Boats docked outside a house in Dal Lake with a green film on the water in the foreground. Credit: Athar Parvaiz/IPS
SRINAGAR, India, Mar 31 2026 (IPS) – For the past few weeks, residents living in and around Dal Lake in Indian Kashmir have witnessed “a different phenomenon” as a green sludge has accumulated on the once pristine water. Photos circulating widely on social media triggered a public outcry.
Some citizens and environmentalists warned that the transformation reflects heavy sewage pollution in this Himalayan Lake in the heart of Srinagar, Kashmir’s summer capital. The Dal Lake is a complex wetland ecosystem covering roughly 18 square kilometres that supports fisheries, aquatic vegetation, and thousands of livelihoods tied to tourism and lake agriculture.
Officials managing the lake, however, urged calm and said that the sudden discolouration was most likely caused by a lack of rainfall and unusual temperatures for the season in Kashmir, though they didn’t deny the pollution problem and nutrient richness in the lake.
Muzamil Ahmad Rafiqui, Superintending Engineer for Kashmir’s Lake Conservation and Management Authority (LCMA), said that the lake is receiving nutrients, pesticides and other pollutants from the peripheries at many sources because of agricultural and other activities.
But Rafiqui added that the discolouration was more so due to over 50 percent reduction in precipitation and constant above-normal temperatures for weeks in this part of the season in Kashmir.
“Also, when the inflow from all the channels supplying water to the lake is extremely low and the outflow gates of the lake are also closed for retaining water in the lake, it is quite natural there will be changes in the water colour in a stagnant water body,” Rafiqui said.
Experts, scientific studies and official watchdogs have highlighted decades of pollution, sewage inflow and unregulated urban growth that have steadily degraded this iconic lake in the Kashmir Himalayas. A report submitted by Kashmir’s Pollution Control Committee (PCC) to the National Green Tribunal in response to the latter’s directions and other reports in recent years confirmed the “unabated flow of untreated sewage” into the Dal Lake in “violation of environmental norms”.
From Exclusion to Participation
Earlier this year, the Jammu and Kashmir government, in a dramatic policy shift, shelved a 416-crore rupees (USD 4.5 million) Dal Lake restoration project that had started implementation nearly two decades ago but had made little progress. The project aimed to move nearly 9,000 families living near Dal Lake to the city outskirts but was able to relocate only 1,808 families in 17 years.
The project, approved in 2009, centred on relocating thousands of families living inside the lake to newly built colonies on the outskirts of Srinagar, as the authorities believed human settlements within the lake were a major source of pollution and encroachment.
Now the government has abandoned the relocation-driven strategy altogether. In its place, officials are now promoting an in-situ conservation model that recognises lake dwellers as part of the ecosystem rather than obstacles to restoration.
The new approach proposes developing “eco-hamlets” within the lake’s settlements, installing sewage systems, treating inflowing drains and improving water circulation through dredging and channel restoration.
“It is a striking shift in philosophy. The very communities who were once blamed for the lake’s decline are now being seen as potential guardians,” said Raja Muzaffar Bhat, a prominent environmental and social activist based in Srinagar who often files petitions in India’s National Green Tribunal against the local administration for “failing to implement environmental safety rules and regulations” available under a broader regulatory framework in India for environmental protection.
Whether the new conservation strategy succeeds, said Bhat, may depend on “whether it combines community participation with stronger environmental governance.”
Iftikhar Drabu, a senior engineer who specialises in water engineering, warned that without stronger sewage infrastructure, strict regulation of tourism and effective monitoring of inflowing drains, community participation alone will not restore the lake. “Nothing will work in isolation. A multi-pronged approach is needed for conserving the lake,” he said.
‘We Know How to Protect the Lake’
For many families who have so far been relocated, the policy reversal has reopened painful questions. At Rakh-e-Arath, a rehabilitation colony on Srinagar’s outskirts built for displaced lake residents. “They told us our presence was destroying the lake. We believed the government and moved here,” said a resident, Mohammd Ashraf, whose family was relocated 10 years back, adding that life away from the water, all these years, has been difficult.
“Our time was wasted and our livelihoods were ruined,” he said. “We only know the lake as we were born there and have spent our childhood and youth by the lake. Fishing, growing vegetables on floating gardens, and rowing tourists in small boats are what we are adapted to,” Ashraf told Inter Press Service (IPS).
If the government now says people are needed to protect the lake, he said, “I welcome it, and I hope we will be taken back to the lake.” Other relocated families, who IPS spoke with, expressed similar feelings.
Communities living on the lake have historically maintained its channels, harvested weeds and monitored changes in water conditions. Integrating them into restoration efforts, they say, could help control the pollution and conserve the lake. “We have always been urging the government to give us the responsibility of conserving the lake. We are the ones who know the lake, not the people who sit in government offices,” said Akram Guru, a Shikara Walla at Dal Lake.
“We have been dubbed as the lake’s destroyers for decades. Now they say the lake needs its people,” he said smilingly. “I hope the change in the government’s approach finally facilitates our contribution to protecting the lake.”
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints, carrying around a quarter of global seaborne oil trade and significant volumes of liquefied natural gas and fertilizers.
NEW YORK, Mar 31 2026 (IPS) – Trump’s Iran war has left the Gulf shattered: US bases turned into targets, economies battered, and the “oasis” myth destroyed. Gulf rulers now confront a harsh reckoning over their reliance on Washington and the uncertain search for a new, fragile security order.
As Trump assembled major US naval and air assets in the eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and others quietly urged Washington to avoid a full-scale assault on Iran, fearing a direct blowback on their territory and energy infrastructure.
Nevertheless, the US–Israeli air campaign began on February 28, 2026, without a clearly defined and publicly articulated political endgame beyond “crippling” Iran’s capabilities. This disconnect between military escalation and strategic purpose now lies at the core of Gulf leaders’ anger and sense of betrayal toward Washington.
Trump’s Strategic Miscalculation
Trump’s decision to launch joint US–Israeli strikes on Iran has produced far higher strategic costs than his administration appears to have anticipated, from energy shock and disrupted shipping to heightened regional fragmentation and anti-American sentiment.
Even if Iranian capabilities are significantly degraded, the war has exposed vulnerabilities in US power projection, unsettled allies, and invited greater Russian and Chinese diplomatic activism in the Gulf. The long-term “price” for Washington will be measured less in battlefield metrics than in diminished trust and leverage among its traditional Arab partners.
US Bases Turned to Liabilities
From a Gulf perspective, US bases in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and the UAE were meant to deter Iran and guarantee regime security; instead, they became priority targets once the war began. Iran explicitly framed its strikes on these facilities as retaliation against Washington, but their location in densely populated and economically vital areas meant that nearby civilian infrastructure also suffered severe damage.
This experience is reinforcing a view in Gulf capitals that foreign basing arrangements draw fire without delivering the reliable protection they assumed for decades.
A Nightmare Realized
Gulf leaders long warned that a war with Iran would shatter their security and economies, a nightmare that has now materialized as Iranian missiles and drones hit oil facilities, ports, power plants, and cities across the region. They blame Washington for launching the campaign and Israel for pressing to “neutralize” Iran regardless of collateral damage in neighboring Arab states.
The sense in Gulf capitals is that their caution was dismissed, while they have paid a disproportionate price in physical destruction, economic setback, disrupted exports, and heightened domestic anxiety.
Shattered Oasis Narrative
The image of Gulf hubs like Dubai, Doha, and Riyadh as insulated “oases” open to business, tourism, and investment has been badly damaged by missile alerts, strikes on ports and airports, and the closure of key sea lanes.
Restoring confidence will require visible reconstruction, enhanced civil defense, improved air and missile defenses, and credible diplomacy that lowers the perceived risk of another sudden war. Investors and tourists will demand proof that the region can manage Iran-related tensions, not just high-end events and mega-projects.
Trump’s Misreading of Iranian Escalation
Trump publicly argued that overwhelming force would quickly coerce Iran and usher in regime change while keeping fighting “over there,” yet he appears not to have anticipated the breadth of Iranian retaliation against neighboring Gulf states or a prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
The IRGC’s effective shutdown of the strait, including attacks and threats against commercial shipping, has produced global energy shocks and exposed the fragility of US planning assumptions. For Gulf leaders, this underscores how inadequate Washington’s war planning was in accounting for second- and third-order consequences.
Calculated Decision Not to Retaliate
Despite heavy damage, Gulf rulers have so far avoided direct retaliation against Iran, calculating that further escalation would expose their cities and infrastructure to even more punishing strikes. Publicly, they stress restraint and international law, but privately, officials acknowledge their enduring geographic reality: they must coexist with a powerful and proximate Iran long after this US-led campaign ends.
By holding their fire, they hope to preserve space for postwar de-escalation and avoid being locked into a permanent state of open conflict.
Recasting Security Arrangements with Washington
Given their limited strategic alternatives, Gulf monarchies are unlikely to sever ties with Washington but will seek more conditional, transactional security arrangements. They are pressing for clearer US commitments on defense of their territory, better integration of regional missile defenses, and greater say over decisions that could trigger Iranian retaliation.
At the same time, they will hedge by deepening ties with China, Russia, Europe, and Asian energy importers, thereby reducing exclusive reliance on the US while keeping the American security umbrella in place.
Gulf Options to Prevent Future Conflagration
To prevent a repeat, Gulf states are also exploring limited de-escalation channels with Tehran, tighter regional crisis hotlines, and revived maritime security arrangements that include non-Western actors such as China and India. They may push for new rules of engagement around energy infrastructure and shipping lanes, seeking informal understandings that keep these off-limits even in crises.
Internally, they are reassessing missile defense, hardening critical facilities, and considering more diversified export routes that reduce dependence on Hormuz. None of these options are fully reassuring, but together they offer partial risk reduction.
Prospects for Normalization with Iran
Speculation about full normalization, including a non-belligerency pact between Iran and Gulf states, builds on prewar trends of cautious dialogue and economic engagement. Whether this is truly “in the cards” depends on war outcomes, Iran’s internal politics, and Gulf threat perceptions: if Tehran’s regime survives but remains hostile, Gulf states will likely revert to hedging—combining deterrence, limited engagement, and outreach to outside powers.
A more pragmatic Iranian leadership could make structured security arrangements and phased confidence-building measures more plausible over time.
No Return to Status Quo Ante
The Gulf States will not return to the prewar status quo; instead, they are likely to pursue a more diversified security architecture, combining a thinner US shield with expanded ties to China, Russia, and Asian importers. This shift will gradually dilute Washington’s centrality in Gulf security, complicating US force posture and Israel’s assumption of automatic Arab backing against Iran.
For Israel, a more cautious, risk-averse Gulf may limit overt strategic alignment, while for the US, enduring mistrust will make coalition-building for future crises far more difficult.
Trump’s Iran adventure is not an isolated blunder but the latest, and perhaps most explosive, expression of his assault on an already fragile global order. By discarding restraint, sidelining allies, and weaponizing American power for short-term political gain, he has accelerated the erosion of US credibility, fractured Western alliances, and opened new strategic space for Russia and China. The Gulf States are simply the newest casualties of this disorder: their cities struck, economies shaken, and security assumptions shattered.
Whatever emerges from this war, it will not be a restored status quo, but a more fragmented, volatile Middle East in which Israel and the United States confront a diminished margin for error and a far narrower circle of willing, trusting partners.
Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
GENEVA, Mar 30 2026 (IPS) – The United Nations was not founded to be comfortable; it was founded to be necessary. Created in the aftermath of catastrophe, its purpose was clear: to maintain international peace and security, to uphold international law, to defend human rights and to promote human dignity and development.
Dag Hammarskjöld, who understood that the Secretary-General was not merely a secretary to governments, but a servant of the Charter and, ultimately, of the peoples of the world.
The office of the Secretary-General was never intended to be merely administrative. It was intended to be moral, political and, when necessary, courageous.
As member states consider the appointment of the next Secretary-General, they face a decision that will shape not only the future of the United Nations, but also its credibility. The world today does not suffer from a surplus of institutions; it suffers from a shortage of trust in them.
The next Secretary-General must therefore be more than a careful manager of bureaucracy. The world needs a leader with vision, independence and integrity — a leader willing to uphold the Charter even when doing so is inconvenient to powerful member states.
Too often, the selection process produces a candidate who is acceptable to everyone precisely because they are unlikely to seriously challenge anyone. This may be politically expedient, but it is strategically short-sighted. An overly cautious Secretary-General may preserve short-term diplomatic comfort while presiding over long-term institutional decline.
The United Nations does not need a figure who simply reflects the balance of power within the Security Council; it needs a figure who reflects the principles of the Charter.
The next Secretary-General must be bold enough to articulate a clear vision for what the United Nations is for in the twenty-first century. That vision must be rooted in the organization’s founding objectives: preventing conflict, strengthening respect for international law, protecting human rights and promoting conditions under which peace is possible. These goals require not only administrative competence, but political courage and moral clarity.
Equally important, the next Secretary-General must be strong enough to maintain independence from the influence of any single member state or group of states. The United Nations does not exist to legitimize the actions of the powerful; it exists to ensure that power operates within rules.
The Secretary-General cannot fulfill this role if the office is perceived as operating at the beck and call of a few influential capitals. Independence is not a luxury in this role; it is the source of its authority.
With independence must come integrity. The United Nations possesses little in the way of traditional power: it does not command armies, it does not control vast financial resources and it cannot compel states to act. Its greatest asset is legitimacy — the belief that it stands for something larger than the interests of individual nations.
That legitimacy depends heavily on the personal credibility of the Secretary-General. Ethical leadership, transparency, accountability and consistency must once again become the defining characteristics of the office.
In this regard, the world would do well to remember Dag Hammarskjöld, who understood that the Secretary-General was not merely a secretary to governments, but a servant of the Charter and, ultimately, of the peoples of the world. He demonstrated that quiet diplomacy and moral courage are not opposites; they are partners.
He showed that the authority of the Secretary-General does not come from military or economic power, but from independence, integrity and a willingness to act when action is required.
Much attention is often given to the identity of the next Secretary-General — nationality, region, and increasingly gender. These questions are politically understandable, but they are not the most important questions. The defining question is not where the Secretary-General comes from, but what the Secretary-General stands for.
The United Nations is often described as an organization of states. But states exist to serve people, not the other way around. If that principle is true at the national level, it must also be true at the international level. The United Nations, therefore, does not ultimately belong to governments. It belongs to the peoples in whose name its Charter was written. Member states do not own the United Nations; they are trustees of it. And trustees are not meant to serve themselves, but those on whose behalf they hold responsibility.
This understanding should guide the selection of the next Secretary-General. The position requires someone who understands that the office is not merely administrative, but custodial — custodial of the Charter, of international law and of the trust that the world’s peoples place, however imperfectly, in the United Nations.
The selection process itself, however, raises a final and somewhat uncomfortable question. The Secretary-General is often described as the world’s top diplomat, and yet the world’s people have no direct voice in choosing this person.
The decision rests, as everyone knows, with a small number of states possessing veto power. This may be politically realistic, but it is increasingly difficult to explain to a global public that is more educated, more connected and more aware than at any time in history.
Perhaps, then, one day the world might experiment with something new — global consultations, or even worldwide elections — allowing the peoples of the world to express their preference for who should occupy this uniquely global office.
It is a slightly amusing idea, perhaps even an unrealistic one for now, but it contains a serious point: if the United Nations truly begins with “We the Peoples,” then their voice should be heard more clearly in choosing its leader.
Until that day comes, the responsibility rests with member states. They must choose not the safest candidate, not the most convenient candidate and not the candidate least likely to upset powerful governments. They must choose the candidate most likely to uphold the Charter, speak with independence, act with courage and restore integrity to the office.
The world does not need a careful manager. The world needs a courageous Secretary-General.
Naïma Abdellaoui, UNOG – UNison Staff Representative, International Civil Servant since 2004.
If the risk of sexual violence accumulates across economic strain, relational conflict, addiction, trauma, isolation, and distorted beliefs, then it makes sense that prevention, would need to be equally layered. Instead of one-dimensional awareness campaigns or interventions, more effective efforts seek to strengthen individuals, marriages, families, and communities at the same time.
If the first article mapped the terrain of vulnerability, the second this part turns to the work of building protection.
What would it look like to respond proportionately to what the evidence actually shows? If certain patterns repeatedly increase vulnerability, then their opposites ought tomust become deliberate priorities. In this section, I outline practical steps—grounded in the research reviewed previouslyabove—that families, faith communities, and civic institutions can take to reduce risk and expand real protection for women and children.
The protection of healthy, genuine faith
In part one, I outlined ways that limited religious community and faith commitment can increase the risk of sexual violence against women. The opposite is also true, with religious affiliation, identification and participation often protective against sexual violence according to studies in various countries. For instance:
A family’s “affiliation with Christian religious denominations” is “associated with lower risk of physical and sexual violence” in India (Kimuna, et al., 2013).
Being a Muslim was “protective from any type” of intimate partner violence” including “sexual and emotional” in the Ivory Coast (Peltzer & Pengpid, 2014).
The latter finding is mirrored in an earlier study finding Muslim religion protective against intimate partner violence in six African countries (Alio, et al., 2010).
Beyond affiliation alone, regular church attendance was specifically protective against victimization as well (Lown & Vega, 2001; O’Connor, et al., 2023). Respondents with higher levels of religious involvement in different studies were less likely to report intimate partner victimization (Zavala & Muniz, 2020) -with the latter U.S. research team noting this finding was “consistent with prior studies looking at the relationship between religious beliefs and intimate partner violence.” For instance:
“Frequent church attendance” is among the factors “associated with decreased risk of violence” in Filipino homes according to Fehringer & Hindin, 2009—who report “less male perpetration if mothers attended church more often”—in line with other findings, as they say “other research supports a protective effect of church attendance on partner violence.”
The same research team observed in a second article that “regular church attendance by the wife” and “regular church attendance by the husband” were both associated with lower risk of perpetrating violence in a marriage (Ansara & Hindin, 2009).
Fergusson, et al., 1986 highlighted “church attendance” as a significant factor in the frequency of “wife assault” in New Zealand—with the religious attendance of both fathers and mothers making the perpetration of victimization within their relationship less likely. They specifically found that men and women least likely to commit domestic violence were those who participate in services once a month or more are least -followed by those who attend less than monthly.
In an analysis of U.S. couples two decades ago, Ellison, et al., 1999 likewise reported that “regular attendance at religious services” made domestic violence perpetration less likely. “Both men and women who attend religious services regularly are less likely to commit acts of domestic violence than persons who attend rarely or not at all,” they observed—noting that for men, it was only when they participated weekly that this effect showed up, while women also had a protective effect with monthly attendance.
Overall, “religiosity does decrease (intimate partner) victimization” report Ellison, et al., 2007 based on a U.S. survey—adding that “religious involvement, specifically church attendance, protects against domestic violence”—a “protective effect,” which they note, is “stronger for African American men and women and for Hispanic men, groups that, for a variety of reasons, experience elevated risk for this type of violence.”
As reflected above, studies show repeatedly that faith participation can prevent both perpetration and victimization. This seems, in part, due to pro-social teachings, avoidance of risky behavior and a sense of higher purpose and meaning.
Victims often described in studies how leaders and fellow congregants helped them get away from earlier abuse and begin to find healing. This is not always true, of course—with certain attitudes held by people of faith sometimes functioning as a barrier to healing and safety. Indeed, another set of studies point towards less healthy religious attitudes that leave women at greater risk for different kinds of abuse.
Conflicting evidence
Even so, the influence of religion is not as simple as described above—with more nuance to consider. Psychological, physical and sexual violence had a “significant association” with evangelical faith in a Brazilian study—with the authors reporting a “33% increase in intimate partner sexual abuse in life in evangelical women, compared to those who do not belong to this group” (Santos, et al., 2020).
How exactly to interpret these and other seemingly contradictory findings is a critical point, something I explore in-depth in my full report. In simple form, not all religiosity is the same, with religious faith that allows men to dominate women, or which does not place serious emphasis on avoiding alcohol or casual sex, putting women (and children) at risk.
“Misinterpretation of religious beliefs” was cited in a Pakistani analysis of influences on sexual and other kinds of violence at home, with the authors advocating for “public policy informed by correct interpretation of religion” which they said could prompt “a change in prevailing societal norms.”
Religious institutions may reduce the risk of violence in a relationship.
After analyzing data from the Philippines, another research team notes that religious institutions may reduce the risk of violence in a relationship “by promoting messages encouraging a commitment to family life, providing counseling in conflict resolution or alcohol-related problems, providing information about resources in the community …. and providing an opportunity for strengthening social networks.”
In addition, there’s also evidence that sincere, “intrinsic” religious practice and conviction among men and women functions as a more powerful protector against sexual violence and other abuse, while more superficial, “extrinsic” religious conviction simply does not. It seems clear that “weak commitment to religion” could be a factor in victimization within a relationship, Vakili, et al., 2010 notes that a “woman and husband’s weak level of religious commitment” in Iran was “significantly associated with an increase in physical, sexual, and psychological abuse.”
The authors later said that “strong religious beliefs may be instrumental in reducing the likelihood of intimate partner violence among Iranian families” (Vakili, et al., 2010).In the other direction, deeper and more sincere religious conviction shows promising effects—with “religious intensity” associated in another study with a “lower victimization count” (Sabina, et al., 2013).
Complex, overlapping patterns of vulnerability
While this broad array of variables involved in increasing (or decreasing) the risk for sexual violence can seem overwhelming, I believe it can be invaluable to know that, broadly speaking, women and men who have experienced significant past abuse, who are under heavy current stress and financial pressures and are experiencing compromised faculties, significant conflict and real isolation, are all at much higher risk of future victimization (and perpetration)—especially if they have little awareness about the extent of the risk.
By contrast, women and men who have been protected from past abuse, who are not facing current heavy stress or compromised faculties, who don’t have significant conflict or isolation, will all be significantly more protected against future victimization (and perpetration)—especially if they have adequate awareness about the extent of the risk.
To the degree a woman or man falls on a higher or lower place on any of these spectrums (more past trauma, but lower stress levels today … less conflict, but also greater isolation), their level of risk (and protection) will likewise vary widely.
In addition, women who are less educated, divorced, addicted (or with partners addicted to alcohol or pornography) are more likely to experience sexual violence—especially if they experience inadequate financial support, limited healthy community commitments, and a dearth of higher meaning and spiritual purpose in life.
Perpetrators focus on places where any vulnerability exists
Even one risk factor can have rippling effects—with the sheer, cumulative risk of risk factors also corresponding with greater risk. One researcher, for instance, observed “six percent of young white women with no risk factors, nine percent of those with one, 26 percent of those with two, and 68 percent of those with three or more had been sexually abused before or during adolescence” (Moore, et al., 1989).
Certainly, none of the above factors operates in a vacuum independent of each other—with interlinkages among all ten factors. For instance, people of faith are also more likely to avoid drug/alcohol dependency, experience nurturing social support and be happily married (while also having more children).
But overall, the research makes it clear that perpetrators focus on places where any vulnerability exists. For instance, women of younger age and much older age are both more likely to be victimized, as are those with reduced cognitive or physical capacity due to disability or prior victimization.
Some factors are more changeable than others, obviously. But even those that appear unchangeable (past abuse) have interventions that can prompt healing. On a general level, as reflected above, “a person’s routine and lifestyle influences the level of exposure one has to potential perpetrators and how vulnerable one is as a target,” as Walker, et al., 2020 state. Consequently, “the identification of variables that influence likelihood of (sexual violence) is fundamental for prevention efforts” (Thomas & Kopel, 2023).
Alignment with other studies
Many of these themes have been identified in other attempts to survey available risk factors, such as a CDC analysis from 2016, which touched on most of the above patterns, but overlooked the potentially protective role of faith and religiosity.
This national and international data also align with demographic data collected locally in Utah, showing higher vulnerability to sexual violence among women who are homeless, with lower socioeconomic status, using drugs or alcohol, in minority groups, younger, or experiencing some kind of physical or mental impairments.
One especially impressive University of Washington literature review from 2017 concluded that the available evidence “reinforces the long-standing notion that sexual aggression is a complex behavior that emerges based on the interplay of multiple risk factors over time.”
“Additionally,” they note “there are likely very different pathways to the development of sexually aggressive behavior.
As Casey & Masters, 2017 conclude, “This means that preventing sexual aggression before it begins necessitates prioritizing multiple risk factors, and bolstering multiple protective factors across individuals and communities.”
The only real purpose of such study, of course, is taking better steps to protect women from sexual violence.
Better data, better prevention
The CDC advocated nearly two decades ago for building a comprehensive ecological model that “offers a framework for understanding the complex interplay of individual, relationship, social, political, cultural, and environmental factors that influence sexual violence” —all of which they note can inform specific intervention and prevention steps.
In an early 2004 exploration of what sexual violence prevention programs should look like, the CDC called for prevention efforts that “work to modify and/or entirely eliminate the events, conditions, situations, or exposure to influences (risk factors) that result in the initiation of sexual violence” and thereby proactively take steps to “prevent sexual violence from initially occurring.”
Yet a decade later in 2014, CDC researchers admitted (as I cited earlier) “rates of sexual violence remain alarmingly high, and we still know very little about how to prevent it,” going on to describe how most prevention efforts were largely “one dimensional” attempts to change individual attitudes, and little more.
Kathleen C. Basile, Associate Director for Science in the Division of Violence Prevention, in the Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC, told me in an interview with Deseret News, “I would also add that sexual violence, intimate partner violence, all types of violence are preventable, and the way we prevent them, like you alluded to earlier, is to understand the size of the problem and who is impacted, and so the characteristics, like who the perpetrators are, who, what age, it happens, things like that” (italics my own).
In a 2014 review of strategies to prevent sexual violence perpetration, CDC researchers stated that “the vast majority of preventative interventions evaluated to date have failed to demonstrate sufficient evidence of impact on sexual violence perpetration behaviors.”
They went on to call for “an evidence-based, comprehensive, multi-level strategy to combat sexual violence,” suggesting that “addressing a broader range of risk and protective factors for sexual violence may be more likely to be effective.”
Two years later in 2016, the CDC released a prevention resource prevent sexual violence called “STOP SV”—noting that although the evidence for sexual violence prevention is “less developed” than other areas of prevention, “a comprehensive approach with preventive interventions at multiple levels of the social ecological model (i.e., individual, relationship, community, and societal) is critical to having a population level impact on SV.” But they noted that evidence remained “limited and must continuously be built through rigorous evaluation.”
As CDC researchers summarized in 2016, “Risk for sexual violence perpetration is influenced by a range of factors, including characteristics of the individual and their social and physical environments. These factors interact with one another to increase or decrease risk for SV over time and within specific contexts.”
CDC researchers also wrote in 2016 that “prevention strategies that address risk and protective factors for sexual violence at the community level are important components of a comprehensive approach,” before lamenting that “few such strategies have been identified or evaluated.”
Ten life patterns that increase protection
Our review of these root contributors paints a picture of what deeper strategies of protection would look like. For instance, men who are less educated, financially struggling, addicted, isolated, emotionally unhealthy, promiscuous and spiritually disengaged, are also more likely to perpetrate sexually on vulnerable women.
There’s also protective power in more fully appreciating that women and men who are better off economically, have good educational experiences, and are embedded within both healthy marriages and supportive communities are less vulnerable to sexual violence. This is doubly true if they also avoid substance abuse and habits of risky, casual sexual relations with multiple people, while nourishing a healthy spiritual foundation.
Here are the ten steps that follow from this research broken down:
Helping lift families and communities out of poverty
Expanding educational opportunities for both women and men
Helping nurture marriages and families that are healthy and happy
Providing additional support for younger and larger families
Helping to prevent compulsivity and support addicts in finding freedom
Encouraging the value of sexually-exclusive marriages and healthy, non-aggressive masculinity
Fostering deeper healing for mental health challenges
Helping those who have experienced earlier abuse to work through post-traumatic symptoms
Expanding robust community connections and durable social support
Fostering healthy spirituality and religious connection
To see a broader summary of concrete steps, go here for the Deseret News article. Some of these ten themes are reflected in a 2016 prevention resource released by the CDC called “STOP SV.” This resource highlighted research-based recommendations that include efforts to “provide opportunities to empower and support girls and women, support victims/survivors to lessen harms, create protective environments, teach skills to prevent sexual violence and promote social norms that protect against violence.”
As reflected above, some of the best ways to ensure women remain safe may be to proactively encourage life and community patterns proven to protect against both victimization and perpetration, including:
Healthy marriages that are cooperative and satisfying, surrounded by layers of trustworthy community support.
An atmosphere where education is prioritized and there are adequate resources to provide for the financial needs of the family, while helping both men and women avoid drugs and alcohol, delay sexual behavior until marriage, and learn how to control anger and impulses.
A hopeful environment that nurtures healing from past trauma and current mental health challenges, while ideally also providing a grounding sense of higher purpose and spiritual meaning.
According to the evidence, women embedded in this kind of a context will be significantly less likely to be sexually victimized (or abused in other ways)—compared with those living within chaotic settings with poor education, financial deficits, fraying marriages, spiritual detachment, few healing resources, rampant substance abuse, sexual promiscuity and out of control anger.
Just as any vulnerability can be exploited by perpetrators, any time a vulnerability is shored up and turned into a strength, there is more protection against multiple kinds of abuse. Therefore, if we want to get at the roots of sexual victimization, more focus needs to go towards these kinds of protective life patterns, and additional ways to encourage and promote them.
Special thanks to Laura Whitney, Odessa Taylor, Jacob Orse, and Brigham Powelson for helping to gather and sift through published studies, and to Diana Gourley for helping edit the review. In addition to recent support from Deseret News, the author expresses thanks to Public Square Magazine for initial funding for the project.
If you or someone you love has experienced sexual assault of any kind and need additional support in the U.S., contact the National Sexual Assault Hotline (1-800-656-HOPE)- with virtual and text-based options available. This is a confidential networking service in the U.S. helping connect victims with local agencies who can offer therapeutic support across the country. Similar kinds of hotlines exist in many countries around the world.
Civil society representatives in discussion during the first day of the Caribbean convening organised by the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS
SAINT LUCIA, Mar 27 2026 (IPS) – As the world edges closer to breaching key climate thresholds, Caribbean policymakers, scientists and civil society leaders gathered in Saint Lucia this month to coordinate the region’s position ahead of a landmark global meeting on transitioning away from fossil fuels.
The conference, scheduled for late April in Santa Marta and co-hosted by Colombia, The Netherlands, and Tuvalu, is expected to examine strategies for a unified global transition away from fossil fuels, including financing, governance, and legal structures.
For Caribbean nations reeling from climate impacts, the discussions are far from theoretical.
“Our exposure to climate impacts is acute,” said Dr James Fletcher, climate envoy for CARICOM, in opening remarks to the gathering. “The transition is both an existential necessity and a structural transformation challenge.”
Preparing the Region’s voice
The Saint Lucia meeting was structured across two days: the first dedicated to civil society organisations and the second to government technical officials.
Organisers said the goal was to ensure both groups enter the Santa Marta conference with clear priorities and a coordinated regional position.
The Caribbean has historically played an outsized role in global climate diplomacy. Small island states were instrumental in securing the 1.5°C temperature target within the landmark Paris Agreement, despite contributing only a fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Yet that goal now appears increasingly fragile.
“We will overshoot 1.5 degrees Celsius — at least temporarily,” Fletcher told participants. “The question we now have to grapple with is for how long and by how much.”
Scientists warn that without deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, global warming could approach or exceed 2°C by the end of the century. For low-lying island states, that difference could mean the loss of ecosystems, infrastructure and territory.
A Push for Global Coordination
A key focus of the discussions was the proposal for a global fossil fuel treaty. It is an idea that is gaining traction among a coalition of countries and civil society organisations.
The treaty proposal seeks to create an international framework that would manage the decline of fossil fuel production in a coordinated and equitable way.
“The proposal came into the world because many civil society organisations realised that simply saying ‘end fossil fuels’ was not enough,” said Alex Rafalowicz, executive director of the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative.
“If we are truly going to address the question of fossil fuels, we have to move beyond rhetoric and get into the details,” he said. “Those details require coordination and cooperation between countries.”
Eighteen countries are currently participating in discussions on the idea, including several small island states such as Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas and Saint Kitts and Nevis.
The Science Behind the Urgency
Scientific evidence presented at the Saint Lucia meeting reinforced the sense of urgency.
Professor Tannecia Stephenson, a climate scientist at the University of the West Indies, warned that the world is already experiencing “widespread, unprecedented, rapid and intensified climate change”.
Unless there are “immediate, rapid and sustained large-scale reductions in greenhouse gas emissions”, she told the convening, the goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C will slip out of reach.
The Caribbean, she noted, faces a convergence of climate hazards, stronger hurricanes, rising sea levels and more severe droughts that threaten key sectors such as tourism, agriculture, and water security.
“How does a small island really prepare for a Category 5 storm of the strength and magnitude that we are now seeing?” she asked.
The answer, many participants argued, lies partly in addressing the root cause of climate change, that is, the continued expansion and use of fossil fuels.
Balancing Transition and Reality
Despite the urgency, the transition away from fossil fuels presents complex challenges for the Caribbean.
Many countries remain heavily dependent on imported oil and gas for electricity generation, transport and industry. Others rely on fossil-fuel-related revenues.
At the same time, the region faces chronic fiscal constraints and rising debt levels, often exacerbated by repeated climate disasters.
“Many of our countries are carrying high debt burdens,” Fletcher said. “Why? Because they continuously have to borrow money to recover from the last extreme weather event.”
This financial pressure complicates the transition to renewable energy and climate-resilient infrastructure.
To address this, discussions during the government officials’ session explored potential financing mechanisms linked to a fossil fuel treaty, including proposals for a climate-related debt resolution facility and international transition funds.
Advocates argue that such mechanisms could help ensure that poorer and more vulnerable countries are not left behind as the world shifts toward cleaner energy systems.
Civil Society Demands
The first day of the Saint Lucia convening focused on civil society perspectives, including community organisations and environmental groups from across the Caribbean.
Participants worked in groups to identify priorities and “red lines” for the region ahead of the Santa Marta meeting.
Among the themes raised were the need for stronger international commitments to phase out fossil fuel production, greater financial support for climate-vulnerable countries and protections for workers and communities affected by the energy transition.
Organisers also discussed plans for civil society mobilisation around the Santa Marta conference, including a people’s summit intended to amplify grassroots voices.
A Diplomatic Opening
While the Santa Marta conference is not formally part of the United Nations climate negotiations, many observers see it as an important diplomatic opportunity.
Fletcher described it as a “space outside the formal structure” of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to explore new governance options and political alignments.
Its significance was underscored when it was referenced during the closing plenary of the COP30 climate summit in Belém, Brazil.
For the Caribbean, preparing a coordinated position is essential, Fletcher said.
“Caribbean leadership is most effective when it is coordinated — when we move as a bloc,” he told participants.
Punching Above Their Weight
Small island states have long leveraged their moral authority in climate negotiations, drawing attention to the disproportionate impacts they face despite contributing little to global emissions.
Fletcher reminded the audience that Caribbean countries helped secure the 1.5°C target in the Paris Agreement and have been at the forefront of campaigns on climate justice, loss and damage financing and reform of the global financial system.
“We do not lead because we are powerful,” he said. “We lead because we are principled. We lead because we are credible.”
But leadership, he added, must be matched with strategy and unity.
As delegates left the Saint Lucia meeting, the message was clear: the Santa Marta conference could represent an important step toward building global momentum for a managed phase-out of fossil fuels.
For the Caribbean, however, the stakes could hardly be higher.
“The Caribbean has often been the moral compass of global climate diplomacy,” Fletcher said. “We must continue to lead strategically, coherently and decisively.”
It was hope that kept me going. – Professor Kaveh Madani
Kaveh Madani, Director of the UN University’s Institute for Water,
Environment and Health and lead author of the report entitled “Global Water
Bankruptcy: Living Beyond Our Hydrological Means in the Post-Crisis Era” briefs reporters at UN
Headquarters.
Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 25 2026 (IPS) – Professor Kaveh Madani of Iran has been named the 2026 Stockholm Water Prize laureate. The award will be formally presented by King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden in August during World Water Week in Stockholm.
The Stockholm Water Prize is widely regarded as the highest global honour in water science and policy. Often called the Nobel Prize for water, it recognises individuals and institutions for exceptional contributions to the sustainable use and protection of water resources. This year’s selection stands out for both scientific impact and the extraordinary personal journey of the laureate.
At 44, Madani is the first Muslim and the youngest recipient in the prize’s 35 year history. He is also the first United Nations official and the first former politician to receive the award.
Madani currently serves as Director of the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health. Once a senior official in Iran’s government, he later faced arrest, interrogation, and a sustained smear campaign that forced him to leave his country.
Born in Tehran in 1981, Madani grew up in a family deeply connected to Iran’s water sector. His early exposure to the country’s mounting water challenges shaped his academic direction. He studied civil engineering at the University of Tabriz before moving to Sweden to pursue a master’s degree in water resources at Lund University. He later earned a PhD from the University of California, Davis, followed by postdoctoral research at the University of California, Riverside.
By his early 30s, Madani had established himself as a leading systems analyst. He joined Imperial College, London, where his work focused on the mathematical modelling of complex human water systems. His research combined hydrology, economics, and decision sciences to improve policymaking in water management.
In 2017, he made a decisive move. Leaving a prestigious academic career in London, he returned to Iran to serve as Deputy Vice President and Deputy Head of the Department of Environment. Many viewed his appointment as a signal of reform and a bridge between Iran and its scientific diaspora.
During his tenure, Madani pushed for transparency and structural reforms in water governance. He used innovative public campaigns to raise awareness about environmental degradation. However, his efforts challenged entrenched interests.
State-aligned media accused him of espionage and labelled him a “water terrorist” and “bioterrorist”. Conspiracy theories circulated, linking him to foreign intelligence agencies and even to alleged weather manipulation schemes. His advocacy for international environmental agreements further intensified opposition.
In early 2018, a broader crackdown on environmental experts began. Madani was detained and interrogated multiple times. Several of his colleagues were arrested. One of them, Kavous Seyed Emami, died in custody under contested circumstances.
Facing mounting pressure, Madani left Iran and entered a period of exile. He joined Yale University, where he continued his research and advocacy. He began to focus more on bridging science and policy at the global level.
Madani’s academic contributions have been widely recognised. He is known for integrating game theory into water resource management. His work challenged traditional models that assumed cooperation among stakeholders. He demonstrated that individual incentives often lead to uncooperative behaviour, which makes many engineering solutions ineffective in practice.
This approach provided new tools to understand conflicts over shared water resources. It has been applied to transboundary water disputes and to policy design in regions with limited trust among stakeholders.
One of his most influential contributions is “water bankruptcy.” He introduced the term to describe a condition where water systems can no longer recover to their historical levels. Unlike a crisis, which implies a temporary disruption, water bankruptcy signals a long-term structural failure.
In a recent United Nations report, Madani argued that the world entered an era of global water bankruptcy in January 2026. The report highlighted that many river basins and aquifers have lost their capacity to regenerate. This framing has sparked debate among policymakers and researchers.
Madani uses simple financial language to explain complex ecological realities. He argues that humanity is no longer living off renewable water flows but is depleting long-term reserves. This framing has made the concept widely accessible and influential.
Beyond academia, Madani has built a strong public presence. With a large following on social media, he has used digital platforms to communicate scientific findings in accessible ways. His work includes documentaries and public campaigns aimed at increasing awareness and accountability.
He has also played key roles in international diplomacy. As Iran’s lead environmental diplomat, he participated in global negotiations and served as Vice President of the UN Environment Assembly Bureau in 2017. At the COP23 climate conference in Bonn, he called for greater attention to water in global climate agreements.
Today, as head of the United Nations water think tank, he continues to advocate for integrating water into climate and development policies. He has particularly focused on the Global South, where water stress closely links with food insecurity, migration, and conflict.
The Stockholm Water Prize Committee cited his “unique combination of groundbreaking research, policy engagement, diplomacy, and global outreach, often under personal risk” in awarding him the 2026 prize.
In an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service, Madani recalled the intense pressure and fear that defined his final days in Iran. He described repeated interrogations, surveillance, and a growing sense that his work had placed him in direct confrontation with powerful institutions.
Here are edited excerpts from the interview:
IPS: You introduced the idea of “water bankruptcy.” How does this change how governments must act today?
Madani: Water bankruptcy is defined as a post-crisis state of failure in which the system is suffering from insolvency, meaning that water use has been more than the available water for an extended period, and also irreversibility, meaning that there are some damages to the ecosystem and the machinery of water production that are irreversible and cannot be fixed.
What that means is that some of the things that used to be just anomalies and abnormal conditions are now the new normal, and we’re no longer experiencing only a temporary deviation from what we are used to, but we have a situation that we have to get used to. Crisis management is about mitigation.
Bankruptcy management is about mitigating what can still be mitigated and adapting to new realities with more restrictions. Bankruptcy management calls for an honest confession, the admission of a confession that a mistake has been made, and the current business model is not working, so it calls for honestly admitting to the mistakes made and transforming the business model, that calls for a fresh new start and a change of course.
It is bitter. Bankruptcy is not a pleasant condition but admitting to it helps us prevent further irreversible damages and enables a future that is less catastrophic.
IPS: You faced arrest, exile, and serious accusations in Iran. What kept you going during that period?
Professor Madani: Hope. Hope is what kept me going because I had gone back there to help and at least at the start, I was trying to take what was happening to me as part of the job and as part of the adventure because I was there to make a positive impact, and if I had given up too quickly, then that would not have matched my essential motivation to help.
I knew that it would not be a very smooth path, but it turned out to be much more bumpy than what I had anticipated, and I think many also, you know, those who made that situation bumpy for me, also regret that today, but by the time they realised mistakes were made, it was too late to do anything about it.
Can you recall your arrest and interrogation? What do you remember most from that experience, and how did it affect you personally?
I think arrests and interrogations are very frustrating, especially when you haven’t done anything wrong.
What kills you is constantly worrying about what others think of you and coming up with different scenarios and conspiracy theories. Dealing with conspiracy theories and proving them wrong is not easy. Those were very hard times for me, but as you know, my background is in behaviour analysis. I was trying to put myself in the shoes of those who were suspicious of me, understand their concerns, and address them so I could help my homeland.
IPS: Many countries still treat water stress as a temporary crisis. What are the biggest policy mistakes they continue to make?
Madani: Yes, crisis management is all about mitigation. Those who deny the crisis and enter the bankruptcy state continue to borrow more from nature, build more infrastructure, dig deeper wells, add additional reservoirs and storage capacity, implement more water transfer projects and build more, and construct more desalination plants. Continuing to add to their supply, on the other hand, they think things would be temporary, and through some sort of rationing, things would be solved, but the continuation of that behaviour and the denial of that reality makes the problem worse.
They get drained into a deepening problem, and again, like the financial world, if your business model is not working and you’re in denial, you continue taking more loans and your expenses and your debt become higher and higher. By the time that people realise that there is no way out of that chaos and that failure, the cost is much, much higher. Remaining in denial would result in major significant irreversible damages that generations would have to pay for.
IPS: You combined science with diplomacy and public outreach. Which of these has had the most real impact on decision-making?
Professor Madani: It’s very hard to really say which one has the most impact, because they’re very complementary. The science is very good, but it’s not enough for decision-making. You still have to understand what the real world looks like and how incentives shape behaviour and actions and how interests promote conflicts and cooperation to be able to act.
Science, of course, opens doors and puts more solutions on the table, but still, without understanding the politics or navigating through politics, it would not work. Diplomacy is another one when it comes to the international scale; even when it comes to negotiating with stakeholders, that’s a skill that would be extremely helpful. So, in a way, these are the things that you need.
And on top of these, public outreach educates you about perceptions, how people and societies understand problems, how they judge different situations, and how their emotions and their perceptions shape their beliefs, and that tells you what you need to do when it comes to communicating your science better, changing their opinion, impacting their opinion, and even negotiating with them or convincing them that things might be different or a different pathway is required. I think they all help you create a recipe for something that might work.
IPS: Your work focuses on human behaviour in water management. Why do technical solutions alone often fail?
Madani: A lot of times, technical solutions developed by our computer models or in our labs don’t take into account the full elements of reality. When humans are involved, we deal with different motives, incentives, emotions, and psychologies, and that makes – that creates – some essentially unexpected realities that might tweak things. Simply put, a lot of times when it comes to developing a solution for a water problem or an environmental solution or a sustainability solution, we think that everyone agrees to making short-term sacrifices for the sake of long-term resilience, but that is not the case in reality because different stakeholders, different groups, farmers, urban users, and industrial users also have short-term goals.
They maximise profit, make sure that the quality of life is not impacted, and so on, which makes them non-cooperative to an extent. And if you miss this reality, then you think that the solution, the optimal solution, is very practical and everyone would cooperate, but then you get very disappointed.
Yet, you can take that into account to the extent possible, try to understand the behavioural element and incorporate those into your assessment and projections to be able to align those incentives and motives with the long-term interest to offer a solution that is more attractive and win-win.
IPS: You now advise governments globally. What is the one urgent action every water-stressed country must take in the next five years?
Madani: I think that by now, countries must understand the importance of water as an essential resource for establishing peace, national security, justice, prosperity, and development. I mean, it supports human development, health, and long-term resilience in society. So, countries must not take it for granted and understand that technological solutions would not be sufficient to address shortages.
They must revisit their practices. They must do a proper accounting to understand what, what’s, and how water is currently being spent and if it’s strategic – strategically speaking, that is the right way of doing things when it comes to matters of national security and long-term resilience. Bankruptcy management starts with accounting and transparency.
That’s something that is missing in many water-stressed and non-water-stressed countries, and I think that’s something that we can focus on, put the lens of science on, and not be afraid of accounting and measuring and monitoring what is happening in the system because that knowledge is required if you want to make improvements.
IPS: Thank you very much for taking the time and speaking to IPS and congratulations again for the well-deserved award.
