Pavitra Nandagiri—one of the highest-ranking transgender spiritual leaders at Maha Kumbh, the largest religious gathering on earth in Prayagraj, India. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
PRAYAGRAJ, India, Feb 18 2025 (IPS) – Despite a blazing sun and growing heat, Pavitra Nandagiri sits on a cot smiling. Clad in a saffron robe and headgear with her forehead painted with turmeric and vermillion, Nandagiri is a Mahamandaleshwar—one of the highest-ranking monks of the Kinnar Akhada (Transgender Arena) at the Maha Kumbh, the world’s largest religious gathering currently underway in northern India.
As a steady stream of visitors pours in to touch her feet, Nandagiri raises her right hand and touches their heads in a gesture of accepting their respect and blesses them.
Just a few hours ago, she had taken part in the special, ceremonial snan (bathing) in the Sangam—a place with mythological significance where three holy rivers—Ganga, Jamuna and Saraswati—are believed to have met. Taking a dip in the confluence of these rivers is considered by Hindus as the most sacred act of one’s lifetime.
The ceremonial bathing is led by the most important of the living Hindu saints and godmen who follow a strict order of hierarchy. On Wednesday morning (February 12), the fourth ceremonial bathing of the 45-day Maha Kumbh was held. Fifteen transgender spiritual leaders, including Nandagiri, marched along with the Naga Sadhus and Aghoris—the legendary saints with ash-covered bodies, matted hair, and minimalistic clothing. Together, they bathed in the river with the holy chant of “Har har Mahadev” (Hail Shiva) while saints of other sects waited for their turn.
A devotee prays at the Maha Kumbh Sangam, where three rivers are believed to have converged. While two of the rivers—Ganges and Yamuna—are visible, the third river, Saraswati, is said to be hidden underneath. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
Later, inside the Kinnar Akhada, trans gurus receive visitors while some are seen performing some rituals and meditating along with Aghori ascetics. Asked how the partnership between the third highest order of the religious saints and the trans leaders came to be, Nandagiri says that it had been in the making since 2015 and culminated in a functioning collaboration during this year’s Maha Kumbh, which happens once every 12 years. She, however, does not share other details except that perhaps what brought together the two sects is their shared denouncement of worldly pleasure and embracing of a life free from its wealth and other complexities.
Transgender-Inclusive Kumbh: Conditions Apply
At the Kumbh, Akharas are organized into various sects, primarily categorized based on their philosophical orientation and the deity they worship. The two main sects are Shaiva Akharas, dedicated to Lord Shiva, and Vaishnava Akharas, devoted to Lord Vishnu. Each Akhara operates under a hierarchical structure, typically led by a Mahant (chief) or Acharya (spiritual leader) who oversees the spiritual and administrative functions.
The inclusion of the transgender Acharyas in the Kumbh, especially as a part of the highly revered Juna Akhada of the group of the Naga Sadhus, however, has not been completely free of controversies. Some have disputed their claim of embracing a minimalistic life and accused them of indulging in a game of power and authority considered unbefitting for true sainthood.
On January 24, the community ushered in a former film actress called Mamta Kulkarni as one of its top leaders, which led to protests by many both from within the trans community and leaders of other Hindu sects, who described it as a public relations stunt. Baba Ramdev—a well-known yoga guru—called it a violation of the Hindu religious ethos. Some gurus went as far as threatening to boycott the next Kumbh—to be held in 2037—if the Kinnar Akhada is not excluded from the ritual bathing.
Kalyani Nandagiri—another top-ranking trans guru who opposed the actress’s inclusion—was physically attacked by unidentified assailants on February 12.
A monk at the Transgender Arena within the Maha Kumbh. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
Despite these deep divisions and acts of violence, Pavitra Nanndgiri remains hopeful of the community’s future.
“People say a lot of things; some wrongs also happen. But such small issues should not be highlighted much. We are here today, and we will be here then (in the next Kumbh),” she says, sounding more like a peace advocate.
A Different Picture
While inside the Kinnar Akhada, trans gurus are busy receiving and blessing visitors; outside, on the street, a small crowd of men is seen surrounding a young trans man dancing to the fast beats of music.
“This is Launda Naach,” says Ajeet Bahadur—a local theater artist. “It’s a common form of rural entertainment here, performed typically by cross-dressing trans men.”
The audience of Launda Naach is typically male. It is said to have started at a time when women were not allowed to dance in public because of orthodox social norms. However, today the moves of a Launda Naach performer are often sleazy and according to Ajeet Bahadur, the dancers are often sexually exploited, and their performance is rarely seen as art.
“Their lives are unbelievably miserable; there is little respect for their art, all eyes are on their bodies and exploitation and poverty are a constant part of their lives,” says Bahadur, who has studied the lives of Launda Naach performers for some time.
Aside from Launda Naach performers, thousands of other trans men and women in India struggle to earn a living. They are usually seen begging on the street and inside public transport, while many are also often accused of extorting money from small businesses such as shopkeepers in local markets. Not surprisingly, the presence of a trans person in India usually evokes a mix of fear and contempt instead of the deep respect that is on display in the Kinnar Akhada of the Kumbh. Will the elevated status of the gurus here lead to any change in the social status of the common trans people?
Priyanka Nandagiri, a transgender monk, says that it cannot be guaranteed. “Broadly, the transgender community in India is divided into two groups: the Sanatani and the Deredaar. We are the members of the Sanatani group who have always been immersed in religious activities, while the Deredaar are the ones who have chosen a different lifestyle, such as performing dances on the street and at social events like weddings, etc. So, we have always been following separate paths,” she explains.
Dwita Acharya and Mohini Acharya—two other trans monks—nod in agreement: “It will depend on what life they choose,” they say in unison.
”If they want to follow our path (the Sanatani), they will get that recognition but if they want to continue with their usual Deredaar lifestyle, then people will continue to view them accordingly.”
Crowley Logistics in Miami, Florida, was one of three USAID shipping and logistics facilities in the nation. It could, in times of emergency humanitarian relief aid, respond with supplies delivered to aircraft at Miami International Airport within two hours. Credit: USDAID/Lance Cheung
Feb 17 2025 (IPS) – As the full effects of the US decision to freeze foreign aid funding begin to be felt across the world, organizations in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA) are warning years of work in everything from delivering life-saving healthcare to defending human rights and strengthening democracy could be undone.
In many countries in the region, foreign aid is vital for the continued functioning of large parts of civil society and the activities NGOs and other groups carry out.
But since US President Donald Trump’s executive order on January 20 freezing foreign aid for 90 days and a ‘stop work order’ announced four days later, some groups have had to entirely, or partly, shut down their operations—with potentially devastating consequences.
One area that has been heavily affected is the fight against HIV/AIDS.
According to a UN report published in 2024, only half of the 2.1 million people living with HIV in the EECA region have access to treatment, and just 42% of people living with HIV have suppressed viral loads—the lowest rate in the world. In 2023, 140,000 new cases of HIV infection were registered in the region.
US funding has been central to the HIV response in EECA, including through the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), as well as USAID.
According to UNAIDS, this support has helped fund community-based HIV prevention programmes, provision of antiretroviral therapy (ART), development of laboratory and diagnostic infrastructure, and training of health workers. It has also played a key role in prevention and harm reduction programmes among key populations.
This is critical in a region where 94 percent of new HIV cases occur among key populations and their partners.
While US aid is not the primary source of funds for HIV programmes in some countries in the region, in others it is vital.
In Ukraine, which has Europe’s second worst HIV epidemic, local groups working with key populations and people living with HIV say the aid freeze has had a dramatic impact.
The charity 100% Life provides treatment and prevention services to marginalized communities, including drug users and people with HIV, TB, and other diseases, often operating in frontline areas.
Dmytro Sherembei, head of the Coordination Council of 100% Life, told IPS that up to 25 percent of specialist staff carrying out testing, monitoring and other tasks would have to be laid off, while testing programmes and other assistance for state healthcare projects would be stopped.
“The funding suspensions stopped our whole programme, and it will cause a lot of damage,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Alliance for Public Health (APH), one of the country’s largest healthcare NGOs, said its HIV case-finding operations had been suspended after the aid freeze.
“About 35-40 percent of all HIV-positive cases in Ukraine are found, tested, and referred for treatment by APH and its partners. It will be difficult to find alternative funding,” Andriy Klepikov, Executive Director of APH, told IPS.
APH estimates the halt to testing could mean thousands of cases going undetected during the 90-day suspension of aid.
There are also concerns that treatment for more than 100,000 patients with HIV may be interrupted. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion, the Ukrainian government has not had funds to procure antiretroviral drugs (ARVs), and PEPFAR has been procuring ARVs for all patients.
The country has ARV stocks for the next six months, “but a suspension of funding could impact the next delivery of medications planned for March,” Klepikov said.
“This funding stop threatens to turn a manageable epidemic into a deadly crisis,” warned Sherembei.
In Tajikistan, US funding has supported services including treatment and prevention among key populations, training of professionals, strengthening of local organizations, and support for community-led initiatives.
But the funding freeze is threatening to undo years of progress, local HIV activists told IPS.
Pulod Dzhamalov, Director of the Tajik NGO SPIN PLUS, said services for people living with HIV and other key populations in many places had “simply ceased to exist.”
“For many people who sought these services, it was the only place where they felt safe. And staff who worked on these projects have suddenly found themselves unemployed, without any means of livelihood or hope for the future. Significant resources were invested in building a positive image of these services, and now all of that has gone to waste. A considerable portion of the national HIV prevention programme’s budget was covered by PEPFAR funding, and this will inevitably impact the healthcare system as a whole,” he said.
Takhmina Haiderova, head of the Tajik Network of Women Living with HIV, said her organization was “facing serious challenges” and that the freeze on US funds had had a significant impact on all HIV-service NGOs in the country.
“Reduced funding results in fewer HIV prevention and treatment projects, staff reductions, and limited access to life-saving services such as testing, counseling, and treatment. In addition, it negatively affects the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, such as reducing the spread of HIV, improving the quality of life of people living with HIV, ensuring gender equality, and upholding human rights,” she said.
The decision to freeze funding, especially in places where the epidemic is not improving, such as EECA, risks doing irreparable harm to global efforts to fight HIV, activists say.
“[The Trump administration’s] efforts are doing irreparable harm to the global HIV response and global health more broadly. These are inefficient, wasteful and deadly policy moves,” Asia Russell, Executive Director of the Health Gap advocacy organization, told IPS.
But it is far from just efforts to fight HIV/AIDS in the region that have been affected by the pause on US aid.
In many countries, foreign funding is essential to the survival of independent media, keeping a check on autocracies and serving audiences living under repressive regimes.
Press freedom watchdogs say the aid freeze has created confusion, chaos, and uncertainty among media organizations and outlets that rely heavily, or completely, on American funds.
Exiled media reporting for audiences in countries such as Russia, Belarus, and others from outside those states are particularly vulnerable.
“This is very bad news for exiled media that relocated to democratic countries after crackdowns. Some newsrooms from Belarus have reported a complete lack of funding due to the current [US aid] freeze, which may lead to a complete cessation of these projects due to the inability to pay employees. Others have been forced to cut their staff, which is very worrying since they have so far managed to keep their audience in their country, despite being forced into exile. Their efforts made it possible to effectively counter official Belarusian and Kremlin propaganda,” Jeanne Cavelier, Head of Eastern Europe & Central Asia Desk at Reporters Without Borders (RSF), told IPS.
Meanwhile, in Ukraine, where nine out of ten outlets rely on subsidies and USAID is the primary donor, a survey after the aid freeze showed that almost 60% of media professionals surveyed believe that the suspension of US media support programmes could have ‘catastrophic consequences and lead to the closure or significant reduction in the work of many independent media outlets,’ according to RSF.
“Projects funded by American aid, such as USAID, were mostly intended to enable the media to investigate corruption and public spending. This is critical for reliable information, as well as for small media outlets reporting from the frontline,” said Cavelier.
“The freeze has already led a number of newsrooms to cut back on content, lower salaries, increase part-time working and reduce staff numbers,” she added.
Editors at local independent media outlets fear the suspension could lead to publications turning to other sources of funding, which could then look to change editorial stances, influence the independence of these media and, potentially, become tools for Russian propaganda.
There are similar fears in other parts of the region.
“The independent media here relies very much on foreign funding because otherwise they would not be economically viable in a country that is poor and in a market where some media are financed by shady Russian money,” Valeriu Pasha, Programme Manager at Moldovan think tank WatchDog.Md, told IPS.
“I think we could definitely see some deals where some media that are now struggling with funding could be bought by, or would start to be funded through, Russian sources in some way,” he added.
However, he pointed out that it was not just independent media that had been affected by the US aid freeze.
“This will have quite an effect on civil society here; plenty of organizations will feel its impact,” he said, pointing out that groups involved in everything from local election observation to healthcare, rights defense, and even working with the government on judicial reform were reliant to some extent on US aid.
“Even our organization, which has not really been affected by this so far, could well be affected in the future. We don’t know,” he added.
The freezing of US funding may also have had an unexpected, although equally pernicious, effect on civil society in the region.
The US administration’s apparent efforts to effectively shutter USAID have been welcomed by authoritarian leaders who have already been cracking down on NGOs and others they see as critical of their regimes.
In Georgia, USAID is currently investing in scores of programmes across the country with a total value of USD 373 million, according to local media. These initiatives focus on, among others, strengthening democratic institutions and increasing public resilience to disinformation.
Much US funding to the country was stopped last year in response to increasingly authoritarian behavior by the ruling regime—including legislative crackdowns on civil society.
But Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze earlier this month told local journalists the stop on USAID activities proved his government’s previous claims that the organization’s funds were used not for humanitarian goals but to “stage revolutions, sow disorder, and destabilize countries, including Georgia.”
Lawmakers appear to have also taken it as confirmation of the hardline approach they have already taken to civil society and the media—including a controversial law on foreign funding of NGOs introduced last year, which forced many to close—and emboldened them to tighten restrictions even further. On February 5, a media regulation law was announced that would ban foreign funding of media, as well as an even more restrictive version of the law on foreign funding for NGOs.
Reports have suggested authorities in Russia, where a swathe of laws and repressive measures have already forced the closure of many key services provided by civil society groups in areas from HIV prevention and help for marginalized groups to rights organizations, may be planning to ask US Congress to share a list of Russian citizens who received US funding with Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB).
Groups affected by the funding freeze are looking to find alternative sources of finance. Some have called for governments, particularly in Europe, to step in and fill the gap left by the withdrawal of American money.
In a statement, a group of European disability organizations and services called on the European Union and non-governmental donors to provide emergency and long-term funding to disability organizations affected by the cuts in US funding.
They highlighted that organizations were implementing lifesaving programs in countries such as Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Albania and that the loss of funding will put at risk organizations and persons with disabilities in the Balkans, Eastern Europe and South Caucasus, leaving hundreds of thousands without support.
While there are hopes that US funding will, sooner or later, resume once the Trump administration finishes its review, whatever US foreign aid is resumed, it is unlikely to be disbursed in the same way as it was previously, said Pasha.
“I expect that some aid will resume in some form after the 90-day freeze, but it will reflect the priorities of the new US administration—in the future it will likely be less connected to values and more to economics,” he said.
PARIS, Feb 17 2025 (IPS) – The world is witnessing a dangerous retreat from international solidarity by Global Minority countries. From Washington to Brussels, governments are slashing funds that sustain human rights, democracy, and humanitarian initiatives.
The U.S. foreign aid freeze, the European Union’s cut in development spending, and Belgium’s reduction in foreign aid all reflect a broader trend in countries with far-right elected governments of prioritizing domestic politics over global responsibility and solidarity.
Some may argue this is simply an abstract budgetary issue. But these funding cuts translate into real-life lost jobs, shuttered programs, and the most marginalized communities being left without vital support.
They send a clear signal: governments, even those once seen as champions of human rights, are redefining their external priorities and turning inward. The consequences will be devastating, particularly for Global Majority countries, where local organizations are already struggling to survive.
But this crisis is not inevitable. Philanthropy, civil society, and remaining international allies must step up not just to fill financial gaps but to rethink global solidarity and how civil society is funded, protected, and sustained in the long term.
The dangerous trend around funding cuts
Far-right governments and their growing global influence are driving these decisions. The U.S. foreign aid suspension is part of a broader pattern of governments scaling back support for civil society and humanitarian initiatives.
Similarly, the European Union’s decision to cut its development spending by 2 billion euros over the next three years will reduce aid to the world’s lowest-income countries by 35%, exacerbating existing inequalities.
Belgium’s 25% cut in foreign aid mirrors this shift, as does the Netherlands’ move to reduce funding for NGOs, prioritizing themes that serve its national interests over global needs. These disruptions weaken trust in international partnerships and force organizations further into survival mode rather than allowing for long-term strategic action.
The withdrawal of funding not only to civil society and humanitarian organizations, but also to multilateral institutions will further hinder efforts to address economic inequality and climate change for all.
Although it will take time to fully assess the impact of these recent decisions, we can already foresee their magnitude in terms of humanitarian assistance, but also in terms of human rights, democracy and global governance.
The U.S. 90-day foreign aid freeze alone has halted critical funding for international development organizations and federal contractors delivering humanitarian assistance worldwide. Thousands of jobs will be lost, and many organizations may not survive the freeze due to a lack of reserve funds.
Beyond economic devastation, the crisis is deeply human. Hospitals that once provided essential care are shutting down, perishable food supplies are going to waste, and communities are left without lifesaving support.
The full impact on human rights and democracy may take longer to materialize, but we already see the warning signs: fewer resources for independent media, greater exposure for vulnerable activists, and increasing shrinking spaces for civil society.
This funding retreat is particularly dangerous for civil society organizations operating in repressive environments. Countries where civic space is already under immense pressure will become even more vulnerable, putting human rights defenders and activists at higher risk.
According to the CIVICUS Monitor, 72.4% of the world’s population lives in countries where civic space is repressed or closed. The message these funding cuts send to authoritarian and repressive states is clear: civil society is no longer a priority for Western democracies that once invested in the protection and promotion of civic space.
The role of philanthropy
Private foundations and philanthropic institutions must fill the gaps left by bilateral funders, providing flexible and rapid funding to sustain critical work. While the shortfall is vast, philanthropy must rise to the occasion to prevent the collapse of vital organizations and initiatives.
Emergency grants are needed to sustain operations, protect staff, and support security-related expenses such as safe houses, legal aid and physical and digital protection. Without this intervention, our ability to advocate for democracy, justice, and human rights for all will be severely diminished. Investments must prioritize local actors, ensuring they have the resources to lead, innovate, and sustain their work beyond donor-driven priorities.
Rethinking global solidarity
This moment calls for a fundamental rethinking of global solidarity. The traditional donor-recipient model is currently showing its limits. In this time of crisis, we must recognize that the challenges faced by civil society globally are shared, and the responsibility to support those in need should be mutually distributed rather than concentrated in a few high-income countries.
We should foster collaborative, co-designed solutions where all partners, North and South, large and small, share the risks and rewards of international development efforts.
This is where the power of coalitions and alliances like CIVICUS comes in. In the face of growing fear and retribution, many individuals and organizations, both in the U.S. and abroad, are afraid to speak out. CIVICUS and other global alliances and coalitions must step in to amplify the voices of those who fear retaliation and support those on the ground fighting for justice.
This moment demands not just financial resources but a renewed commitment to our shared values. This crisis might be ripping the guts out of the international aid system, but it cannot take the heart out of solidarity.
Conclusion
This moment is a stress test for global civil society. If donor-driven priorities continue to dictate the fate of grassroots organizations, social and activist movements, and civil society organizations, we will see the erosion of human rights, justice, and democracy worldwide.
The question is not just how to survive these cuts, but how to build a model of solidarity that is independent of political whims.
At the same time, this is a moment for introspection and transformation within civil society itself. Circumstances demand that we explore alternative means of resource mobilization, adapt to new challenges, and build resilience that is not solely dependent on traditional funding structures.
Now more than ever, we must reaffirm our commitment to global solidarity not as a charitable act, but as an existential necessity for a just and sustainable future.
Jessica Corredor Villamil is Chief Officer, Advocacy and Solidarity Action at CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance. She is based in Paris.
GEBZE, Turkiye, Feb 17 2025 (IPS) – The 4th International Conference on Financing for Development could catalyse coordinated action to close the financing gap and set the stage for a STI-driven transformation in the world’s poorest countries.
The stark reality is that just over 250 weeks remain to go before the end of the decade, marking the endgame for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). With less than a fifth of the Goals on track, the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) or the world’s poorest countries urgently need bold, innovative financing for science, technology and innovation (STI) to re-set their development trajectories and salvage the 2030 Agenda.
In June/July this year, the Spanish city of Seville will host the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development, or FfD4. The last such summit was held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in 2015, the same year the SDGs were agreed.
Since then, the development financing gap has widened as has the divide between the richest and poorest countries across the globe. The financing gap – the amount of money required to achieve the SDGs and the resources that have been committed – is now estimated at $4.2 trillion annually.
The silver lining could be golden for the world’s most vulnerable
Notably, this past decade has seen astonishingly rapid developments in STI, spanning areas such as biotech, artificial intelligence, machine learning, green technologies and satellite connectivity. These breakthroughs, largely driven by digital technologies, have created immense wealth for a few.
According to Oxfam, five individuals will reach trillionaire status before the close of 2029, while the number of people living in poverty has remained stubbornly high since 1990. Yet for the 700 million people in the margins, this progress has not translated into better opportunities.
For them, these developments in STI could be truly transformational. There’s no better time than now to close the inequality gap and harness these assets for the benefit of all.
“There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come”- Victor Hugo
The concept of a dedicated global fund for STI has never been fully operationalized at scale, but the idea is not new. The United Nations, UNESCO, the World Bank, the African Union, the G77 and China have all proposed the idea of an STI funding pool, suggesting growing momentum and backing for such a mechanism.
However, it is important to push the envelope and make the case for such a fund exclusively for the LDCs. June/July’s high-level summit on financing for development could provide the coordination and impetus it needs to get started. With the key global players in attendance, this summit could be a pivotal moment to bring the idea of a STI fund to life.
What the world’s 44 least developed countries (LDCs) need.
A global fund for STI should focus on financing three priorities: Boosting the capacity of institutions in LDCs; closing the skills gap; and creating an enabling environment for STI to flourish.
Economic resilience and structural change depend upon strong productive capacity which is driven by equally strong national institutions that can effectively implement pro-growth strategies and technology. Tech transfer and skills building will only support development if a country’s institutions can take advantage of the technologies they need. This aligns with the imperative to upskill and reskill workers in LDCs.
With just under half of their citizens having no access to electricity and only a third able to access the internet, it is imperative that countries are supported with vital, enabling development infrastructure. Additionally, a grant financing facility to bolster centres of excellence in the Global South would enable countries to effect game-changing outcomes in critical areas such as climate change, agriculture, and business development.
Why a global STI fund is a smart investment
Investing in the tech capacities of LDCs is not only a moral obligation but makes good business sense. High levels of inequality limit access to education and skills, undermining social mobility and economic growth in the world’s 44 LDCs. Rapid economic growth and development in these countries – with their massive market of over one billion people – represents an equally massive opportunity for countries in the global South and also for developed countries.
Investing in a dedicated STI fund would pave the way for long-term sustainable development in LDCs, providing opportunities for collaboration, harnessing the talent of their youthful populations and opening up new markets.
The Financing for Development summit as a catalyst for coordinated action
This decade began with a global pandemic that wrought havoc on economies worldwide, particularly the most vulnerable. Those who didn’t have the buffers to bounce back continue to struggle to meet basic development objectives and as a result, the SDG promises of 2015 remain elusive.
The 4th International Conference on Financing for Development presents a unique opportunity to focus on STI as an essential driver for development. The summit could catalyse coordinated action to close the financing gap and set the stage for a STI-driven transformation in the world’s poorest countries.
As we approach the final stretch of the 2030 Agenda, the need for solutions has never been more obvious. Investing in a global STI fund for LDCs is not just about making a big difference for the people in the poorest and most vulnerable countries, it also makes good business sense.
Deodat Maharaj is the Managing Direct0r of the United Nations Technology Bank for the Least Developed Countries and can be reached at: deodat.maharaj@un.org
Residents walk next to a vehicle with M23 fighters in Bukavu on February 16, 2025. M23 fighters entered the DR Congo provincial capital of Bukavu on February 14, 2025. [AFP]
For decades, Congo’s eastern regions of North and South Kivu have been a tinderbox waiting to catch fire — and those willing to light a match were many and varied.
History has been rhyming in that vast country, where the more things seem to change, the more they stay the same.
The players of the ongoing war that started in earnest last month — Tutsis and Hutus and their allies, including Rwandan and Congolese governments, as well as mercenaries — are more or less the same.
[embedded content]
The setting is the same as it was in the 1990s. Yesterday’s accusations, counter-accusations, grievances and modi operandi are the same as today.
As ever, Congolese civilians are being killed in their thousands and displaced in their hundreds of thousands.
And the international community is as confused and complicit as before.
If in the 1996 war, forces from Uganda, Angola, Burundi and African American mercenaries fought alongside Rwanda. Today, Burundi, South Africa and European mercenaries are fighting for Congo.
Unlike the past, though, Rwanda and its Tutsi proxies, who’re tacitly supported by Uganda, are fighting alone this time around.
The ongoing war in eastern Congo has many similarities to the 1996 Rwanda-led offensive that eventually toppled Mobutu Sese Seko a year later.
At the time, Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame argued that Hutu militiamen, many of whom were perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in his country, were using refugee camps in Eastern Congo as bases to try to retake power from his Tutsi-led government.
To avert such a possibility, Rwanda trained and armed Congolese Tutsis, who were victims of Congolese Hutus and their government, and finally sent its troops across the border to finish the job.
Whether Kagame harbours similar intentions now is far from clear. Nor is it clear whether the current war would spark a regional war, as it did in 1998.
But, ominous signs are everywhere: Rwanda and Congo are trading accusations.
The world’s big powers are distracted by wars in Europe, the Middle East and Sudan. The US that once acted as the world’s police is more concerned about its own internal affairs, as President Donald Trump is busy remaking his country.
Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter
On Feburary 7, 2025, almost two weeks after Rwandan-backed rebel group, M23, seized the major city of Goma, James Ngango, Rwanda’s ambassador to the UN in Geneva, said that an “imminent” large-scale attack against Rwanda was being hatched in Congo before the rebels captured Goma, a city of two million people.
Ngango accused a Kinshasa-backed coalition of stockpiling a large number of weapons and military equipment near Rwanda’s border, especially around Goma’s airport.
Ngango’s claim was akin to Kagame’s 1996’s raison d’être that Hutus were trying to invade Rwanda.
Prior to the 1996 invasion of Congo, Rwanda had two main concerns: refugee camps in eastern Congo that were housing Hutu extremists and laxity by the UN.
“It is my strong belief that the United Nations people are trying to deflect the blame for failures of their own making onto us,” Kagame, who was then vice president and defence minister, told a Washington Post reporter in 1997.
“Their failure to act in eastern Zaire (now Congo) directly caused these problems, and when things blew up in their faces they blamed us. These are people who want to be judges and nobody can judge them.”
Rwanda’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Corporation said the war “was triggered by constant violations of ceasefire by the Congolese Armed Forces in coalition with UN sanctioned militia FDLR (Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda), European mercenaries, ethnic militias (Wazalendo), Burundian armed forces, SMIDRC (the Southern African Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo) forces, as well as Monusco (the French meaning of United Nations Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo).”
To Rwanda, the war in eastern Congo was inevitable.
“Is there anybody among us who did not see this coming,” Kagame told his East African counterparts during a virtual meeting on January 29, 2025, that Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi skipped. “I, for one, saw it coming to be where we’re now. I saw it coming because I didn’t see who was taking charge of the process, who was listening, who was trying to provide any guide as to what we should be doing from one thing, from one day to another.”
For years, Kigali has voiced its displeasure with Kinshasa’s approach toward the M23 movement, a Tutsi ethnic group whose presence in eastern Congo served its interest.
Last month, Kagame accused East African leaders of not matching their words with action.
“We’re on one hand assuming or pretending we’re coming together over an issue and trying to find a solution, while at the same time each country is pulling in its own direction, different from others,” he said. “This is the fact of the matter.”
Our people
He accused Tshisekedi of bringing Burundi and Southern African Development Community (SADC) forces to Congo to fight his war.
“SADC was, without any doubt, coming to assist Tshisekedi to fight alongside FDLR, these murderers of our people in this country, to fight against mercenaries and to have Burundi on ethnic political basis,’’ Kagame said
‘‘They have displaced people, they have murdered people, they have persecuted on a daily basis for who they’re.”
The Democratic Republic of the Congo’s (DRC) lack of consistency — at one time accepting M23 as a local rebel group and another time characterising it as a foreign terrorist organisation — is the core difference between Kinshasa and Kigali, which ethnic Tutsis in East Africa look up to as their protector.
M23’s name was inspired by the unfulfilled peace treaty between the Tutsi rebel group, National Congress for the Defence of the People (CNDP), and the Congolese government on March 23, 2009.
That deal called for, among other things, the transformation of the group into a political party and integration of its fighters into the Congolese army.
The deal fell apart after Kinshasa failed to honour it, touching off a new rebellion by a Tutsi group, now rebranded as M23.
In 2023, the M23 agreed to withdraw its fighters from North Kivu and to sue for peace during talks with Kenya’s former President Uhuru Kenyatta, who led an East African Community’s process aimed at ending the conflict in eastern Congo.
But, Kinshasa, dissatisfied with the force’s lack of military action against M23, expelled it and replaced it with another force from SADC that, according to Rwanda, worked with European mercenaries and FDLR, a group made up of the remnants of the militia that sought refugee in eastern region after carrying out the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.
“There was never any discussion with East African Community about this,” a Rwandan government’s spokesperson wrote in an email to The Standard.
On December 15, 2024, weeks before the eruption of the war, Kagame skipped a scheduled meeting with Tshisekedi in Angola’s capital, Luanda, after Kinshasa rejected his request that it hold direct talks with M23.
The two leaders were expected to sign an agreement calling for the withdrawal of Rwandan forces from eastern Congo and neutralisation of FDLR.
“That summit couldn’t take place because the only item on the agenda (that was important to Rwanda) was no more,” Rwanda’s Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe told Al Jazeera in a recent interview.
The cancellation of that meeting deepened the diplomatic row between the two neighbours and may have, retrospectively, turbocharged M23’s offensive that led to the capture of Goma, the largest city in eastern Congo, on January 26.
Since then, the group has been scything through villages and towns in eastern Congo.
The group, which now calls itself the Congo River Alliance (or its French acronym, AFC), has recently taken control of Bukavu, which points to the likely hood of the group pushing to other towns of South East DRC. It had already driven DRC forces and their allies from most of North Kivu.
Its leader, Corneille Nangaa, said his aim was to “liberate” the country from its current leaders and “give a good life” to Congolese people with “no exclusion, no discrimination.”
“Our struggle has an objective: Our objective is to go to Kinshasa because we have a vision for the people of DRC,” Nangaa told Rwanda’s New Times newspaper in an interview. He said his group’s vision was “to make Congo a business land.”
Both the UN and DRC have accused Rwandan forces of playing a role in the Goma takeover, something Rwanda didn’t explicitly address. Burundian President Évariste Ndayishimiye has also accused Rwanda of expansionism and of training Burundian Tutsi fighters to destabilise his country.
“People get lost in the blame game — this and that — and forget to address the root causes of the problems we have and find a solution,” Kagame said in a press conference on January 3. “And then you have geopolitics being played into all this.”
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk said nearly 3,000 people have been killed and 2,880 injured in attacks by the M23 and their allies since January 26, 2025, “with heavy weapons used in populated areas, and intense fighting against the armed forces of the DRC and their allies.”
On February 7, 2025, the World Health Organisation (WHO)said more than 70 (or six per cent) of the health facilities in North Kivu have been affected, with some completely destroyed and others struggling to restart operations.”
The rapid collapse of DRC forces is likely to weaken its bargaining power in any future negotiations with M23, a group it has been trying to eradicate since its emergence in 2012.
“Right from the start, it was evident that we’re not looking at a repeat of 2012 in terms of the type of the warfare, in terms of the brutality of the warfare, in terms of the sophistication of the weaponry that was used,” said Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner, DRC’s Foreign Affairs minister, in an interview with Sans Frontieres Associates on February 10.
Kayikwamba said “this is not reminiscent of 2012 (when M23 captured Goma), but this is reminiscent of Rwanda and its tactics in eastern DRC in the late ‘90s.”
“We are looking at IDP camps being forcefully disbanded, we’re looking at people being disappeared. We’re looking at thousands of people being killed in a span of a few days,” she said, claiming that Kagame was being “emboldened by impunity” of ruling Rwanda for more than 30 years.
Rwanda’s alleged involvement in DRC echoes the 1997 invasion to overthrow Mobutu and installation of Laurent Kabila as his replacement.
That war started from eastern Congo. Then, as now, Rwandan forces and their allies swept through large swathes of the vast country without much resistance.
For its part, Rwanda has accused Kinshasa of collaborating with FDLR and of persecuting ethnic Tutsis, using regional armies and mercenaries.
“Three fundamental issues must be addressed: First, the FDLR must be neutralised as a threat. Second, Congolese Tutsi communities must be protected from persecution. Third, refugees must be able to return home safely,” said Rwanda’s government in a statement to The Standard.
The DRC has since the mid 1900s been a geopolitical plaything for foreign countries, with some as far as Eritrea and South Africa at one time meddling in its affairs.
An estimated 5.4 million people died in DRC as a result of what is called the African World War between 1998-2003 in which nine African countries took part.
The International Rescue Committee said “in terms of fatalities” the DRC war and its aftermath surpassed any other since World War II.
The mineral-rich eastern Congo, as most of DRC’s regions, has been a scene of suffering for its inhabitants and a sphere of influence for international companies and nations trying to loot its resources.
More than a dozen countries, including Burundi, Malawi, South Africa and Tanzania, as well as European mercenaries, operate in eastern Congo.
As of October 2024, the UN had 10,183 soldiers and 1,324 police forces. That force was as powerless and inept as it was in 2012 when the M23 first captured Goma.
More than 100 armed groups operate in the country due to its lawlessness and the almost nonexistent infrastructure.
Rwanda’s government told The Standard that it’s ready to “work with all parties who are committed to finding a lasting solution to the instability in the region.”
It also welcomed the recent joint communiqué by leaders of East African Community and SADC that called for the “cessation of hostilities and an immediate ceasefire” and peaceful resolution of the conflict through the Luanda/Nairobi process.”
The leaders of the two blocs “emphasised that political and diplomatic engagement is the most sustainable solution to the conflict in eastern DRC” and directed their chiefs of defence forces to meet within five days and provide a technical direction on how, among other issues, hostilities could be ended and immediate ceasefire could be realised.
They also called for the “neutralization of FDLR,” a long-held demand of Rwanda, which was asked to disengage its forces from Congo as agreed in the Luanda process.
Hubert Kabasu Babu, a Congolese writer and analyst of African politics, said Tshisekedi’s refusal to talk to M23 to address its grievances and to deal with the issue of FDRL that threatens Rwanda was “incomprehensible” that only exacerbated the crisis.
He said DRC is suffering from “state degradation” that was worsened by Tshisekedi’s “predatory and oppressive authoritarian drift.”
The International Crisis Group urged European Union and its member states to press Rwanda “to accept a deal to withdraw the M23 from Goma, with its troops and proxies desisting from further advances.”
If Rwanda maintains its aggressive military posture, the group said, “Brussels should withdraw its support for the Rwandan army mission (in Mozambique) to signal its growing concern about the escalating conflict in North Kivu.”
It said two issues are vitally important for relations between Kinshasa and Brussels.
“First, tensions are mounting between Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi and the opposition over his plans to change the constitution and potentially remove the current two-term limit so as to extend his stay in office,” said the group. “Secondly, while Europe is interested in enhancing its access to the DRC’s minerals, these remain a source of corruption and illicit financial flows that are hurting the country’s development.”
President Tshisekedi has repeatedly threatened to attack Rwanda and has even entertained ousting the regime there, which, in essence, could mean a new genocide in Rwanda as any potential seizure of Rwanda by Hutus is likely to trigger another bloodbath.
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Feb 16 2025 (IPS) – “I was shocked when told by a security guard that the clinic has been closed down. I, along with my relatives, used to visit the clinic for free checkups,” Jamila Begum, 22, an Afghan woman, told IPS.
The clinic has been established by an NGO with the financial assistance of the USAID to reduce maternal complications on the outskirts of Peshawar, the capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, one of Pakistan’s four provinces. Begum, who is near to delivering a baby, says she couldn’t afford the high fee of blood tests and ultrasound examinations in private hospitals and is concerned about her delivery. Fareeda Bibi, an Afghan refugee, is concerned too.
“We have been receiving more than a dozen Afghan women for pre- and post-natal checkups through a clinic funded by the U.S., which has now been shut down,” Bibi, a female health worker, said at a clinic on the outskirts of Peshawar.
Pakistan is home to 1.9 million Afghan refugees and most of the women seek health services in NGO-run health facilities funded by the United States.
“The Afghan women cannot visit remote hospitals and came here conveniently because we have all female staff but all of a sudden, the small clinics have been closed, leaving the population high and dry,” Bibi says. “In the past year, we have received 700 women for free check-ups and medicines, due to which they were able to stay safe from delivery-related complications.”
Jamila Khan, who runs an NGO helping women in rural settings of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, one of Pakistan’s four provinces, is also upset by the funding freeze.
“Most of the USAID’s funds were used by NGOs, who will now either be completely closed down or will look for new sources of funds. For the time being, they are struggling to continue operations after the withdrawal of promised funds,” she says.
The suspension of funds by the USAID has hit all sectors in Pakistan, a former employee of USAID, Akram Shah, told IPS.
“The 39 projects funded by the United States included energy, economic development, agriculture, democracy, human rights and governance, education, health, and humanitarian assistance. The suspension order has impacted all,” he says.
President Donald Trump’s directives of suspending USAID funding worldwide after assuming his office also brought to a standstill several projects worth over USD 845 million in Pakistan.
Shah says the abrupt funding cut will badly harm the small landowners who looked towards the USAID but now we are immensely concerned about how to go ahead with our annual plan of going crops without financial assistance.
Our farming has been worst hit as farmers banked on the financial and technical assistance provided by the U.S. to enhance agricultural productivity.
“Most farmers in rural areas have been benefitting from the USAID for a long time, as we got high-quality seeds, tools, fertilizers, etc., which helped us to grow more crops and earn for our sustenance,” Muhammad Shah, a farmer, says.
The health sector is also badly hit, as USAID’s money kept running the Integrated Health Systems Strengthening and Service Delivery Integrated Health System Program, says Dr. Raees Ahmed at the Ministry of National Health Services Regulations and Coordination.
The promised funds of USD 86 million aimed at strengthening Pakistan’s healthcare infrastructure would leave the program half finished, he says. Additionally, Pakistan was supposed to receive USD 52 million under the Global Health Supply Chain Program to ensure the availability of essential medical supplies, but it will be closed down for want of funds.
Education officer Akbar Ali says they had pinned hopes on USAID’s assistance of USD 30.7 million for the Merit and Needs-Based Scholarship Program for the poor students to continue their studies but it has become a dream now.
Ali says the inclusive democratic processes and governance projects, of which USD 15 million was promised, have been halted. The program, in which teachers were also included, was intended to enhance democratic governance and transparency.
Funds for improving governance and the administrative system in the violence-stricken tribal areas along Afghanistan’s border will also stop. The USAID had pledged USD 40.7 million.
Muhammad Wakil, a social activist, says his organization, which is working for a U.S.-funded Building Peace in Pakistan, is also suffering. The program, worth USD 9 million, aimed at fostering religious, ethnic, and political harmony, has had to close.
“We have asked our workers to stay home and have suspended at least 20 workshops scheduled this year,” Wakil says.
He wondered why the United States, a staunch supporter of peace and religious harmony, has stopped funds.
The Mangla Dam Rehabilitation Project, a USD 150 million initiative essential for Pakistan’s energy and water security, has also suffered.
The decision to suspend these aid programs comes as part of a broader restructuring of US foreign assistance under Trump’s “America First” policy.
USAID, established in 1961 under President John F. Kennedy, has long been a cornerstone of US foreign policy, administering approximately 60 percent of the country’s aid budget. In the 2023 fiscal year alone, USAID disbursed USD 43.79 billion in global assistance, supporting development efforts in over 130 countries, media reported.
