US Tariffs Threaten to Undermine World Trade Organization

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Democracy, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Credit: John Birch Society

UNITED NATIONS, Apr 11 2025 (IPS) – As the Trump administration’s hostility towards the United Nations and other international organizations keeps growing, a New York Times columnist last week proposed what he frivolously described as “something a little incendiary”.

Maybe Trump could follow up on his non-appointment of Elise Stefanik as US Ambassador to the United Nations—who has been virulently anti-UN—by withdrawing the US from the United Nations entirely.

The UN’s 39-storeyed building, the Times columnist remarked, has “amazing views of the East River”—and said, rather sarcastically, it would be a great condo conversion– as a luxury apartment complex.

A White House Executive Order last February was titled “Withdrawing the United States from, and ending funding to certain United Nations organizations, and reviewing United States support to ALL international organizations.”

President Trump, who withdrew the US from the UN Human Rights Council, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Climate Treaty, has threatened to pull out of UNESCO and the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestine Refugees in the Near East– and also to terminate US contracts with the World Food Programme (WFP) in Rome (which was later reversed and described as “a mistake”).

And could Trump reverse his withdrawals from UN agencies –as he did with tariffs? But that seems very unlikely.

Trump’s staggering US tariffs worldwide have not only threatened the longstanding ground rules in world trade but also undermined the Geneva-based World Trade Organization (WTO), described as the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations.

Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, which is focused on trade, was quoted as saying: “I would say the WTO is toast, but what matters now is how other members respond”.

“Do they stand up for the system? Or do they also ignore key principles, provisions and practices?”

In his unpredictable on-again, off-again decision-making, Trump backed down last week on most reciprocal tariffs for a period of 90 days, citing new talks with foreign nations, explaining his reversal. But China, he said, would not be included, and he raised tariffs on its exports to 125 percent.

Perhaps after 90 days, the tariffs will be at play once again, continuing to de-stabilize world trade and the global economy.

The move leaves a universal 10 percent tariff on all other countries except Canada and Mexico, which face separate duties. But it undoes some of the original tariffs — 20 percent on the European Union, 24 percent on Japan, 46 percent on Vietnam.

China has said it will impose reciprocal tariffs on all imports from the United States, escalating a trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Interim Co-Secretary-General CIVICUS, a global alliance of civil society organizations (CSOs), told IPS: “We are entering a dangerous age of values-free transactional diplomacy which is leading to the breakdown of the rules based international order”.

A lot of it, he pointed out, has to do with the rise of authoritarianism and populism over the past few years which has elevated political leaders who spread disinformation and rule by personality cult rather than established norms.

“Civil society and the independent media serve as important checks on the exercise of arbitrary power in the public interest but are being attacked in unprecedented ways,” he declared.

Sadly, humanity has been here before in the period prior to the start of the first and second world wars in the twentieth century, which caused immeasurable death and destruction.

Autocratic and populist regimes, he said, are deliberately undermining international norms that seek to create peaceful, just, equal and sustainable societies.

Notably, civil society organising and citizen action offer the last line of defence against the relentless assault on cherished ideals enshrined in constitutional and international law,” said Tiwana.

Asked if the rash of tariffs would lead to a global economic recession, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told reporters April 8: “I’ve been clarifying my position about this issue time and time again. Trade wars are extremely negative. Nobody wins with a trade war. Everybody tends to lose”.

“And I’m particularly worried with the most vulnerable developing countries, in which the impact will be more devastating. I sincerely hope that we will have no recession, because a recession will have dramatic consequences, especially for the poorest people in the world,” he warned.

Dr Jim Jennings, president of Conscience International and Executive Director of US Academics for Peace, told IPS the widespread “Hands Off” protests in the US threaten to return the country to the decades of debate over tariffs that took place during the 19th Century. The issue then, as now, was protectionism—believed to enrich the manufacturing class.

Whereas the Whigs (today’s Republicans) wanted high tariffs, the idea of free trade as a way to reach prosperity was the mantra of the Democrats, who favored the working class.

President Lincoln favored tariffs, but by 1860 admitted that arguing for a protective tariff was unwise for political reasons—few people at that time favored it. Most Americans had come to realize that high tariffs were protecting the moneyed class and simply raise taxes for everybody. Lincoln knew he was unlikely to be elected President if tariffs were the key to his campaign.

Today’s bewildering day in-day out bluffs and threats by Mr. Trump means that the market will continue to bounce around. “Wall Street likes certainty, but the only certainty we can see is that the US economy is in the hands of amateurs”.

“While the idea of comparing our globalized economy to that of 1840-60 is problematic, with the world already teetering on the verge of WW III, a Trade War is the last thing we need,” declared Dr Jennings.

Andreas Bummel, Executive Director, Democracy Without Borders, told IPS “from the standpoint of democratic checks and balances, it is concerning that the US President apparently can unleash a trade war with most of the world’s countries while the US Congress simply looks on.”

But according to an Associated Press (AP) report April 9, the State Department has rolled back an undisclosed number of sweeping funding cuts to U.N. World Food Program emergency projects in 14 impoverished countries, saying it had terminated some of the contracts for life-saving aid “by mistake”.

“There were a few programs that were cut in other countries that were not meant to be cut, that have been rolled back and put into place,” State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters.

Meanwhile, China has said it will retaliate by imposing reciprocal tariffs on all imports from the United States. “This practice of the U.S. is not in line with international trade rules, undermines China’s legitimate rights and interests, and is a typical unilateral bullying practice,” China’s finance ministry said in a statement.

China has also filed a lawsuit with the World Trade Organization, saying the U.S. tariffs were “a typical unilateral bullying practice that endangers the stability of the global economic and trade order.”

Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the WTO, said the Secretariat is closely monitoring and analysing the measures announced by the United States on April 2, 2025.

“Many members have reached out to us and we are actively engaging with them in response to their questions about the potential impact on their economies and the global trading system.”

The recent announcements, he pointed out, will have substantial implications for global trade and economic growth prospects.

“While the situation is rapidly evolving, our initial estimates suggest that these measures, coupled with those introduced since the beginning of the year, could lead to an overall contraction of around 1% in global merchandise trade volumes this year, representing a downward revision of nearly four percentage points from previous projections”

“I am deeply concerned about this decline and the potential for escalation into a tariff war with a cycle of retaliatory measures that lead to further declines in trade.”

It is important to remember that, despite these new measures, the vast majority of global trade still flows under the WTO’s Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) terms.

“Our estimates now indicate that this share currently stands at 74%, down from around 80% at the beginning of the year. WTO members must stand together to safeguard these gains.”

Trade measures of this magnitude have the potential to create significant trade diversion effects. “I call on Members to manage the resulting pressures responsibly to prevent trade tensions from proliferating,” said Dr Okonjo-Iweala.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

A Make-or-Break Moment for Global Development Finance—& the Role Philanthropy Must Play

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Change, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

FFD4 Home Seville Platform for Action, 30 June-3 July 2025. Credit: United Nations

WASHINGTON DC, Apr 9 2025 (IPS) – This June, world leaders will gather in Seville for the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4), a milestone opportunity to reimagine how the global economy delivers for people and the planet. But the real question isn’t whether this historic convening will happen. It’s whether it will matter.

Global systems are straining under the weight of overlapping crises: a ballooning debt burden across the Global South, massive financing gaps to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and climate catastrophes that demand urgent and equitable funding.

And yet, even as needs escalate, traditional sources of foreign aid are in retreat. The U.S. and other major donors are pulling back, creating gaping holes in public budgets and threatening the survival of civil society organizations that provide essential services and accountability functions.

Michael Jarvis

We are facing a post-aid world. But that doesn’t mean we must accept a post-development world. In fact, the FfD4 conference, set for June 30 to July 3 in Seville, presents a rare and time-sensitive opportunity to reconfigure development finance – balancing funds that will come from taxes and raising sustainable debt with those to come as official development assistance or via philanthropic contributions.

And if governments are willing to be bold, they won’t be alone. Philanthropy can be a catalytic force backing systemic reforms. Funders can lead by example with commitments under the Sevilla Platform for Action that will bring together voluntary initiatives to deliver measurable progress to boost a renewed financing framework.

The current draft of the conference outcome document includes some encouraging steps: nods to progressive taxation, recognition of the need for fairer sovereign debt mechanisms, and reform of international finance institutions.

But as the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) notes, many proposals still fall short of transformative change. Key concepts like human rights, gender equality, and participation appear inconsistently and more as rhetoric than as guiding principles.

We can do more to center Global South voices in negotiations and this is one way in which philanthropy can step up – helping expand the participation of diverse voices to be at the table, ensuring the perspectives of those most affected by financing decisions are heard.

Funders can also support the technical and diplomatic engagement of Global South governments in negotiations, so their priorities are fully represented.

Beyond participation, there’s a pressing need to fill thematic gaps—particularly in underfunded areas such as debt justice, fair taxation, and protection of civic space. Philanthropic commitments that align publicly with the FfD4 goals can build credibility and create positive pressure for ambitious reforms.

Just as importantly, funders must be willing to invest beyond the conference itself, providing long-term support to translate declarations into tangible outcomes on the ground.

Consider the issue of sovereign debt. Today, over 50 countries are in crisis, with many spending more on debt service than on healthcare or education. Without systemic reform, these countries will remain trapped in cycles of austerity and underdevelopment.

Philanthropy can fund advocacy, support debtor country coalitions and research to unlock debt relief, but also invest in revising frameworks, including building in greater transparency and oversight, to ensure that when countries borrow in the future debt is more sustainable.

Tax reform is another area where funders can have a significant impact. In the face of reduced foreign assistance, countries will need to rely more on their own revenue mobilization, but in ways that don’t exacerbate inequality.

From reinforcing constructive engagement in shaping the new UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation to supporting watchdog organizations that expose illicit financial flows, philanthropy can help shift the narrative and the policy framework toward a fairer tax system and restore faith in tax as our “social superpower” that supports so many of the services that citizens rely upon.

Climate finance, too, demands a bolder philanthropic role. For example, we need to invest not just in raising new finance for climate mitigation and adaptation, but in ensuring those funds get to where they need to go.

Philanthropy can support government and civil society capacity to ensure that every climate dollar counts. None of this is about replacing governments. It’s about augmenting their ability to act in the public interest and holding them accountable when they do not.

Funders, such as the members of the Trust, Accountability and Inclusion Collaborative, have already demonstrated what’s possible when philanthropy aligns with governance reform. They’re not just writing checks, they are investing in a more trust-based, accountable and inclusive development finance system. That model must become the norm and for those funders interested to learn more there are peers ready to offer advice or join forces.

In an era when multilateralism is under strain and trust in public institutions is eroding, the role of independent, values-driven actors is more important than ever. The FfD4 conference is a moment to demonstrate that the international development community can still serve people and the planet if enough of us are willing to push in that direction.

Philanthropy has the agility, the resources, and the networks to lead that push. It must not be a silent partner at this time. The stakes are too high.

Michael Jarvis is the Executive Director of the Trust, Accountability, and Inclusion (TAI) Collaborative, a network of philanthropic funders advancing systemic reforms to build more inclusive and accountable governance globally.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Behind the Feeding of the 5,000 (or Should That Be 10,000) at CGIAR Science Week

Posted on by admin

Africa, Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Food Sustainability, Global, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Poverty & SDGs, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Youth

Food and Agriculture

Ismahane Elouafi Executive Managing Director, CGIAR and Nairobi Chef Kiran Jethwa in discussion during the Good Food for All lunch at CGIAR Science Week 2025. Credit: CGIAR

Ismahane Elouafi
Executive Managing Director, CGIAR and Nairobi Chef Kiran Jethwa in discussion during the Good Food for All lunch at CGIAR Science Week 2025. Credit: CGIAR

NAIROBI, Apr 8 2025 (IPS) – Good Food for All is the motto of The Chef’s Manifesto, a project that brings together more than 1,500 chefs from around the world to explore how to ensure the food they prepare is planet-friendly and sustainable.

It was Nairobi Chef Kiran Jethwa who prepared a menu filled with locally sourced food for the thousands of  delegates on the first day at the GCIAR Science Week in Nairobi.

The menu included High Iron Red Kidney Bean and Biofortified Sweet Potato,  Swahili Curry with Toasted Ginger and Dhania, Tilapia Pilau with Omena (Native Small Fish), Slow Braised Kenyan Kinyeji Chicken Stew with Cassava, Arrow Root with Seared Terere (Amaranth and Millet and Jaegerry Halwa with Raisins and Roasted Cashews.

Delegates snaked towards the tent under beautiful trees on this most exotic United Nations campus situated near Kienyeji forest in Nairobi.

At the Chef's Manifesto lunch on the first day of CGIAR science week. Credit: IPS

At the Chef’s Manifesto lunch on the first day of CGIAR science week. Credit: IPS

Food is central to the debates here, where delegates debate how science can make a difference in the world where hunger is rampant (according to the United Nations, 3.1 billion people cannot afford a healthy diet) and climate change and conflict, among other issues, complicate food production.

As Prof. Lindiwe Majele Sibanda, who chaired the Council of the Wise session in the opening plenary, told the audience, the crisis we are in calls for bold action.

“We’re in a crisis because of climate change. We’re in a crisis because of environmental and health degradation… We are in crisis because of gender inequality, no jobs for our youth, and nutrition insecurity,” she said, and during this week “we are looking for solutions” to this in science.

Summing up the argument of former Prime Minister Dr. Ibrahim Assane Mayaki as AU Special Envoy for Food Systems, Sibanda coined a quote for social media.

“We are in a crisis and Dr. Mayaki says… We need more leaders who are scientists, because scientists solve problems.”

To applause, he agreed.

A healthy plate of sustainably sourced food. Credit: IPS

A healthy plate of sustainably sourced food. Credit: IPS

Former President of Mauritius, Dr. Ameenah Firdaus Gurib-Fakim, asked where the empowerment of women in agriculture was. “Food is produced mostly by women.”

And, she asked, how is it possible to get youth into agriculture?

Agriculture needs to break the stereotype of agriculture as a woman with a hoe breaking hard earth.

“We need the youth to realize that agriculture is a 1 trillion dollar business,” Gurib-Fakim said, emphasizing that it was time to change the narrative.

Sibanda agreed. “Can we have an education that is fit for purpose? Can we have women empowerment and youth as drivers of the food systems, research, and innovation?”

Former Prime Minister of the Republic of Guinea and expert in agricultural finance, Mohamed Beavogui, said it was time for “bold, practical, and inclusive solutions” for ensuring that what was produced on the land ended up on the plate.

Looking for a quotable quote, Sibanda summed it up as “LLP from the lab to the land to the plate, that’s a systems approach,” elaborating that CGIAR aims to reform the food, land, and water systems for food security globally.

“Please Tweet that,” she asked the audience, referring to X by its pre-Elon Musk name.

Finally, Sibanda asked former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan why we are still hungry, poor, and not preserving our biodiversity.

He didn’t believe that it was necessary to elect presidents that are scientists; he commented that in Africa leaders probably spend more time thinking about how to “hold onto leadership than thinking about their people.”

But getting the right mix into the cabinet was crucial—it was more about finding the right people and putting them in roles where they can make a difference.

Sibanda sums it up: “The president has to surround himself with the right people… to be game changers in the country.

Sibanda noted the session produced lots of “tweetable tweets.”

Summing up the panel’s view on policymaking, she said it was as messy and inexact—like “sausage making”—but needed to be “contextualized, evidence-based,” and those affected need to be consulted.

The “billboard” message, however, was that youth are the future and science should be at the forefront of agriculture.

IPS UN Bureau Report,

  Source

Digital Democracy at a Crossroads. Key Takeaways from RigthsCon2025

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Education, Featured, Gender, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

RIO DE JANEIRO / ABUJA, Apr 7 2025 (IPS) – In an increasingly digital world, democratic practices are evolving to encompass new forms of participation. Digital democracy – the use of technology to enhance civic action, movement building and access to information – has become a crucial force in shaping local and global political landscapes.

As digital spaces become central to public discourse, civil society’s work is crucial to ensure these spaces remain accessible, open, participatory and resistant to disinformation, censorship and repression.

RightsCon 2025, recently held in Taiwan, offered an opportunity to discuss the current challenges and opportunities at the intersection of tech and human rights.

The digital democracy dilemma

Internet access has expanded among excluded communities, providing new opportunities for civic action and organising for historically excluded communities. But at the same time there’s increasing use of digital surveillance, censorship and algorithmic manipulation by governments and companies with the aim of suppressing dissent and controlling public discourse.

In 2023, the last year for which full data is available, internet penetration in low-income countries grew by three per cent, but this came alongside a record decline in global electoral integrity, with state-backed disinformation campaigns influencing elections in at least 30 countries. This means there’s an urgent need for policies that both enhance digital inclusion and safeguard civic freedoms from technological threats, particularly given that AI use is growing.

Civil society is calling for a global regulatory framework that ensures tech is beneficial for all, while facing the challenge of tech-facilitated attacks on civic freedoms. At the same time, civil society resourcing is shrinking and stigmatising narratives from authoritarian governments spread by tech are on the rise. Meanwhile – as CIVICUS’s 2025 State of Civil Society Report outlines – big-tech corporations focus on protecting their political and profit agendas. This makes spaces for convening and deliberation like RightsCon more vital than ever.

What next?

A global framework is crucial to ensure technology serves the public good and contributes to a more inclusive and equitable society. As digital technologies become deeply embedded in every aspect of governance and civic space, as well as cultural and belief systems, the risks of fragmented digital policies and regulations grow, leading to inconsistent mechanisms for protection and unequal access across regions. This fragmentation can significantly increase exposure to disinformation, exploitation and surveillance, particularly for traditionally excluded and vulnerable groups.

The Global Digital Compact (GDC) agreed at last year’s UN Summit of the Future represents the kind of comprehensive, multilateral framework civil society should advocate for. By fostering global cooperation, the GDC aims to establish shared principles for digital governance that prioritise human rights, democratic values and inclusive access to digital tools.

Through international bodies and cross-sector collaborations – such as those held at RightsCon – civil society can contribute towards shaping this framework, ensuring that civil society, governments and the private sector, including tech companies, work together to create a cohesive and accountable approach to digital governance.

Challenges and opportunities

Follow-up to the GDC must address a wide range of challenges, including digital access and inclusion. The existing digital ecosystem hinders equitable participation in democratic processes and efforts to realise human rights. There’s a need to close digital divides through targeted investments in education, digital skills and infrastructure, ensuring that everyone, regardless of geography or socioeconomic status, can access the tools needed to participate fully in shaping society. Civil society’s work here must be locally led, putting communities’ needs at the heart of advocacy and focusing on curating spaces for consultation and participation.

Another critical challenge is the intersection of government digitalisation and civic engagement. E-governance and online public services offer the potential for greater transparency, efficiency and participation, but they also introduce risks for privacy and security, reinforcing longstanding structural injustices such as racism and gender discrimination. Guidelines are needed to ensure transparency and accountability in digital governance while protecting the right to privacy. Polices need to enable the use of digital tools to fight and prevent corruption and ensure governments are held accountable.

And then there are the complex issues of AI governance. As AI technologies rapidly evolve, there come growing threats of algorithmic biases, a lack of transparency and the manipulation of public discourse and information ecosystems. Robust ethical standards for AI are needed that prioritise human rights and democratic values.

From the manipulation of public opinion, efforts to distort electoral outcomes and the generation of false narratives that can incite violence and social unrest, disinformation has many negative impacts on democracy. Evidence has repeatedly shown that in countries where politicians intensively use disinformation tactics, people’s trust in public institutions and democratic processes wanes and civic participation, a critical ingredient for democratic progress, falls. Conversations during RightsCon 2025 emphasised that civil society must engage with governments and regional and global institutions to help develop policies that regulate how information is managed in the digital age while working to improve media literacy and fact-checking initiatives.

The added value of civil society lies in its ability to act as a convener, broker and watchdog, and an advocate with and for traditionally excluded voices. Civil society is key in pushing for the inclusion of strong data protection laws, digital rights protections and regulations that curb the unchecked power of tech companies, where many grey areas for accountability remain underexplored. Working alongside governments and the private sector, civil society can lead the way in developing policies that safeguard democratic values, enhance accountability and ensure technology remains a tool for positive societal change. Through collective advocacy and partnership, civil society can drive a vision of a truly inclusive and ethical digital future.

Digital democracy and the challenges it faces aren’t national issues but global ones. Disinformation, cyberattacks and the erosion of digital rights transcend borders. More grounded international solidarity and cooperation is needed to create and enforce standards that protect online civic space and rights. The GDC must be supported and made more robust as a global framework for digital governance that upholds human rights, promotes transparency and ensures accountability.

Initiatives like the Digital Democracy Initiative should be championed in recognition of the unique role society plays in monitoring, analysing and challenging threats to digital democracy. It’s never been more crucial to enable and amplify civil society action in the face of global democratic decline amid an increasingly digital age.

Carolina Vega is Innovation Quality Management Lead at CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance. Chibuzor Nwabueze is Programme and Network Coordinator for CIVICUS’s Digital Democracy Initiative.

  Source

CGIAR Science Week Seeks Solutions for a Food-Secure, Climate Resilient Future

Posted on by admin

Africa, Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conservation, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Food Sustainability, Gender, Humanitarian Emergencies, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment, Youth

Food and Agriculture

Sweetpotato crossing block, Uganda. Reuben Ssali, a plant breeder Associate with the International Potato Center. Credit: CGIAR

Sweetpotato crossing block, Uganda. Reuben Ssali, a plant breeder Associate with the International Potato Center. Credit: CGIAR

NAIROBI, Apr 7 2025 (IPS) – CGIAR and the Kenyan Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO) are bringing together the world’s leading scientists and decision-makers in agriculture, climate, and health for the first CGIAR Science Week. This gathering will be a key moment to advance research and innovation, inspire action, and establish critical partnerships that can secure investment in sustainable food systems for people and the planet.

IPS’ team of journalists, Busani Bafana, Joyce Chimbi, and Naureen Hossain, will bring you news and interviews throughout the week as the conference unfolds. This will include the launch of the CGIAR Research Portfolio 2025-2030 today (April 7, 2025).

IPS UN Bureau Report,

  Source

Challenging the Taliban’s Violations of Afghan Women’s Rights

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Gender, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

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.

A 31-year-old woman sits by the window. She used to be an entrepreneur before the Taliban takeover. Credit: UN Women/Sayed Habib Bidell

NEW YORK, Apr 7 2025 (IPS) – The Taliban’s egregious violations of women’s rights in Afghanistan, especially banning women from education and even from speaking in public, are beyond the pale. Imposing economic sanctions alone, however, has not changed in any significant way the Taliban’s treatment of women.

By demonstrating that they understand the Taliban’s cultural heritage and religious beliefs, Western powers, with the support of several Arab states, will be in a better position to persuade the Taliban that respecting women’s rights is consistent with their beliefs and would be greatly beneficial to their country.

Although the Taliban were exposed to democracy, freedom, and equality for both men and women for nearly 20 years during the American presence, they reversed these reforms once they reassumed power following the American withdrawal in August 2021, even though the Afghans embraced such freedoms wholeheartedly. From the Taliban’s perspective, these reforms were contrary to their beliefs and way of life.

The Taliban’s Egregious Women’s Rights Violations

In 2021, the Taliban banned all education for girls beyond the sixth grade, which has deprived a total of 2.2 million girls and women of their right to education. UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell stated last month that the ban continues to harm the future of millions of Afghan girls, and that over four million girls will have been deprived of an education beyond the primary level if the ban persists for another five years. Accordingly, she said, “The consequences for these girls – and for Afghanistan – are catastrophic.”

Since 2021, Afghan women have faced unimaginable oppression. Beyond education bans, the Taliban forced women to cover themselves completely, with criminal penalties for those who refuse to comply. In December 2024, they announced their plan to shut down all NGOs employing women over so-called dress code violations.

Their voices are literally silenced through an August 2024 law that bans women from speaking outside the home. Their rights are stripped away, and their resistance met with brutality. In the shadows of war and conflict, women and girls endure unimaginable suffering, facing heightened levels of gender-based violence, including arbitrary killings, torture, and forced marriage and sexual violence, leaving deep physical and emotional scars.

The Taliban are not oblivious to these findings, as some officials have publicly argued against some bans, but they nevertheless continue to violate women’s rights under the pretext of their bans being consistent with their religious and traditional role in Afghan society.

The Taliban are predominantly from the Pashtun tribes, which are indigenous to the region and have a strong tribal structure and cultural traditions, which influenced the Taliban’s socio-political orientation.

The Historic Perspective

To better understand the Taliban’s mindset, which reflects their resilience and extremism against foreign domination, it is important to reflect briefly on Afghanistan’s history. The region now known as Afghanistan was a target for invaders as early as the sixth century BCE, facing scores of foreign invaders up through the US-led invasion in 2001, yet has shown great resilience against foreign domination, as invaders repeatedly faced fierce resistance and were ultimately forced to withdraw.

Across centuries, Afghanistan has consistently defied foreign powers, earning its reputation as the “graveyard of empires.” The Taliban’s emergence as a movement was, in large part, a response to the chaos and power vacuum left by the Soviet withdrawal in 1990. They rose to power in 1996 and were ousted by the US-led invasion in 2001.

Afghan religious extremism stems from several factors. The U.S. and its allies funded and armed mujahideen fighters during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, fostering radical ideologies. Saudi-funded schools in Pakistan taught extreme Deobandi and Wahhabi ideologies to Afghan refugees, who returned to Afghanistan to fight in the Afghan Civil War.

Following the departure of the Soviets, the Taliban imposed puritanical Islam rooted in Deobandi ideology and ethnic and political manipulation. Extremism was used to consolidate power, suppress minorities, and resist foreign influence.

Cutting aid alone is not the answer

It is necessary for global powers to hold the Taliban accountable for gender persecution and take punitive actions, including cutting off financial aid; however, thus far, imposing economic sanctions alone has not yielded the desired results.

The Taliban’s harsh treatment of women remains unabated, and to effect a real change, the West must change its strategy.

While the threat of more sanctions should continue to hover over the Taliban’s heads, to effect the necessary changes to improve women’s rights, the West should take systematic measures that align with the group’s cultural and religious teachings.

Working with influential Muslim-majority countries, including Indonesia, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, which is the leader of Sunni Islam, is key in order to challenge the Taliban’s interpretation of Sharia law while highlighting Quranic principles of equality and historical examples of female scholarship in Islam.

In Afghanistan, the restrictions on women’s rights, including education and dress codes, are based on interpretations of Islamic law and cultural practices rather than direct Quranic edicts. To demonstrate to the Taliban leaders that respecting women’s human rights complements rather than compromises their cultural and religious beliefs, the West’s Arab and Muslim partners should cite Quranic verses to make the case.

The first revelation to Prophet Muhammad begins with the command to “read,” which is seen as a universal call to acquire knowledge. Surah Al-Tawbah (9:71) emphasizes the equal responsibility of men and women in seeking knowledge and upholding moral values. Surah Al-Hadid (57:25) promotes education as a means to establish justice and equity in society.

Moreover, the Quran does not explicitly state that women should be segregated from men, nor that they must wear a hijab. Surah An-Nur (24:30-31) instructs both men and women to be modest and guard their private parts, certainly not their heads or faces, but the Taliban interprets this to support the wearing of a burqa that covers Afghan women from head to toe.

In that regard, the West should provide aid to Afghan clerics who advocate for girls’ education and women’s rights within Islamic teachings, and invoke women’s literacy in Afghanistan before the rise of the Taliban to encourage those clerics.

Additionally, targeted economic support for infrastructure projects and agricultural investments should be offered in exchange for reopening girls’ secondary schools or permitting women’s employment in the health and education sectors while emphasizing the economic cost of excluding women.

In conjunction with that, preferential trade terms for Afghan products produced by women should be provided while highlighting how educated women improve public health outcomes for all.

The West should also support community-based schools and computer and science training for women and girls, which reliable local NGOs should administer, and provide safe channels for women activists to air their grievances. Culturally, the West should invest in programs showcasing women artists, poets, and historians as custodians of Afghanistan’s cultural heritage.

In that regard, the media should be used to disseminate success stories of Muslim-majority countries, like Bangladesh and the UAE, where women’s education and employment coexist with cultural and religious values.

By combining religious dialogue, economic pragmatism, and grassroots movements to empower women, the West should pursue incremental progress, which will be more sustainable than seeking instantaneous change.

Recalling the way the Afghan people were treated by foreign powers over the centuries, the Taliban have developed an instinctive adversarial reaction to anything proposed by any foreign power.

This certainly does not justify their treatment of women, but they need to be persuaded, however, that the proposed changes can only benefit their country’s socio-economic conditions while respecting women’s rights, without compromising their cultural and religious beliefs.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source