The Indus Water Treaty Suspension: A Wake-Up Call for Asia–Pacific Unity ?

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Climate Change, Crime & Justice, Environment, Food and Agriculture, Headlines, Migration & Refugees, Peace, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Confluence of the Indus and Zanskar Rivers Credit: martinho Smart/shutterstock.com

May 12 2025 (IPS) –  
On April 23, India suspended the Indus Water Treaty (IWT), a 65-year-old agreement that had been a rare symbol of cooperation between India and Pakistan despite decades of hostility. The suspension came a day after militants attacked civilians in Jammu and Kashmir, a disputed region, killing 26 people, most of them Indian tourists. India accused Pakistan of supporting “cross-border terrorism” and responded by halting the treaty. Pakistan denied involvement in the attack and called India’s move an “act of war.”

The IWT, signed in 1960, was a landmark agreement that allowed the two countries to share the water of the Indus River system. It gave India control over the eastern tributaries (Ravi, Sutlej, and Beas), and Pakistan control over the western tributaries (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab). Beyond water-sharing, the treaty established mechanisms for data sharing, technical cooperation and dispute resolution. For decades, the treaty was celebrated as a triumph of diplomacy and environmental cooperation. But its suspension now threatens to unravel this legacy, with devastating consequences – especially for Pakistan.

Why the IWT Matters

Pakistan’s economy depends heavily on agriculture, which employs nearly 70% of its rural workforce. The Indus River irrigates 80% of the country’s farmland, making it a lifeline for millions. If India were to divert or reduce water flows, it could cripple Pakistan’s agriculture, triggering widespread food insecurity and economic instability. The stakes are high, and the consequences of failing to manage shared water resources responsibly would ripple far beyond Pakistan’s borders.

The timing of the IWT’s suspension couldn’t be worse. Climate and environmental risks are escalating across the Asia–Pacific region, with extreme weather events becoming more frequent and severe. Between 2008-2023, floods displaced 57 million people in India alone. In Pakistan, floods have not only destroyed homes but have also degraded soil quality, leaving farmers unable to grow enough crops to survive. These pressures are driving migration to cities, where migrants face exploitative conditions and often accrue large debts.

Climate Risks and Regional Instability

The link between climate change and regional instability is becoming impossible to ignore. In Central Asia, a 2021 clash over transboundary water resources between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan left 50 dead and displaced 10,000 others. In the Pacific, rising sea levels are forcing entire communities to relocate, sparking tensions in countries like Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. Meanwhile, large-scale infrastructure projects, such as hydroelectric dams in Southeast Asia, are displacing thousands and straining relations between countries like Laos, Thailand and Vietnam.

The demand for critical minerals to build renewable energy sources is adding another layer of complexity. Competition between China and the U.S over these resources is heightening global tensions. Critical mineral mining is also fuelling exploitation and violence in mining regions, like the Philippines and Indonesia. These examples highlight a troubling reality: climate and environmental risks are not just environmental issues – they are also security issues.

The Case for Regional Cooperation

Responding to these challenges requires a collective approach. Climate risks don’t respect national borders, and attempting to tackle them in isolation is a losing strategy. Cooperation offers a way to pool resources, share knowledge, and build resilience. For low-income countries in particular, regional solidarity—through climate finance, data sharing and technological transfer—could mean the difference between survival or collapse.

But cooperation isn’t just about survival; it’s also about seizing opportunities. Joint climate action can strengthen regional ties, foster peace and create shared prosperity. Cross-border collaboration on climate and environmental issues can connect institutions, research communities, and civil society, laying the groundwork to tackle future challenges. By working together, the Asia–Pacific region can turn shared challenges into shared strengths.

The suspension of the IWT is a wake-up call. At a time when cooperation is more critical than ever, we cannot afford to let geopolitical tensions derail climate action. The Asia–Pacific region faces immense challenges, but it also holds immense potential. By prioritising collaboration over confrontation, the climate crisis could provide an opportunity for peace, resilience, and shared prosperity. The path forward won’t be easy, but it’s the only path worth taking.

Related articles:
Kashmir: Escalating to War?
Kashmir: Paradise Lost
India’s Climate Calamities
Leaky Roof: Melting Himalayas in the ‘Asian Century’

Sinéad Barry is an Analyst at adelphi’s Climate Diplomacy and Security programme.
Emma Whitaker is a Senior Advisor at adelphi’s Climate Diplomacy and Security programme.

This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and is being republished from the original with their permission.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

‘Trump Is Advancing a 21st-century US Variant of Fascism, Backed by a White Nationalist Ideology’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Economy & Trade, Featured, Gender Identity, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Migration & Refugees, North America, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

May 7 2025 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS speaks about democratic decline in the USA with humanitarian and civil society activist Samuel Worthington, former president of the US civil society alliance InterAction and author of a new book, Prisoners of Hope: Global Action and the Evolving Roles of US NGOs.

The USA has been added to the CIVICUS Monitor Watchlist due to rising concerns about civic freedoms under Donald Trump’s second administration. Since January 2025, executive orders have driven sweeping personnel changes across federal agencies, particularly in the Justice Department. USAID has undergone dramatic restructuring, with funding cuts severely impacting on civil society organisations (CSOs) that support excluded groups across the world. Protests – particularly those addressing immigration and Israel’s war on Gaza – face heightened scrutiny and restrictions. Against this backdrop, civil society is mobilising to preserve democratic principles and civic engagement.

Samuel Worthington

How would you characterise the current state of US democracy?

The USA is experiencing what can only be described as a technocratic coup, rooted in far-right authoritarian ideology. The Trump administration is using every tool at its disposal, even if that means ignoring and breaking laws. The goal is speed: to use technology, claims of waste and abuse, combined with actions that dismantle institutions and attack individuals and organisations.

The Trump administration has adopted a typical authoritarian playbook, similar to that used by leaders such as Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, but at a much greater scale and speed that has taken many by surprise. A prime example is the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which uses computer systems to cripple organisations, create lists of ‘illegal’ individuals for targeting and dismantle protections for civic freedoms. Trump is attempting to centralise power in a 21st-century US variant of fascism, backed by a white nationalist ideology and largely based on Project 2025.

Civil society and institutions were not prepared for this level of attack. Many assumed democracy was more resilient and norms would hold. Instead, we are now witnessing core democratic institutions under assault. For the first time, we are seeing explicit federal government-driven censorship, with official lists of banned words. The administration is systematically attacking diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and withholding funds to punish noncompliant universities and institutions.

Trump is weaponising public money as leverage – even blackmail – to force organisations and US states to comply with his ideology. While pushback from the courts is increasing, this resistance has led to Trump’s attacks on the judiciary. The administration is also limiting media access to outlets that don’t align with its ideology.

As with all forms of fascism, there must be a scapegoat, and here, it’s migrants and transgender people. The Trump administration labels migrants as ‘illegals’ and mass deportations target anyone who doesn’t fit its narrow definition of who is an American. Changes to the constitution are being proposed to strip citizenship rights from US-born children of undocumented parents. Random arrests, disappearances and militarised threats against migrants are becoming increasingly common.

All of this has transpired in just the first hundred days. Democracy’s core institutions — civil society, media, Congress, the judiciary — and the rule of law itself are under enormous stress. The USA is in the midst of a profound constitutional crisis.

How has USAID’s restructuring impacted on civil society?

USAID served as the administration’s test case for destroying a government agency. DOGE destroyed USAID by disabling its computer systems, stopping funding and cancelling contracts. Under the constitution, only Congress has the authority to control appropriations or close government agencies. Even when courts ruled against the administration and ordered programmes to restart, the damage was irreversible: USAID’s systems had already been dismantled by DOGE and could not be easily rebuilt.

Many CSOs that relied heavily on USAID funding lost between 30 and 80 per cent of their resources, leading to mass layoffs, office closures and collapsed partnerships. Fortunately, the USA has a strong tradition of private philanthropy amounting to around US$450 billion a year, with over US$20 billion directed internationally. This private funding is helping some organisations survive. Many are now reorganising around private donors and preparing for the possibility that foundations themselves could become targets of future attacks.

Some CSOs are considering transforming into businesses to protect themselves. Others are fighting back through lawsuits. Some are trying to stay quiet in the hope of being overlooked — not a healthy strategy, but an understandable one. For most, simply trying to survive has become the primary focus.

What global implications are resulting from these domestic developments?

Global civil society has long been critical of the USA, but there was still an assumption that it remained committed to the values of democracy, freedom and global cooperation. This assumption has now been shattered.

The US government is no longer promoting democracy abroad. Instead, it is openly supporting authoritarian regimes and undermining civil society efforts worldwide. Both domestically and internationally, it is actively restricting independent civic action.

The dismantling of USAID alone will cost millions of lives. The USA once provided around half of global humanitarian resources. With this pullback, we’re already witnessing mass deaths and growing risks of famine. Essential supplies of medicines, including HIV/AIDS treatments, are being cut, putting millions more lives at risk.

As the USA disengages and retreats from its global leadership role, it leaves a vacuum, likely to be filled by authoritarian powers such as China and Russia. They will try to reshape the global system in ways that threaten human rights and democratic values.

Finally, the administration’s rhetoric about annexing Canada and seizing Greenland is eroding the post-Second World War rules-based international order, which was established specifically to prevent territorial expansion. By undermining these norms, the USA is effectively encouraging other authoritarian-leaning states to expand through force.

How are people responding to these challenges?

As Trump’s authoritarianism intensifies, people are mobilising to defend democracy and resist repression. Three major protest movements have emerged: the broad-based ‘Hands Off’ movement against fascism and in defence of democracy, student protests focused on Gaza and Palestine and the growing resistance to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportations.

Protesting against ICE or in solidarity with Gaza has become increasingly dangerous. Citizens may face serious criminal charges simply for joining protests, and non-citizens risk prison and deportation. The case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia illustrates this reality: after living in Maryland for 13 years and with legal protection, he was forcibly deported to El Salvador.

Despite these risks, as ICE steps up deportations, activists are taking steps to protect vulnerable people. In some cases, they form human chains to block ICE officers and help people reach their homes, where immigration agents cannot enter without legal permission.

People are fighting back both in the streets and in the courts, challenging these injustices, pushing back against escalating repression and defending fundamental rights.

Do you see any hope for US democracy?

I believe that ultimately, Trump’s attempt to break the US government and dismantle constitutional democracy will fail, for several reasons.

First, we are a country of independent states, and states like California, Illinois and Massachusetts are actively resisting, fighting in courts and passing their own laws to protect their residents. This resistance comes at a cost. The Trump administration has already threatened to cut all federal funding to Maine after its governor refused to follow the administration’s anti-diversity directives. So far, the courts have sided with Maine.

Trump has repeatedly bypassed Congress and violated the separation of powers. In response, CSOs, US states, unions, universities and citizens have already filed over 150 lawsuits against the federal government alleging breaches of the constitution. These lawsuits are steadily moving through the courts and so far, the rulings have overwhelmingly gone against the administration.

At the grassroots level, daily protests continue and constantly evolve. Instead of trying to bring millions to Washington DC, the strategy has shifted toward organising thousands of decentralised protests across the country. After national parks were shut down, for example, there were 433 protests across every single national park on the same day. Movements like ‘Hands Off’ have mobilised millions.

We are learning from struggles in Hungary, Turkey, Ukraine and elsewhere. We now know that democracy cannot be taken for granted; it must be defended every day. But we also know that our strength lies in solidarity. People are forming networks of resistance across the country. We have realised that if we stand alone, we may fail, but together, we can preserve our democracy.

GET IN TOUCH
LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Trump and Musk take the chainsaw to global civil society CIVICUS Lens 07.Mar.2025
Tech leaders cosy up to Trump CIVICUS Lens 20.Feb.2025
US funding cuts: Philanthropy must step in to support locally led development CIVICUS 12.Feb.2025

  Source

Lawyer-Turned-Activist Bhuwan Ribhu Honored for Leading a Campaign to End Child Marriage

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Asia-Pacific, Child Labour, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Editors’ Choice, Education, Featured, Gender, Gender Violence, Headlines, Human Rights, Human Trafficking, Humanitarian Emergencies, Latin America & the Caribbean, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Women’s Health, Youth

Human Rights

Dominican Republic’s Minister of Labor Eddy Olivares Ortega and Javier Cremades, President of the World Jurist Association, hand the Medal of Honor award to Just Rights for Children founder Bhuwan Ribhu.

Dominican Republic’s Minister of Labor Eddy Olivares Ortega and Javier Cremades, President of the World Jurist Association, hand the Medal of Honor award to Just Rights for Children founder Bhuwan Ribhu.

NEW DELHI, May 6 2025 (IPS) – Bhuwan Ribhu didn’t plan to become a child rights activist. But when he saw how many children in India were being trafficked, abused, and forced into marriage, he knew he couldn’t stay silent.

“It all started with failure,” Ribhu says. “We tried to help, but we weren’t stopping the problem. That’s when I realized—no one group can do this alone. Calling the problem for what it truly is—a criminal justice issue rather than a social justice issue—I knew the solution needed holistic scale.”

Today, Bhuwan Ribhu leads Just Rights for Children—one of the world’s largest networks dedicated to protecting children. In recognition of his relentless efforts to combat child marriage and trafficking, he has just been awarded the prestigious Medal of Honor by the World Jurist Association. The award was presented at the recently concluded World Law Congress in the Dominican Republic.

But for Ribhu, the honor isn’t about recognition. “This is a reminder that the world is watching—and that children are counting on us,” he tells IPS in his first interview after receiving the award.

Looking Back: One Meeting Changed Everything

For Ribhu, a lawyer by profession, it has been a long, arduous, and illustrious journey to getting justice for children. But this long journey began during a meeting of small nonprofits in eastern India’s Jharkhand state, where someone spoke up: “Girls from my village are being taken far away, to Kashmir, and sold into marriage.”

That moment hit Ribhu hard.

“That’s when it struck me—one person or one group can’t solve a problem that crosses state borders,” he says. He then started building a nationwide network.

And just like that, the Child Marriage-Free India (CMFI) campaign was born. Dozens of organizations joined, and the number grew steadily until it reached 262.

So far, more than 260 million people have joined in the campaign, with the Indian government launching Bal Vivah Mukt Bharat—a national mission towards ending child marriage in India.

Across villages, towns, and cities, people are speaking up for a child marriage-free India.

“What used to feel impossible is now within reach,” Ribhu says.

Taking the Fight to Courtrooms

Ribhu is a trained lawyer, and for him, the law is a powerful weapon.

Since 2005, he’s fought—and won—dozens of important cases in Indian courts. These have helped define child trafficking in Indian law; make it mandatory for police to act when children go missing; criminalize child labor; set up support systems for abuse survivors; and remove harmful child sexual abuse content from the internet.

One big success came when the courts accepted that if a child is missing, police should assume they might have been trafficked. This changed everything. Reported missing cases dropped from 117,480 to  67,638 a year.

“That’s what justice in action looks like,” said Ribhu.

Taking Along Religious Leaders

One of the most powerful moves of CMFI was reaching out to religious leaders.

The reason was simple: whatever the religion is, it is the religious leader who conducts a marriage.

“If religious leaders refuse to marry children, the practice will stop,” says Ribhu.

The movement began visiting thousands of villages. They met Hindu priests, Muslim clerics, Christian pastors, and others. They asked them to take a simple pledge: “I will not marry a child, and I will report child marriage if I see it.”

The results have been astonishing: on festivals like Akshaya Tritiya—considered auspicious for weddings—many child marriages used to happen until recently. But temples now refuse to perform them.

“Faith can be a big force for justice,” Ribhu says. “And religious texts support education and protection for children.”

Going Global with a Universal Goal

But the campaign is no longer just India’s story. In January of this year, Nepal, inspired by the campaign, launched its own Child Marriage-Free Nepal initiative with the support of Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli. All the seven provinces of the country have joined it, vowing to take steps to stop child marriage

The campaign has also spread to 39 other countries, including Kenya and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where calls for a global child protection legal network are gaining momentum.

“The legal systems of different countries and regions may differ, but justice should be the same everywhere,” says Ribhu, who has also authored two books—Just Rights and When Children Have Children—where he has laid out a legal, institutional, and moral framework to end child exploitation called PICKET. “It’s not just about shouting for change. It’s about building systems that protect children every day,” Ribhu says.

Sacrifices and Hope

Ribhu gave up a promising career in law practice. Many people didn’t understand why.

“People said I was wasting my time,” he remembers. “But one day my son said, ‘Even if you save just one child, it’s worth it.’ That meant everything to me.”

A believer in the idea of Gandhian trusteeship—the belief that we should use our talents and privileges to serve others, especially those who need help the most.

“I may not be the one to fight child marriage in Iraq or Congo. But someone will. And we’ll stand beside them.”

A Powerful Award and a Bigger Mission

The World Jurist Association Medal isn’t just a trophy. For Ribhu, it’s a platform. “It tells the world: This is possible. Change is happening. Let’s join in.”

He also hopes that the award will help his team connect with new partners and expand their work to new regions.

“In 2024 alone, over 2.6 lakhs Child Marriages were prevented and stopped and over 56,000 children were rescued from trafficking and exploitation in India. These numbers show that change is not just a dream—it’s real,” he says.

By 2030, Ribhu hopes to see the number of child marriages in India falling below 5 percent.

But there’s more to do. In some countries, like Iraq, girls can still be married as young as 10, and in the United States, 35 states still allow child marriage under certain conditions.

“Justice can’t be occasional,” Ribhu says. “It must be a part of the system everywhere. We must make sure justice isn’t just a word—it’s a way of life.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

To Save Our Planet, We Must Protect Its Defenders

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Change, Crime & Justice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

A campaign to urge the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to adopt the standards of the Escazú Agreement in its upcoming Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency was launched at the Third Conference of the Parties of the Escazú Agreement held in Santiago, Chile, in April 2024. Credit: Lily Plazas

WASHINGTON DC, May 2 2025 (IPS) – The most powerful court in Latin America and the Caribbean, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, is preparing to clarify the obligations of States in relation to climate change. In its upcoming Advisory Opinion, the Court must articulate ambitious standards for respecting and protecting the human rights of environmental defenders in the context of the climate crisis.

Environmental defenders — advocates protecting environmental rights, resources, and marginalized communities — play a critical role in helping us navigate the climate crisis: they preserve ecosystem health, and mobilize and organize when the environment is under threat. Their work is vital.

Across the globe, we are witnessing the impacts of a warming planet: devastating wildfires, lethal flash floods, droughts that fuel hunger, and increasingly intense hurricanes. This strain on land and resources translates into greater pressure on those who defend the environment.

It is thus essential to strengthen the rights and work of environmental defenders, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean, a region that is amongst the most vulnerable to the effects of the climate emergency and the most dangerous in the world for environmental activism.

During public hearings in May 2024, a petition supported by over a 1,000 individuals and human rights organizations was delivered to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights urging the Court to incorporate the Escazú standards into its Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency. Credit: Romulo Serpa

Environmental defenders’ work is often deadly. In 2023, 196 environmental defenders were brutally murdered. Most of them were opposing deforestation, pollution, and land grabbing. Their struggles are for essential needs: clean air, healthy ecosystems and biodiversity, safe and sufficient water, and food.

Only four countries in Latin America and the Caribbean — Brazil, Colombia, Honduras, and Mexico — account for 85 percent of the documented murders of environmental defenders, confirming this region as the most violent one in the world for those who defend the land and the environment.

The call to strengthen environmental defenders’ rights and work was heard loud and clear at the Third Forum on Human Rights Defenders in Environmental Matters of the Escazú Agreement, where countries from the region convened in the Caribbean island State of St. Kitts and Nevis in April.

This Forum marked a historic moment: it was the first event of its kind in the Insular Caribbean, a region already experiencing — and poised to disproportionately face — the severe impacts of the climate crisis.

“It served as a vital platform not only to advance defenders’ rights but also to expose alarming new threats: rising attacks not only against individual human rights defenders but also against groups and organizations, through the spread of “laws against NGOs” and strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) suits targeting environmental lawyers.”

SLAPPs are tactics used, mostly by businesses, to intimidate and silence environmental defender organizations. Unlike genuine legal actions, SLAPPs abuse the court system to drain resources and undermine activists’ efforts. These lawsuits can create a “chilling effect” on free speech, making others hesitant to speak out for fear of being sued.

They also burden public resources and waste judicial time on unnecessary cases. These tactics aim to silence collective action and dismantle the critical support networks that defenders rely on.

The Escazú Agreement is the first binding regional treaty to promote environmental democracy — the right to information, participation, and justice — in Latin America and the Caribbean. It is also the only one in the world that contains specific provisions aiming to guarantee a safe and enabling space for environmental defenders. It is the fruit of decades of hard work by regional governments, civil society organizations, and environmental defenders.

The Environmental Defenders Forums, in the framework of the Escazú Agreement, were established for the discussion and implementation of the Action Plan on Human Rights Defenders in Environmental Matters. This Action Plan outlines strategic measures to ensure the safety of environmental defenders in the region, as well as recognize and protect their rights while ensuring that States prevent, investigate, and sanction attacks and threats against them.

Hosting the Forum in the Insular Caribbean was a notable political achievement for the countries of this region. Internationally, discussions often group Latin America and the Caribbean as a single, cohesive entity. However, the experiences of defenders in Latin American nations and the continental Caribbean differ significantly from those in the Insular Caribbean.

Key distinctions — such as country size, government capacities, and unique environmental challenges, including heightened vulnerability to specific climate events — result in diverse needs and priorities for environmental defenders.

This event was eye-opening for many, as it shed light on the diverse realities within the Caribbean that are often overshadowed when grouped under the broad label of “Latin America and the Caribbean.”

Environmental defenders in the Caribbean face significant pressures despite lower reported lethal attacks compared to Latin America. Over a decade, three lethal cases were recorded in one country, but reports acknowledge these figures as incomplete due to challenges such as limited civil society presence, media repression, and insecurity. Additionally, non-lethal aggressions — such as criminalization, harassment, and stigmatization — often go overlooked.

During the Forum, Caribbean environmental defenders highlighted socio-environmental conflicts across industries like oil and gas, mining, tourism, and infrastructure. Despite their efforts, their work is often stigmatized, infantilized, and unrecognized —even by themselves — as many identify as “climate activists” or “community leaders” rather than environmental defenders.

This lack of recognition hinders awareness of their protections and State obligations under international human rights law, underscoring the need for States to better recognize, protect, and promote defenders’ rights.

State representatives had a limited presence at the Forum, unlike mandatory participation in the Escazú Conference of the Parties, leaving “empty chairs” without accountability. This absence isolates environmental defenders in echo chambers, limiting dialogue with decision-makers.

The Forum is a vital platform to address violence and threats against defenders, but State neglect undermines its purpose. By failing to engage in the Forum and to protect defenders, States violate their rights and international law, making their absence unacceptable.
In this critical context, strengthening the rights and work of environmental defenders is essential, with the Escazú Agreement and its Action Plan providing a vital framework.

The Advisory Opinion process of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the Climate Emergency presents a key opportunity for the region’s most influential Court to advance this goal.

We urge the Court to incorporate the Escazú Agreement’s specific standards as a baseline where Inter-American standards are less robust. This includes clearly defining the minimum essential content of the rights to access information, public participation, and justice in environmental matters under the American Convention.

Additionally, regional and international standards must be harmonized to ensure strong protections for environmental defenders, including a safe and enabling environment for their vital work.

There is no time to lose — every moment of inaction puts the lives of environmental defenders at greater risk. Without those who defend the planet, there can be no sustainable future. Protecting environmental defenders is not charity — it is survival.

Luisa Gómez Betancur is Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL).

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

‘The International Response Should Follow the Principle of ‘Nothing about Us, Without Us’’

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Europe, Featured, Gender, Gender Violence, Global, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Labour, Migration & Refugees, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

May 1 2025 (IPS) – CIVICUS speaks with Ukrainian gender rights activist Maryna Rudenko about the gendered impacts of the war in Ukraine and the importance of including women in peacebuilding efforts.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has profoundly impacted on women and girls. Many have been displaced and are struggling with poverty and unemployment. Those who’ve stayed endure daily missile attacks, damaged infrastructure, lack of basic services and sexual violence from Russian forces if they live in occupied territories. Women activists, caregivers and journalists are particularly vulnerable. The international community must increase support to ensure justice for victims and women’s inclusion in peace efforts.

Maryna Rudenko

What have been the impacts of the war in Ukraine, particularly on women and girls?

The war began in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea, with Indigenous women, particularly Crimean Tatars, immediately and severely affected. They risked losing their property and livelihoods, and to continue working they were forced to change their citizenship. Pro-Ukraine activists had to flee and those who stayed faced arrest. This placed a heavier burden on many women who were left in charge of their families.

At the same time in 2014, Russia began supporting separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, leading to the occupation of territories such as Donetsk and Luhansk and the displacement of over a million people. When Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022, many lost their homes again. Nearly seven million fled to European countries. This population loss poses a significant demographic challenge to Ukraine’s post-war development.

Since 2015, conflict-related sexual violence has been a major issue. Around 342 cases have been documented. The International Criminal Court recognised that conflict-related sexual violence has been committed in the temporarily occupied territories since 2014.

Ukraine also experienced the largest campaign of child abduction in recent history: Russia took close to 20,000 Ukrainian children from occupied territories and sent then to ‘camps’ in Crimea or Russia, where the authorities changed their names and nationalities and gave them to Russian families. Ukrainian children were forced to change their national identity. This is evidence of genocidal approach in Russia’s war activities.

The war has also devastated infrastructure and the economy. In my town, 30 km from Kyiv, the heating station was hit by 11 ballistic missiles, leaving us without electricity or water for a long time. It was very scary to stay at the apartment with my daughter and know that Russian ballistic missiles were flying over our house. Roughly 40 per cent of the economy was destroyed in 2022 alone, causing job losses at a time when the government spends over half its budget on the military. Civilians, including a record 70,000 women, have taken up arms.

Beyond the immediate human cost, the war is causing serious environmental damage, with weapons and missile debris polluting soil and water beyond national borders. Russia’s occupation of Zaporizhzhia, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, poses a very real risk of a nuclear disaster for Ukraine and Europe as a whole.

How have Ukrainian women’s organisations responded?

Starting in 2014, we focused on advocacy, championing United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1,325, which reaffirms the role of women in conflict prevention and resolution. The government adopted its National Action Plan on the implementation of the resolution in 2016. We formed local coalitions to implement this agenda, leading to reforms such as opening military roles to women, establishing policies to prevent sexual harassment, integrating gender equality in the training curriculum and gender mainstreaming as part of police reform.

Following the full-scale invasion, Ukrainian women’s civil society organisations (CSOs) shifted to providing immediate humanitarian relief, as survival became the top priority. Women’s CSOs began helping people, particularly those with disabilities, relocate to western Ukraine and providing direct aid to those who remained. As schools, hospitals and shelters for survivors of domestic violence were destroyed, women’s CSOs tried to fill the gap, providing food, hygiene packages and cash and improvising school lessons in metro tunnels.

People stood up and helped. In Kharkiv, which is located 30 km from the boarder with Russia, the local government created underground schools. It’s unbelievable that this happened in the 21st century and because of the aggression of a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Our children, women and men can’t sleep normally because every night there are missile and drone attacks.

In the second half of 2022, women’s CSOs and the government tried to refocus on long-term development. One of the first initiatives was to amend the National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security to better address conflict-related sexual violence in both occupied and liberated areas. This was a much-needed response given the many reported cases of killing, rape and torture. This involved training law enforcement officers, prosecutors and other officials on how to document these crimes and properly communicate with survivors, who often blame themselves due to stigma surrounding the violence.

We have also reported Russia’s violations of the Geneva Conventions, particularly those concerning women, to UN human rights bodies.

Women’s groups are pushing for more donor support for psychological services to address trauma and helping plan for long-term recovery, aiming to rebuild damaged infrastructure and improve services to meet the needs of excluded groups. Some donors, like the Ukrainian Women’s Fund, have agreed to support the costs of mental recovery for women activists to help them restore their strength and support others.

How should women’s voices be integrated into recovery and peacebuilding efforts?

Women must have a real seat at the negotiation table. Genuine participation means not just counting the number of women involved but ensuring their voices are heard and their needs addressed. Unfortunately, the gender impacts of the war remain a secondary concern.

We have outlined at least 10 key areas where the gender impacts of the war should be discussed and prioritised in negotiations. However, it looks like these are being largely ignored in the current high-level negotiations between Russia and the USA. We heard that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy highlighted the importance of returning Ukrainian children when he met with Donald Trump. It’s highly important for the mothers and fathers of these children and for all Ukrainians.

Women’s CSOs are working to ensure all survivors can access justice and fair reparations, and that nobody forgets and excuses the war crimes committed. We urgently need accountability; peace cannot be achieved at the expense of truth. This is particularly important because the Council of Europe’s Register of Damage for Ukraine only accepts testimonies of war crimes that happened after the 2022 invasion, leaving out many survivors from crimes committed since 2014. We are working to amend this rule.

The international response should follow the principle of ‘nothing about us, without us’. International partners should collaborate directly with women-led CSOs, using trauma-informed approaches. For women affected by combat, loss or abduction, recovery must start with psychological support, and civil society can play a vital role in this process.

The effective implementation of Resolution 1,325 also requires reconstruction funds that incorporate a gender perspective throughout. Ukrainian women’s CSOs prepared a statement to highlight the importance of analysing the war’s impact on the implementation of the UN’s Beijing Platform for Action on gender equality and we used this as common message during the recent meeting of the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

Additionally, we believe it’s time to consider the successes and failures in implementation of Resolution 1,325 and its sister resolutions, because it’s 25 years since its adoption and the world is not safer.

We appreciate any platforms where we can speak about the experience of Ukraine and call for action to support Ukraine to help make a just and sustain peace in Europe and the world.

GET IN TOUCH
LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Ukraine: ‘Civil society remains resilient and responsive, but financial constraints now hamper its efforts’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Mykhailo Savva 25.Feb.2025
Russia: Further tightening of restrictions on ‘undesirable’ organisations CIVICUS Monitor 30.Jul.2024
Russia and Ukraine: a tale of two civil societies CIVICUS Lens 24.Feb.2024

  Source

Trump’s First 100 Days Portend Long-Lasting Damage to Press Freedom

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

NEW YORK, May 1 2025 (IPS) – Press freedom is no longer a given in the United States 100 days into President Donald Trump’s second term as journalists and newsrooms face mounting pressures that threaten their ability to report freely and the public’s right to know.

A new report released April 30 by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)– “Alarm bells: Trump’s first 100 days ramp up fear for the press, democracy,” noted that the administration has scaled up its rhetorical attacks and launched a startling number of actions using regulatory bodies and powerful allies that, taken together, may cause irreparable harm to press freedom in the U.S. and will likely take decades to repair.

The level of trepidation among U.S. journalists is such that CPJ has provided more security training since the November election than at any other period.

“This is a definitive moment for U.S. media and the public’s right to be informed. CPJ is providing journalists with resources at record rates so they can report safely and without fear or favor, but we need everyone to understand that protecting the First Amendment is not a choice, it’s a necessity. All our freedoms depend on it,” said CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg.

Emerging challenges to a free press in the United States fall under three main categories:
1) The restriction of access for some news organizations; 2) The increasing use of government and regulatory bodies against news organizations; and 3) Targeted attacks against journalists and newsrooms.

While The Associated Press (AP), a global newswire agency serving thousands of newsrooms in the U.S. and across the world, has faced retaliation for not adhering to state-mandated language, the Federal Communications Commission is mounting investigations against three major broadcasters – CBS, ABC, and NBC – along with the country’s two public broadcasters – NPR and PBS – in moves widely viewed as politically motivated.

“The rising tide of threats facing U.S. journalists and newsrooms are a direct threat to the American public,” said Ginsberg. “Whether at the federal or state level, the investigations, hearings, and verbal attacks amount to an environment where the media’s ability to bear witness to government action is already curtailed.”

Journalists who reached out to CPJ in recent months are worried about online harassment and digital and physical safety. Newsrooms have also shared with us worries about the possibility of punitive regulatory actions.

Since the presidential election last November until March 7 of this year, CPJ has provided safety consultations to more than 530 journalists working in the country. This figure was only 20 in all of 2022, marking an exponential increase in the need for safety information.

Globally, the gutting of the U.S. Agency for Global Media resulted in the effective termination of thousands of journalist positions, and the elimination of USAID independent media support impoverished the news landscape in many regions across the globe where the news ecosystem is underdeveloped or information is severely restricted.

As the executive branch of the U.S. government is taking unprecedented steps to permanently undermine press freedom, CPJ is calling on the public, news organizations, civil society, and all branches, levels, and institutions of government – from municipalities to the U.S. Supreme Court – to safeguard press freedom to help secure the future of American democracy.

In particular, Congress must prioritize passage of the PRESS Act and The Free Speech Protection Act, both bipartisan bills that can strengthen and protect press freedom throughout the United States.

The Committee to Protect Journalists is an independent, nonprofit, and nonpartisan organization that promotes press freedom worldwide. We defend the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source