to these questions is at the heart of a new initiative, launched this month by GRI, the sustainability reporting standard setter, and global power company Enel. Titled ‘Driving corporate action towards accomplishing the SDGs’, it will seek solutions by engaging businesses, policy makers and NGOs.

The project links two of the requirements that apply to all member states under the SDGs. These are to encourage companies to adopt sustainable practices and report sustainability information (set out within goal 12); and strengthening global partnerships between the private sector, government and civil society (goal 17).

From the inception of the SDGs, GRI has championed the participation of the private sector in measuring and achieving progress. In fact, we believe this is a crucial contributing factor to the overall success of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

That’s because, through engaging in reporting on the SDGs and embedding this within corporate disclosures, businesses are encouraged to adopt more sustainable ways of working. Yet we need to encourage more companies to get on board. While there are good examples from around the world, a complete picture is lacking. So, more needs to be done to strengthen collaboration and translate these partnerships into measurable impact.

Agreement on the pressing need to address these issues led to the partnership between GRI and Enel, with phase one now underway. At the center of this work are online collaboration forums where anyone can sign up to participate, free of charge. Each of these 90-minute sessions will be led by a diverse panel of experts, convened by GRI and Enel.

The forums will get under the skin of what is already happening to support business engagement in the SDGs – and where more help is needed. Taking place at times that accommodate those in different time zones, we are seeking widespread and international participation.

The online sessions will take place in October and November and are hosted by insights and strategy consultancy GlobeScan. The findings will feed into a series of regional events in 2020.

#ActNow for a better future for all

Participants in the forums will be asked to share their perspectives on the current state of affairs and help develop a vision on how companies and governments should work together.
Questions to be addressed will include:

• • • How has reporting by the private sector enhanced the implementation of the SDGs?

 

• • • What’s the role of the SDGs in contributing to business strategy?

 

• • • Has reporting increased the understanding of the opportunities and threats related to the topics covered by the SDGs?

 

• • How has involvement by businesses in the SDGs led to new partnerships or different ways of working?

Following each of the forums, a report covering the main outputs will be published so that a wider audience can engage in the trends, initiatives and challenges that have been discussed – with the aim of inspiring others to get involved.

Based on these reports, phase two of the project will see four regional events taking place around the world next year, where key findings from the research will be shared. These will focus on practical learning and action that encourage companies to engage in SDG reporting and make the transition to more sustainable business models by engaging in partnerships and collaboration.

All of this activity builds up to the pivotal 2020 UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, which will mark the five-year milestone for the SDGs when the world will take stock of progress made.

What is clear is that without the involvement of an engaged private sector, the SDGs will fall short. There is therefore both an urgent opportunity and necessity to increase the momentum and stimulate greater business engagement in the SDGs. That is why we need as many organizations as possible to get involved in the project.

At its heart, this work is about understanding how businesses, governments and other organizations each can play their part in contributing towards the success of the SDGs. Ultimately, this can help us navigate the route to a more sustainable future, which will benefit companies, communities and the planet.

The post Businesses Crucial to the Success of SDGs appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Peter Paul van de Wijs is Chief External Affairs Officer for Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the independent international organizations that helps businesses and other organizations understand and report their sustainability impacts.

The post Businesses Crucial to the Success of SDGs appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Anis Chowdhury and Jomo Kwame Sundaram
SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, Jul 30 2019 (IPS)

July 2019 saw the 75th anniversary of the historic conference of 44 countries held at the Bretton Woods (BW) resort in New Hampshire during July 1-22, 1944.

Conference
At BW, John Maynard Keynes, representing the UK, and Harry Dexter White, for the USA, both sought a new international monetary system following the Great Depression, which many attributed to the functioning of the gold standard before World War II.

Anis Chowdhury

Keynes wanted a powerful global central bank, to be called the Clearing Union, and a new international reserve currency, ‘bancor’, while White favoured a more modest lending fund and a greater role for the US dollar, instead of a new currency. The new BW arrangements were built around White’s plan, but he went into oblivion following accusations within the US administration of being a Soviet agent.

The Soviet Union, which had participated in the creation of the BW institutions (BWIs), was invited to be one of the ‘big five’ in the post-war governance system, mirroring the United Nations Security Council, but decided not to join.

Institutions
The principal goals of the two BWIs were to create conditions for a lasting peace by promoting international economic growth and stability for all by fashioning a new international monetary system with stable currencies, an efficient foreign exchange system and without competitive currency devaluations.

The BW conference created the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD). Hence, the IMF and the World Bank (WB) Group, including the IBRD, its largest part, are referred to as the BWIs.

The IMF would monitor exchange rates and lend reserve currencies, typically US dollars, to countries facing temporary balance of payments difficulties, while the IBRD would provide credit and other assistance to rebuild economies devastated by World War II, and to develop poor countries in the post-colonial world economy.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Keynes also wanted a third body, the International Trade Organisation (ITO), to enable, regulate and promote trade, to ensure post-war world economic growth, transformation and stability. But this was later opposed by the US Congress, preferring to continue US protectionism from the 19th century.

Developed country domination
At the outset, the ‘basic vote’, of ‘one country, one vote’, accounted for almost half the total voting rights in the IMF. Over the decades, the ‘basic vote’ share has dropped to an eighth. Remaining voting rights have been determined by a complex formula perpetuating European dominance, thanks to greater intra-European trade over the decades.

As the largest single shareholder, the US dominates the BWIs, with the collective clout of Western Europe. The two agreed that the WB President should be an American, while the IMF would be led by a European, with an American second-in-command.

Despite some modest reforms, BWI governance remains biased towards this North Atlantic alliance, not even reflecting changing realities and emerging economic powers. While Europeans still have a third of IMF votes, China now has 6.09 per cent, Brazil 2.2 per cent and India 2.64 per cent — less than Belgium, Holland and Luxemburg.

Unsurprisingly, regardless of changing rhetoric and claims, policies that serve the interests of developed countries are still promoted by the BWIs, with poorer countries forced to adopt such policies to qualify for credit and other support.

Harmful conditionalities
Both the IMF and the WB have abused their conditionalities to stabilize, liberalize and privatize, resulting in the ‘lost decades’ of the 1980s and 1990s. While reforms were forced on developing countries, ostensibly to accelerate growth, their median per capita income growth was 0.0 per cent during 1980-1998, after 2.5 per cent in 1960-1979.

Developing countries experienced multiple crises due to “deficiencies in the design and execution of the reform strategies”, according to the World Bank’s own evaluation. Without China’s growth, global poverty would have increased significantly after two decades of IMF-WB reforms, while economic inequality has grown in many countries.

IMF mishandling of the 1997-1998 Asian crises is now well documented. The IMF response exacerbated the crisis, especially in Indonesia. Not surprisingly, policymakers in the crisis countries privately claim they will never seek IMF assistance again.

At the height of the Asian crisis, Japan called for an Asian Monetary Fund because the IMF “didn’t know Asia” and “its remedies were likely to do great damage to the Asian economy”, but the proposal was killed due to strong US opposition.

Political interference
The strategic interests of the major powers have influenced the disbursement of BWI financial resources, while regimes seen as hostile to the major powers have been deprived of loans on the pretext that they failed to meet the BWIs’ criteria.

Since their creation, the IMF and the WB have violated international pacts on human and labour rights, and have had few qualms about supporting dictatorships, e.g., in Chile, Brazil, Nicaragua, Congo-Kinshasa, Philippines, Indonesia and Romania, even though these regimes did not meet official criteria and violated human rights.

The WB’s 2018 Doing Business report manipulated Chile’s ranking to discredit the left-leaning government of Michelle Bachelet, in support of conservative billionaire Sebastian Pinera’s successful bid for a second presidency.

When the WB’s then chief economist, Paul Romer, apologized for this blatant political bias, he had to resign. Previously, Joseph Stiglitz had to resign the same post following his criticism of the IMF’s handling of the 1997-1998 Asian crisis. Both received Nobel prizes (Stiglitz in 2001 and Romer in 2018) after their resignations

The post Bretton Woods Institutions: From Solution to Problem appeared first on Inter Press Service.

The post Unidentified Men Take Erick Kabendera from Tanzanian Home appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Katja Iversen
NEW YORK, Jul 29 2019 (IPS)

It’s on all of us to make gender equality a reality – which means harnessing our collective power to build a gender equal world.

By empowering girls and women, realizing sexual and reproductive health and rights, tackling gender-based violence, and confronting the combinations of sexism, misogyny, racism, and colonialism, we can take steps towards true gender equality.

Coming off the heels of the Women Deliver 2019 Conference in Vancouver, we both explore the need to use – and share – power to deliver transformative change for girls and women.

Katja Iversen: At the Women Deliver 2019 Conference we focused on power, and how it can drive – or hinder – progress and change for girls and women, and therefore for all. How will you use your power?

Justin Trudeau: Power is a privilege and a responsibility. Ultimately, the best thing you can do with power is share it. As we saw at Women Deliver, grassroots advocates and activists are creating change on the ground. Young people, like Natasha Wang Mwansa, are not just the leaders of tomorrow, but the leaders of today.

We need to amplify the work they’re doing, pass them the microphone, and make sure there’s a seat at the table for people of diverse identities and perspectives.

Katja Iversen: In the lead up to and during the Women Deliver 2019 Conference, we have seen unprecedented energy and enthusiasm for advancing gender equality. How do we take that energy and commitment and turn it into action? From world leaders and business leaders to advocates and influencers, what is your call to action to keep up the momentum?

Justin Trudeau: At Women Deliver, we announced new steps forward on everything from funding for women’s health and women’s organizations, to support for women entrepreneurs and housing commitments that will benefit women.

We announced that Canada will increase our investment to $1.4 billion to support women and girls’ health globally, positioning us as a leading donor worldwide on comprehensive sexual and reproductive health rights. $700 million of this annual investment is dedicated to sexual and reproductive health rights.

We’re focusing on the most neglected areas of this field. This is a game changer. We welcome other leaders to join us.

Globally, and here at home, we are seeing attacks on women’s rights, whether it’s undermining a woman’s fundamental right to choose, or violence against Indigenous women and girls. We can’t take our foot off the pedal, not even for a moment.

There’s simply too much at stake. We all need to work together to move forward, and to build more sustainable, more inclusive movements. It’s on all of us to make gender equality a reality.

Katja Iversen: Over the last several years we have heard more world leaders and private sector executives make public statements about the importance of gender equality. This is certainly critical, commendable, and encouraging! But we also need to see these leaders “walk the talk” and move toward action.

This is something you have emphasized throughout your administration from appointing a gender equal cabinet to developing gender-responsive federal budgets – both of which are crucial for moving policies and programs to actual impact. What impact have these actions had in Canada and around the world and what will you do next to move the needle for girls and women?

Justin Trudeau: Our government has put gender equality at the heart of everything we do. This means grappling with interlocking issues like sexism and misogyny, racism and colonialism. These challenges are complex and layered.

We won’t always get it right, but we will always keep trying. We know that it’s time to put an end to violence against all women and transgender, non-binary, and two spirit people, which is why we launched the first ever national strategy on gender-based violence.

We know that advancing gender equality hinges on economic equality, too. We will continue to demand that women and men receive equal pay for work of equal value, that everyone has a safe place to live, and that parents can share equally in both the joys and the responsibilities of raising children.

That’s why we introduced historic proactive pay equity legislation, and created more flexible parental leave options. And it’s why we launched a housing strategy where a minimum of 25% specifically supports women, girls, and their families.

There is much more work to do, and Canada is in it for the long haul. We will keep fighting for gender equality and concrete change – not just when it is popular, but always.

Katja Iversen: From driving Canada’s first Feminist International Assistance Policy to establishing the first Gender Equality Advisory Council to a G7 Presidency, you have led the way for political leadership toward gender equality – with an emphasis on improving girls’ and women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Why should world leaders like you prioritize gender equality and women’s right to decide on their own bodies on international agendas and what more do you plan to do? Please provide 1-2 specific examples.

Justin Trudeau: Women don’t have to imagine not being able to access healthcare when they need it. They don’t have to imagine being denied the right to choose what’s best for their health and their future. For far too many people, that’s their reality. And that’s unacceptable.

Governments need to stand with those on the frontlines as partners and as allies. Leaders should prioritize gender equality and women’s right over their own bodies because it makes our countries, our communities, our workplaces, our governments, and our families stronger.

When women are healthy, free to make decisions about their lives, and can equally participate in our economies, we all benefit.

Katja Iversen: From the hallways of power to the main stage of global convenings, what argument have you found to be most effective in converting more people – especially decision makers – to join you as gender equality champions?
Justin Trudeau: Gender equality is not only the right thing to do, but it is also the smart thing to do. It powers our economies, and changes our communities for the better. Everyone should be able to get behind that.

Katja Iversen: You have spoken about raising your sons with an awareness of power dynamics and to act as allies of girls and women. Part of this involves a shift in mindset, from the idea that boys and men are losing power to the idea that power is shared with girls and women, to the benefit of all.

Why is it so important to you and your wife – Mme Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, a Deliver for Good Influencer – to raise your sons as young feminists, and how have you encouraged them to be effective and supportive allies for gender equality?

Justin Trudeau: Sophie and I want to help our kids grow up to be strong allies and empathetic adults, who walk through the world with openness, compassion, and a commitment to justice. That’s why raising our kids as feminists is such a priority for us.

We want our daughter, Ella-Grace, to have the same opportunities as her brothers, Hadrien and Xavier. And we want our sons to escape the pressure to be ‘a particular kind of masculine’ that can be damaging to men and to the people around them.

We want all three of them to be confident in being themselves, to stand up for what is right, and to do so with pride. We try to instill in our children the notion that everyone should be treated equally, and that there’s work left to do so that everyone shares the same rights and freedoms. We hope our children learn that they have a responsibility – and the power – to shape our world for the better.

The post Power is a Privilege & a Responsibility: Q&A with Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

In a special conversation, Katja Iversen, President/CEO of Women Deliver speaks with Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, about Canada's role in taking action for gender equality at home and abroad and our collective and individual responsibility to share power to build a gender equal world.

The post Power is a Privilege & a Responsibility: Q&A with Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada appeared first on Inter Press Service.

OECD

By Annegret Bendiek, Nadine Godehardt, and David Schulze
BERLIN, Jul 29 2019 (IPS)

The geopolitical significance of key digital technologies now takes centre stage in a new global conflict between the US and China. The dispute over the Chinese technology group Huawei exemplifies this situation. 

The US government perceives the Chinese telecom equipment provider as the Trojan horse of a hostile regime that stands for fundamentally different values. That’s why the US insists to show China its limits. But this extends far beyond a traditional American ‘containment’ approach. Instead, the US now pursues an ‘up to here and no further’ policy towards China.

We can detect this in an entire series of recent decisions. They include the signing of President Donald Trump’s executive order on 15 May 2019 to secure information and communication technology and service supply chains; adding Huawei to the sanctions list of the US Department of Commerce on 16 May; and including four more Chinese companies in the supercomputer industry on 21 June.

The confrontation between the US and China over Huawei has taken on a strongly geopolitical dimension. It’s emblematic of a fundamental break with the underlying rationale of a market economy and shows how foreign policy is deliberately conducted by economic pressures.

This basically amounts to an embargo on Chinese companies in the area of critical key technologies. The Chinese government strongly objects to such protectionist measures and interprets the exclusion from the US market as a hostile act directed primarily against its economically and technologically successful development.

As a result, the confrontation between the US and China over Huawei has taken on a strongly geopolitical dimension. It’s emblematic of a fundamental break with the underlying rationale of a market economy and shows how foreign policy is deliberately conducted by economic pressures.

To many, the convergence of markets no longer appears to be an opportunity for prosperity, but increasingly looms as a threat to public safety. Digital geopolitics is on the rise.

 

What’s digital geopolitics?

The notion of digital geopolitics brings together two opposing trends in international politics. On the one hand, digital geopolitics is based on the power politics of territorial units — for example, nation states such as the US and China or regional actors such as the European Union.

On the other hand, digital geopolitics involves decentralised transnational networks that consist of the connectivity between non-state actors and multinational companies, platforms, hubs, content and infrastructures, extending beyond politically fixed territorial units.

Neither of these developments is new, but they are often discussed separately. What’s new, however, is the increasing entanglement of these two trends, as is seen in the case of Huawei. This also reveals how power and order increasingly lie at the heart of digital geopolitics. Therefore, they require particular attention on our part.

The EU is well aware of its economic and technological dependence on China. For the EU, as for Europe as a whole, there’s the danger of being crushed between the two superpowers. European trade, economy, and production chains are inextricably connected to both Chinese and US technologies.

Unlike the US, however, Europe already has Huawei technology installed in its 4G mobile networks. In the future, this will most likely also be the case for the expansion of the 5G network.

The EU’s connectivity policy for Asia, released in September 2018, includes the goal of building constructive and fair EU relations with China. However, in March 2019, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, published a strategy paper that unexpectedly revealed areas of tension within the relationship.

Although China is still seen as a partner for cooperation and negotiation, the EU explicitly classifies the country as an economic competitor and system rival.

 

The EU is dependent on China

Unaffected by this sceptical assessment of the relationship — a perception also supported by the difficult negotiations between European leaders and China at the EU-China summit in April 2019 — certain member states are independently seeking closer contact with Beijing.

In March 2019, Italy was the first of the G7 countries to sign a Memorandum of Understanding to participate in the New Silk Road project (Belt and Road Initiative, or BRI). Thus, the Italian government has circumvented the attempt of other large member states to negotiate participation in the BRI initiative as a European bloc, rather than bilaterally.

The EU is well aware of its economic and technological dependence on China. Industrial policy, market access and data protection are central conflict lines in EU-China relations. However, the EU has recently decided against excluding Chinese companies from the internal market.

China has been deemed culpable for a multitude of cyber espionage incidents against European information and communication structures. Nevertheless, the close security cooperation with the US, including NATO, could lead to economic decoupling.

The bottom line is that Europe’s reconciliation of interests with China can only be successful across the EU and not across the individual member states.

The military use of 5G mobile networks or cyber sabotage incidents against digital infrastructures in Europe would provide significant momentum for pursuing strategic autonomy vis-à-vis China.

In extreme circumstances, such a scenario could lead to a global, technological form of trench warfare, in which any social and technical vulnerability would be avoided because of it might be a potential gateway to security risks. A world economic crisis and massive global arms race would be the result.

 

Divide and rule

If, in the areas of cybersecurity and Industry 4.0, the EU fails to establish lasting cooperative structures to build security and trust with China, then a second, equally negative, scenario of a worldwide ‘collapse of digital commons’ seems plausible.

Global challenges such as securing social peace and creating social justice under the (labour) conditions of digitisation are not addressed in this scenario. The EU also continues to accuse the Chinese authorities of pursuing an industrial policy that systematically promotes national subsidies to private and state enterprises to give their own producers a competitive advantage at the global level.

Conversely, Chinese companies and direct investment in Europe have an easy time because of technological dependencies. Member states are still pursuing only the idea of a ‘Europe of independent nations,’ while the single market is becoming the site of a technological proxy war between the US and China.

Political action is focused solely on cyber defence. Similar to the global financial crisis, the inability to regulate engenders political irresponsibility.

Prosperity and stability on a regional and global scale are crucially dependent on adherence to common minimum standards in IT security, norms regarding states’ conduct in cyberspace and the development of joint mechanisms.

In this context, it seems necessary to have strategically relevant foreign and security policy objectives in a comprehensive digital policy, especially at the EU level with regard to China. This can also be negotiated within the framework of the new EU connectivity strategy with China and other Asian partner countries.

The bottom line is that Europe’s reconciliation of interests with China can only be successful across the EU and not across the individual member states. The EU with its Digital Single Market can, as Wolfgang Kleinwächter writes in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, set an example of a ‘global multi-stakeholder pact for the protection of the public core of the Internet.’

The post The Age of Digital Geopolitics & Proxy War Between US and China appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Dr Annegret Bendiek works as a researcher in the research group EU/Europe of Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik; Dr Nadine Godehardt is a member of the Research Group Asia of Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik; David Schulze is research assistant of the research group Asia of Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik.

The post The Age of Digital Geopolitics & Proxy War Between US and China appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Santals, evicted from their land in Gaibandha, are seen at a makeshift camp in Joypur. The attack on the Santal community on November 6, 2016 resulted in at least three deaths, more than 50 people injured and around 2000 families displaced. Photo: Anisur Rahman

By Mia Seppo
Jul 29 2019 (IPS-Partners)

On June 26, the world comme-morated the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture—an opportunity to uphold the dignity of life, access to justice, and freedom from torture, which is a right of all people, to be enjoyed without discrimination, regardless of their civil, cultural, economic, political or social position or status.

This International Day has deep and global roots, going back to the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR), a global standard of customary international law, which recognises the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. It also states that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. These vital points are echoed in Bangladesh’s constitution, which refers to the rule of law, fundamental human rights and freedom, equality and justice for all citizens. It guarantees the rights to life and personal liberty and provides safeguards in case of arrest and detention. Like the UDHR, the constitution stipulates that nobody shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Bangladesh and other countries have also committed themselves to guaranteeing the rule of law, good governance and effective institutions in their efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda and achieve its Sustainable Development Goals. Yet violations of human rights, abuse of power and impunity continue around the world and threaten the achievement of sustainable development.

Torture, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, can occur in many places. These violations are not limited to criminal custodial settings such as detention centres or prisons but can take place in schools, hospitals, institutions that care for children, or for persons with mental disabilities. Torture or ill-treatment may also take place in the public domain, for example during demonstrations where there is excessive use of force by the authorities.

Torture and ill-treatment can take many forms. Violence against women and girls, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions have been classified as torture, especially where impunity and lack of due diligence reign, and no systemic action is taken to prevent or redress such acts.

Bangladesh has been a state party to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) since 1998. The CAT’s monitoring body, the Committee against Torture, will be reviewing Bangladesh for the first time, in Geneva from July 30-31. It is a welcome step that the government has just submitted its first state report, 19 years overdue.

Every state has a responsibility to take effective measures against human rights abuses. It is commendable that the government of Bangladesh supported a recommendation from the Universal Periodic Review 2018 to investigate serious human rights violations, including torture, extrajudicial killings and disappearances. The United Nations looks forward to action in this regard. More preventative measures should be taken to make sure that no further cases arise.

The United Nations also appreciates that Bangladesh enacted the Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention) Act in 2013. However, very few cases have been filed, investigated or tried under this law. The media continue to report about people who have been victims of alleged excessive use of force, ill-treatment or torture at the hands of public authorities, or the latter’s collusion or inaction when non-state actors are the perpetrators. There have been very few cases of compensation being awarded to victims. Intimidation and harassment have been alleged against individuals who have sought justice. There must be no reprisals, or else fear will prevent people from seeking redress.

National institutions have investigated and intervened in a few cases of alleged torture and ill-treatment. For example, violence against the Santal community on November 6, 2016 resulted in at least three deaths, more than 50 people injured and around 2000 families displaced. The attackers also ill-treated people, looted the community’s homes and livestock and set fire to about 600 residences. Civil society and human rights activists raised serious concerns over inaction and alleged involvement of police in the unprecedented eviction drive. The National Human Rights Commission, together with the Parliamentarian Caucus on indigenous people, conducted a fact-finding mission and found that the eviction was mishandled, resulting in serious human rights violations, and recommended preventative measures and reparation. The matter is still sub judice.

The upcoming review by the CAT will provide an opportunity for Bangladesh to showcase measures that it has taken or intends to take. This might include strictly enforcing existing policy and legal safeguards against torture, strengthening accountability of law enforcement agencies and other actors, capacity building and training, investigations of alleged perpetrators and bringing them to justice in fair trials, protection of witnesses and victims, making reliable data available to lawyers and policy makers, and information campaigns for the general public who may have limited awareness about their rights.

The United Nations Secretary General has urged all states “to end impunity for perpetrators and eradicate these reprehensible acts that defy our common humanity.” The UN stands ready to work with Bangladesh to make this a reality for torture survivors and everyone else.

Mia Seppo is United Nations Resident Coordinator in Bangladesh.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

The post Bangladesh and the fight to end torture appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Felix Dodds is Adjunct Professor at the University of North Carolina and Associate fellow at the Tellus Institute

By Felix Dodds
NEW YORK, Jul 29 2019 (IPS)

As some of you will know I have a new book out Stakeholder Democracy: Represented Democracy in a Time of Fear.  (other contributors to the book were:  Jan-Gustav Strandenaes, Carolina Duque Chopitea, Minu Hemmati, Susanne Salz, Bernd Lakemeier, Laura Schmitz, and Jana Borkenhagen). 

The book’s theory of change is very simple involving stakeholders in the decision making makes better-informed decisions and that those decisions are more likely to be implemented with those stakeholder’s support either singularly or in partnership.

The book places Stakeholder Democracy within the spectrum of Representative to Participatory Democracy.

It argues that we need to strengthen represented democracy in a time of fear through engaging stakeholders. It recognizes that in many places politicians are no longer believed but they need to make difficult decisions. To help them do this engaging with the support of stakeholders can help them to have the political courage to address climate change or the wave of new technologies coming or migration or the many other difficult issues we will be facing in the next ten years up to 2030.

 

Two discourses

Since around 1992 we have had two different political discourses in play that of stakeholders and that of civil society.

Under the leadership of Maurice Strong, Chip Lindner, and Nitin Desai the Earth Summit moved away from the old NGO discourse. This was that in the UN everyone who wasn’t a government or an intergovernmental organization was an NGO as far as the UN was concerned.

The Earth Summit changed that. Agenda 21 recognized 9 stakeholder groups in society who should be involved in policy development and in helping to deliver Agenda 21 and the Rio Conventions. These were:

 

1. Women
2. Children and Youth
3. Indigenous Peoples
4. Non-Governmental Organizations
5. Local Authorities
6. Workers and Trade Unions
7. Business and Industry
8. Scientific and Technological Community
9. Farmers

 

By the way, these were enlarged in the development of the 2030 Agenda to include others such as older people and the disabled.

At the same time in the  World Social Summit (1995), the Financing for Development space (2002) and those around the Bretton Woods Institutions a different political discourse evolved that of civil society.

This discourse recognized only two different groups than government and intergovernmental bodies these two were industry and civil society. What did this mean?

 

Civil Society concept increases space for industry

We often hear in the civil society discourse of the increased space that industry has.

Well, the conceptual framework for civil society by its nature increases the space of industry from one of nine to one to two.

So let’s be clear the advocates for this by their own actions are giving up massive space for industry and reducing space for other stakeholders.

It also allows governments and intergovernmental organizations to just group anyone who isn’t industry into a catch-all group.

Who is Civil Society?

Well, there are many definitions out there and the book looks at some of them. But what it tends to be is a space dominated by NGOs…it does subjugate women, youth, community groups etc into this one space no longer having their individual and unique voices.

By doing this it dilutes the gender perspective – it reduces the voice of the next generation.

Civil Society also excludes a number of key stakeholders that includes academics and scientists, Indigenous Peoples – they are a “Peoples” and should, of course, have not to be subjugated to other views.

It excludes local and subnational government who is seen as a level of government but whose voices freedom found with their national government.

The book goes into examples where this course has resulted in the wrong people being at the table.

The Stakeholder discourse, on the other hand, requires an ongoing stakeholder mapping process to ensure the right people are at the table.

It gives them individual space to articulate for a gender perspective or youth a next-generation perspective. It enables new relevant stakeholders that have emerged over the last 25 years to be recognized and given space such as older people or people with disabilities.

 

Civil Society discourse is a lazy discourse

What amazes me is how groups that do not benefit from the civil society discourse seem to accept it without question.

I can only think it is because its easier than to argue for the individual voice of relevant stakeholders.

For governments and intergovernmental organizations, it makes their life much easier.

They don’t have to show what they are doing for engaging each of the stakeholders they leave it to a broad engagement with this catch-all group of civil society.

What it has done in many UN bodies that have adopted this reduces the staff support for stakeholders and increase it for industry – a good example of this is UNEP.

After all, now intergovernmental bodies would only be servicing two groups… resulting in the need for only a form of parity between civil society support and industry. Previously there needed to be evidence of support for women, youth, Indigenous Peoples etc.

You can hear from some of those lazy people the comments like…

“ahh how do you decide which stakeholder group you should be a member of”
”
They go on to say “what if you are a woman and a young person and work for an NGO.

Well, the engagement isn’t and shouldn’t be based on the individual it’s based on the organization in all cases. To be clear it should be based on what the organization’s policy priorities are. If the organization is focused on youth policies then it should engage with the youth caucus, if its work is gender then it should engage with the women’s stakeholder group and if it’s a mixture well work in a number of different stakeholder groups.

 

Who benefits from the Civil Society discourse?

I always like to look at who benefits to see if that has a bearing.

It’s clear that there is a number that benefit.

Governments and Intergovernmental organizations benefit as they don’t have to address the different voices and leave that coordination to whoever is organizing the civil society group.

Industry benefits as they gain a huge additional space vacated by key stakeholders one of 2 is so much better than one of 9 or more for them.

Also, large well organized northern-based NGOs benefit as they can assert a larger influence on one space than many.

So if you are happy with giving more space to industry, reducing space for women and youth and other key stakeholders, not recognizing Indigenous Peoples right for their own space, do not want academics and scientists to be able to represent their research then do continue to use the civil society concept but understand what you are doing.

You are actively taking part in reducing space for all other stakeholders.

 

The post Is Civil Society Arguing Itself out of Political Space? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Felix Dodds is Adjunct Professor at the University of North Carolina and Associate fellow at the Tellus Institute

The post Is Civil Society Arguing Itself out of Political Space? appeared first on Inter Press Service.