‘AI-powered Weapons Depersonalise the Violence, Making It Easier for the Military to Approve More Destruction’

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, TerraViva United Nations

Nov 22 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the dangers arising from military uses of artificial intelligence (AI) with Sophia Goodfriend, Post-Doctoral Fellow at Harvard Kennedy School’s Middle East Initiative.


The global rise of AI has raised concerns about its impact on human rights, particularly for excluded groups, with controversial uses ranging from domestic policing and surveillance to ‘kill lists’ such as those used by Israel to identify targets for missile strikes. Digital rights groups are calling for the development of an AI governance framework that prioritises human rights and bans the most dangerous uses of AI. While recent United Nations (UN) resolutions recognise the human rights risks of AI, more decisive action is needed.

Sophia Goodfriend

Why should we be concerned about AI and its current and potential uses?

AI is being rapidly integrated into military operations around the world, particularly in weapons systems, intelligence gathering and decision-making. Its increasing autonomy reduces human oversight, raising serious concerns and sci-fi fears of machines making life-and-death decisions without meaningful human intervention.

AI-based technologies such as drones, automated weapons and advanced targeting systems are now part of military arsenals. The military’s increasing reliance on these systems raises significant concerns, as they are largely unregulated under international law. The level of surveillance these technologies rely on violates privacy protections under international law and many national civil rights laws.

The rapid development and deployment of these technologies is outpacing regulation, leaving the public largely unaware of their implications. Without proper oversight, AI could be misused in ways that cause widespread harm and evade accountability. We urgently need to regulate the military use of AI and ensure it is consistent with international law and humanitarian principles.

In addition, faulty or biased data can lead to devastating mistakes, raising serious ethical and legal questions. And the decisions made by these systems can undermine the principles of proportionality and distinction in warfare, putting civilian lives at risk.

What’s an example of how AI is currently being used?

The Israeli military is using AI-assisted targeting systems to identify and strike targets in Gaza. These systems analyse huge amounts of data collected through drones, satellites, surveillance cameras, social media and phone hacks to identify potential targets, locate them and decide where and when people should be killed.

AI-generated ‘kill lists’ raise serious concerns. Flawed or biased data has already led to devastating mistakes, with journalists and humanitarian workers killed in strikes. There have also been allegations that the military has expanded its definition of who or what constitutes a valid target, allowing attacks on people or places that may not meet the standards set by international law.

These systems operate at an unprecedented speed and scale, creating a huge number of targets. They have the potential to cause widespread destruction without thorough oversight. Soldiers operating in Gaza have as little as 20 seconds to approve targets that include Hamas militants, but also people who wouldn’t be considered valid military targets under international laws of war and human rights standards.

What does this mean for moral responsibility over the damage caused?

AI-assisted targeting technologies such as the Lavender system are not fully autonomous. They still require human oversight. This is a critical point because these technologies are only as destructive as the people in charge. It all depends on the decisions made by military leaders, and these decisions can either comply with or violate international human rights law.

At the same time, the use of machines to target and destroy can depersonalise violence, making it easier for military personnel to authorise more destruction. By outsourcing decision-making to AI, there’s a risk of abdicating moral responsibility. This technological approach makes military action seem more efficient and rational, which can help justify each bombing with a seemingly logical rationale, but it also dehumanises the civilian casualties and widespread devastation that follow.

Are current AI governance frameworks sufficient to protect human rights?

The short answer is no: current AI governance frameworks fall short in protecting human rights, particularly in military applications. While most states agree that AI-driven weapons – from fully autonomous to AI-assisted ones – should comply with international human rights law, there’s no global framework to ensure this happens.

This has led to calls for more comprehensive and enforceable rules, and there have been some positive steps. For example, civil society groups and researchers successfully pushed for a ban on fully autonomous weapons in the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, which was supported by over 100 states. As a result, the UN Secretary-General has called for a legally binding treaty to be adopted in 2026 to completely ban fully autonomous weapons, which are powered by AI but have no human oversight of their operations.

The European Union (EU) has also taken action, banning some military AI applications such as social scoring systems – which give people ratings based on their social behaviour – as part of its AI Act. However, the EU still lacks specific rules for military AI.

Organisations such as the Future of Life Institute, Human Rights Watch and Stop Killer Robots have been instrumental in pushing for change. But they’re facing growing challenges as Silicon Valley tech CEOs and venture capitalists push for faster AI development with fewer regulations. This is worrying, as these powerful figures will now have more influence over AI policy under a new Trump administration.

What role should AI companies play in ensuring compliance with human rights principles?

Companies have a critical role to play. In recent years, many of the leading companies, such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft and OpenAI, have made public statements about their commitment to human rights. OpenAI, for example, has called for the creation of a watchdog similar to the International Atomic Energy Agency, and its founders have pledged not to allow their technology to be used for military purposes. Amazon, Google and Microsoft also have fair use policies, which they claim ensure their technologies are used in accordance with human rights principles.

But in practice, these policies often fall short, particularly when it comes to military applications. Despite their claims, many of these companies have sold their technologies to military forces, and the extent of their involvement in military AI development is often unclear. Just a few weeks ago, The Intercept reported that the US military’s Africa Command had purchased OpenAI software through Microsoft. We also know the Israeli military used Google cloud services to target bombs in Gaza and Amazon web services to store classified surveillance data on civilians in the Palestinian territories.

This has sparked protests within the companies involved, with workers staging walkouts and demanding greater transparency and accountability. While these protests are important, AI companies can ultimately only do so much to ensure their technologies are used ethically. We need stronger, more comprehensive international laws on the military use of AI, and governments must take responsibility for ensuring these laws are enforced at the national level.

At the same time, many tech CEOs, such as Elon Musk, have moved away from their previous commitment to human rights and are more aligned with right-wing political leaders like Trump. Some CEOs, such as Peter Thiel of PayPal and Alex Karp of Palantir Technologies, argue that private companies need to work closely with the military to maintain US technological superiority. This has created tensions between human rights advocates and tech giants, highlighting the need for stronger regulatory frameworks to hold these companies accountable and prevent AI being used in ways that undermine human rights.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
LinkedIn
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Human rights take a backseat in AI regulation CIVICUS Lens 16.Jan.2024
AI: ‘The biggest challenges are the biases and lack of transparency of algorithms’ Interview with Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team 24.Aug.2023
AI regulation: ‘There must be a balance between promoting innovation and protecting rights’ Interview with Nadia Benaissa 25.Jul.2023

  Source

Climate Change in Azerbaijan is Putting Women at Increased Risk of Gender-Based Violence

Civil Society, Climate Change, Environment, Featured, Gender, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: UN Women

PARIS, Nov 22 2024 (IPS) – Climate change exacerbates existing gender inequalities and gender-based violence. At COP29 in Azerbaijan, governments have been urged to prioritize gender-responsive climate policies that address the specific needs of women and girls, and serious concerns have been raised about backtracking on women’s rights during these crucial negotiations on climate action.


In Azerbaijan, extreme weather events made worse by global warming and poor environmental management are heightening the risks women and girls face. As the frequency and intensity of climate-related disasters increase, more families are being left vulnerable, accelerating the need for targeted interventions.

Clean World Social Union participated in COP29 to address the critical intersection of gender inequality and the climate crisis, advocating for policies that prioritize the needs and rights of women and girls in the face of environmental challenges.

Clean World Social Union is one of only two civil society organizations in Azerbaijan providing specialist accommodation and support to women escaping gender-based violence. They operate a shelter in the capital city, Baku, housing up to 60 women and children. A second shelter in Ganja, managed by the Public Union “Tamas,” accommodates 25 residents.

Clean World Social Union collaborates with the international women’s rights organization Equality Now to strengthen the legal rights of women and girls in Azerbaijan.

Leyla Suleymanova

Coordinator Leyla Suleymanova spoke to Equality Now about how climate-induced displacement is impacting women in the country and why the government urgently needs to do more in response.

What are some of the ways that climate change is affecting women and girls in Azerbaijan?

Climate change is definitely making women more vulnerable to gender-based violence. We’ve worked with many women from rural areas whose families have lost their homes and livelihoods due to floods, drought, and other environmental crises. People become homeless, their lives have been devastated. Before, they had opportunities to earn money to improve their lives, but now they don’t.

This is forcing people to migrate and is pushing them into urban areas. Gender-based violence increases because when people become poorer, it puts pressure on families who cannot earn a living, and men can become more violent. Every day, we receive hundreds of calls from women, but due to the limited capacity of our shelters, we have to refuse many.

After extreme climate events, many women migrate alone to urban centers like Baku to support their families. However, some do not have the necessary skills or knowledge to find employment and earn money. Displacement caused by ecological crisis isolates women from their social networks and support systems, and makes them more vulnerable to abuse. As well as domestic violence, we have seen increases in commercial sexual exploitation and trafficking.

How is Azerbaijan’s government responding to the impact that climate change is having on women in the country?

In Azerbaijan, there is some understanding about how climate change impacts women and girls, but not enough. And while the government is doing some things about climate change, it’s not making the connection between ecological crisis, gender issues, and gender-based violence.

Changes in legislation and punishment for child marriage are getting tougher, but I think the ecological crisis is making the situation worse. With people becoming poorer and life getting harder, this connects to child marriage. Some families think if they have a girl who they cannot afford to provide food and education for, she should be married off quickly.

In cases of gender-based violence after extreme weather events, women often don’t have financial support, don’t know who to turn to, and may have psychological issues. It is sometimes very difficult to support these victims as they need free and regular assistance, but there are many we cannot help because of limited resources. And when there are floods, there is a big increase in the number of women needing help but we cannot provide so much support.

I have not heard of any official strategies or action plans to improve the situation for women when an ecological crisis happens. Government strategies should include implementation and coordination to address women’s issues. Without this, it is difficult to deal with these problems.

What action on climate change to support women is needed from governments?

Women and girls are being directly and disproportionately affected by the ecological crisis and we have to raise this with governments and other key stakeholders. There is a critical opportunity to address the unique challenges by developing and implementing comprehensive frameworks and gender-responsive strategies that tackle both the immediate and longer-term impacts.

Vocational training programs can help women adapt to climate change by equipping them with skills for sustainable livelihoods. This is particularly crucial for women in rural areas who may need to migrate to urban centers, where employment opportunities are more accessible. Providing these tools empowers women to rebuild their lives and communities while fostering resilience against climate-related challenges.

It is equally important to increase women’s participation in decision-making processes related to climate policies. By including women’s perspectives and experiences, governments can create more equitable and effective solutions. Gender equality must be central to these discussions, ensuring women’s voices shape policies addressing ecological and societal impacts.

Strengthening support systems is another vital step. Expanding access to psychological counseling, legal aid, and safe shelters for women and girls will address the immediate fallout of climate shocks. Additionally, building local capacity to meet the needs of women affected by these events will ensure long-term sustainability.

Public awareness campaigns are necessary to educate communities about the gendered impacts of climate change, and women should be given information about who they can turn to for support when their rights have been violated. Initiatives can shift societal attitudes, promoting a greater understanding of women’s vulnerabilities and the need for protective measures.

The COP29 summit in Azerbaijan underscored the urgency of integrating gender issues into climate action. Coordination among government agencies, civil society organizations, and international partners is essential to ensure these efforts are effective, inclusive, and provide women and girls with protection in the face of an evolving climate crisis.

Maithreyi Kamalanathan, Equality Now

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Stand Up, Speak Out: A Global Call to Men on the 25th Anniversary of International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Gender, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: UN Women

LONDON, Nov 22 2024 (IPS) – In 1960, the Rafael Trujillo regime in the Dominican Republic assassinated the Mirabal sisters— renowned and respected for their courage and activism against dictatorship. To give their senseless violent death some meaning and to preserve their legacy, in 1999, the United Nations inaugurated November 25—the day of their assassination—as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (EVAW).


When talk of violence against women (VAW) was still taboo in polite and political circles, the UN’s stance was powerful. It put a spotlight on a pervasive pandemic of violence evident across continents and cultures that caused devastation in the lives of millions and replicated itself across generations.

The assumption was that raising public awareness and creating a political platform—a global one, no less—would prompt attention, concern, action, and genuine political will to address and eliminate this preventable form of harm and trauma.

Unfulfilled Promise of Global Initiatives

In the subsequent years, other high-profile, largely performative, initiatives followed. UN events became annual feel-good rituals, sidelining seasoned women’s rights advocates in favor of celebrity-driven initiatives.

UN Women’s campaigns, such as actress Nicole Kidman’s “Say No-UNiTE to End Violence Against Women,” featuring stern Wonder Woman-inspired imagery on reusable bottles, raised funds but did little to reach perpetrators of violence. Emma Watson’s HeforShe seemed to admonish women for excluding men—despite decades of efforts to engage men in tackling violence.

Iceland even hosted an all-male “barbershop” conference to address equality, with limited impact. Similarly, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague garnered attention with grand declarations about ending wartime rape through the UK-led Prevention of Sexual Violence Initiative (PSVI), backed by long-time activist and actress Angelina Jolie.

But his premise that sexual violence in war would be prevented if cases were documented and perpetrators faced the future prospect of criminal justice, missed fundamental facts – including that to stop war-time rape, more focus and resources should be put on preventing wars.

Meanwhile, the top-down international attention barely made a dent in addressing the problem where it resided worldwide: in communities and homes, and increasingly online—especially in times of crisis and conflict. In large part, the lack of impact of these high-level initiatives was their failure to reach the right audiences with the right messages through trusted messengers.

Relying on Hollywood actresses to inspire largely women’s audiences to unite against violence may be necessary for motivating women, but it is not sufficient. When the perpetrators of violence are overwhelmingly male, strategies, messaging, policies, and programs must also be directed at men.

Implicitly acknowledging that world leaders did not care about the social and human cost of violence against women, the World Bank took a different tack: following the money. In 2014, the Bank reported that violence against women cost countries up to 3.4% of their GDP.1 In some countries, this was more than double their investments in education.

Implying that we should care about violence against women because it affects our bottom line is certainly a mercenary approach, but even this stark calculation failed to prompt a change in policies, practices, or prioritization of the elimination of violence against women (EVAW) as a socio-economic and security concern.

Countless diplomats, activists and bureaucrats have shaped new policies and resolutions at national and international levels. A transnational bureaucracy has grown around the agenda and EVAW has gone global with the “16 Days of Activism” campaign. Yet, 25 years later, the outlook remains grim.

We know that in Gaza women endure caesareans without anesthesia because of the Israeli blockade on food, water, electricity, and medication—but nothing is being done to prevent it. We know that in Sudan, women and girls face extreme sexual violence and rape, yet nothing is being done to prevent this violence or provide protection and care for survivors.

We saw how the COVID-19 pandemic prompted a spike of some 40% in domestic violence across the world—and yet, nothing is being done to acknowledge or deal with the issues systemically. Year after year, femicide persists. Between March 2023-2024, in the UK alone, 100 women were killed by men.

Multifaceted Solutions

Breaking the silence on violence against women through awareness-raising campaigns has certainly drawn attention to the issue. We now have increased reporting, with better data on the forms of violence and the victims and survivors. We have an increased trickle of funding for programming and, perhaps most importantly, we have clear evidence of what works. It is not surprising that the solutions are multifaceted.

Laws and policies matter. In France, as the Gisele Pelicot case reveals, the legal definition of rape matters. Similarly, changing institutional cultures matters, especially in male-dominated law enforcement. In the U.S., a 2020 study found that one in four women will experience sexual assault in their lifetime, but fewer than 5% of survivors report the assaults to law enforcement.

In the U.S., police code 20% of reported cases as “unfounded,” based on the reporting officers’ perceptions of the woman reporting the incident. The 2020 report notes that “dismissing sexual violence has become common practice amongst the police.”2 Training and changing police practices is therefore essential to bring perpetrators to justice and increase women’s trust in the service.

Globally, grassroots initiatives prove that impactful change begins with local security personnel and community leaders. At the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), we have supported many of our partners in the Women’s Alliance for Security Leadership (WASL) in their efforts.

In Sri Lanka, the Association of War Affected Women (AWAW) successfully advocated for deploying female police officers to rural areas, trained male and female police officers on international laws such as UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and encouraged them to develop culturally effective approaches to addressing VAW.

In a Syrian refugee community in Turkey, our partner Kareemat has led interventions to stop child marriages that often take place because they are “one less mouth to feed.” Since fathers are making these decisions, raising awareness of the risks to their daughters and offering livelihood alternatives is essential.

To ensure the message resonates, Kareemat engaged trusted male religious leaders to emphasize that child marriage contradicts Islamic values and harms young girls. They also advocate for continued education and provide skills training, supporting girls to have their own livelihoods.

“We have observed a positive shift among many beneficiaries, especially men…agreeing on the importance of waiting until a girl reaches the age of eighteen before marriage,” says Kareemat Founder, Najla Sheikh. “These men also advocated for preparing young women by equipping them with a profession that enables them to support themselves…The beneficiaries expressed a desire to see girls achieve financial independence and be able to protect themselves in a safe environment like Kareemat.”3

Efforts to engage men in communities has expanded over the years. But as UK-based investigative journalist Sonia Sodha wrote in 2022,4 when it comes to the seriously violent, awareness and education is just not enough; reflecting on the differences between and within men is also essential.

Sodha highlights the UK-based project, Drive, which “has shed once and for all the feminist attachment to the idea that the key to reducing serious violence is teaching men to be better.” The project works with high-risk domestic abusers, assigning them case managers to provide support with jobs, mental health, and housing, while also serving as early warning conduits to involve police and social services when necessary to disrupt violence.

The results are astounding with an 82% and 88% drop in physical and sexual abuse respectively. Yet, access remains severely limited, with only 1% of serious abusers receiving such intervention.5

Meanwhile, a consistent factor in men’s violence is their own exposure to violence as children. Childhood abuse is a leading precursor of adult violence, yet in rich and poorer countries, programs to protect children are being slashed. As the wars in Gaza and Yemen show, children are increasingly the key targets of violent conflict.

Violence Against Women Amidst War and Displacement

With 56 wars raging and over 120 million people displaced by conflict, violence against women is on the rise, in increasingly complex forms. Ukraine is a case in point. Ukrainian men have become soldiers at the frontlines fighting Russian forces to protect their families and homeland.

But too often, on leave, they mete out their own trauma against their wives and children. It is wretchedly heartbreaking, yet universal in contexts of crisis and conflict.6 Simultaneously, displacement and economic hardship forces more women into sex work, trafficking, and other situations that heighten their vulnerability. Political dealmaking, such as the U.S.-Taliban agreement, has fueled multi-generational violence against women and children.

Over half a century since the Mirabals’ assassination, as a global community, we are certainly more aware of the horrors of violence against women. But it is still women who are picking up the pieces.

Our support networks are critical, says South African activist Bernedette Muthein, recalling “the street groups that intervene during domestic violence” and the women-led organizations that provide advice, support, and exit plans that “include stashing identity documents, clothes and money.”

Shelters and women-only spaces also remain essential for victims. But in Liberia, says peacebuilder Cerue Garlo “such issues are still not seen as national issues. The public expects women to handle them as ‘women’s issues’,” a sentiment that resonates around the world.

Time to Break the Cycle

On November 25, 2024, as the UN commemorates the 25th anniversary of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, perhaps it is worth stating it explicitly: violence against women is not just a women’s issue. It is a societal, economic, and security issue. Given the vast majority of perpetrators are men, it is also very clearly a men’s issue.

At a minimum, it is time to shift the shame and fear that women have harbored for so long, onto the men who perpetuate the violence. Too often, when such calls are made, social media platforms are flooded with #NotAllMen. Of course, not all men are implicated in VAW—and this is precisely the point. It is time for the good men—those who are indignant about and abhor such violence—to stand up, speak out, and join women to take on the challenge of ending this pandemic.

It is also time to dedicate more funding and channel resources directly to the women’s organizations working to tackle the roots, symptoms, causes, and effects of such violence.

The good news is that when the most serious abusers in the UK can be stopped, and destitute Syrian fathers can be convinced to protect their daughters, we know that violence against women is not inevitable. We just need to muster up the political will, social courage, and economic resources. Let’s not wait another 25 years to make the promise of ending violence against women a reality.

1 https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2023/08/25/tackling-gender-based-violence-development-imperative
2 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9136376/
3 Personal correspondence
4 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/06/male-violence-against-women-much-more-than-toxic-masculinity
5 Ibid
6 https://gppi.net/media/Kotliuk_2024_Hidden-Front-of-Russias-War_ENG.pdf

Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, MBE, is Founder/CEO, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN)

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Breaking Cycle of Violence to Save Mothers & Children: Why Ending Gender-Based Violence is Essential for Global Health

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Gender, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Pioneering effort to protect women and children in quarantine centres in Viet Nam Credit: UN Women

GENEVA, Nov 21 2024 (IPS) – Each year, millions of women and children around the world die from preventable causes. Maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) is a shared global priority, yet we often overlook one of its most pressing—and preventable—barriers: violence against women.


As we mark the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence, we are reminded that gender-based violence (GBV) is not just a social issue but a critical health crisis that endangers the lives of mothers and children everywhere.

When we consider that a woman experiencing violence is 1.5 times more likely to have a low-birth-weight baby and that this condition greatly increases infant mortality, the need for urgent, integrated action becomes starkly clear. 1 Addressing violence is not peripheral to MNCH efforts—it is foundational.

Violence and Health: A Devastating Cycle

Evidence tells us that intimate partner violence (IPV) directly affects maternal and infant outcomes. Pregnant women subjected to IPV face a heightened risk of complications like preterm labor and hemorrhage, often resulting in increased maternal and newborn mortality.2 3 The problem doesn’t end with pregnancy: children born to mothers experiencing violence have a higher likelihood of malnutrition, stunting, and developmental delays, perpetuating a cycle of vulnerability. 4

The psychological toll is just as concerning. Women subjected to violence are more prone to depression and anxiety, both of which affect maternal health-seeking behavior.5 Depressed mothers are less likely to access antenatal care and postnatal services, further endangering the lives of their infants. In turn, these mental health impacts lead to cascading health and social risks for women and their families, affecting entire communities.

Rajat Khosla

The Crisis Within Crises: Humanitarian Settings

Nowhere are these challenges more pressing than in humanitarian settings. Conflict, natural disasters, and displacement magnify the vulnerability of women and children, often leading to spikes in sexual violence and the breakdown of healthcare systems. In conflict zones, over 60% of women report having experienced sexual violence, according to humanitarian reports. 6 These women are not only at risk of severe trauma and infection but also of maternal mortality, with rates nearly double those found in stable environments. 7

It’s estimated that more than 500 women and girls die every day from preventable complications related to pregnancy and childbirth in humanitarian settings,8 underscoring an urgent need for an integrated approach to MNCH and GBV response. These statistics are more than numbers—they represent the lives of mothers, daughters, and children who deserve health, safety, and dignity.

The Overlooked Victims: Women Health Care Workers

It’s not only patients who suffer. Female health workers, the backbone of MNCH services worldwide, are often at grave risk. In fragile and conflict-affected settings, women health workers face high rates of violence, including harassment and physical assault.

Research suggests that up to 80% of healthcare workers in these settings report experiencing violence, a statistic that directly impacts their ability to provide care.9 High rates of violence lead to burnout, turnover, and a critical shortage of trauma-informed healthcare providers when they are needed most.10

For many, this threat is exacerbated by their roles as frontline responders to gender-based violence. The safety and mental health of our healthcare workforce are inextricably linked to the health outcomes we aim to achieve for mothers and children.

A Call to Action for Integrated Policies

    As we look to the future, it’s time to broaden our understanding of what it means to support maternal and child health. Policies that address violence against women and protect female health workers must become a central pillar of MNCH efforts. This calls for a multi-pronged approach:
    1. Prioritize Funding for Integrated MNCH and GBV Services: Donors and governments should increase funding for programs that integrate maternal health services with GBV prevention and response, particularly in crisis-prone areas.
    2. Strengthen Health Systems in Humanitarian Settings: We must scale up support for safe, trauma-informed healthcare in conflict zones, ensuring that women and children have access to life-saving care without the threat of further violence.
    3. Protect and Support Women Health Workers: Policies that safeguard the well-being of women health workers are essential. Measures like workplace protections, mental health support, and security protocols can help mitigate the impacts of violence and ensure that healthcare workers can provide essential services safely.

The costs of inaction are too high. Each preventable death of a mother or child as a result of violence marks a failure to uphold the rights to health and safety for all. By placing violence against women at the forefront of our MNCH efforts, we can break the cycle of suffering and create the conditions needed for healthy mothers and thriving children.

This 16 Days of Activism, let’s commit to integrated action against violence—because women’s health, newborn survival, and child development depend on it. Together, we can build a world where women and children live free from violence, and where health and dignity go hand in hand.

1 World Health Organization. (2013). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Geneva: World Health Organization.
2 Shah, I. H., & Hatcher, A. (2013). The impact of intimate partner violence on women’s reproductive health: A review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14(2), 128-137. doi:10.1177/1524838012451845
3 Elizabeth P. Lockington et al. Intimate partner violence is a significant risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcomes. AJOG Global Reports. Volume 3, Issue 4, November 2023, 100283
4 Ellsberg, M., & Heise, L. (2005). Researching violence against women: A practical guide for researchers and activists. Geneva: World Health Organization.
5 World Health Organization. (2013). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Consequences. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/77431/WHO_RHR_12.43_eng.pdf
6 UNODC. (2021). Sexual violence in conflict: Current trends and implications. Vienna: United Nations. Retrieved from UNODC
7 UNFPA. (2019). Maternal mortality in humanitarian settings. New York: UNFPA. Retrieved from UNFPA
8 UNFPA. (2020). Maternal mortality in emergencies: The hidden crisis. Retrieved from UNFPA
9 Médecins Sans Frontières. (2018). Health workers in conflict zones: Risks and realities. Retrieved from MSF
10 World Health Organization. (2021). Violence against health workers. Geneva: WHO.

Rajat Khosla is Executive Director of the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health (PMNCH), the global alliance for women’s, children’s and adolescents’ health and well-being, hosted by the World Health Organization, based in Geneva.

Email: khoslar@who.int

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Brazil Vows to Make COP30 a Catalyst for Climate Action and Biodiversity Celebration

Biodiversity, Climate Action, Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Energy, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainability, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Moisés Savian, Brazil's Secretary of Land Governance, Territorial and Socio Environmental Development at COP29. He looks forward to COP30 which will be held in his country. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Moisés Savian, Brazil’s Secretary of Land Governance, Territorial and Socio Environmental Development at COP29. He looks forward to COP30 which will be held in his country. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

BAKU, Nov 21 2024 (IPS) – As Brazil gears up to host COP30 in Belém next year, Moisés Savian, the country’s Secretary of Land Governance, Territorial and Socio Environmental Development, outlined the event’s significance in showcasing Brazil’s environmental policies and fostering global collaboration.


In an interview with IPS, Savian highlighted Brazil’s progress under President Lula’s administration and outlined the country’s aspirations for the upcoming climate conference.

The 2025 UN Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP30) is scheduled for November 2025 in Belém, Brazil. This event will feature the 30th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP30), the 20th Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP20), and the seventh Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA7). Additionally, it will include the 63rd sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA63) and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI63).

A Moment to Shine

“The next COP is a significant opportunity for Brazil. Our nation is blessed with immense natural resources, diverse ecosystems, and cultural richness. Hosting this event allows us to highlight our environmental policies and contribute meaningfully to the global dialogue on climate action.”

Savian said that past COPs held in nations like Dubai and Azerbaijan were remarkable in their own right but Brazil’s edition will be distinct.

“Brazil’s unique societal fabric, comprising contributions from people across the globe, coupled with its vast ecological diversity—from the Amazon to the Cerrado—will add an unparalleled dynamism to COP30,” he said.

Achievements in Environmental Protection

Savian says that under President Lula’s administration, Brazil has made significant strides in reducing deforestation and transitioning toward sustainable agriculture. “In the past year alone, we have reduced deforestation by 30 percent in the Amazon and 25 percent in the Cerrado. These achievements reflect our commitment to protecting our vital biomes.”

In the agricultural sector, Brazil is heavily investing in an ecological transition to reduce emissions. 

In 2023, Brazil revised its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) and enhanced its climate ambitions, committing to a 53 percent reduction in emissions by 2030. The country aims to position itself as the first G20 nation to achieve net-zero emissions while fostering job creation and economic prosperity. Brazil is also finalizing its 2035 emissions reduction targets, focusing on combating deforestation, promoting sustainable agriculture, decarbonizing industries, implementing nature-based solutions, expanding renewable energy sources, advancing sustainable transportation, and developing the bioeconomy. However, despite these initiatives, Brazil’s climate plans have received only a fraction of the necessary funding to meet its ambitious goals.

According to Savian, focusing on traditional and indigenous populations, ensuring their rights and territories are preserved is extremely important. “We are formulating a specific national plan for family farming, which constitutes the majority of our rural population. These communities are often the most affected by climate extremes, so targeted public policies are essential.”

Global Responsibility and Support

Savian also addressed the role of developed nations in supporting climate adaptation and mitigation in countries like Brazil. He outlined four key areas where global cooperation is essential.

Financing Climate Action- Developed countries must deliver on their promises to fund climate initiatives. Technological Support- Advanced technologies from these nations can aid in decarbonizing economies like Brazil’s. Sustainable Consumption- A focus on low-carbon products and sustainable supply chains is crucial. And Knowledge Exchange-Collaboration in research and capacity-building is vital for global progress.

“Less than 1 percent of global climate financing currently reaches family farmers and traditional communities. This needs to change. While funding is critical, so too are clear criteria for its allocation and ensuring it reaches those who need it most.”

Challenges and Priorities for COP29

Commenting on COP29, Savian expressed concerns about slow progress in implementing commitments. He stressed the need for tangible outcomes in three key areas Climate Financing—establishing actionable frameworks and ensuring funds reach grassroots communities; finalizing regulations to operationalize carbon trading and monitoring mechanisms, including setting up indicators to track progress and results.

“Without a focus on family farming and food system transformation, there can be no just transition,” he said.

Brazil’s Vision for COP30

Savian expressed confidence in Brazil’s readiness to host COP30, acknowledging the logistical challenges posed by Belém, a city of 1.5 million people.

“Despite these hurdles, we are committed to showcasing Amazon to the world. This will be a chance for global leaders and citizens to engage with the heart of Brazil’s environmental efforts.”

He also highlighted Brazil’s track record of successfully hosting major international events under President Lula’s leadership. “We aim to make COP30 a transformative experience that advances climate goals and deepens global appreciation for Brazil’s biodiversity and environmental stewardship,” Savian said.

 

It’s a Deal—Wealthy Nations Pledge Not to Build New Unabated Coal-Power Plants

Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Energy, Featured, Headlines, Poverty & SDGs, TerraViva United Nations

Activists speak out against fossil fuels amid a new pledge from wealthy nations and EU against new unabated coal power plants. Credit: Joyce Chimbi

BAKU, Nov 21 2024 (IPS) – Of all fossil fuels, coal has had the most serious and long-term effects on global warming. When burnt, coal releases more carbon dioxide than oil and gas, producing an estimated 39 percent of the global carbon dioxide emissions. Yet, coal is still the number one energy source, providing nearly 40 percent of the world’s electricity.


A COP29 deal struck on Wednesday November 21 now holds the promise to change the fossil fuel landscape and climate change trajectory, placing the world back on track to net zero. Twenty-five countries and the EU have now pledged not to build any new unabated coal-power plants in their next round of national climate plans in bid to scale up ambitions in the next phase of climate action.

Fossil fuels are highly polluting. The ‘no new unabated coal power’ COP29 initiative was signed by EU climate envoy Wopke Hoekstra to pledge that when the 25 nations submit their national climate plans by February 2025 along with all other nations party to the Paris Agreement, theirs will reflect no new unabated coal in their respective energy systems to accelerate phasing out of fossil fuels.

In reference to fossil fuels, ‘unabated’ means taking no measures to reduce the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released from the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas. Abated refers to attempts to decrease release of polluting substances to an acceptable level.

“I’m often asked what gives me confidence that we can get this job done.  The answer is lots of things.  Quiet acts of solidarity, from people who get knocked down, but who refuse to stay down.  But there are also big things – the macro trends that aren’t up for debate.    And there’s none bigger than the global clean energy boom – set to hit two trillion dollars this year alone.  And it’s just getting started,” Simon Stiell, the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, stressed.

“Money talks, and as we enter the second quarter of this century, it is saying loud and clear: there is no stopping the clean energy juggernaut, and the vast benefits it brings: stronger growth, more jobs, less pollution and inflation, cheaper and cleaner energy. The list of benefits goes on.” 

The coalition of nations backing the diplomatic campaign to encourage all countries to end new coal power is constituted of mostly wealthy nations such as Germany, France, Canada, the United Kingdom and notably Australia – a major coal producer. This is the latest pledge towards curbing use of the fuel and phasing out fossil fuels in line with the COP28 deal.

The pledge is incredibly critical for despite coal being extremely dangerous to the global climate goals, a coal boom is unfolding. Data in the Global Coal Plant Tracker show that “69.5 GW of coal power capacity was commissioned while 21.1 GW was retired in 2023, resulting in a net annual increase of 48.4 GW for the year and a global total capacity of 2,130 GW. This is the highest net increase in operating coal capacity since 2016.”

COP29 has been centered around a new deal for climate financing to support the third Nationally Determined Contributions in the developing world, but delegates have not lost sight of the COP28 landmark deal when nearly 200 nations—for the first time—called on all nations to transition away from fossil fuels.

Activists want a net-zero world and they want it now, calling for ambitious climate actions to save the planet. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Teresa Anderson, the Global Lead on Climate Justice at ActionAid International, told IPS, “Just transitions and climate finance have to go hand in hand. Last year’s agreement to transition away from fossils was an important step. But without finance to make the just transition a reality, developing countries are in a bind.”

Stressing that climate-hit countries want to “leapfrog the fossil fuel era and scale up renewables, but can’t do so when they are being pushed deeper into debt by the climate crisis. To finally unlock the climate action the planet needs, COP29 needs to agree on an ambitious finance goal worth trillions of dollars in grants each year. Ensuring a just transition in energy is about much more than encouraging corporate investment and can’t just be left up to the private sector.

“When shifting away from fossil fuels, governments have a responsibility to actively involve communities in planning, training, social protection and ensuring energy access and secure livelihoods. Public services can join the dots, and have a key role in the just transition. The new climate finance goal has to provide trillions of dollars in grants, not loans or corporate investment targets,” Anderson observed.

Hailed as a major progressive step in the journey towards phasing out fossil fuels, the initiative is nonetheless not the silver bullet to end coal. The new commitment does not compel nations to stop mining or exporting coal. Notably, the world’s greatest coal-power generators, such as the United Nations and India, are not part of the initiative. Nonetheless, despite coal power growing in the past years despite the COP28 deal on fossil fuels, Hoekstra expressed optimism that this call to action will set the ball rolling towards a much-needed fossil fuel phasing out.

IPS UN Bureau Report