Civil Society at the Finance in Common Summit Calls for Community-led, Equitable, and Human Rights-based Development

Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Energy, Environment, Financial Crisis, Food and Agriculture, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Inequality, Sustainability, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Civil society organisations and community leaders at the Finance in Common Summit 2023. Credit: Sebastian Barros/Forus

CAPE TOWN, South Africa, Feb 24 2025 (IPS) – As public development banks gather for the Finance in Common Summit (FiCS) in Cape Town, South Africa, civil society and community activists from across the world are demanding a shift to a community-led, equitable, and human rights-based development approach, that prioritise people and planet over profit, and a reform of the global financial architecture.


“With more than 10 % global investment flowing through them each year, public development banks hold immense responsibility—not only to fund infrastructure and development but to do so in a way that is just, inclusive, and sustainable. Development that does not listen to the voices of the people it affects is not true development; it deepens inequalities, harms ecosystems, and leaves communities behind. True development is not done for communities, but with them”, says Mavalow Christelle Kalhoule, Chair at Forus.

Since its first edition in 2020, civil society has been playing a critical role at FiCS in ensuring public development banks are accountable to the people they serve, and in amplifying the voices – too often ignored – of communities in the Global South who are most directly affected by development projects.

“Over the next few days, the world’s public development banks will be patting themselves on the back for all the good they’re doing around the world. But all that glitters is not gold. Way too often these institutions are replicating a neocolonial and neoliberal approach, dividing the world between those to be sacrificed and those to benefit from the sacrifices”, says Ony Soa Ratsifandrihamanana, Africa Regional Coordinator at the Coalition for Human Rights in Development.

Civil society organisations and community leaders at the Finance in Common Summit 2023. Credit: Sebastian Barros/Forus

Amidst rising inequality, debt crises, and the climate emergency, public development banks must move beyond rhetoric and commit to concrete, transformative actions. This is why over 300 civil society groups have joined forces to bring their demands at FiCS, calling on development banks to champion a new era of development finance, placing human rights, community leadership, and environmental sustainability at the core of all financing decisions.

“The world is passing through the most critical and testing times of its history and once again the solutions are being imposed without the consent, participation and engagement of citizens at large and representative civil society in particular. This is the time to think, reflect and act out of the box, and this opportunity of coming together at FiCS should not be considered business as usual,” says Zia ur Rehman, Secretary General and Director at the Asia Development Alliance.

In a context of shrinking civic space and increasing attacks against the human rights movement, development banks should also play a more decisive role to make sure people can actively and safely participate in decision-making processes and consultations.

“While development banks acknowledge the importance of civil society engagement, their frameworks often fall short in implementation, resulting in limited access to information, tokenistic public participation, and a lack of accountability for reprisals against activists,” says Manana Kochladze, Strategic Area Leader – Democratization and Human Rights at CEE Bankwatch Network. “There is a pressing need for development banks to collaboratively develop a unified and proactive approach to safeguarding and expanding civic space”.

More than 60 civil society organizations and community activists will also join the Summit in-person, to share their first-hand testimonies on the actual impact of development projects. From renewables in Kenya to green hydrogen projects in Chile, too often projects presented as sustainable are displacing local communities, polluting the environment, and failing to ensure that the benefits trickle down to those most in need.

Civil society organisations and community leaders at the Finance in Common Summit 2023. Credit: Sebastian Barros/Forus

“When decisions are made without the input of local voices, finance becomes an instrument of exclusion, perpetuating inequality and undermining true progress. We demand a comprehensive overhaul of global financial structures that prioritizes community rights. A shift to people-led finance will enable genuine economic transformation, lifting up every individual and fostering resilient, inclusive growth that benefits society as a whole,” says Ndeye Fatou Sy, Programs Manager at Lumière Synergie pour le Développement (Senegal).

The Lesotho Highlands Water Project, for instance, provides water to South Africa in exchange for royalties and generation of hydropower for Lesotho, but has led to devastating socio-economic and environmental impacts. Hundreds of families have been involuntarily resettled and more than 30,000 people lost their cropland and grazing land, with a particular impact on women.

“As we gather at the Finance in Common Summit, we remind public development banks that front-line communities should not bear the cost of development. Public development banks must create and use independent accountability mechanisms to hear directly from local communities and ensure that their land, livelihoods, and environment are protected,” says Robi Chacha Mosenda, Senior Associate at Accountability Counsel.

Civil society and community representatives participating at the Summit will also present viable and alternative solutions, such as small-scale and renewable energy solutions that are led by Indigenous communities themselves.

“Any form of financing by multilateral development banks should start with support to community-led planning initiatives that ascertain that decisions on energy alternatives centre the rights of affected persons and communities”, says Mwebe John, Africa Finance Campaigner at Recourse. “Multilateral development banks are investing more money than ever into renewable energy, but the scale and kind of projects matters if these investments are going to truly power people and protect the planet. Community-led projects are popping up everywhere – from rooftop solar in India, to micro hydropower in Indonesia, and rural mini grids in Rwanda and Tanzania. These are the types of projects to be supported,” adds Federico Sibaja, IMF Campaign Manager at Recourse.

These stories show that it is key for development banks to use FiCS as an opportunity to step out from their echo chamber, listen to those who are bearing the brunt of their investments, and strengthen the dialogue with civil society.

Lorena Cotza is Communications Lead, Coalition for Human Rights in Development

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

CARICOM Leaders Take Steps to Tackle Crime, Climate, Trade and Food Crises

Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Education, Environment, Featured, Food Security and Nutrition, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Latin America & the Caribbean, Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Conferences

Leaders of the 15 member states of the Caribbean Community concluded their 48th meeting on February 21 with commitments to tackle growing climate change and food security challenges, education and trade reform, while declaring crime and violence a public health concern.

Press Conference to mark the end of the 48th Regular CARICOM Heads of Government Meeting (L-R) CARICOM Secretary General Dr. Carla Barnett, Prime Ministers Philip Davis (Bahamas), Dr. Keith Rowley (Trinidad & Tobago), Mia Mottley (Barbados), Andrew Holness (Jamaica) and President Dr. Irfaan Ali (Guyana).

Press Conference to mark the end of the 48th Regular CARICOM Heads of Government Meeting (L-R) CARICOM Secretary General Dr. Carla Barnett, Prime Ministers Philip Davis (Bahamas), Dr. Keith Rowley (Trinidad & Tobago), Mia Mottley (Barbados), Andrew Holness (Jamaica) and President Dr. Irfaan Ali (Guyana).

DOMINICA, Feb 24 2025 (IPS) – CARICOM leaders wrapped up a crucial meeting on February 21, reaffirming their commitment to tackling pressing regional challenges with unity and resolve. From crime and security to education, trade and climate change, the leaders highlighted the need for decisive action amid global uncertainties.


Education Transformation

Barbados’ Prime Minister and CARICOM Chair Mia Mottley told the press that the leaders agreed to establish a CARICOM Educational Transformation Commission—a body that will move the region’s education systems beyond outdated foundations.

“We all accept that our educational systems are not fit for purpose. They were designed for a colonial period with a hierarchical system that only served a few, not all of our people. If we are to be able to ensure that we produce citizens fit for the time, with the appropriate social and emotional learning targets, we must move now,” she stated.

Over the coming weeks, the commission’s Terms of Reference and composition will be finalized, marking a major step in reshaping regional education policies.

Violence and Crime: Existential Threats

Outgoing Trinidadian Prime Minister Dr. Keith Rowley, attending his final CARICOM Heads of Government meeting, highlighted the increasing crime surge across the region, particularly the rise of gang violence in some countries.

Trinidad is still in a state of emergency over surging crime levels.

“We agreed that the changing nature of crime is such that action and acts of violence in the public space in certain instances must now be regarded as acts of terrorism. We are talking here about indiscriminate shooting in a public place where perpetrators endanger all and sundry.”

The leaders endorsed the classification of crime and violence as a public health issue and committed to appointing a high-level representative on law and criminal justice to design a strategic plan for modernizing the region’s criminal justice system.

Critical Climate Change Concerns

Another existential threat that leaders are grappling with is climate change.

Representing small island states that contribute minimally to global emissions but face disproportionate vulnerability to its impacts, the CARICOM leaders voiced their frustration with unmet promises by major polluters.

The USD 100 billion climate fund promised in 2015 remains unfulfilled, leaving these nations without critical support.

“For several years we attempted to see how we could shake up those who are pledging and committing to live up to their pledges and commitments. They decided to come up with a new regime called the New Collective Quantified Goal,” said Bahamian Prime MInister Philip Davis, adding, “All I can say is that we should continue our advocacy to ensure that not only is finance available to small island developing states but also to ensure that there will be easier access and timely release of funds once a request is made.”

A Changing Trading Environment

Meanwhile, Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness addressed concerns over shifts in United States trade policy and their potential impact on regional economies.

“We must be prepared. We cannot approach this with panic and we should accept that with these changes the concern should not only be disruption in the normal routine of trade, but that there could also be great opportunities for the region.”

Holness announced that CARICOM will conduct a comprehensive review of its trade relations with the U.S., aiming to deliver a policy direction within the next few months to support regional governments.

Mounting Food Security Worries

Guyanese President Irfaan Ali warned of escalating food security issues due to rising global food prices, bird flu outbreak and increased logistics costs. The region faces a 20% decline in U.S. egg production, leading to a 70% price hike, adding further strain.

“Increased climate-related challenges, increased transportation and logistics costs, and uncertainty in tariffs and trade rules will have a significant impact on the cost of food globally and in our region,” Ali stated.

Ali said that if Brazil is affected by these challenges, it could lead to major problems with pricing and supply for the region. In response, CARICOM is exploring alternative supply routes and strategies to enhance regional capacity against a potential major shock in the global market.

The Dream of Stability—and Elections—in Haiti

The crisis in Haiti remained a focal point of discussions. Prime Minister Mottley reaffirmed CARICOM’s dedication to stabilizing the nation.

“This last incarnation of the Haiti situation goes back to the gas riots of September 2022. It has been an unacceptably long period of time to bring stability and relief to the people of Haiti. You will appreciate that there are some matters that are delicate at the discussion stages, but suffice it to say CARICOM expresses solidarity with the government and people of Haiti that we will work with the United Nations and all of the other friends of Haiti to be able to ensure that Haiti is in a position to have its elections in a fair and free way.”

Martinique’s Potential Associate Membership

In a historic move, CARICOM leaders signed an agreement with France and Martinique, paving the way for the French territory to become the newest associate member of CARICOM, pending ratification by the French government. If approved, Martinique will join Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos Islands in this capacity.

The way forward

The meeting concluded with a renewed commitment to collective action and regional unity.

Like she did two days before at the meeting’s opening ceremony, the CARICOM Chair underscored the importance of a united CARICOM taking action towards a sustainable future.

“Now, more than ever, unity is crucial for overcoming the shared challenges posed by the world,” Prime Minister Mottley said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Is the UN’s Human Rights Agenda in Jeopardy?

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

Credit: United Nations

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 24 2025 (IPS) – The UN’s human rights agenda is in danger of faltering since the Geneva-based Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) is planning to “restructure” the office, under the moniker OHCHR 2.0.

But this proposal, if implemented, would result in the abolition of the Special Procedures Branch, established by the Human Rights Council (HRC), to report and advise on human rights from thematic and country-specific perspectives.


The question remains whether or not the HRC will give its blessings to the proposed restructuring. Currently, there are more than 46 thematic mandates and 14 country-specific mandates.

The Special Rapporteurs (who are also designated “independent UN human rights experts”) cover a wide range of thematic issues, including investigations into extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, racism and xenophobia, human rights in the Palestinian territories, right to freedom of opinion and expression, rights of the indigenous peoples, violence against women, human rights of immigrants, among others.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures-human-rights-council/current-and-former-mandate-holders-existing-mandates

Ian Richards, an economist at the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and former President of the Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations, told IPS the staff of the Special Procedures Branch play an essential role in supporting the work of the special rapporteurs.

He said former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described their work as the jewel in the crown of the UN human rights system.

“We know that some of their recent work has created pushback. There is a belief is that they are being penalized for this”.

“The High Commissioner for Human Rights “hasn’t accepted to meet with the staff union to discuss this, which is unusual. We hope he will change his mind,” said Richards.

Some of the Special Rapporteurs have been vociferously critical of member states, including Israel, on war crimes charges in Gaza, and also countries in the Middle East and South-east Asia, like Singapore and Saudi Arabia, for continuing to enforce the death penalty.

In a press release last week, two Special Rapporteurs said Singapore must urgently halt the execution of Malaysian national Pannir Selvam Pranthaman for drug trafficking.

“We have repeatedly** called on Singapore to halt executions for drug offences which are illegal under international human rights law on several grounds,” the experts said.

“We reiterate that under international law, only crimes of extreme gravity involving intentional killing meet the threshold for the death penalty,” the experts said. “Mandatory death sentences are inherently over-inclusive and inevitably violate human rights law.”

“There is no evidence that the death penalty does more than any other punishment to curb or prevent drug trafficking,” they said.

The experts warned that the rate of execution notices for drug-related offences in Singapore was “highly alarming”. They noted that eight people have already been executed on these charges since 1 October 2024, a period of just four and a half months.

Speaking off-the-record, a UN source told IPS the staff of the Special Procedures Branch fear the “re-structuring” is being done in order to reduce the effectiveness and voice of the Special Rapporteurs. And the High Commissioner’s refusal to consult with the union may be evidence of this, he said.

“As you may be aware, the special rapporteurs, and one in particular, have been vocal on the issue of Gaza, which has generated complaints from a number of member states to the High Commissioner. To seek a second term, he needs their support”.

According to the UN, Special Rapporteurs/Independent Experts/Working Groups are independent human rights experts appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council. Together, these experts are referred to as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council.

Special Procedures experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. While the UN Human Rights office acts as the secretariat for Special Procedures, the experts serve in their individual capacity and are independent from any government or organization, including OHCHR and the UN.

Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the UN or OHCHR. Country-specific observations and recommendations by the UN human rights mechanisms, including the special procedures, the treaty bodies and the Universal Periodic Review, can be found on the Universal Human Rights Index https://uhri.ohchr.org/en/

The Office of the High Commissioner is being funded by the UN regular budget and voluntary contributions.

But UN Special Rapporteurs are not paid a salary by the United Nations. They receive funding primarily through logistical and personnel support from the Office of the High Commissioner.

They often also receive additional funding from private foundations and NGOs like the Ford Foundation and Open Society Foundations, which can raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest due to the source of funding.

Special procedures cover all human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political and social as well as issues relating to specific groups. Special procedures mandate-holders are either an individual (called a Special Rapporteur (SR) or Independent Expert (IE)) or a Working Group (WG) of five members, according to the UN.

As part of their mandates, special procedures examine, advise and publicly report on human rights issues and situations. They conduct thematic studies and convene expert consultations, contribute to the development of international human rights standards, engage in advocacy and provide advice for technical cooperation.

Upon the invitation from Governments, they visit particular countries or territories in order to monitor the situation on the ground. Special procedures also act on individual cases and concerns of a broader, structural nature by sending communications to States and other entities in which they bring alleged violations or abuses to their attention.

Finally, they raise public awareness of a specific topic through press releases or other public statements. Special procedures report annually to the Human Rights Council; the majority of the mandates also report annually to the General Assembly

In 2024, OHCHR received a total of US$268.9 million in voluntary contributions. As in previous years, the overwhelming majority of voluntary contributions came from Member States and International organizations including the European Commission and UN partners.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

From trailblazer to track star: Dr. Del Meriwether and his Duke roots

In honor of Black History Month, The Chronicle takes a look at Wilhelm Delano “Del” Meriwether, Duke’s first Black medical student and a world-class sprinter: 

As Wilhelm Delano “Del” Meriwether watched the United States track team struggle against France during a 1970 track meet, he boldly told his wife, “Hey, I think I can beat those guys.”

Myrtle Meriwether waved her husband’s comment off. Del was not an athlete. He had neither a coach, nor any training experience. At the time, he was a 27-year-old hematologist who had become the first Black person to graduate from the Duke School of Medicine just three years prior.

But a year after Del made his ambitious declaration while lying in bed watching the American sprinters flounder on TV, he made good on his promise. A doctor by day but sprinter by night, Meriwether broke world records seemingly without breaking a sweat, eventually finding himself inches away from becoming an Olympian just two years after he stepped onto the track for the first time.

Despite the acclaim, Meriwether’s track accolades constituted just one chapter of a long and dynamic career featuring civil rights activism, public health leadership and investment in underserved communities at home and abroad.

* * *

Born on April 23, 1943, in Nashville, Tennessee, and raised in segregated Charleston, South Carolina, Meriwether displayed an aptitude for science from a young age. He appeared in the national science fair twice while attending Burke High School and worked in a veterinary hospital while still a student. By the time he graduated, Meriwether had been recognized by the American Veterinary Medical Association for his research on internal parasites found in dogs.

Impressed by his accolades, Michigan State University recruited Meriwether to its veterinary program in the fall of 1960. After a year at the school, however, he realized that his interests lay in human medicine, so he decided to switch to the pre-medical route.

Accordingly, after completing his MSU degree program in just three years, Meriwether ventured to Duke in 1963. He was the University’s first African American medical student and the only Black student in his class.

In a 2008 interview by Jessica Roseberry, then-oral history program coordinator at the Duke University Medical Center Archives, Meriwether said he applied to Duke at his father’s encouragement.

“Duke was not my first choice,” he said. “… During the sixties, Duke [alongside] a number of other schools in the South needed some guidance and pushed to diversify its student body, and as a result, I … agreed to come to Duke.”

He explained that several schools in the region were actively recruiting Black students in the wake of a new federal policy that mandated hospitals and medical institutions be racially integrated in order to qualify for federal funding. Despite the University’s delay in diversifying its student body, Meriwether maintained that “[t]he school itself was not a solid resistant entity.”

“[T]hey simply needed help, and with my father and others, we helped liberate a good institution,” he said. “Everyone benefited.”

As part of the admissions process, though, Meriwether was asked to come to Duke for an interview — an experience that almost convinced him to not enroll at the University. After his Sunday evening arrival at the Raleigh-Durham airport, a tired and hungry Meriwether made it to campus looking for something to eat.

The University cafeteria was closed, so Meriwether asked a Black woman on duty where he could find food. She replied, “there’s no place nearby for Black men and women to eat,” but when Meriwether pressed further, she eventually gave him vague directions to a place named “the Blue Light.”

But Meriwether was turned away by the restaurant’s owner, who stated that the young Black man “did not belong inside the restaurant with clients.” After a 10-minute standoff, an angry Meriwether left hungry.

He said he refrained from telling Duke’s administration about the incident. Once he was accepted, though, he made it a priority to push the University to change both its policies and the policies of private establishments that served Duke students to become more inclusive.

Influenced by the Civil Rights Movement, Meriwether advocated for increasing the diversity of students and faculty on campus. The hospital also integrated its wards while he was a student, though he noted he was not an “active” participant in the process, which went “smoothly” with the “blessing” of some University administrators.

While many of his peers who led integration efforts at other universities faced backlash and made national headlines, Meriwether did not find his experience at Duke to be “a huge event.”

“I don’t think that it’s always necessary to make a big to-do about something that is morally right and that needs to be done,” Meriwether said in the 2008 interview. “I think the quieter things can be done, the better.”

In 1967, he graduated from Duke with honors.

Meriwether went on to pursue an internship at the University of Pennsylvania, working under former Duke professor James Wyngaarden, and in 1969, he moved to the Baltimore Cancer Research Center. It was then that he picked up running on the side, for “exercise and entertainment,” he said.

By June 1971, Meriwether was competing in the Amateur Athletic Union championships against world-record holders. Clad in an unconventional uniform of gold swimming trunks and black-and-white suspenders over a hospital T-shirt, he clocked a stunning nine seconds in the 100-yard dash. At the time, the feat had only been achieved by one other man. Meriwether’s time was deemed “wind-aided” — otherwise, he would hold the record today (though the event was replaced by the 100-meter dash in most competitions in 1970).

Meriwether picked up several national titles over the course of his running career. Representing the Baltimore Olympic Club, he logged a 9.6 100-yard in the South Atlantic AAU meet, a 9.5 in the Baltimore Municipal Games and a 9.4 at the All-Eastern. Meriwether’s sprinting escapades remained a side hustle; though he spent his nights training alone on the Johns Hopkins University track, his days were devoted to treating leukemia patients.

Still, the young hematologist’s prowess at the sport was undeniable. He was profiled by national outlets including The New York Times, Sports Illustrated and Time, and readers couldn’t get enough of the thrilling underdog tale.

But staying true to the shooting star storyline his ascendancy seemed to emulate, Meriwether’s moment in the spotlight was short-lived. In 1972, the fledgling track star lost out on a chance at that year’s Olympic Games due to a knee injury. After a similar injury took him out of the running in 1976, Meriwether retired from the sport to focus on his career in medicine.

Before retiring from running, Meriwether had completed his residency at the Ohio State University, then conducted hematology research at Harvard Medical School and Boston’s Thorndike Memorial Laboratory before earning a master’s degree in public health from Johns Hopkins.

He served as a 1973-74 White House Fellow, and in 1976, he was appointed director of the U.S. Public Health Service’s National lnfluenza Immunization Program amid fears of a swine flu epidemic. There, Meriwether led a team that helped immunize 40 million people against the virus by the end of the year.

In 1983, Meriwether moved to Gazankulu, South Africa, on a mission trip with his second wife, Nomvimbi, who was born and raised in the African country but studied in the United States as an adult. There, Meriwether became one of only six physicians available to treat half a million people.

The couple’s stay was only meant to last a year, but they ended up spending eight years serving the community, a period Meriwether looked back on as “the most rewarding of [his] life” in a 1997 interview with Sports Illustrated.

Some of his work entailed petitioning for supplies, teaching about birth control and treating patients at the rural Tintswalo Hospital. Many of Meriwether’s patients were women, children and elderly refugees who had been relocated from the neighboring country of Mozambique, then in the throes of civil war.

According to Meriwether, his experience of the American Civil Rights Movement and integrating Duke’s medical school prepared him to be a part of the South African anti-apartheid movement, which he characterized in 2008 as “the last civil rights movement on earth based on color.”

“I prefer to use the word ‘liberate,’ as opposed to merely ‘integrate,’” Meriwether said in the 2008 interview. “… My wife and I did not integrate South Africa. We helped liberate those who were in positions of leadership, as well as the masses who were discriminated against and confined.”

In 1990, Meriwether returned to the U.S. and served as an emergency doctor in the Washington, D.C. area. He has since provided emergency medical services in Pennsylvania and Maryland.  

He and his wife founded the Meriwether Foundation in 2007, a nonprofit that operates “health, education, nutrition and economic empowerment programs in rural and peri-urban areas of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi and Mozambique.”

Meriwether — now 81 years old — has retired in Maryland, passing on the baton to the next generation of Duke’s Black medical students.

Editor’s note: Meriwether did not respond to The Chronicle’s request to interview ahead of publication.


Zoe Kolenovsky profile
Zoe Kolenovsky | News Editor

Zoe Kolenovsky is a Trinity junior and news editor of The Chronicle’s 120th volume.


Srilakshmi Venkatesan

Srilakshmi Venkatesan is a Trinity first-year and a staff reporter for the news department.

Source

Trump’s War on Global Governance: Lessons from the Past on How to Fight Back

Civil Society, Democracy, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Daniel D. Bradlow is Professor/Senior Research Fellow, Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship, University of Pretoria, South Africa.

In a powerful appeal to the world’s largest economies during the G20 Summit, November 2024, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for urgent climate action and reform of international institutions, warning that current systems are failing to meet global challenges. Credit: UN Photo/Gustavo Stephan

PRETORIA, South Africa, Feb 19 2025 (IPS) – US president Donald Trump’s recent actions seem designed to reassert American power and demonstrate that it is still the dominant global power and is capable of bullying weaker nations into following America’s lead.


He has shown contempt for international collaboration by withdrawing from the UN climate negotiations and the World Health Organization. His officials have also indicated that they will not participate in upcoming G20 meetings because he does not like the policies of South Africa, the G20 president for 2025.

In addition, he’s shown a lack of concern for international solidarity by halting US aid programmes and by undermining efforts to keep businesses honest. He has demonstrated his contempt for allies by imposing tariffs on their exports.

These actions demand a response from the rest of the international community that mitigates the risk to the well-being of people and planet and the effective management of global affairs.
My research on global economic governance suggests that history can offer some guidance on how to shape an effective response.

Such a response should be based on a realistic assessment of the configuration of global forces. It should seek to build tactical coalitions between state and non-state actors in both the global south and the global north who can agree on clear and limited objectives.

The following three historical lessons help explain this point.

Cautionary lessons

The first lesson is about the dangers of being overoptimistic in assessing the potential for change. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the US was confronting defeat in the war in Vietnam, high inflation and domestic unrest, including the assassination of leading politicians and the murder of protesting students.

The US was also losing confidence in its ability to sustain the international monetary order it had established at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944.

In addition, the countries of the global south were calling for a new international economic order that was more responsive to their needs. Given the concerns about the political and economic situation in the US and the relative strength of the Soviet bloc at the time, this seemed a realistic demand.

In August 1971, President Richard Nixon, without any international consultations, launched what became known as the Nixon Shock. He broke the link between gold and the US dollar, thereby ending the international monetary system established in 1944. He also imposed a 10% surcharge on all imports into the US.

When America’s European allies protested and sought to create a reformed version of the old monetary order, US treasury secretary John Connolly informed them that the dollar was our currency but your problem.

Over the course of the 1970s, US allies in western Europe, Asia and all countries that participated in the old Bretton Woods system were forced to accept what the US preferred: a market-based international monetary system in which the US dollar became the dominant currency.

The US, along with its allies in the global north, also defeated the calls for a new international economic order and imposed their neo-liberal economic order on the world.

The second cautionary lesson highlights the importance of building robust tactical coalitions. In 1969, the International Monetary Fund member states agreed to authorise the IMF to create special drawing rights, the IMF’s unique reserve asset.

At the time, many IMF developing country member states advocated establishing a link between development and the special drawing rights. This would enable those countries most in need of additional resources to access more than their proportionate share of special drawing rights to fund their development.

All developing countries supported this demand. But they couldn’t agree on how to do it. The rich countries were able to exploit these differences and defeat the proposed link between the special drawing rights and development.

As a result, the special drawing rights are now distributed to all IMF member states according to their quotas in the IMF. This means that most allocations go to the rich countries who do not need them and have no obligation to share them with developing countries.

A third lesson arises from the successful Jubilee 2000 campaign to forgive the debts of low-income developing countries experiencing debt crises. This campaign, supported by a secretariat in the United Kingdom, eventually involved: civil society organisations and activists in 40 countries a petition signed by 21 million people and governments in both creditor and debtor countries.

These efforts resulted in the cancellation of the debts of 35 developing countries. These debts, totalling about US$100 billion, were owed primarily to bilateral and multilateral official creditors.

They were also a demonstration of the political power that can be generated by the combined actions of civil society organisations and governments in both rich and poor countries.

They can force the most powerful and wealthy institutions and individuals in the world to accept actions that, while requiring them to make affordable sacrifices, benefit low-income countries and potentially poor communities within those states.

What conclusions should be drawn?

We shouldn’t under-estimate the power of the US or the determination of the MAGA movement to use that power. However, their power is not absolute. It is constrained by the relative decline in US power as countries such as China and India gain economic and political strength.

In addition, there are now mechanisms for international cooperation, such as the G20, where states can coordinate their actions and gain tactical victories that are meaningful to people and planet.

But gaining such victories will require the following:

Firstly, the formation of tactical coalitions that include states from both the global south and the global north. If these states cooperate around limited and shared objectives they can counter the vested interests around the world that support Trump’s objectives.

Secondly, a special kind of public-private partnership in which states and non-state actors set aside their differences and agree to cooperate to achieve limited shared objectives. Neither states alone nor civil society groups alone were able to defeat the vested interests that opposed debt relief in the late 1990s. Working together they were able to defeat powerful creditor interests and gain debt relief for the poorest states.

Thirdly, this special partnership will only be possible if there’s general agreement on both the diagnosis of the problem and on the general contours of the solution. This was the case with the debt issue in the 1990s.

There are good candidates for such collaborative actions. For example, many states and non-state actors agree that international financial institutions need to be reformed and made more responsive to the needs of those member states that actually use their services but lack voice and vote in their governance.

The institutions also need to be more accountable to those affected by their policies and practices. They also agree that large corporations and financial institutions should pay their fair share of taxes and should be environmentally and socially responsible.

The urgency of the challenges facing the global community demands that the world begin countering Trump as soon as possible. South Africa as the current chair of the G20 has a special responsibility to ensure that this year the G20, together with its engagement groups, acts creatively and responsibly in relation to people and planet.

Source: Conversation Africa

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Trump’s Proposed Gaza Takeover Denounced as “Mad Ethnic Cleansing Plan”

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Featured, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Children in Gaza stand on debris from a destroyed building. February 2025. Credit: UN News

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 19 2025 (IPS) – President Trump—whose rash and ill-conceived proposals continue unabated—has threatened to “seize Gaza,” turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East,” and move Palestinians to Egypt and Jordan, two longstanding American allies who depend heavily on US support for their survival.

The US President has also hinted that both countries would suffer either cutbacks or elimination of billions of dollars in economic and military aid —if they refuse to cooperate with him.


Is this for real or just an empty threat?

The proposed seizure of Gaza has been condemned by virtually all Arab leaders who have long advocated a full-fledged Palestinian homeland in the Gaza Strip

In an interview with Christiane Amanpour, Chief International Anchor for Cable News Network (CNN), Prince Turki Al-Faisal, a former Saudi ambassador to the US and UK, was quoted as saying Trump’s Gaza strategy is a “mad ethnic cleansing plan.”

Dr Ramzy Baroud, a journalist and Editor of The Palestine Chronicle, told IPS Arabs cannot accept Trump’s ethnic cleansing plan simply because doing so will destabilize the entire region and all of their regimes.

The repercussions of the original ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948 are still felt throughout the Middle East to this day, he said.

At that time, the majority of the native population of the Palestinian homeland was displaced, around 800,000, most of whom remained displaced within historic Palestine.

Displacing a population of 2.2 million, following a genocide that has ignited rage across the Middle East and around the world, he argued, is a suicidal move for Arab regimes that are already struggling in a desperate search for legitimacy.

“I believe Trump already knows this, but is using the threats to put pressure on Arab regimes to come up with an ‘alternative’ plan aimed at disarming the Palestinian resistance, thus meeting Israel halfway. But in essence, the Arabs have no control over the outcome of the war in Gaza”.

If Israel has failed to disarm Gaza after 15 months of a war of extermination, the Arabs won’t be able to do so, said Dr Baroud, author of six books and a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA).

In an interview with FRANCE 24, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said Trump’s plan at “ethnic cleansing is not acceptable in our world”.

“In the search for solutions, we must not make the problem worse. It is vital to stay true to the bedrock of international law. It is essential to avoid any form of ethnic cleansing,” Guterres told the U.N. Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.

Addressing members of the Committee last week, Guterres said: “At its essence, the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people is about the right of Palestinians to simply live as human beings in their own land.”

However, he said, “we have seen the realization of those rights steadily slip farther out of reach” as well as “a chilling, systematic dehumanization and demonization of an entire people.”

Dr Baroud said Prince Turki Al-Faisal is correct to call it “a mad ethnic cleansing plan”. It is.

But it will fail if the Arabs understand American intentions and focus their energies on supporting Palestinian steadfastness in Gaza

Israel is in its weakest position in decades, and aside from empty threats and rhetoric, it has very few cards left. Arab unity is now key, and I believe that a collective response could positively influence inner Arab relations and re-center Palestine as the driving cause for all Arab nations.

In fact, this could be the chance for the Arab League to matter once more, after decades of marginalization and irrelevance, declared Dr Baroud.

Meanwhile, when US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was in the Middle East last week, he was able to gauge the widespread Arab opposition to Trump’s plan, but apparently downplayed the proposal.

The New York Times quoted Rubio as saying Trump was merely trying to “get a reaction” and “stir” other nations into providing more assistance to post-war Gaza.

King Abdullah II of Jordan, leading a country which is already home to about 700,00 Palestinian, Syrian and Iraqi refugees, told Trump during a White House meeting last week that he is ready to offer a home to about 2,000 Palestinian children in need of medical care.

And perhaps nothing more.

Incidentally, the wife of the Jordanian King is Queen Rania, who is of Palestinian descent.

The proposed takeover of Gaza –and the forcible transfer of Palestinians—are considered both a war crime and a crime against humanity, according to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Janina Dill, co-director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict, was quoted in the New York Times, as saying: “Trump is just casually making major international crimes into policy proposals. He just normalizes violating, or proposing to violate, the absolute bedrock principles of international law”.

Meanwhile, Reuter’s reported that Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi will not travel to Washington for talks at the White House, if the agenda includes Trump’s plan to expel Palestinians from Gaza, according to two Egyptian security sources.

In a call with al-Sisi on 1 February, the US president extended an open invitation to the Egyptian President to visit the White House. No date has been set for any such visit, a US official said.

The Gaza takeover will also be the primary topic on the agenda of an emergency Arab Summit meeting scheduled to take place in Cairo March 4.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source