Partnering for Progress: Maldives’ Sustainable Ocean Initiatives

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Small Island Developing States, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The UN’s focus on green energy, plastic, biodiversity, and early warnings aims to safeguard the Maldives from climate change. Credit: UNDP Maldives / Ashwa Faheem

MALE, Maldives, Aug 2 2024 (IPS) – The ocean is our lifeline, covering 70 percent of the earth’s surface, it is the source of half of the oxygen we breathe, and it absorbs 26 percent of the carbon dioxide we produce. It is home to millions of marine species, contains 97 percent of all of the water on our planet and offers humankind immense resources. 

Maldives – 500,000 people living in ocean-side communities across an archipelago of 26 atolls and 1,192 islands – demonstrates both the challenges of living within an ocean world and its vast potential. Therefore, we must ensure that the ocean is not only our treasured history but part of our healthy and prosperous future as well.

The UN in Maldives together with Ocean Generation (an organization working to restore a healthy relationship between people and the ocean), is supporting the Maldives in meeting the increasing dangers of the climate crisis and preserving and protecting our threatened ocean.

At the recently concluded 4th Small Island Developing States (SIDS4) Conference in Antigua, Maldives President Mohamed Muizzu directly addressed these challenges, calling for international public and private sector finance to invest in Maldives – to provide urgently needed climate financing for new green energy sources and to fund climate protection for communities and islands threatened by rising sea levels.

Recognizing the precarious state of our oceans due to human consumption patterns and global heating, the President has recently ordered a pause to coastal development activities over concerns of high-water temperatures and coral bleaching in nearby waters.

Heeding the President’s call, the UN and Ocean Generation are looking forward to working with Maldives towards solutions for the challenges faced by one of the most climate-vulnerable states in the world.

Here are four key areas with the potential to make the biggest difference.

1) Green energy

A critical issue for Maldives is to reduce the use of expensive diesel fuel for energy production and transport between the many and distant atolls and island communities. Less diesel fuel use is a win-win: fewer carbon emissions and less foreign exchange spent on costly imported fuel.

International investment is urgently needed to scale-up commercial, private-sector supported solar and other renewable energy sources for the capital city Malé and other urban areas, for smaller island communities, and for resorts.

Meeting the Government’s goal of 33 per cent green energy supply by 2028 is a key priority where UN and World Bank initiatives can contribute.

2) Reducing plastic pollution

Safely disposing of waste and reducing the amount of waste that is generated are crucial goals for improving the lives of coastal communities. Reducing the import of single use, throwaway plastics into Maldives that ultimately end in our ocean and wash up on the shores of Maldives atolls, will be essential.

Global plastic production is currently around 420 million metric tonnes per year.  Half of this is destined for single-use. We cannot rely on recycling to address our plastic waste problem.  Only 13 percent of global plastic is recycled and of that 13 percent, only 1 percent is re-used through the system again meaning that even the plastic that does get recycled will eventually end up in landfill, being burned or in the environment.

Maldives Ministry of Environment, Climate Change and Technology’s efforts to increase fees on plastic bags is essential to the national goal of phasing out plastic usage. Working with the Government, the UN and Ocean Generation strive to raise awareness among stakeholders of the cost of inaction and the shift towards environmentally-friendly alternatives to single-use plastics.

The rich biodiversity of the Maldives is vital for the resilience of its island communities, supporting thriving fisheries, diverse vegetation, and various economic opportunities. Credit: UNDP Maldives / Ashwa Faheem

3) Biodiversity conservation

The broad biodiversity of Maldives coastal and marine life is the key to resilience of the interconnected communities of the islands, through fisheries and vegetation and economic livelihoods. Maldives can act as a global laboratory both for oceanic health and for the immediate and dynamic effects of climate change. Ongoing UN initiatives focused on conservation and sustainably managing coral reefs in fishing communities are already laying the ground for local lessons to shape national policy change.

4) Fighting climate change

The ocean is our biggest ally when it comes to climate change, especially with regards to absorbing heat. Average global temperatures today sit at 15 degrees C, (59 F) and without the ocean absorbing heat, that average is estimated to be 50 degrees C (122 F).  Maldives has already demonstrated its commitment to climate resilience, by becoming the first country in Asia and the first Small Island Developing State to embrace the UN Secretary-General’s Early Warnings for All (EW4All) initiative.

Globally, it is the first country to endorse a national EW4All road map, at the presidential level, to ensure multi-hazard early warnings for all by 2027. Continuing to conserve, protect and restore marine resources, as a clear nature-based solution to climate change, is of utmost priority.

Maldives’ climate initiatives offer valuable lessons for all island nations, and their successful implementation could serve as a model for global change. By scaling up efforts to reduce fossil fuel dependence and combat throwaway consumerism, we can protect our oceans and planet, creating a sustainable future for all.

This article was adapted from an Op-Ed written by the UN Resident Coordinator in the Maldives Bradley Busetto and the founder of Ocean Generation Jo Ruxton, MBE. The links follow: maldives.un.org oceangeneration.org.

Source: UN Development Coordination Office (UNDCO).

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

79 Years After Hiroshima & Nagasaki: A Grim Reminder of Nuclear Annihilation

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Nuclear Disarmament, Nuclear Energy – Nuclear Weapons, TerraViva United Nations

Nuclear Disarmament

Erico Platt looks at the disarmament exhibition that she staged, “Three Quarters of a Century After Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The Hibakusha—Brave Survivors Working for a Nuclear-Free World.” Credit: UNODA/Diane Barnes

UNITED NATIONS, Aug 1 2024 (IPS) – The upcoming 79th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which took place on August 6 and 9, 1945, remains a grim reminder of the destructive consequences of nuclear weapons.

The US bombings killed an estimated 90,000 to 210,000, with roughly half of the deaths occurring on the first day in Hiroshima.

But despite an intense global campaign for nuclear disarmament, the world has witnessed an increase in the number of nuclear powers from five—the US, UK, France, China and Russia—to nine, including India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel.

Is the continued worldwide anti-nuclear campaign an exercise in futility? And will the rising trend continue—with countries such as Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and South Korea—as potential nuclear powers of the future?

South Africa is the only country that has voluntarily given up nuclear weapons after developing them. In the 1980s, South Africa produced six nuclear weapons, but dismantled them between 1989 and 1993. A number of factors may have influenced South Africa’s decision, including national security, international relations, and a desire to avoid becoming a pariah state.

But there is an equally valid argument that there have been no nuclear wars—only threats—largely because of the success of the world-wide anti-nuclear campaign, the role of the United Nations and the collective action by most of the 193 member states in adopting several anti-nuclear treaties.

According to the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), the United Nations has sought to eliminate weapons  of mass destruction (WMDs) ever since the establishment of the world body. The first resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1946 established a commission to deal with problems related to the discovery of atomic energy, among others.

The commission was to make proposals for, inter alia, the control of atomic energy to the extent necessary to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes.

Several multilateral treaties have since been established with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation and testing, while promoting progress in nuclear disarmament.

These include the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water, also known as the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was signed in 1996 but has yet to enter into force, and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).

Jackie Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation in Oakland, California, which monitors and analyzes US nuclear weapons programs and policies, told IPS: “As we approach the 79th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world is facing a greater danger of nuclear war than at any time since 1945.”

“The terrifying doctrine of “nuclear deterrence,” which should long ago have been delegitimized and relegated to the dustbin of history and replaced with multilateral, non-militarized common security, has metastasized into a pathological ideology brandished by nuclear-armed states and their allies to justify the perpetual possession and threatened use—including first use—of nuclear weapons,” she pointed out.

“It is more important than ever that we heed the warnings of the aging hibakusha (A-bomb survivors): What happened to us must never be allowed to happen to anyone again; nuclear weapons and human beings cannot co-exist; no more Hiroshimas, no more Nagasakis!”

This demands an irreversible process of nuclear disarmament. But to the contrary, all nuclear armed states are qualitatively and, in some cases, quantitatively upgrading their nuclear arsenals and a new multipolar arms race is underway, she noted.

“To achieve the elimination of nuclear weapons and a global society that is more fair, peaceful, and ecologically sustainable, we will need to move from the irrational fear-based ideology of deterrence to the rational fear of an eventual nuclear weapon use, whether by accident, miscalculation, or design.”

“We will also need to stimulate a rational hope that security can be redefined in humanitarian and ecologically sustainable terms that will lead to the elimination of nuclear weapons and dramatic demilitarization, freeing up tremendous resources desperately needed to address universal human needs and protect the environment.”

In this time of multiple global crises, “our work for the elimination of nuclear weapons must take place in a much broader framework, taking into account the interface between nuclear and conventional weapons and militarism in general, the humanitarian and long-term environmental consequences of nuclear war, and the fundamental incompatibility of nuclear weapons with democracy, the rule of law, and human wellbeing,” declared Cabasso.

Dr. M.V. Ramana, Professor and Simons Chair in Disarmament, Global and Human Security School of Public Policy and Global Affairs and Graduate Program Director, MPPGA at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, told IPS, “The glass is half-full or half-empty depending on how one looks at it.”

“The fact that we have avoided nuclear war since 1945 is also partly due to the persistence of the anti-nuclear movement. Historians like Lawrence Wittner have pointed to the many instances when governments have chosen nuclear restraint instead of unrestrained expansion.”

While South Africa is the only country that dismantled its entire nuclear weapons program, many countries—Sweden, for example—have chosen not to develop nuclear weapons even though they had the technical capacity to do so. They did so in part because of strong public opposition to nuclear weapons, which in turn is due to social movements supporting nuclear disarmament, he pointed out.

Thus, organizing for nuclear disarmament is not futile. Especially as we move into another era of conflicts between major powers, such movements will be critical to our survival, declared Ramana.

According to the UN, a group of elderly hibakusha, called Nihon Hidankyo, have dedicated their lives to achieving a non-proliferation treaty, which they hope will ultimately lead to a total ban on nuclear weapons.

“On an overcrowded train on the Hakushima line, I fainted for a while, holding in my arms my eldest daughter of one year and six months. I regained my senses at her cries and found no one else was on the train,” a 34-year-old woman testifies in the booklet. She was located just two kilometres from the Hiroshima epicenter.

Fleeing to her relatives in Hesaka, at age 24, another woman remembers that “people, with the skin dangling down, were stumbling along. They fell down with a thud and died one after another,” adding, “still now I often have nightmares about this, and people say, ‘it’s neurosis’.”

One man who entered Hiroshima after the bomb recalled in the exhibition “that dreadful scene—I cannot forget even after many decades.”

At a disarmament exhibition in UN Headquarters in New York, a visitor reads text about a young boy bringing his little brother to a cremation site in Nagasaki, Japan. Credit: UNODA/Erico Platt

At a disarmament exhibition in UN Headquarters in New York, a visitor reads text about a young boy bringing his little brother to a cremation site in Nagasaki, Japan. Credit: UNODA/Erico Platt

A woman who was 25 years old at the time said, “When I went outside, it was dark as night. Then it got brighter and brighter, and I could see burnt people crying and running about in utter confusion. It was hell…I found my neighbor trapped under a fallen concrete wall… Only half of his face was showing. He was burned alive”.

The steadfast conviction of the Hidankyo remains: “Nuclear weapons are absolute evil that cannot coexist with humans. There is no choice but to abolish them.”

Addressing the UN Security Council last March, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that with geopolitical tensions escalating the risk of nuclear warfare to its highest point in decades, reducing and abolishing nuclear weapons is the only viable path to saving humanity.

“There is one path—and one path only—that will vanquish this senseless and suicidal shadow once and for all.  We need disarmament now,” he said, urging nuclear-weapon States to re-engage to prevent any use of a nuclear weapon, re-affirm moratoria on nuclear testing and “urgently agree that none of them will be the first to use nuclear weapons.”

He called for reductions in the number of nuclear weapons led by the holders of the largest arsenals—the United States and the Russian Federation—to “find a way back to the negotiating table” to fully implement the New Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, or START Treaty, and agree on its successor.

“When each country pursues its own security without regard for others, we create global insecurity that threatens us all,” he observed.  Almost eight decades after the incineration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons still represent a clear danger to global peace and security, growing in power, range and stealth.”

“States possessing them are absent from the negotiating table, and some statements have raised the prospect of unleashing nuclear hell—threats that we must all denounce with clarity and force,” he said.  Moreover, emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and cyber and outer space domains have created new risks.”

From Pope Francis, who calls the possession of nuclear arms “immoral”, to the hibakusha, the brave survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to Hollywood, where Oppenheimer brought the harsh reality of nuclear doomsday to vivid life for millions around the world, people are calling for an end to the nuclear madness.  “Humanity cannot survive a sequel to Oppenheimer,” he warned.

When Nagasaki marked the 78th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing of the city last year, the mayor Shiro Suzuki, urged world powers to abolish nuclear weapons, saying nuclear deterrence also increases risks of nuclear war, according to an Associated Press (AP) report.

He called on the Group of Seven (G7) industrial powers to adopt a separate document on nuclear disarmament that called for using nuclear weapons as deterrence.

“Now is the time to show courage and make the decision to break free from dependence on nuclear deterrence,” Suzuki said in his peace declaration. “As long as states are dependent on nuclear deterrence, we cannot realize a world without nuclear weapons.”

Russia’s nuclear threat has encouraged other nuclear states to accelerate their dependence on nuclear weapons or enhance capabilities, further increasing the risk of nuclear war, and that Russia is not the only one representing the risk of nuclear deterrence, Suzuki said.

Suzuki, whose parents were hibakusha, or survivors of the Nagasaki attack, said knowing the reality of the atomic bombings is the starting point for achieving a world without nuclear weapons. He said the survivors’ testimonies are a true deterrent against nuclear weapons use, the AP report said.

This article is brought to you by IPS Noram, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with UN ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Cambodia’s Young Environmental Activists Pay a Heavy Price

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Economy & Trade, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Indigenous Rights, Labour, Natural Resources, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Tang Chhin Sothy/AFP via Getty Images

LONDON, Aug 1 2024 (IPS) – It’s risky to try to protect the environment in authoritarian Cambodia. Ten young activists from the Mother Nature environmental group have recently been given long jail sentences. Two were sentenced to eight years on charges of plotting and insulting the king. Another seven were sentenced to six years for plotting, while one, a Spanish national banned from entering Cambodia, was sentenced in absentia.

Four of the activists were then violently dragged away from a peaceful sit-in they’d joined outside the court building. The five who’ve so far been jailed have been split up and sent to separate prisons, some far away from their families.

This is the latest in a long line of attacks on Mother Nature activists. The group is being punished for its work to try to protect natural resources, prevent water pollution and stop illegal logging and sand mining.

An autocratic regime

Cambodia’s de facto one-party regime tolerates little criticism. Its former prime minister, Hun Sen, ruled the country from 1985 until 2023, when he handed over to his son. This came shortly after a non-competitive election where the only credible opposition party was banned. It was the same story with the election in 2018. This suppression of democracy required a crackdown on dissenting voices, targeting civil society as well as the political opposition.

The authorities have weaponised the legal system. They use highly politicised courts to detain civil society activists and opposition politicians for long spells before subjecting them to grossly unfair trials. Campaigners for environmental rights, labour rights and social justice are frequently charged with vaguely defined offences under the Criminal Coder such as plotting and incitement. Last year, nine trade unionists were convicted of incitement after going on strike to demand better pay and conditions for casino workers.

In 2015 the government introduced the restrictive Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organisations (LANGO), which requires civil society organisations to submit financial records and annual reports, giving the state broad powers to refuse registration or deregister organisations. In 2023, Hun Sen threatened to dissolve organisations if they failed to submit documents.

The state also closely controls the media. People close to the ruling family run the four main media groups and so they mostly follow the government line. Independent media outlets are severely restricted. Last year the authorities shut down one of the last remaining independent platforms, Voice of Democracy. Self-censorship means topics such as corruption and environmental concerns remain largely uncovered.

This extensive political control is closely entwined with economic power. The ruling family and its inner circle are connected to an array of economic projects. Landgrabs by state officials are common. These means land and Indigenous people’s rights activists are among those targeted.

In 2023, courts sentenced 10 land activists to a year in jail in response to their activism against land grabbing for a sugar plantation. That same year, three people from the Coalition of Cambodian Farmer Community, a farmers’ rights group, were charged with incitement and plotting. The LANGO has also been used to prevent unregistered community groups taking part in anti-logging patrols.

The activity that saw the Mother Nature activists charged with plotting involved documenting the flow of waste into a river close to the royal palace in the capital, Phnom Pen. It’s far from the first time the group’s environmental action has earned the state’s ire. The government feels threatened by the fact that Mother Nature’s activism resonates with many young people.

Three of the group’s activists were convicted on incitement charges in 2022 after organising a protest march to the prime minister’s residence to protest against the filling in of a lake for construction. In 2023, Mother Nature delivered a petition urging the government to stop granting land to private companies in Kirirom National Park; there’s evidence of licences going to people connected to ruling party politicians. In response, the Ministry of Environment said Mother Nature was an illegal organisation and that its actions were ‘against the interests of Cambodian civil society’.

Media also get in trouble if they report on the sensitive issue of land exploitation. In 2023, the authorities revoked the licences of three media companies for publishing reports on a senior official’s involvement in land fraud. In 2022, two teams of reporters covering a deforestation operation were violently arrested.

Regional challenges

Repression of environmental activism isn’t limited to Cambodia. In neighbouring Vietnam, the one-party communist state is also cracking down on climate and environmental activists. In part this is because, as in Cambodia, climate and environmental activism is increasingly shining a light on the environmentally destructive economic practices of authoritarian leaders.

Cambodia’s creeping use of the charge of insulting the king to stifle legitimate dissent also echoes a tactic frequently used in Thailand, where the authorities have jailed young democracy campaigners for violating an archaic lèse majesté law that criminalises criticism of the king. Other repressive states are following its lead – including Cambodia, where the law on insulting the king was introduced when the crackdown was well underway in 2018.

Cambodia provides ample evidence of how the denial of democracy and the repression that comes with it enable environmentally destructive policies that further affect people’s lives and rights. The solution to protect the environment and prevent runaway climate change is less repression, more democracy and a more enabled civil society.

Cambodia’s international partners should emphasise this in their dealings with the state. They should press the authorities to release the jailed Mother Nature activists, who deserve to spend the coming years helping make their country a better place, not rotting in prison.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

  Source

At Paris Olympics, Art Runs in Tandem with Sports

Posted on by admin

Arts, Civil Society, Europe, Headlines, Inequality, TerraViva United Nations

Human Rights

Cover of the Cultural Olympiad programme

PARIS, Jul 31 2024 (IPS) – As cheers from beach-volleyball fans fill the air at the Eiffel Tower Stadium on a steamy, sunny day, pedestrians just down the road are enjoying another kind of show: an outdoor exhibition of huge photographs gleaming on the metal railings of UNESCO headquarters.

Titled Cultures at the Games, the exhibition is among hundreds of artistic and cultural events taking place across France during the 2024 Olympic Games (hosted by the French capital July 26 to Aug. 11), and they’re being staged alongside the numerous athletic contests.

The events even have an umbrella name – the Cultural Olympiad – and include photography, painting, sculpture, fashion, and a host of attractions linking art and sport. Most are scheduled to run beyond the closing ceremony of the Games.

UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) is a “partner” in the Cultural Olympiad, arranging not only the usual meetings where bureaucrats give lofty speeches, but also showcasing a series of works to highlight diversity and inclusion.

Cultures at the Games, for instance, comprises some 140 photographs portraying memorable aspects of the opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympics since 1924 and is presented in association with the Olympic Museum of Lausanne.

Images show how national delegations have transmitted their culture during these extravaganzas, and the pictures depict athletes such as Jamaica’s Usain Bolt, whose “lightning bolt” pose has become part of the Games’ folklore even as he has helped to make the green, gold and black colours of his country’s flag more recognizable.

Inside UNESCO’s Y-shaped building, meanwhile, a collection of panels focuses on how sport can “Change the Game”, a theme running across all of the organization’s “Olympiad” events. (At the “World Ministerial Meeting” that UNESCO hosted on July 24, just ahead of the Olympics, officials discussed gender equality, inclusion of people with disabilities, and protection of athletes, for example.)

A notable section of the indoor exhibition features historic photographs that pay tribute to athletes who sparked change through their achievements or activism. Here, one can view an iconic picture of American athlete Jesse Owens, the “spanner in the works that completely disrupted the Nazi propaganda machine set up during the 1936 Berlin Olympics,” according to the curators.

Owens won four medals at the Games, but “received no immediate (official) recognition from his own country” despite being welcomed as a hero by the public, as the exhibition notes. The racism in the United States meant that President Franklyn D. Roosevelt refused to congratulate him “for fear of losing votes in the Southern states.” The photo shows him standing on the podium in Berlin, while behind him another competitor gives a “Hitler salute”.

Jesse Owens at the Berlin Olympics, in Athletes who changed the world at UNESCO;

Athletes who changed the world equally features boxer Mohammad Ali, who in 1967 refused to fight in Vietnam and was stripped of his world championship title and banned from the ring for three years.

Perhaps the most famous image, however, is that of athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos at the 1968 games in Mexico City. They “removed their shoes and walked forward in socks to protest against the extreme poverty faced by African Americans,” as the caption reminds viewers. “With solemn faces, Smith and Carlos bowed their heads and raised their gloved black fists, aiming to raise global awareness about racial segregation in their country.”

A photo of Tommie Smith, in Athletes who changed the world at UNESCO

The exhibition outlines the long battles faced by women athletes as well, and it highlights the work of Alice Milliat who, as president of the French Women’s Sports Federation, “campaigned for women’s inclusion in Olympic sports”. She organized the first Women’s Olympic Games in Paris in 1922, bringing together five countries and 77 athletes.

Although Milliat “died in obscurity” in 1957, her “legacy endures today, with the Paris 2024 Games highlighting gender equality in sports, largely thanks to her visionary efforts,” says the photo caption.

Similarly, the exhibition spotlights the contributions of disabled athletes such as Ryadh Sallem, who was born without arms or legs, a victim of the Thalidomide medication that was prescribed to pregnant women in the 1950s and Sixties and caused deformities in children.

Sallem won 15 French championship titles in swimming and later turned to team sports such as wheelchair basketball and rugby. At UNESCO, his photograph is prominently displayed, along with the story of his hopes for the 2024 Paralympics and his mission to “promote a positive vision of disability”.

Elsewhere in the city, artists and museums are also paying tribute to Paralympic competitors, ahead of the Paralympic Games from Aug. 28 to Sept. 8 in Paris.

On the fencing around the imposing Gare de l’Est (train station), colourful works by artist Lorenzo Mattoti show disabled athletes competing in a variety of sports, while the Panthéon is presenting the “Paralympic Stories: From Sporting Integration to Social Inclusion (1948-2024)”. This exposition relates the “history of Paralympism and the challenges of equality,” according to curators Anne Marcellini and Sylvain Ferez.

For fans of sculpture, Paris has a range of “Olympiad” works on view for free. In June, the city unveiled its official “sculpture olympique” or Olympic Statue, created by Los Angeles-based African-American artist Alison Saar, who cites inspiration from Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America.

The sculpture, located near the famed Champs Elysées avenue, depicts a seated African woman holding a flame in front of the Olympic rings, and it “embodies Olympic values of inclusivity and peace,” according to the office of Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo.

When it was inaugurated on June 23, however, it sparked a flurry of hostile remarks from some far-right commentators on social media, who apparently felt threatened by the work.

Another statue of a woman, that of Venus de Milo or the mythical goddess Aphrodite, has been “reinterpreted” in six versions by artistic director Laurent Perbos to symbolise “feminine” sporting disciplines, including boxing, archery and surfing. The statues stand in front of the National Assembly, and the irony won’t be lost on most viewers: French women secured the right to vote only in 1944.

Of course, Paris wouldn’t be Paris without another particular artform. As the much-discussed Opening Ceremony of the Olympics showed, fashion is an integral part of these Games, and those who didn’t get enough of the array of sometimes questionable costumes can head for another dose with “La Mode en movement #2” (Fashion in Motion #2).

This exhibition at the Palais Galliera / Fashion Museum looks at the history of sports clothing from the 18th century, with a special focus on beachwear. Among the 250 pieces on display, viewers will surely gain tips on what to wear for beach volleyball.

For more information, see: Olympiade Culturelle (paris2024.org)

  Source

Sportwashing Allegations at Africa’s Top Football Tournament

Posted on by admin

Africa, Climate Action, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Energy, Environment, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Green Economy, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Climate Change

Opponents of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline protested American International Group's continued support of the project. The protest was in New York in July. Credit: 350.org

Opponents of the East African Crude Oil pipeline protested American International Group’s continued support of the project. The protest was in New York in July. Credit: 350.org

ABUJA, Jul 30 2024 (IPS) – Following the recent Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) tournament in Ivory Coast, a continent-wide campaign has emerged on social media challenging the tournament’s main sponsor, TotalEnergies, over its involvement in the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).

EACOP, a massive 1,443-kilometer crude oil export pipeline, is designed to transport oil from Western Uganda’s oilfields to the port of Tanga in Tanzania. TotalEnergies, a major stakeholder in the project, will extract oil from the Tilenga field and export it to the Global North.

Environmentalists argue that the project threatens the livelihoods of tens of thousands of people and the region’s fragile ecosystems. The Ugandan and Tanzanian governments have dismissed these concerns, asserting that the pipeline is essential for bolstering their economies.

Many of these campaigners, particularly environmentalists, have faced harassment and arrest.

One of them, Stephen Kwikiriza, an employee of Uganda’s Environment Governance Institute (EGI), a non-profit organization, was reportedly abducted and beaten by the Ugandan armed forces in Kampala on June 4, 2024.

After being questioned, he was abandoned hundreds of miles from the capital, highlighting the latest episode in the crackdown on environmentalists in Uganda.

TotalEnergies, through their press officer, François Sinecan, emphatically denied that the company had anything to do with the harassment of environmentalists, or was involved in legitimizing the company through sponsorship.

Sportswashing

Critics argue that TotalEnergies is exploiting Uganda and Tanzania for their oil, even as it faces numerous legal battles due to its role in the climate crisis and refusal to take responsibility.

They worry that TotalEnergies is using AFCON, the continent’s biggest football tournament, and its global viewership to enhance its image while profiting from climate-wrecking fossil fuel extraction across Africa.

“AFCON is one of the ways they [TotalEnergies] are using to legitimize their existence. They have to use the sports arena. They seem to say, ‘Look at what we are doing in Africa, and in your communities, it is to your benefit.’ Every time you look at the logo of TotalEnergies, you might be convinced that this is a big corporation that should invest [in Africa], when in actuality, they are destroying our existence,” Nkurunziza Alphonse, the Ugandan Coordinator of the Students Against EACOP Uganda, told IPS.

Alphonse was arrested in October 2022 when he led a group of students to the EU embassy in Kampala to deliver a petition against EACOP. But he is not the only student to be arrested and harassed in recent times.

On December 15 last year, Bwete Abdul Aziiz, a co-founder of the Justice Movement Uganda and a student at Kyambogo University in Kampala, rallied 50 students, including members of the movement, to protest and deliver a petition to the Ugandan parliament against the EACOP.

However, the students did not reach their destination as the police dispersed the protest and arrested Abdul Aziiz, along with three other students who are members of the movement.

“Before we were taken to the Central Police Station in Kampala, where we spent four days, we were held in an enclosed space for about an hour where the police threatened us to stop fighting the government. I was kicked in the ribs by a police officer, and other colleagues were slapped,” Abdul Aziiz told IPS.

However, Sinecan, TotalEnergies press officer, denied claims of sportwashing and involvement in the arrests of climate activists.

“Africa is part of the DNA of TotalEnergies, which has been present on the continent for ninety years and has never ceased to develop its activities and strengthen its local roots. The company employs 10,000 men and women in more than 40 African countries, working across the entire energy production and distribution chain. Every day, nearly 4 million customers visit the 4,700 service stations in the TotalEnergies network in Africa,” Sinecan told IPS.

He added that TotalEnergies  “will not tolerate any threat or attack against those who peacefully defend and promote human rights.”

“TotalEnergies has a history of engaging directly with all members of civil society, including NGOs involved in human rights issues. To this end, the company’s commitments include quarterly meetings, stakeholder dialogue, bilateral meetings, webinars on keynote topics identified by NGOs and responses to questions and concerns raised by all project stakeholders,” said Sinecan.

However, activists that IPS spoke to do not agree.

Bhekhumuzi Bhebhe, Campaigns Lead at Power Shift Africa, in a statement sent to IPS said, “Investing millions in sportswashing while undercompensating displaced households exposes a profound deceit by the French multinational. It also highlights the glaring disconnect between corporate sponsorship and genuine social responsibility.”

But the French oil giant denied claims of undercompensating displaced households, telling IPS that “as with all other aspects of the project, TotalEnergies stringently complies with local regulations and international standards (IFC).”

Football and Climate Change

The 2023 AFCON was postponed to 2024 due to adverse weather conditions, leading critics to argue that the tournament underscored the impacts of the climate crisis, for which TotalEnergies and other oil majors are largely responsible.

Richard Heede of the Climate Accountability Project has described EACOP as a mid-sized carbon bomb. The pipeline is projected to become operational by 2025 and once completed, it is expected to contribute approximately 34 million tons of carbon emissions annually for around 25 years.

Baraka Lenga, Greenfaith Tanzania coordinator, considers this a climate disaster.

“For capitalists and businessmen, EACOP implies making billions of dollars. TotalEnergies does not care about human rights but about money. In Tanzania, over 70 percent of citizens depend on agriculture, yet instead of being concerned about the negative impacts of EACOP, TotalEnergies is focused on profit,” Lenga said.

Alagoa Morris, an environmental expert and human rights activist in Nigeria, told IPS that African governments allow oil giants to exploit communities in the continent to maintain support from the Global North, where the majority of these oil firms are based. He says this has also led to numerous oil spills in the continent.

Last year, the Nigerian government confirmed the loss of 3,000 barrels of crude oil in TotalEnergies’ spill in the oil-rich Niger-Delta region, which is already one of the most polluted areas on the planet due to frequent oil spills.

“African governments are complicit in the exploitation of the continent’s oil resources because the wealth generated from oil is then used to fuel the lust for power and wealth of a few individuals, perpetuating a cycle of corruption and environmental degradation,” Morris said.

Renewable Energies?

To do away with fossil fuels by mid-century, world leaders during cop28 held at UAE last year, pledged to keep investing in renewable energies. However, with a projected population of about 2.5 billion in 2050, many African leaders doubt that renewable energy can adequately substitute for energy obtained from fossil fuels required to produce power for a rapidly growing population in Africa.

Seyifunmi Adebote, an environmental policy expert in Nigeria, believes Africa must embrace renewable energy but according to him, “many countries on the continent lack the infrastructure to transition to renewable energy in the short run.”

Despite accusations of investing in fossil fuels, TotalEnergies told IPS that it has “dedicated USD 5 billion to renewable and low-carbon energies and will dedicate another USD 5 billion in 2024. This is the second year in a row that TotalEnergies has invested more in low-carbon energies than in new hydrocarbon projects.

“Since 2020, we have been resolutely committed to our transition strategy, which is based on two pillars: gas and electricity. Gas and low-carbon electricity are at the heart of tomorrow’s energy system. Gas is an essential transitional energy to support the rise of intermittent renewable energies and replace coal in power generation. In electricity, we are already one of the world’s biggest solar and wind power developers, which should put us in the top 5 worldwide in this sector by 2030.”

Victory In Sight

The fate of EACOP is uncertain after several financial institutions, including previous supporters of TotalEnergies, announced they would no longer back the project due to global environmental protests.

European lawmakers have also condemned and called for its delay.

For the Ugandan-based Alphonse, this marks a significant victory in the fight against EACOP, as the lack of financiers could lead to the project being suspended.

“This is the time African countries should move away from fossil fuels. Oil is destroying our continent,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report,

  Source

SUMMIT OF THE FUTURE: ‘The UN Secretary-General Underestimated the Difficulty of Reaching Consensus’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Environment, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainability, TerraViva United Nations

Jul 30 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the upcoming Summit of the Future with Renzo Pomi, who represents Amnesty International at the United Nations (UN) in New York.

Renzo Pomi

In September, world leaders will gather at the UN World Summit of the Future to adopt the Pact for the Future. Ahead of the summit, civil society, academia and the private sector have contributed to the pact’s zero draft. Civil society sees the process as an opportunity to strengthen commitments on the environment, human rights and social justice, and CIVICUS advocates for the inclusion of language on the protection and expansion of civic space. But much work remains to be done before, during and after the summit to ensure ambitious commitments are adopted and then realised.

How did the Summit of the Future come about?

In September 2021, the UN Secretary-General released a report, ‘Our Common Agenda’, outlining global challenges and proposing a summit for world leaders to address them. Originally scheduled for September 2023, the summit was postponed due to a lack of consensus and will now take place in September 2024. Just before the opening of the 79th session of the UN General Assembly, world leaders will gather in New York to discuss the future and adopt by consensus an action-oriented document, the Pact for the Future.

The pact and its two annexes – the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration on Future Generations – will be the summit’s main outcome. It aims to address our global challenges through commitments in five thematic areas: sustainable development and financing for development, international peace and security, science, technology and innovation, youth and future generations, and transforming global governance. The pact will address a wide range of challenges facing humanity and the international system, and will seek to make intergovernmental institutions such as the UN more fit for the purpose they were created for.

What has the process towards the draft pact been like, and what role has civil society played in it?

The drafting process has been largely a state-owned and state-exclusive process. Germany and Namibia have co-facilitated the negotiations and presented the zero draft in January and subsequent revisions in May and July 2024.

Civil society participation has been very limited. We rely mostly on friendly states for information, as we are not in the room when negotiations take place. After each draft was released, we were invited to submit our recommendations and participate in virtual consultations to discuss the content. But, while we value these opportunities, nothing replaces the chance to be actively involved in negotiations. When you hold a virtual meeting like this, what you get is a series of hasty statements, not a real dialogue. As a result, we’ve had to lobby states to champion our issues, and it’s unclear whether our views will be reflected in the pact.

While the co-facilitators are often blamed for this, the truth is that the process was agreed by all states. The UN Charter recognises civil society as an important stakeholder, as does the Secretary-General, but many states believe the UN should be exclusively state-run and civil society shouldn’t have a place in discussing important issues.

Further, relations between civil society and the UN in New York are particularly strained compared to Geneva, where there is a more established tradition of including civil society in discussions. And the UN’s financial crisis means there’s no investment in hybrid meetings, which allow civil society organisations (CSOs) that can’t afford to travel to have a voice in meetings.

What did you advocate should be including in the pact?

We made two submissions, one before the zero draft was circulated and the other commenting on it. We analysed the whole document and focused on ensuring that a human rights perspective was adopted in every measure. Our proposals covered issues from Security Council reform to increased civil society participation in the UN.

We have long argued that Security Council permanent members should refrain from vetoing or blocking credible resolutions on serious violations such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Unfortunately, this proposal is not accurately reflected on the draft. States may at the end agree to expand the Security Council, but otherwise most of the language simply reaffirms existing commitments, such as Article 27.3 of the Charter, which prevents states involved in conflicts voting on related resolutions but is currently ignored.

We also highlighted that CSOs face several barriers to engaging with the UN. The Economic and Social Council’s NGO Committee, which reviews applications for consultative status, often acts as a gatekeeper, unfairly denying access to CSOs that challenge the positions of particular states. We have proposed dismantling this committee and setting up an independent expert mechanism to assess applications on the basis of merit rather than political considerations. However, this proposal is unlikely to be included in the pact’s final draft.

How much real impact do you think the pact will have?

We hope some of our recommendations will be included in the pact, but the geopolitical climate suggests many will not. The Secretary-General has correctly identified the challenges, but he has underestimated the difficulty of reaching consensus on meaningful commitments. International cooperation is now almost non-existent. Today’s context resembles the Cold War, where there was no room for agreement on even basic issues. In the current circumstances, it was unrealistic for the Secretary-General to think he could launch such a massive undertaking and get an action-oriented document with real commitments for reform adopted.

It is said that even in the worst moments you have to push for the best. We may not get actionable commitments, but we may still get some good language and a minimum common denominator every country can agree on.

For the pact to have a real impact, global civil society needs to push for the strongest possible commitments and their implementation. In 2005, a similar summit ended with a decision to create the Human Rights Council in place of the discredited Commission on Human Rights. Now it’s very difficult to foresee getting commitments this specific, and as we approach the summit, proposals are being watered down. Civil society will have to be very creative in finding ways to use the watered-down language to demand change.

What’s next for civil society ahead of the summit?

In the days leading up to the summit, Summit of the Future Action Days will allow civil society, states and UN bodies to propose side events. Getting selected is very difficult, as requirements include sponsorship by two member states and one UN entity, and support by a coalition or network of CSOs. As a result, only a few side events will be approved.

As the summit approaches, civil society should focus on reviewing the second revision of the pact and identifying advocacy opportunities. Chances to advance our agenda will become more limited as September approaches. States will struggle to reach consensus on a final document and there will be no space to reopen closed discussions.

Once the pact is adopted, civil society will need to continue to push for critical issues and stay vigilant in monitoring its implementation.

Get in touch with Amnesty International through its website or Facebook and Instagram pages, and follow @amnesty on Twitter.

This interview was conducted as part of the ENSURED Horizon research project funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed in this interview are those of the interviewee only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.

  Source