Pride Parade participants march on the Elisabeth bridge in Budapest, Hungary on 27 June 2026. Credit: Attila Kisbenedek/AFP

By Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Jul 15 2026 (IPS)

On the morning of 28 June, riot police sealed off Taksim Square with iron barriers and enforced bans on all weekend gatherings in Istanbul. Marchers pressed ahead anyway, re-emerging from side streets each time police dispersed them. By the end of the day police had detained at least 50 people, including a journalist. It was Istanbul Pride’s 24th edition, and the 12th year running that the authorities banned it outright.

Homosexuality is not illegal in Turkey, so the state cannot prosecute people for who they are. Instead, it punishes them for making themselves visible. Authorities ban marches on ‘public morality’ grounds, block access to the social media accounts of LGBTQI+ organisations and put activists on trial for ‘obscenity’.

The pattern repeats in country after country. For a movement that spent decades making progress in winning recognition of rights, this Pride season tells a story of regression. A concerted backlash is clawing back territory once claimed, and Pride has again become a protest.

Much of the current wave of regression is a direct response to the gains LGBTQI+ movements made over previous decades. Anti-discrimination laws, recognition of equal marriage rights and growing public visibility have given opponents a clear target to mobilise against, and governments under economic or political pressure have found a convenient scapegoat in the LGBTQI+ community.

Authoritarian and populist leaders, facing discontent over corruption, inflation and unemployment, redirect public anger towards a minority that can be attacked without political cost, while conservative religious institutions find in opposition to LGBTQI+ rights, and particularly trans rights, a rallying cause that restores their claim to define society’s moral order. The result is a mutually reinforcing alliance between political power and religious conservatism, dressed up as the defence of children, the family and national identity.

Existence criminalised

A growing number of states are going further, criminalising not only LGBTQI+ people’s visibility but their very existence. Four West African states have criminalised consensual same-sex relations in the past two years, framing their move as a defence of national sovereignty against western influence. Mali’s military government criminalised homosexuality in December 2024 and Burkina Faso’s junta followed in September 2025. Niger’s new penal code, adopted last month, imposes punishment of up to 20 years in prison. Within weeks, media reported at least 40 arrests, the suspension of HIV prevention services and people fleeing the country.

Electoral democracies aren’t immune. In Senegal, parliament doubled the maximum sentence for ‘unnatural acts’ to 10 years in March, and over 300 ‘suspected homosexuals’ have reportedly been arrested in the past few months. Ghana’s parliament passed a bill imposing jail sentences on anyone who identifies as LGBTQI+ and requiring people to report prohibited activities to the authorities. President John Mahama has yet to sign it into law, but the debate about the bill has already fuelled a rise in blackmail, evictions and workplace discrimination.

The model is Uganda’s 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act, which includes the death penalty for ‘aggravated homosexuality’ and punishes the vaguely defined crime of ‘promoting’ homosexuality with up to 20 years in prison.

All these laws, marketed as a rejection of foreign interference and imported values, have been promoted with foreign money. US-based conservative groups such as the American Center for Law and Justice and Family Watch International have played a key role in funding anti-rights advocacy. Days after passing its bill, Ghana’s parliament hosted the African Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Family Values and Sovereignty, a platform with documented ties to those groups that has promoted Uganda’s law as a template for the continent.

Consensus in retreat

US anti-rights groups have their president’s ear. Since returning to office, Donald Trump has signed a series of executive orders rolling back federal protections, particularly targeting transgender people. Private companies heard the message. Major events including NYC Pride and San Francisco Pride lost sponsors in 2025, and Tampa Pride had to cancel its 2026 parade.

For years, activist groups such as New York’s Reclaim Pride Coalition accused corporations of pinkwashing, that is, turning Pride into a corporate vehicle without advancing demands for rights. Many sponsors are now gone, but for the wrong reasons. Whatever its motives, sponsorship functioned as a seal of approval from mainstream institutions. Money withdrawn out of political fear takes with it more than event budgets; it erodes a social consensus that took decades to build.

Marching for those who can’t

In this context, the year’s biggest marches have become acts of political defiance. A million people marched in São Paulo under the theme ‘The street summons, the ballot box confirms’, ahead of Brazil’s October general election. In Bangkok, an all-time record half a million people marched a year after Thailand’s marriage equality law took effect, a testament to what legal recognition can do for a community’s visibility.

On 27 June, tens of thousands joined the 31st Budapest Pride, the first held since voters removed the right-wing populist government that repeatedly banned it. Organisers are treating this as a starting point, pressing the new government with a list of 14 demands that begins with repealing a 2021 ‘anti-LGBT propaganda’ law the European Union’s top court has ruled incompatible with equality and human dignity. Hungary shows that change is possible after all.

In places like Indonesia, Iraq, Niger and Uganda, among many more, there’s no Pride march to ban, because holding one is unthinkable. Even private organising now risks prosecution. In those places, people are looking outward, hoping that a crowd marching freely somewhere else will march for them too. That’s the duty of Pride season for those still free to gather: to mobilise both for themselves and for the many being forced to hide who they are.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Head of Research and Analysis, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report. She is also a Professor of Comparative Politics at Universidad ORT Uruguay.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Philippines was the most advanced Southeast Asian country with the highest per capita GDP until about the early 1960s. Its per capita GDP in purchasing power parity terms were about the same as South Korea’s and above that of Thailand in the early 1970s.The Nobel Laureate economist, Gunnar Myrdal, did not have much hope for “disease infested” Indonesia when in 1968 he published his famous Asian Drama: An Enquiry Into the Poverty of Nations. But Indonesia surged ahead since the late 1960s with growth acceleration exceeding that of Philippines; thus, eventually overtaking Philippines in GDP per capita in the mid-1980s. What factors separated Indonesia from Philippines?

Elite Stake

It has been the elite stake in the country that played the critical role. The Indonesian elite put their trust in the country, whereas the Filipino elite began to think that their future was in the United States (US). Incidentally, this coincided with President Ferdinand Marcos’ turning into a despot by imposing martial law in 1972 and embracing a policy of “constitutional authoritarianism”.

Anis Chowdhury

It does not mean that IFFs do not occur in Indonesia. In recent years, IFFs have become a major concern for Indonesia; however, there the main actors are multinational corporations, especially in the mining sector. The mining sector in Indonesia accounted for 10.5% of total of IFFs out of Indonesia.

The difference is in the scale and actors.

Good governance myth

Poor governance, especially corruption, is seen as a critical barrier to development. However, the Philippines and Indonesia tale casts doubt on the “good governance” thesis.

Indonesia ranks 109th out of 180 countries in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), while Philippines ranks 120th. Although Philippines is placed at a lower place than Indonesia, corruption is endemic in both countries and the scale is not much different.

However, the difference is where the ill-gotten money is being invested. Without condoning corruption, the tale of these two countries implies that if the ill-gotten money is invested domestically instead of siphoned-off, the country will experience a better development outcome. One can call this “patriotic” corruption as a means of primitive capital accumulation. Where the corrupt money is siphoned-off, corruption is “predatory” analogous to colonial plundering.

Bangladesh is a glaring example of predatory corruption. A 2011 UNDP report ranked Bangladesh no 1 among least developed countries in IFFs. Between 1990 and 2008 the cumulative illicit outflow of funds from Bangladesh was estimated at US$34.8 billion. An estimated US$234 billion was plundered from Bangladesh during Sheikh Hasina’s 15-year autocratic reign.

Authoritarianism debunked

The East Asian development success created a perception, codified in the “Lee hypothesis”, that authoritarian regimes deliver better development outcomes than democracies. Sheikh Hasina, like many other despots, used this argument to consolidate her autocratic rule by brutal suppression of human and democratic rights.

As highlighted earlier, in the case of Indonesia, the elite displayed trust in the country, while in the case of Philippines and Bangladesh, the elite plundered to siphon-off with the aid of repressive kleptocratic regimes.

At the end, however, all three autocratic regimes collapsed; but rebuilding the trust and elite stake in the country remains a challenge in plundered countries like Philippines and Bangladesh.

Anna Karenina principle

Leo Tolstoy in his 1877 novel, Anna Karenina, laid down the Anna Karenina principle: “All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way”. The Anna Karenina principle implies that a deficiency in any one of several critical factors dooms a complex endeavour to failure even if all other essential factors are present. In technical jargons, they constitute the “sufficient” condition for the “necessary condition” to work.

Both Indonesia and Philippines share many common factors – they are both archipelago consisting of thousands of small islands dispersed over vast areas of the South China Sea like a garland. They are ethnically diverse; while Indonesia is a Muslim majority country, Catholics dominate in Philippines. Both faiths are regarded as un-worldly, focusing more on the hereafter compared with the Protestant ethics, which is more conducive for capitalism to flourish. Both countries also experienced ethnic separatist armed conflicts.

Both Indonesia and Philippines had pro-US regimes, and the two countries witnessed repressive autocratic rules lasting for decades. Both pro-US regimes also received large US aid and access to the US market as well as foreign direct investment.

Yet their development experiences have differed.

The missing factor is elite stake, the glue to hold all other essential conducive factors together.

Anis Chowdhury, Emeritus Professor, Western Sydney University (Australia). He held senior UN positions in Bangkok and New York and served as Special Assistant to the Chief Advisor for Finance (with the status and rank of State Minister) in the Professor Yunus-led Interim Government. Anis has written extensively on East and Southeast Asian economies, including The Newly Industrialising Economies of East Asia (Routledge) and The Political Economy of East Asia (Oxford University Press). E-mail: anis.z.chowdhury@gmail.com; a.chowdhury@westernsydney.edu.au

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

A UN Peacebuilding Week Event held in Egypt’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations, New York. Credit: Maximilian Malawista

By Maximilian Malawista
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 30 2026 (IPS)

As the United Nations held its first-ever Peacebuilding Week (June 22-26), UN officials and developmental partners gathered at Egypt’s Permanent Mission on June 23 to hold a dialogue on the main question that emerged from the 2025 Peacebuilding Architecture Review (PBAR): “How can global commitments to peacebuilding translate into tangible results on the ground?”

This event, hosted by Egypt at the sidelines of Peacebuilding Week, titled “Strengthening National Peace Infrastructures in Africa: Lessons Learned and the Way Forward,” brought together representatives from African governments and regional organizations, as well as members of the UN system, to discuss how nationally-owned institutions can mitigate and prevent conflict, manage effects and sustain peace long after such situations have ended.

To open the event, Egypt’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ihab Moustafa Awad Moustafa, emphasized that the 2025 PBAR negotiations repeatedly asserted a fundamental concern: ensuring that policy discussions in New York produce measurable impact on the ground, whether in Africa or in any other peacekeeping sites.

“One of the clearest answers that emerged during those discussions was the need to strengthen national capacities and institutions,” Moustafa said. “We are serious about peacebuilding, sustaining peace, and primarily prevention. We must invest in national peace infrastructure.”

The PBAR, which was adopted in November of 2025, reaffirmed that nationally led and nationally owned endeavors remain at the core of sustainable peace. The PBAR actively calls on Member States, regional organizations, development partners, international financial institutions, and the UN system to strengthen the institutions capable of preventing conflict, fostering social cohesion, and managing risk.

Throughout the discussion, speakers agreed that contemporary conflicts are rooted in security threats but also pointed to institutional fragility, governance deficits, and declining trust of public institutions between citizens as an additional threat.

Brian James Williams, Chief of the Peacebuilding Fund at the Peacebuilding and Peace Support Office (PBPSO), explained that the review provides a clear mandate for the international community to follow nationally identified priorities.

“Prevention and sustaining peace need stronger national capacities, stronger institutions and better alignment of international support behind those national priorities,” Williams said.

Williams detailed the UN Peacebuilding Fund’s increasingly important role in helping governments operationalize existing national mechanisms, rather than creating new parallel structures. Williams cited examples such as support for peace and reconciliation committees in Chad and local peacebuilding mechanisms in the Central African Republic.

“These committees bring together administrative authorities, traditional and religious leaders, women, young, and marginalized groups,” Williams said, relaying the efforts to connect national peace architectures with local institutions and provincial actors.

Participants of the dialogue repeatedly emphasized that national ownership must extend beyond central governments. Effective peace infrastructures require civil society organizations; participation of local authorities, women, youth, religious leaders, and representatives of the community; and capability of identifying tensions or risks before they can escalate into violence.

Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations, Ibrahim F. Jimoh, highlighted his country’s model to strengthen peacebuilding through institutions such as the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution and through reintegration, demobilization, disarmament, and reconciliation programs tailored to specific local conditions.

“Such infrastructures provide the framework through which countries can anticipate risks, address grievances, and support recovery,” Jimoh said. “Their effectiveness depends on inclusive participation, institutional resilience, and strong national ownership.”

Sierra Leone, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, and The Gambia also shared examples where local mediation structures, national peace councils, reconciliation commissions, and traditional institutions of justice have contributed to conflict prevention and social cohesion.

Jacqueline Seck, Chief of Staff, Office of the Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA), pointed to Ghana’s Peace Council as an example of nationally owned institutions providing trusted platforms to have dialogue, mediation, and electoral conflict prevention. Similarly, in The Gambia and Sierra Leone, the role of dedicated peace institutions in helping support post-conflict reconciliation and manage political tensions was discussed.

Among the major challenges, financing emerged as a recurring topic throughout the duration of the dialogue. While the catalytic role of the Peacebuilding Fund was praised by the speakers, many emphasized that sustained peace ultimately requires a long-term political commitment to peace as well as continuous domestic investment.

Williams warned that developing institutions often takes a lot of time and is a gradual process.

“Institutions take time to develop,” he said. “Results often require support at a certain scale, across the country, and across different parts of an institution to make meaningful impact.”

Throughout the discussion, participants pointed to a broader shift in peacebuilding strategy, from responding to crises after violence has already erupted to investing in preventative institutions designed to address risks before conflict happens.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

 
CIVICUS discusses Ghana’s anti-LGBTQI+ law with Leila Lariba, Executive Director of One Love Sisters Ghana, a community-driven organisation that advances human rights, social inclusion and wellbeing for Muslim LGBTQI+ people in Ghana.

On 29 May, Ghana’s parliament approved the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, which imposes prison terms of up to three years for people who identify as LGBTQI+ and three to five years for anyone deemed to promote, sponsor or support LGBTQI+ activities. With it, Ghana joins a growing group of West African states, including Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger and Senegal, that have recently passed anti-LGBTQI+ laws.

What does the new bill do, and how different is it from the version parliament approved in 2024?

Parliament approved the new anti-LGBTQI+ bill on 29 May and it now awaits President John Dramani Mahama’s signature. The bill criminalises LGBTQI+ people and anyone perceived to support, advocate for or provide services to them. It reaches far beyond identity and relationships into the freedoms of association, education, expression, healthcare and human rights advocacy. I have worked directly with LGBTQI+ communities across Ghana for years and I see this not as a legal document but as a tool that legitimises discrimination.

The version parliament approved in 2024, which former president Nana Akufo-Addo left office without signing, was already one of the continent’s most restrictive. The new text keeps most of its harmful provisions. It comes at a moment when LGBTQI+ people already face heightened fear, insecurity and stigma, and it makes simply existing, seeking support or speaking about human rights a potential crime.

Why is the bill being pushed now, and who’s behind it?

The bill is being pushed by anti-rights groups that have increasingly turned LGBTQI+ people into a political target. As many Ghanaians struggle with economic hardship, unemployment and governance concerns, public attention is being redirected towards a small and already excluded community.

Behind it stands a coalition of political figures, conservative religious groups and traditional leaders who frame LGBTQI+ rights as a threat to culture and family values. This narrative ignores Ghana’s long history of diversity and the fact that LGBTQI+ people belong to every family, community and faith group in the country and the world.

Do you expect President Dramani to sign the bill, and what would the consequences be?

It’s uncertain whether President Dramani will sign. But the damage is already done. The prolonged public debate has fuelled fear, encouraged discrimination and left many people feeling less safe. Even before it becomes law, the bill has emboldened hostility.

At One Love Sisters Ghana, we have documented rising reports of blackmail, evictions, family rejection, mental health crises, online harassment and workplace discrimination. People are now afraid to seek healthcare, legal help and psychosocial support in case they are exposed or targeted. When fear becomes institutionalised, people stop seeking help precisely when they need it most.

The law would threaten fundamental rights and deepen the stigma, isolation and vulnerability of people who already face daily barriers. As a queer Muslim activist, I know what it means to navigate many layers of exclusion. Many LGBTQI+ people are balancing identity, faith, family and safety. This law would make that even harder.

The impact would reach beyond individual people. Community organisations, healthcare providers, human rights defenders and support networks would also face risk, making it harder for vulnerable people to reach essential services and protection.

How are LGBTQI+ groups, including your organisation, responding?

Ghana’s LGBTQI+ communities are remarkably resilient. Across the country, people are supporting one another, sharing information, strengthening their safety and keeping community ties alive.

At One Love Sisters Ghana, we focus on community care, protection and wellbeing. We have tightened safety and security measures, expanded psychosocial support, documented rights violations and kept referring people in crisis to the help they need.

We work closely with activists, community leaders, health professionals, lawyers and regional partners to track developments and keep people informed and supported. Through our national support systems, we keep hearing from people worried about their safety, livelihoods and future.

We also hold on to hope. Our communities have survived hard times before, and we keep building solidarity, caring for one another and advocating for dignity and human rights.

What further restrictions could follow, and what support do you need to prevent them?

Our greatest fear is that this law lays the groundwork for broader restrictions on civil society, free expression and human rights work. Organisations could face tighter scrutiny, activists greater risk and excluded groups even harder access to services.

To prevent further harm, we need sustained support from national, regional and international allies for community safety initiatives, emergency response, legal assistance, mental health services and the protection of human rights defenders.

International solidarity should be led by local communities and grounded in human rights. Allies should amplify local voices, back grassroots organisations and keep advocating for fundamental freedoms.

This is bigger than LGBTQI+ rights. It’s about the kind of society we want to be. Respect for human rights can’t be selective. When the rights of one group are restricted, it creates a precedent that can affect everyone.

As a queer Muslim feminist and human rights defender, I believe that dignity, freedom and safety belong to all people. The conversations happening today will shape the future of our democracy. I hope Ghana chooses compassion over fear, inclusion over exclusion and human dignity over discrimination.

CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Gender rights: rollback and resistance CIVICUS | State of Civil Society Report 2026
Senegal: ‘The new law criminalises not only LGBTQI+ people but also anyone offering support’ CIVICUS Lens | Anonymous interview 21.May.2026
Ghana: ‘The anti-LGBTQI+ law enshrines prejudice and discrimination and perpetuates inequalities’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Solomon Atsuvia | 01.May.2024

Credit: Phil Nijhuis/ANP via AFP

By Andrew Firmin
LONDON, Apr 27 2026 (IPS)

Yasmin Ullah, from Myanmar’s persecuted Rohingya minority, is determined to see justice. On 13 April, she filed a complaint alleging genocide against Myanmar’s president, Min Aung Hlaing, to Indonesia’s Attorney General’s Office. Min Aung Hlaing led the 2021 coup that ousted a democratically elected government and this month was named president following a sham election held amid intense repression, rubber stamping the army’s continuing grip on power. However secure he appears in his position, Yasmin Ullah’s legal action offers hope his impunity may not be guaranteed.

The complaint accuses Min Aung Hlaing of genocide against Rohingya people, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group denied citizenship despite being long established in Myanmar. He’s accused of being responsible for the burning of Rohingya villages, forced evictions, killings and mass rape in a 2017 military operation, during which around 24,000 Rohingya people were killed and over 700,000 forced to flee. The UN’s fact-finding mission and its Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar have extensively documented atrocities. Civil society has played a key role in gathering testimonies from survivors and preserving evidence.

The case was made possible by changes to Indonesia’s criminal code that came into effect in January. While civil society has raised concerns about revisions to other parts of the code that restrict Indonesian people’s ability to speak out and protest, this particular change stands out as a positive development, enabling people to bring charges against alleged perpetrators of atrocities in other countries under the principle of universal jurisdiction.

Universal jurisdiction on the rise

Universal jurisdiction applies to crimes under international law, such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, on the grounds that these crimes are an offence against humanity as a whole and as such aren’t bound by borders.

Some states, including France and Germany, have passed laws to enable universal jurisdiction prosecutions. Many powerful states however still refuse to recognise the principle, citing national sovereignty, the long-established doctrine of immunity for heads of state and the potential for prosecutions to be politically motivated.

Yet the question of whether government leaders should be immune from prosecution has increasingly been contested. Immunity wasn’t granted when leaders of Sierra Leone and former Yugoslavia were prosecuted for crimes committed during civil wars, and the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC), removed the principle of immunity where it has jurisdiction. Ironically, the Trump administration, which resists international accountability over its officials, may have contributed to further eroding the doctrine of immunity by abducting Venezuela’s president Nicolás Maduro and placing him on trial for drug trafficking.

Universal jurisdiction cases have increased since the end of the Cold War. Belgium, Finland and Germany convicted people for their role in the Rwanda genocide. Switzerland secured the first guilty verdict for crimes committed in the Liberian civil war, while France convicted another Liberian war criminal in 2022. Germany convicted a Bosnian paramilitary soldier of genocide and, in 2021 and 2022, found two Syrian officials guilty of atrocity crimes.

Hopes of justice

Rohingya people have no hope of justice in a country that refuses even to recognise them as citizens, so diaspora civil society organisations are seeking it wherever they find opportunities. In 2025, an Argentinian court issued arrest warrants against Min Aung Hlaing and other senior Myanmar officials on crimes against humanity and genocide charges, in a case brought by a Rohingya organisation. Earlier this year, a human rights organisation filed a criminal case against the Myanmar regime in Timor-Leste. When authorities appointed a senior prosecutor to examine the case, Myanmar retaliated by expelling Timor-Leste’s ambassador.

These efforts complement proceedings in international courts. In 2024, the ICC issued an arrest warrant against Min Aung Hlaing for crimes against humanity, while in January, hearings began at the International Court of Justice in a case brought by the Gambian government accusing Myanmar of breaching the Genocide Convention. It isn’t a question of choosing between national jurisdictions and international courts, but rather of taking every avenue available to demand justice.

Universal jurisdiction has its limits. Those accused tend to be safe when they hold power; when states have successfully prosecuted perpetrators, it’s after they’ve lost the power that enabled their crimes. Currently, this means attempts to hold Israel’s leaders accountable for the genocide in Gaza, such as arrest warrants a Turkish court issued against 37 officials, only have symbolic value. Cases motivated by political point-scoring also risk discrediting the principle, as when a body created by Malaysia’s former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad found an array of US officials guilty in absentia, without legal basis or consequence.

Actions under universal jurisdiction, when targeted at evident offenders, can nonetheless help build moral pressure and signal that justice may eventually come. At a time when the brutal and illegitimate Myanmar regime is buttressed by China, India and Russia, and with the USA easing its pressure in pursuit of economic benefits, it matters that other countries keep holding the line, isolating the junta and exposing its atrocities.

It matters all the more when pressure comes from Southeast Asian countries, depriving the Myanmar regime of the excuse that human rights accountability is a western imposition. Two members of the Association of Southeast Asian nations, Indonesia and Timor-Leste, have now taken action against a fellow member. But other attempts in the region have faltered. Philippine authorities declined to proceed when five survivors of atrocities filed a case in 2023, while an investigation civil society filed with Indonesia’s national human rights commission that same year, alleging that Indonesian companies were supplying military equipment to Myanmar, has so far seen no progress.

As 2026 president of the UN Human Rights Council, Indonesia is uniquely placed to take the lead in the pursuit of justice for atrocity crimes. Indonesian authorities must treat this case as a priority and give it the attention and resources it needs.

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

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Who benefits from a war of choice against Iran?

The immediate political winners may include President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But if the war continues for a longer period, the political consequences for both Trump and Netanyahu could be uncertain. However, the most consistent beneficiaries are defense contractors, defense manufacturers and military lobbyists, who profit regardless of the outcome.

A. K. Abdul Momen

Despite vast reserves of oil and gas, the very engines of global prosperity—many nations across the region continue to face instability, poverty, and insecurity. From Palestine to Yemen, and from Iraq to Afghanistan, millions lack basic necessities, including food, safety, and economic opportunity.

In fact, millions of people in Muslims countries like Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Oman, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria, Algeria, Tunisia, Nigeria, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, etc have been suffering from war and terror, from food deficiency and safety and security of life and liberty.

No wonder, their wealth often flows outward, with elites investing in more stable, non-Muslim countries rather than building productive industries, infrastructure, or research capacity at home. Their investment, if any, in their home countries or Muslim communities are mostly concentrated in building a mosque, a prayer house or a madrassa for poor students.

They are reluctant to build a hospital, a road, a manufacturing or industrial plant, a bridge, a technical school or a research center. This imbalance contributes to long-term structural weakness.

A critical question emerges: what ensures national security?

Increasingly, it appears that states possessing nuclear weapons and long-range missile capabilities enjoy greater deterrence and stability. The case of North Korea illustrates this paradox.

Despite isolation and adversaries, it maintains regime security through nuclear capability. This raises a troubling implication: does survival in today’s world require nuclear armament? Should their leadership acquire nuclear capability to safeguard their national security and stability?

The consequences of a U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran would extend far beyond the battlefield. Even after hostilities end, the region would likely face prolonged economic damage, weakened infrastructure, and fractured political trust.

Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq, Oman, Lebanon and Iran could suffer severe economic disruption and internal instability.

Moreover, the strategic dynamics of such a conflict risk deepening divisions within the Muslim world itself. Military actions and retaliations particularly involving foreign bases in regional states could lead to intra-regional damage, further destabilizing already fragile alliances.

Another question, should leadership allow foreign bases in its home turf to guarantee national security? Or will it welcome more insecurity and conflict? Should leadership deny foreign bases in its own territory? Can they avoid such bases?

In case of Bangladesh, the ousted popular Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina refused her territory to be used as a military base for a foreign government and it cost her job, her government was overthrown. Can they afford to deny a powerful foreign government?

From a geopolitical perspective, wars of this nature often reshape control over resources and influence. Economic motivations particularly access to energy and mineral resources cannot be overlooked in understanding strategic decision-making.

This leads to a deeper ethical question: do power and victory ultimately outweigh principles such as justice, human rights, and moral leadership? Ethics, human rights, fairness and morality are these the sermons of the weak and priests only? Does Machiavelli sounds right— survival of the fittest?

In fact, the logic often resembles the political realism associated with Niccolò Machiavelli—where success is measured by survival and dominance rather than ethical conduct. Machiavelli describes a sneaky, cunning, and manipulative personality that uses deceit, duplicity, and unethical methods to achieve goals often in politics and business as a success story.

And history tends to remember the victors only. Yet the long-term cost—human suffering, instability, and moral compromise—raises the question of whether victory alone defines true leadership.

Professor Dr. A. K. Abdul Momen is Former Foreign Minister of Bangladesh

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Muslim History Month poster- artist Siddhesh Gautam

By Mariya Salim
DELHI, India, Mar 18 2026 (IPS)

In public discourse today, Muslims often appear as subjects of debate rather than authors of their own histories. Discussions about Muslim societies tend to revolve around geopolitics, security or conflict, leaving little space for the cultural, artistic and intellectual traditions that have shaped Muslim communities across centuries.

Reclaiming these narratives is therefore about reclaiming narrative authority. As a Muslim woman, I have often seen how Muslim voices are sidelined even when conversations centre on our own communities and pasts. It was within this context that I started Muslim History Month, together with my friend and colleague Ashwini KP, currently UN Special Rapporteur on Racism, in 2020, choosing to mark it during the month of Ramadan. Hosted on www.zariya.online, the initiative emerged from a simple conviction: communities must have the space to document and narrate their own histories.

Mariya Salim

They remind us that history is not only about remembering the past but also about challenging exclusion and reshaping how societies understand themselves. Muslim History Month builds on this legacy by creating a platform where Muslims, and others who are allies, themselves reflect on the diversity, complexity and richness of their historical and cultural experiences.

What began as a modest collaborative project has since developed into a global platform bringing together writers, scholars, artists and activists to explore overlooked dimensions of Muslim histories. Contributors have written from Egypt, the United States, Palestine, Nepal and Russia, among others, representing a range of communities including Pasmanda, Tsakhurs, Roma and Uyghur Muslims. This year alone there are contributors from over 6 countries, from Lebanon and Palestine to India, Egypt and Indonesia.

The urgency of documenting these histories is reflected in the commitment of the contributors themselves. Rima Barakat, an academic in Islamic Art History from the Lebanese American University (LAU), wrote her contribution this year from Beirut. Explaining why she chose to participate in our endeavour despite living amid ongoing conflict, she observed:

“War always incites me to act culturally and to contribute amidst political turmoil. Historically, during World War I and World War II, artists and writers produced prolifically and contributed to sustaining a cultural economy. That is what I do today and how survival is measured by cultural and artistic endurance.”

Mihrab at the Jami Masjid, 17th century, Bijapur, India. Photo- Author Rajarshi Sengupta

Her words capture something fundamental about the role of culture in difficult times. Artistic expression is often treated as secondary to more immediate political realities. Yet history repeatedly shows that culture can become one of the most powerful ways communities endure, remember and rebuild.

The first edition of Muslim History Month brought together writers from different parts of the world to document overlooked aspects of Muslim communities. Contributors wrote about subjects ranging from Sheedi Muslims in Pakistan to what Ramadan/Ramzaan means. The second edition shifted the focus toward Muslim women from across the world who are no longer with us, many of whose contributions have faded from historical memory, from architect Zaha Hadid to Indian Spy Noor Inayat Khan. By revisiting their lives and work, the edition sought to address the erasures that often shape how Muslim women’s life and experiences are recorded.

The third edition, launched this year, turns its attention to Muslim art and architecture. Rather than limiting the discussion to monumental structures or gallery-based art alone, the edition explores a wider spectrum of creative practices. Art and architecture here include performance traditions, Calligraphy and mosque architecture, craft practices like Rogan Art, cultural rituals like wearing Amulets and everyday acts of creativity through which communities’ express faith, identity and belonging.

One of the contributions by Kawther Alkholy Ramadan in Canada for instance reflects on the aftermath of the Afzaal family murders in London, Ontario. In 2021, the Afzaal family was deliberately targeted and killed in an act of anti-Muslim violence that deeply affected the local community. Rather than focusing solely on the violence of the attack, Ramadan’s piece examines how Muslim women responded through creative and cultural expression.

Stories such as these challenge conventional assumptions about what counts as art. They show how creativity often emerges most powerfully in moments of crisis, when communities search for ways to process trauma and reaffirm their presence.

Another contribution from Indonesia by Adzka Haniina Albarri, for instance explores the performative art known as Shalawat Musawa. Shalawat refers to devotional invocations offered by Muslims in honour of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) The article examines how Shalawat Musawa has become a space where discussions around gender equality can be articulated. By encouraging women’s participation in a devotional practice historically dominated by men, performers are using art to engage with evolving debates about gender and social justice.

Across the edition, similar stories emerge from different parts of the world. Some pieces engage with contemporary artists, including an interview with world renowned Tunisian calligrapher Karim Jabbari, articles by Palestinian jewellery designer Mai Zarkawi and Egyptian academic Balsam Abdul Rahman Saleh. Others explore artistic traditions shaped by migration, diaspora and local cultural histories.

Muslim History Month III highlights how artistic expression remains embedded in everyday life. From neighbourhood cultural initiatives, architectural marvels, discussions on the Bihari Script Quran in Dallas Museum, to devotional performances, these practices reveal how creativity continues to shape the social and spiritual landscapes of Muslim communities.

They also illustrate the diversity within Muslim cultural production. Muslim societies are far from monolithic, and neither are their artistic traditions.

At a time when public discourse frequently reduces Muslims to political headlines or security narratives, these stories offer an important counterpoint. They remind us that Muslim histories are also histories of creativity, scholarship, craftsperson-ship and cultural exchange.

Documenting these histories is itself an act of preservation. History, and for that matter the present that remains unwritten, are easily forgotten or misrepresented. When communities claim authority to narrate their own pasts and present, they challenge the structures that have historically excluded them from broader cultural narratives. Therefore, Muslim History Month, then, is not only about looking back. It is also about shaping how Muslim histories will be understood in the future.

As Rima Barakat’s reflection from Beirut reminds us, even in times marked by war and uncertainty, cultural production persists. For many communities, it is precisely through artistic endurance that survival itself is measured.

Beyond the stereotypes and headlines that dominate public discourse lies a far richer narrative, one shaped by art, architecture, memory and the collective imagination of communities determined to tell their own stories.

Mariya Salim is co-founder of Zariya. She is a Human Rights activist and an international SGBV expert based in Delhi India.
https://zariya.online/category/muslim-history-month-iii/

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

The dead Ali Khamenei hands over the Iranian flag to a mirror image of his son, Mojtaba Khamenei. From the web site https://english.khamenei.ir/

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Mar 12 2026 (IPS)

The US/Israeli war on Iran might be like messing with a hornets’ nest, spreading fear and chaos all around. The Israeli government claimed that the war was a “preventive” measure to address an immediate threat of Iran constructing a nuclear bomb. However, this war has obviously been meticulously planned over a long period of time and it now seemed to be the right time to put this plan into action. The Iranian air defences had been weakened through earlier attacks, while recent Israeli strikes decapitated Hezbollah’s Lebanese leadership, Iran’s allies north of Israel. With Gaza destroyed and Syria’s unreliable Assad gone, Netanyahu had succeeded in securing his party’s coalition with the far-right and could continue to count upon the support of the Trump Administration, providing Israel with a free hand vis-à-vis the Palestinians and turning a blind eye to the massacre of civilians. The U.S. is continuously supporting Isreal with missile-defence systems, coordination, cooperation, and intelligence sharing.

It appears as if the U.S./Israeli forces now intend to bomb everything in Iran – from its highest leaders, down to police stations and thus hope that Iran will exhaust its defence capacities. The aggressors furthermore claim they intend to achieve an Iranian regime change. However, even if Iran’s ninety-two million people now are trapped between a bloody war and a repressive regime it is highly unlikely that a tolerant government will emerge from a battered rump version of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is more probable that such a state will be governed by leaders even more determined to cling to their power after gaining more confidence after overcoming a terrible crisis. U.S. actions seem to be more improvised than Israel’s and it seems that they have not learned from the Afghanistan failure, i.e. the difficulties in achieving and maintaining a regime change through military means.

The U.S. government rejoiced from the killing of Ali Khamenei – a mid-ranking cleric who did not meet the constitutional requirements of being a marja, i.e. a cleric enabled to make legal decisions for followers and clerics below him in rank. Instead, Khamenei was during his 36 years and six months in power forced to rely on his close ties with the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Now, in spite of the fact that the Iranian revolution’s father, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, had declared that “hereditary succession is sinister, evil, and invalid,” Khamenei’s son has been elected as Supreme Leader. So far Mojtaba Khamenei has acted in the shadow of his father and few Iranians have heard him speak. He has not made any public appearances, never given a sermon, or made any declarations; just working in close relation with the leaders of IRGC.

Whereas the Iranian Army acts as protector of the nation’s sovereignty, the IRGC “safeguards” the Islamic Republic. With more than 125,000 members it serves as Iran’s coast guard, operates a media outlet called Sepah News, and controls the nuclear program. From its origins as an ideological militia, the IRGC now controls nearly every aspect of Iranian politics, economy (including energy and food industries), as well as the nation’s social life. It counts upon a paramilitary volunteer militia with 90,000 active personnel. One of IRGC’s branches is the Qods Force, which specialises in unconventional warfare and military intelligence operations.

The presence, terror and fear created by IRGC have made it difficult for any internal opposition to get organised. In Iran there is nothing akin to the African National Congress with leaders like Nelson Mandela. If a leader would arise from the mess created by the U.S. and Israel it would more likely be a man like Alia Ardashir Larijani, a former commander of the IRGC who holds a B.Sc. in computer science and mathematics, as well as a PhD in Western philosophy.

Larijani has served as deputy minister in various cabinets, been head of the Republic’s broadcasting service, and Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. Larijani also served as Iran’s top nuclear envoy. However, in late March 2025 he stated that if Iran would be attacked by the United States and Israel, the nation would have no other choice than to develop nuclear weapons. Larijani is accused of having played a key role in the deadly crackdown against opposition protests that gripped the country in January this year. Since the end of December 2025, he is regarded to be the de facto leader of Iran and after originally opposing the election of Mojtaba Khamenei, Larijani has now rallied his supporters behind the newly elected Supreme Leader.

Apart from the fear of an internal collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran, there are concerns about the economic effects of the current war. Beyond the physical damage, Epic Fury has been quite costly for the Trump Administration that so far has deployed nearly half of the United States’ air power and roughly a third of its naval assets. So far, the Pentagon has not released an official estimate of the cost of the war, but it is currently believed to be USD 2 billion per day. Meanwhile, stocks have plunged all over the world and the price of crude oil spiked from USD 65 per barrel to USD 120 after the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquified gas passes, had been effectively closed.

89 percent of Saudi Arabia’s oil shipments used to pass through the Strait, while Kuwait and Qatar shipped 100 percent, Iraq 97 percent and the United Arab Emirates 66 percent. Qatar has so far been worst hit, particularly since it took the place of Russia for liquified gas exports to Europe. Kuwait has now been forced to suspended its production and export of crude oil and liquefied natural gas (of which it is second to the U.S. as the world’s largest provider).

Winners of this situation are large net energy exporters outside the Gulf whose ability to sell abroad remains unaffected, such as Norway, Russia and Canada, and to a lesser degree Nigeria and Angola. Not the least the U.S. is a winner thanks to its expanding fracking industry. At the other end of the spectrum sit economies where energy imports account for a large share of their GDP. This group includes countries such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, India and China, as well as most European economies including France, Germany and the UK.

It has even been speculated that the war on Iran is a means of USA to hurt China’s economy. In 2025, China bought more than 80 percent of Iran’s shipped oil, around 12 percent of China’s crude oil imports, while approximately 3 percent came from Venezuela (now subjugated by the U.S.).

In 2021, China and Iran signed a 25-year strategic partnership, meaning that China promised to invest USD 400 billion in exchange for keeping Iranian oil flowing. China does not view its “alliances” in the same way the West does, meaning that its government does not sign mutual defence treaties and will not come rushing to its allies’ aid. However, an unpredictable and dysfunctional actor as the U.S. has become under the Trump administration is a great source of unease for Beijing. Worries worsened by the fact that China’s annual economic growth target has reached its lowest level since 1991. Even as Beijing continues its rapid development of high-tech and renewables industries the country is currently battling with low consumption levels, a prolonged property crisis, and a huge local debt.

A big economy like China’s, as well as other wealthy nations, might find means to mitigate rising oil prices, but it’s much worse for smaller, poorer nations. Disruptions to energy supply as a result of a prolonged conflict will have far greater ramifications economically in the Global South than in the West. As an example, a country like Bangladesh, which is particularly dependent on Middle Eastern oil, not least for its garment industry, has already imposed daily limits on fuel sales after panic buying and stockpiling raised concerns about supply. Furthermore, approximately 13 million Bangladeshi expatriates are currently supporting the country’s economic stability through their remittances, of them 8 million live and work within the Middle East.

The same is true of Pakistan, with over 11 million Pakistanis living and working abroad, mainly in the Gulf states. In January 2025 alone, the country received USD 3 billion in remittances, reflecting a 25 percent year-on-year surge. Furthermore, Pakistan shares a 900-kilometre border with Iran and a collapse of Iran into civil war is a constant worry for Pakistan, which also maintains a military relationship with Saudi Arabia with an estimated 1,500 to 2,000 Pakistani troops stationed in the kingdom. If the situation worsens, as Saudi infrastructure is hit any further, it is only a matter of time that Saudi Arabia will ask Pakistan to contribute towards its defence. Pakistan’s border areas with Iran and its huge Shia population (generally well-disposed towards their fellow believers on the other side of the frontier) are already highly volatile and if internal strife within Iran spills over the border, the fallout for Pakistan would be severe. Pakistan is furthermore recently engaged in a war with Afghanistan. On 6 March, Pakistan carried out air strikes in more than twenty locations across Afghanistan, while the Taliban targeted dozens of Pakistani border posts.

Other neighbouring nations to Iran are equally nervous. In Turkmenistan prices have almost doubled compared with pre-war levels. With an average salary of around USD 714 a large portion of the population is hard hit, since Turkmenistan is importing a considerable amount of industrial goods from Iran – like steel, construction materials, and petrochemicals, as well as food and household items that constitute a critical lifeline for many of its residents.

Turkey is also alarmed by the present situation and worries what will happen if Iran collapses into warring factions. If the U.S./Israel confrontation with Iran deepens, particularly in ways that involve regime change with a spillover effect on Turkey, or security implications as a result of expanded U.S./Israeli cooperation with hostile Kurdish militants, this war could quickly evolve into another fault line in U.S.-Turkish relations.

To sum up – the U.S./Israel attack on Iran is very unlikely to result in a regime change, but might instead result in a chaotic and bloody collapse of the entire country. The war is a high-risk game that might have dangerous effects not only on Iran and its immediate neighbours, but the entire world as well.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Participants observe a visual montage linking Abu Dhabi’s Zayed Award ceremony, the Sant’Egidio interfaith forum in Rome and the Astana Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions — symbolizing the emerging “rehearsal space” where religion, civil society and state diplomacy converge. (Credit: INPS / Illustrative image)

By Katsuhiro Asagiri
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates, Feb 24 2026 (IPS)

As wars drag on and the international order grows increasingly unstable, Abu Dhabi has been offering a different kind of narrative. It sought to recognize early efforts at reconciliation, bring religious leaders into the same space, and place former adversaries under the same spotlight. At the heart of the February 4, 2026 Zayed Award for Human Fraternity ceremony was an attempt to make visible, in a public setting, the choice of moving in the direction of easing conflict.

Pope Francis and Ahmed el-Tayeb sign the Document on Human Fraternity。Credit: Vatican News

Seven years on, the international landscape has become even more fragmented. Even so, the organizers have framed the ceremony not merely as an awards event, but as a symbolic platform intended to encourage a minimum measure of restraint when politics turns turbulent.

Shoring Up a Fragile Peace

The moment that drew the most attention this year was the recognition of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev for their peace agreement. After decades of confrontation, the award functioned as a form of international endorsement for a still-fragile peace process in the South Caucasus.

Zayed Prize 2026 to Armenia and Azerbaijan Credit: Vatican News

The award, however, extended beyond state leadership. The 2026 laureates also included Afghan girls’ education advocate Zarqa Yaftali and the Palestinian nonprofit Taawon, honoring efforts to continue humanitarian and development work under conditions of conflict and political instability. It also underscores the award’s intention to bridge “top-down politics,” such as peace agreements, with “bottom-up peacebuilding” that supports communities on the ground. The underlying message is clear: even with treaties and agreements in place, peace cannot take root if the schools, healthcare, and local support systems needed to sustain society remain fragile.

A Dialogue Circuit Linking Rome and Astana

The closing ceremony held against the backdrop of the ancient Roman ruins, the Colosseum. Credit: Community of Sant’Egidio

Further east, Kazakhstan has institutionalized interfaith engagement through the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions in Astana. Both the Holy See and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar have consistently participated, helping to sustain the congress as a venue for structured interreligious dialogue.

Seen in this light, Rome, Astana, and Abu Dhabi are not merely separate events; they emerge as nodal points in a broader space of dialogue that links religion and diplomacy. Put differently, they function like a regular service designed to keep the lines of communication open—ensuring that the ability to meet and talk does not fall silent.

Religious Actors Across Borders

On Feb. 4, a Soka Gakkai delegation led by Vice President Hirotsugu Terasaki attended the 2026 Zayed Award for Human Fraternity ceremony in Abu Dhabi, UAE. At the invitation of @ZayedAward, the delegation joined global religious leaders. On Feb. 3, the delegation met with Judge Mohamed Abdelsalam, Secretary-General of the Zayed Award for Human Fraternity and they delivered a letter from Soka Gakkai President Minoru Harada to the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar His Eminence Ahmed Al-Tayeb. Credit: SGI

Ahead of the Abu Dhabi ceremony, Terasaki met with Judge Mohamed Abdelsalam, Secretary-General of the award, and delivered a letter from Minoru Harada, President of Soka Gakkai, addressed to Grand Imam Ahmed Al-Tayeb. The two exchanged views on the need to further strengthen “heart-to-heart dialogue” that transcends religious differences.

The stages created by the United Arab Emirates and Kazakhstan—both of which place emphasis on “spiritual diplomacy”—are more than mere events. What gives these settings moral authority and lends them ethical weight as arenas for peacebuilding is a sustained architecture of dialogue, underpinned by relationships that religious and civil-society leaders have cultivated over many years. Put differently, it is a system for meeting regularly and ensuring that lines of communication do not fall silent. Even when interstate relations grow tense, religious and civil-society networks can keep channels of dialogue open, serving as a buffer against rupture.

The fact that Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev engaged with this year’s award ceremony through a video address, and that Director-General Terasaki has moved across dialogue venues such as Abu Dhabi, Rome, and Astana, quietly suggests the presence of such networks where religion and diplomacy intersect. Likewise, the Holy See has also been one of the actors continuously involved in all three of these settings.

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev extended his congratulations to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan on being given the Sheikh Zayed Award for Human Fraternity in a video address. Credit: Akorda

Shared Words, Different Realities

The vocabulary repeatedly invoked in these forums is strikingly consistent: fraternity, coexistence, dialogue, and human dignity. At a time when multilateralism is faltering and traditional channels of mediation are weakening, this language also serves a political purpose—allowing states to signal, at home and abroad, a preference for dialogue over force and to project the image that they are not stoking confrontation, but providing a venue in which tensions can be managed.

Yet the distance between ceremony and reality does not disappear. Celebrating a peace agreement does not necessarily guarantee its implementation. Honoring efforts in girls’ education does not automatically reopen classrooms. Proclaiming coexistence does not stop violence overnight. Awards can encourage compromise and bless dialogue, but they are not mechanisms that can compel outcomes.

Even so, governments and religious and civil-society networks continue to engage in these venues—through attendance, public statements, and sustained involvement—because they remain among the few public settings where opposing parties can appear side by side. There are not many spaces where actors in tense relationships can stand in the same room, where restraint is openly affirmed, and where interfaith ties can function as informal diplomatic channels.

A Place to “Rehearse” Peace

A woman crafts a mosaic depicting a peace dove in the Za’atari refugee camp in Jordan. Credit: UN Women/Christopher Herwig

They also point toward the emergence of a new diplomatic domain where religion, civil society and state interests converge.

In today’s international environment, it is precisely these small points of contact that can carry real significance. Before peace is institutionalized as policy, there are only limited spaces where its shape can be publicly “rehearsed.”

The Abu Dhabi ceremony is one of those rare stages. It did not resolve a conflict, nor did it erase suspicion. Even so, choosing dialogue—and continuing to make that choice visible in the open—constitutes an act in itself: a clear signal, in an age of polarization, of a commitment to restraint over enmity.

This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

INPS Japan

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

President Donald Trump Joins Faith Leaders in Prayer – Credit: The White House
 
According to the UN, Sunday marked the start of World Interfaith Harmony Week, a time to emphasize that mutual understanding and interreligious dialogue are essential to building a culture of peace. The week was established to promote harmony among all people, regardless of their faith.

By Azza Karam
NEW YORK, Feb 2 2026 (IPS)

Several events, meetings, consultations, initiatives, etc. taking place among faith-inspired, ‘faith-based’ and a variety of other similar efforts, over the past year, in the United States especially, concern me.

Coming from a background of human rights, international development, and humanitarian service, I have witnessed the arc of ‘none’ to increasing interest by Western governments in ‘religion’ – religious engagement, religion and development, religion and foreign policy, religious freedom, religious peacebuilding, or religion and peace, and more, including even religion and agriculture. Basically, religion and everything.

Non-Western governments within Africa and Asia, including areas overlapping with what we call (variably) “the Middle East”, have long been interested, and indeed actively engaging religious leaders and religious institutions.

As many scholars, observers, and foreign policy pundits have noted, the interest of such governments has often transcended any genuine fascination with faith, towards rather obvious instrumentalization of religious leaders, religious organisations and religious groups, in support of specific political agendas (e.g., making peace with Israel, legitimacy of corrupt – and violent – politically repressive leaders and regimes, etc.).

In fact, the marriage between select religious leaders/institutions/groups and some political actors goes back to the empires we have inherited pre-Westphalian states).

I recall some stories from my time serving as a staff member at the United Nations, and in other international fora. The first story revolves around one Arab and one Indian diplomat speaking with a European counterpart, during one of several UN Strategic Learning Exchanges on Religion, Development and Diplomacy, which I coordinated and facilitated, this one in 2014.

The discussion concerned how best to “benefit” from working with religious leaders to affirm a message of certain political parties, especially, albeit not only, around elections. The Arab patted the European on the back and said, with a smile and a wink: “you are finally catching up on how to use these religious leaders – congratulations my friend”. The Indian one, looking bemused, added “Yes. And be careful”.

Another story concerns another meeting I organised – in one of the basement meeting rooms of the UN – between UN officials and a diverse array of religious actors, around peace and mediation efforts, in select African and Asian conflict settings, early 2015.

A European Christian religious leader of a renowned multi-religious organisation made an intervention to address the concerns about “instrumentalization” of religious actors, which some faith-based NGO leaders were articulating.

While some faith representatives cautioned against religious actors being used to “rubber stamp decisions already made by governments and some intergovernmental organisations” (in the room were both UN and EU officials), this particular Western Christian religious leader spoke up and said, “I am not worried about that at all, in fact, I would like to say to my secular colleagues in this room, please use us… we can certainly benefit you… we are not common civil society actors, our mission makes us exceptional”.

My last story, is from my time serving as the secretary general of an international multireligious organisation which convenes religious leaders from diverse religious institutions around “deeply held and widely shared values”.

As soon as I became a member of the UN Secretary-General’s High Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism, I arranged a meeting between some of my multi-religious Board members (religious leaders), and some members of this high Level UN SG’s Advisory Board.

The idea was to nurture a quiet but candid dialogue between pollical and religious leaders, around why and how multilateralism can be significantly strengthened by multireligious engagement.

I hasten to note that multireligious engagement, if served well, can be – as I have written and persistently argued – resistant to instrumentalization of select religious actors to serve any one particular governmental agenda. The latter is a feature I warn against, and small wonder, given developments from India to the United States, from Russia to Israel, and beyond.

Once again, I heard a religious leader invite the members of the SG’s Board to “use” their (religious) wisdom because of their “exceptional” mission (presumably the godly one). This time, later reflection among members of the UN SG Board led to noting that such multireligious engagement would be inadvisable, due to a concern about “Muslims” involved in such multireligious spaces.

Fast forward to 2026, one year after an increasingly belligerent US Presidential Administration’s record, which includes relatively ‘minor’ policy decisions such as transforming the name of the Ministry of Defence to the “Ministry of War”. And not so minor human rights abuses of citizens and immigrants, and some pointing to manipulation and outright disregard of the rule of law, both at home and abroad (I hope this is polite enough wording). Of course one dares not mention support to certain genocidal regimes killing thousands in the name of self-protection.

In this environment, I listen to conversations among some of the United States’ most esteemed faith-based organisations, all with a remarkable track record of serving humanity in all corners of the world. Who, apparently, are seeking to engage this Administration “constructively”, with some praising the “unprecedented” outreach of members of this Administration in engaging, largely (some would say exclusively), with certain Christian NGOs, certain Christian religious leaders, and certain Christian faith protagonists – no doubt to further noble objectives. Apparently, this is a form of strategic engagement of/with religion.

Even though there were likely some who felt uncomfortable with aspects of this rhetoric, the studiously diplomatic silences – including my own – about challenging anything said, was noteworthy. The bottom line is, “we need access to the White House… we need more resources to do our (good) work”.

Why was I silent? Because I am the quintessential ‘other’ whose outspokenness has already earned me the loss of a sense of ‘home’ and security, many times over. This is neither excuse nor justification, rather, an acknowledgement of cowardice.

Into this Kafkaesque reality, let me ask a few questions I am battling with: what will it take to speak truth to power publicly – the way Minnesotans and Palestinians are having to do with their own regimes? Is it strategic to be silent, or such consummate diplomats, especially when we work in the name of the ‘godly’ – being such “exceptional” actors?

Conversely, is this Administration which we endeavour to be so tactful with, being silent about it’s “divine mission”? Is being “nice and essentially a kind person with their heart in the right place”, and doing godly work, a good reason to work with those who are serving regimes which ignore the rule of law in their own nation and abroad? Does faith-based diplomacy mean we either collude, remain silent, or take the struggle to the streets?

If so, what difference is faith-based diplomacy and engagement actually making to civic engagement, to honoring human rights and the rule of law, or to serving principled leadership? Or do these simply not matter since it is the self-interests of the ruling and rich few, are what matters to determine the integrity of life, planet and leadership?

Perhaps we should ponder the advice of the Indian Diplomat, given to his Western counterpart 22 years ago: how can we “be careful”?

Professor Azza Karam serves as President of Lead Integrity; and Director of the Kahane UN Program, for Occidental College’s Diplomacy and World Affairs.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Refugees by Honoré Daumier (1808-1879)

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jan 13 2026 (IPS)

At the moment, ICE’s advancement in the U.S. is apparently dividing the nation’s population into desired and undesirable elements. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was born after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers and intended to be a response to terrorism. However, with Donald Trump’s return to the White House, federal immigration agents have become the president’s praetorian guard, implementing his immigration politics.

ICE has currently 22,000 employees, a number destined to grow thanks to new recruits. Its budget is USD 30 billion a year. During 2025, the agency’s spending on fire arms has grown 600 percent. Its agents generally act with their faces covered, and move around heavily armed, in unmarked vehicles.

ICE agent, photo from Huffington Post

This while it has been indicated that between 900,000 and 1.6 million Ukrainians on Russian-occupied territories have been deported to Russia, including 260,000 children. Outside of Europe similar activities are taking place in several other areas. For example, in Gaza where from the beginning of the Gaza war on 13 October 2023, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) forced the evacuation of 1.1 million people from Northen Gaza, while the land strip has been bombed and destroyed.

We have to admit that after reaching catastrophic dimensions during the last century the phenomenon of ethnic cleansing is still with us. As the herd animals that we are, we humans have become afflicted with the unfortunate trait of dividing individuals into groups, which we judge and treat according to broad generalizations based on people’s group affiliation, regardless of their unique personality.

Given the xenophobic storms now raging in both in the U.S. and Europe, it may be appropriate to recall the human disasters that such behaviour has caused on their continents. The genocide that the indigenous people of the U.S. were subjected to is well known, and also when during World War II U.S. forcibly relocated and incarcerated about 120,000 U.S, citizens of Japanese descent in various concentration camps. Lesser known is probably the forced deportation of between 300,000 and 2 million Mexicans and Mexican-Americans during the Great Depression between 1929 and 1939, forty to sixty percent of them were U.S, citizens and overwhelmingly children.

The European 20th century history of mass deportations and human slaughter is even darker. It began at the outskirts of the continent when Russian forces between 1863 and 1878 invaded Circassia by the Black Sea, systematically killing and deporting 95 to 97 percent of its population, resulting in the deaths of between 1 and 1.5 million. This was followed by the pogroms, i.e. mass killings of Jews, in for example Odessa (1881), Kishinev (1903), Kiev (1905), and Bialystok (1906), leaving more than 2,000 dead and resulting in a mass migration of Jews from the affected areas, worsened during the following civil war when 35,000 to 250,000 Jews were massacred between 1918 and 1920. At the same time the Bolshevik regime killed and/or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 Don Cossacks.

After World War I between 90,000 and 300,000 Albanians were deported from Yugoslavia and up to 80,000 were killed during this new nation’s colonization of Kosovo. The expulsion and genocide of Armenians and Greeks which occurred in Turkish Anatolia both during and after World War I resulted in mass migrations and between 2 and 3 million Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians were killed. Over 1.2 million ethnic Greeks were expelled from Turkey in 1922-1924, while the Greeks expelled 400,000 Muslims.

Even worse was to come. Between 1935 and 1945, Nazi Germany systematically killed an estimated 130,500 Roma and Sinti people and between 1938 and 1945 more than 6 million Jews. During the same period Nazi German forces killed 3 million Ukrainians, 1,6 million Poles, 1,6 million Russians, 1,4 million Byelorussians. The German allies in Croatia massacred between 200,000 and 500,000 Serbs, as well as approximately 25,000 Roma/Sinti and 30,000 Jews. Their adversaries, the Serbs, killed 32,000 Croats and 33.000 Bosniaks.

The overwhelming part of all these victims were civilians, not combatants, and the estimations above are only some examples of massacres and deportations that occurred all over Europe during World War II.

In the Soviet Union (USSR), Stalin ordered the resettlement of more than 3,5 million ethnic minorities – Ukrainians, Volga Germans, Chechens, Balts, Kalmyks, Crimean Tatars, Balkars, Karachays, Turks, and Ingush. Many of them never returned to their homelands and up to 400,000 deaths due to these expulsions were archived by Soviet authorities.

Before that the Holodomor, a massive man-made famine from 1932 to 1933 had killed 3.5 to 5 million in Ukraine, as well as 62,000 in the Kuban area, while over 300,000 Ukrainians were deported to Kazakhstan, where many died.

All these numbers are just estimations and they might be higher or lower. However, we have to keep in mind that behind every single number we find cruelty and unimaginable suffering.

At the conclusion of World War I, it was borders that were invented and adjusted, while people were on the whole left in place, but during and after World War II what happened was rather the opposite – boundaries remained broadly intact (though USSR significantly expanded its territory) and people were moved instead … millions of them.

For example, 1.6 to 2 million Poles were by the invading Germans expelled from their lands, not counting millions of slave workers deported from Poland to the German Reich. At the same time the USSR transferred 380,000 Poles from their home territories, while 410 000 Finns had to leave Karelia, ceded to the USSR.

On top of that, losses on the battle fields were enormous – Soviet Union lost 6 million soldiers, Germany 4 million, Italy 400,000, and Romania 300,000. If combining military and civilian losses Poland lost one person in 5 of her pre-war population, Yugoslavia one in 8 and Greece one in 14, compared with one in 15 in Germany and 1one in 77 in France.

Nazi Germany captured 5.5 million Soviet soldiers and out of them 3.3 million died in the camps, of the 750,000 German soldiers captured by USSR 20,000 survived.

All this cruelty continued after the war and it was now members of ethnic groups connected with loosing nations who were lumped together into one unit, where individuals came to suffer, both the guilty and the innocent ones.

At the Potsdam Conference from 17 July to 2 August 1945 the heads of the leading Allies – the USSR, the United Kingdom, and the U.S. – agreed upon “orderly and humane” expulsions of the “German populations” from Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, but not Yugoslavia and Romania. As a result, between 13,5 and 16.5 million “ethnic Germans” were expulsed from Central and Eastern European countries.

Estimates of the number of those who died during this process are being debated and range from a half to 3 million. As an example, investigations by a joint German and Czech commission of historians did in 1995 established that 2.1 million ethnic Germans were deported from Czechoslovakia to Germany. The death toll was at least 15,000 persons, but it could range up to a maximum of 30,000 dead, if one assumes that many deaths were not reported.

Yugoslavia was a particularly horrifying example of ethnic cleansing both during and after World War II. As mentioned above Croats and Serbs constantly massacred each other. During the so called foibe massacres (foibes are sink holes common in the region and many victims were thrown into them) ethnic Italians were killed by Communist partisans. During and after the war these crimes caused an exodus amounting to between 230,000 and 350,000 “ethnic Italians”, estimates of massacred victims range from 3,000 to 11,000.

These are just a few examples of expulsions and massacres of some Europeans, without mentioning the horrible fate of many Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Hungarians, Turks, and many others who happened to be minorities in countries where they had lived for centuries. While considering this often forgotten, or at least unmentioned, history of millions of unwelcomed victims and refugees criss-crossing a bombed out and miserable Europe it is difficult to comprehend that so many descendants of these suffering people are now gathering around xenophobic parties which make refugeeism, whether for one’s life, or due to general misery, a crime.

Contemplating the heavily armed ICE agents in the U.S. “liberating” their nation from “foreign elements” you might easily evoke images of equally armed SS troopers, Soviet NKVD agents, Romanian Iron Guards, Croatian Ustaše and many similar units who expelled, and often killed, ethnic groups all over Europe.

Main sources: Judt, Tony (2005) Postwar: A History of Europe since 1945. London: Vintage. Lieberman, Benjamin (2013) Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. Lanham MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Totten, Samuel et al., eds. (1997) Century of Genocide; Eyewitness Accounts and Critical Views. New York: Garland Publishing.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

The panelists at the CIVICUS press briefing on the 2025 People Power Under Attack Report. Credit: Oritro Karim/IPS

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 11 2025 (IPS)

Over the course of 2025, global civic space conditions have deteriorated sharply, with most countries experiencing some degree of obstructed civil liberties. As authoritarian governments strengthen their hold and have even escalated the use of military force to suppress public dissent, civilians report facing increasing limitations of freedoms of association, peaceful assembly, petition and religion, as well as notable crackdowns on press freedoms.

On December 9, CIVICUS Global Alliance published its 2025 People Power Under Attack report, which details the current conditions of civic space worldwide. The findings show that residents of 83 countries and territories now live with routinely denied freedoms—a stark contrast from the 67 countries recorded in 2020. Additionally, 15 countries have recorded considerable downgrades in civic freedoms, including the United States, France, and Germany, which were once seen as global models of democracy.

“We see a continued trend of attacks on people’s right to speak up, come together as a collective, and protest for their rights around the world,” said CIVICUS Secretary General Mandeep Tiwana ahead of the report’s launch. “In a context of rising authoritarianism and populism, no country seems immune from this deeply worrying trend.”

Only an estimated seven percent of the global population now live in countries with free or relatively free civic space—a staggering 50 percent decline from last year’s figures. This has raised alarm among humanitarian organizations, which stress the urgent need to safeguard civic freedoms as a foundation for accountable governance and inclusive democratic participation. CIVICUS highlighted three primary areas of concern: the detention of protestors, journalists, and human rights defenders. These trends underscore the accelerating breakdown of accountability for government corruption and human rights violations.

The report notes that governments detained protestors at more than 200 peaceful demonstrations across 82 countries, with authorities also disrupting protests in 70 countries, with 67 instances involving the use of excessive force. These operations targeted protests calling for action on issues such as government corruption, inadequate access to basic services, rising living costs, the climate crisis, and allegations of electoral fraud.

“We see protests as a crucial space where people can challenge injustice and can hold power to account but we are also watching that space shrink at a rate that should alarm us all,” said Joyce Bukuru, the Representative to the United Nations at Amnesty International.

Amnesty International has recorded the increasing frequency in which authorities suppress public dissent through three key trends. The first of which is that the legal environment for protest is “tightening very fast”. “Across the region, governments are adopting overly broad and outright punitive laws that make it harder for people to protest easily,” Bukuru said.

The organization also reported the widespread use of excessive force. Unlawful and violent policing tactics are routinely used by the government to silence dissent, with instances of arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and the use of weapons such as rubber bullets and stun grenades.

Protestors have increasingly been subjected to increased levels of surveillance, digital repression, and tech-facilitated abuse. Bukuru noted that AI-generated abuse is routinely used against activists, with some stating that they feel like “intimidation follows them everywhere”.

In Uganda and Thailand, Amnesty International recorded the use of tech-facilitated gender-based violence, in which female activists experienced smear campaigns, sexualized doctored images, and threats. “These tactics fundamentally change the risk calculus for anyone considering to engage in activism,” said Bukuru.

In the report, CIVICUS noted that repression of journalists remains pervasive globally. Arrests and detentions of journalists have been documented across 73 countries, with attacks being recorded in 54. Additionally, CIVICUS noted the rise of violations surrounding online freedoms, with roughly 11 percent of all violations occurring online. This includes internet and social media shutdowns, online censorship, coordinated disinformation and misinformation campaigns, and online threats.

The detention of human rights defenders is especially common in Africa south of the Sahara, the Americas, the Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Female and LGBTQI+ activists are routinely subjected to threats of violence, attacks, and increased rates of detention.

“When human rights are not part of the conversation, that sends a message to the rest of the world,” said Widad Franco, the UN Advocacy Officer at Human Rights Watch (HRW). “When you see some kind of excessive response [from governments], the lack of human rights makes it much harder to protect people on the ground.”

CIVICUS emphasized the urgent need for stronger protections of civic space within the United States, with Tiwana warning of the significant global ripple effects that the current administration’s actions could trigger. Efforts by the current administration to suppress dissent, undermine freedom of association, and slash funding for foreign assistance risk setting a dangerous precedent for other governments to follow.

“The U.S. plays an outsized role around the world. When the U.S. signals that it no longer cares about democracy or human rights, it sends a strong message to [authoritarian governments] that they can do whatever they like,” said Tiwana. “Secondly, the U.S.’s own dismantling of USAID has triggered a reduction of funding by other wealthy democracies that are now repurposing the resources they give to civil society or democracy support programs towards their own economic interests.”

Tiwana noted that the United States’ current approach increasingly mirrors China’s model of transactional diplomacy, a shift that risks deepening global economic inequalities. This approach enables the wealthy to exert a disproportionate grasp over governance, while marginalized and lower-income groups continue to struggle for access to essential services and remain considerably underrepresented.

“It is unfortunate that the U.S. is following China’s cue and disregarding its long history of ensuring that human rights are a pillar of foreign policy,” said Tiwana. “Wealthy individuals are basically gaming the system and that is what is leading us into 19th century levels of inequality. People are being denied the agency to call out high-level corruption and to call out the denial of basic services.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

 
CIVICUS discusses US civil society action under the second Trump administration with Bridget Moix, General Secretary of the Friends Committee on National Legislation, the oldest faith-based lobbying organisation in the USA, advocating for peace, justice and environmental stewardship. Bridget has participated in the No Kings movement, a nationwide grassroots response to democratic backsliding and attacks on rights.

Bridget Moix

What drives the No Kings movement?

We are experiencing a rapid and devastating rise of authoritarianism. Since coming into office for his second term, Trump has embarked on a relentless campaign to undo generations of democratic institution building and international law while pursuing his own interests and the interests of billionaires. He has launched a militarised mass deportation campaign against immigrants that is ripping families apart and disappearing people from our streets. At the same time, he is dismantling core government agencies and firing hundreds of thousands of federal employees, punishing political opponents and rewarding those who are willing to serve him and his so-called ‘America First’ agenda.

Many people across the political spectrum are deeply troubled by what he’s doing and see it as a major attack on core principles of democracy, which have been at the heart of the struggle for freedom and equality since the country’s founding. The USA was founded on the rejection of rule by monarchy, a declaration against kings doing what they want at the expense of the public. The No Kings movement recalls that history and speaks out against Trump’s authoritarian actions today.

What have the protests been like, and what role is civil society playing beyond the streets?

The first protests brought about five million people in 1,500 cities and towns across the USA onto the streets to stand up for democracy. More recent protests in October brought seven million people out in 2,600 towns and cities.

What’s impressive about these protests is they bring a wide diversity of people together, across traditional social and political boundaries, who all believe our democracy is at real risk and we need to resist Trump’s authoritarianism. Even in very small towns, large groups gather, including people who have never protested before but feel they must do something now. That gives me hope.

Beyond the protests, US civil society has been very active and is learning and taking inspiration from movements elsewhere, as well as from our history of democratic struggle. Civil society groups have been quick to take legal action to sue the Trump administration for its overreach and continue to do so. They provide training every week on non-violent resistance and monitor immigration enforcement activity. Faith leaders have been speaking out and holding vigils and taking part in civil disobedience. Many groups are advocating with Congress to uphold its constitutional powers and provide a check on the Trump administration. Mutual aid groups are providing support for migrants and others at risk across the country. People are also working to build long-term resilience individually and in solidarity with others because we know this could be a long struggle.

How are immigration policies affecting communities?

Immigration raids and detentions are happening across the USA. I live in Washington DC, where Trump has deployed the national guard to further militarise our communities. The White House has given Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) free rein to terrorise people, detaining them from their homes, schools and workplaces as well as off the street, in front of their families. ICE officers drive unmarked vehicles, wear masks and do not follow due process as they should under US law.

Here in DC we’ve had at least 1,200 people detained in two months, probably many more. They are often taken without any warning and transported hundreds of miles to detention centres. Their families struggle to find out what happened to them and get legal help. Many people who are here legally have been swept up in these detentions, including US citizens. Many families are too afraid to send their children to school or leave their house. All of us know families who have been affected. The economy is also being affected.

However, the good news is that communities are standing up and working around the clock to support and protect one another, document and interrupt abuses and urge our leaders to push back against this mass cruelty campaign. Neighbourhood groups in Chicago, DC, Los Angeles and elsewhere are organising rapid response teams and sharing learning with each other to build resistance and solidarity.

How has the government responded to the protests?

The Trump administration doesn’t care about protests and just tries to ignore them or spread lies about them. We are used to that. What is important though is that we’re beginning to see more movement among members of Congress, whose constituents are protesting and advocating with them, and the protests are building the awareness and broader engagement of the public we need to push back.

Research shows that it takes 3.5 per cent of the population engaged in civil resistance to overcome authoritarian regimes. We have 330 million people in this country, and with each major protest we’re getting closer to that threshold.

What needs to happen to protect democracy?

We need to continue building an engaged and active movement of people who speak up, push back and advocate to rein in the Trump administration’s authoritarian takeover. We need to draw on the lessons from our history of struggles for freedom such as the Civil Rights movement, as well as lessons from grassroots movements around the world, as we grow non-violent civil resistance. We need more people protesting and protecting their neighbours, and we also need to turn that protest into policy action.

We need more people lobbying their members of Congress to stand up as an independent branch of government that responds to people and to do the right thing. Also critical is Congress standing up to protect its constitutional power of the purse and its authority over war. These are critical guardrails we need exercised against the militarised campaigns of the Trump administration at home and abroad.

We need to continue the legal pushback through the courts to uphold the rule of law and prevent the White House from further militarising our streets and corrupting government and elections. Solidarity across impacted communities in the USA and with civil society movements around the world will be very important to help us maintain and grow momentum here. We need to remember that our struggles for peace, justice and freedom are connected to people’s struggles all around the world.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
TikTok
YouTube
Bridget Moix/LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Outsourcing cruelty: the offshoring of migration management CIVICUS Lens 15.Sep.2025
Trump and Musk take the chainsaw to global civil society CIVICUS Lens 07.Mar.2025
Trump 2.0: What to expect CIVICUS Lens 18.Jan.2025

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Nigerians at a newspaper stand with headlines reflecting the Trump versus Nigeria saga. Credit: Promise Eze/IPS

By Promise Eze
ABUJA, Nigeria, Nov 26 2025 (IPS)

Diplomatic relations between Nigeria and the US have continued to sour after US President Donald Trump threatened ‘military’ intervention over what some American lawmakers have called  “Christian genocide” in Africa’s most populous country.

In a series of posts on his social media platform on October 31, Trump accused the Nigerian government of ignoring the killing of Christians by “radical Islamists.” He warned that Washington would suspend all aid to Nigeria and would go into the “disgraced” country “guns-a-blazing” if Abuja failed to respond.

“Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria. Thousands of Christians are being killed. Radical Islamists are responsible for this mass slaughter,” Trump wrote.

He went on to declare Nigeria a “country of particular concern” for alleged violations of religious freedom, instructing the US Department of War to prepare for “possible action” and warning that any strike would be “fast, vicious, and sweet.”

Trump’s remarks follow years of lobbying by American evangelical groups and conservative lawmakers who accuse the Nigerian government of complicity in attacks on Christians in the country.

This is not the first time Trump has accused an African country of genocide. Earlier this year, he claimed that South Africa was committing genocide against white farmers.

Recently, the US stayed away from the G20 summit in South Africa, apparently because of these widely disputed claims that white people are being targeted in the country.

Disputed Narratives

According to an organization that claims to track persecuted Christians, Open Doors International, Nigeria remains one of the world’s most dangerous places to be a Christian, ranking seventh on its 2025 World Watch List of nations where believers face the most persecution.

A report by the International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law estimated that jihadist groups killed more than 7,000 Christians and abducted 7,800 others in 2025 alone. The organization asserts that since 2009, they have killed over 125,000 Christians, destroyed 19,000 churches, and displaced more than 1,100 communities.

Open Doors’ data suggests that Christians in northern Nigeria are 6.5 times more likely to be killed and five times more likely to be abducted than Muslims.

However, the Nigerian authorities have rejected claims of a state-sponsored Christian genocide, insisting that both Christians and Muslims suffer from extremist violence.

Analysts caution that portraying Nigeria’s insecurity as purely religious oversimplifies a crisis rooted in political and economic failure.

With its 230 million citizens divided almost evenly between Christians and Muslims, the country faces multiple overlapping threats, from Boko Haram’s Islamist insurgency and farmer-herder conflicts to ethnic rivalries and separatist agitations in the southeast.

While Christians are among those targeted, researchers note that many victims of armed groups are Muslims living in Nigeria’s predominantly Muslim north, where most attacks are not driven solely by religion.

Data from the US-based Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) show that between January 2020 and September 2025, 20,409 civilians were killed in 11,862 attacks across Nigeria. Of these, only 385 incidents were explicitly linked to victims’ Christian identity, resulting in 317 deaths, while 196 attacks targeted Muslims, leaving 417 dead.

“Trump’s comment has certainly drawn global attention to the problem of insecurity in Nigeria, but it also raises questions about foreign influence and national sovereignty,” said Oludare Ogunlana, Professor of National Security at Collin College in Texas. “What I’ve observed is that many who present themselves as experts on African or global security often lack a nuanced understanding of Nigeria’s realities.”

He described Trump’s claims as misguided, stressing that Nigeria’s insecurity is multifaceted and should not be given a religious coloring.

“If you examine the situation closely, it is not a religious war. It reflects systemic governance failures, economic inequality, and weak law enforcement,” he said. “Citizens of all faiths—Christians, Muslims, atheists, and traditional believers—have suffered from kidnapping, organized crime, and other forms of violence. These criminal activities emerge from disparities in wealth and control over resources, resulting in loss of life across communities.”

Religious Tensions

Trump’s remarks have already inflamed tensions at home and analysts have cautioned that framing Nigeria’s insecurity as a religious conflict risks deepening divisions.

Several Muslim groups have condemned Trump’s comments as an attack on Islam and an attempt to demonize Nigeria’s Muslim population. They argue that Trump, who has long enjoyed support from evangelical Christians, is ill-suited to address the complexities of Nigeria’s Muslim-majority north.

Days after Trump’s comments, members of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria marched through Kano to protest the threat of US military action. Chanting “Death to America” and burning the US flag, demonstrators carried placards reading “There is no Christian genocide in Nigeria” and “America wants to control our resources.”

Northern states like Kano have a long history of bloody religious riots, and observers warn that renewed rhetoric could deepen sectarian divides in a region where relations between the two faiths remain fragile.

Christian and non-Muslim groups, on the other hand, maintain that persecution is real. They cite reports noting that more than 300 Nigerians have been killed over alleged blasphemy since 1999, with few perpetrators prosecuted. They call out government officials who support religious extremism and enforce shariah law on non-Muslims.

“It is an honor to be called an Islamic extremist,” wrote Bashir Ahmad, a former aide to ex-President Muhammadu Buhari, in a since-deleted post on X. Ahmad has previously called for the death penalty for blasphemy.

Deborah Eli Yusuf, a peace advocate with Jugaad Foundation for Peace and Nation Building, expressed concern that ongoing arguments could spill into real-world violence, making tensions difficult to contain.

She told IPS that the government should collaborate with stakeholders to maintain peace.

“This is an opportunity for the government to take the lead in facilitating honest interfaith conversations and dialogues that can lead to mutually agreeable resolutions. The government is best positioned to organize discussions that bring together critical stakeholders, including both religious and traditional leaders.

“Many of these conflicts also intersect with ethnic divisions, which further complicate the situation. The conversations happening now present a chance to address these divides. If left unchecked, rising tensions could deepen fragmentation in a country already divided along tribal, ethnic, and class lines,” she said.

Abba Yakubu Yusuf, Coordinator of the Reves Africa Foundation, believes that while Nigeria faces various forms of violent conflict orchestrated by multiple armed groups, it is misleading for the government to deny that Christians are being specifically targeted by some for their faith. He argues that acknowledging this reality is the first step toward finding solutions.

“Since as far back as 2009, the killings in southern Kaduna, Plateau, Benue, and parts of Kano states have been largely religiously motivated,” he claimed. “There was a massacre in Plateau state that saw an entire village wiped out with no survivors. In the northeast, while attacks target Muslims, there are exceptions. In southern Borno, for example, a largely Christian population has suffered the most. Overall, I would say there is a genocide occurring in Nigeria, and we should not lie to ourselves.”

Yusuf warned that continued denial by the government of systematic attacks on Christians, without addressing the root causes, could have serious consequences for the country’s economy.

“We need investors to come to our country, but they are hesitant. This creates a climate of fear and threatens economic growth,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Kumi Naidoo with Brazilian First Lady Janja Lula da Silva and Brazilian Cultural Minister Margareth Menezes and others at a panel called “Narratives and Storytelling to Face the Climate Crisis” during the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30). Credit: Aline Massuda/COP30

By Joyce Chimbi
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 18 2025 (IPS)

Decades ago, a little girl was born in a place called Cleveland, Ohio, in the heart of the United States of America. Born to a woman from the deep South, the place of Martin Luther King, her mother left her ancestral lands for the economic opportunities in the north.

“Off she went, making it all the way to the east side of Cleveland,” says Rev. Dr. Angelique Walker-Smith. “To the place where most people who look like me lived, and still live, and are subjected to policies of injustice, race and gender.”

Here, she found a more pressing issue.

“I couldn’t breathe, my mother couldn’t breathe, and we all couldn’t breathe,” she narrates.

This urbanization, driven by fossil fuels, occurred in Cleveland, Ohio, where her mother relocated and where her relatives still live today. During the Great Migration, over six million people of African descent traveled from the South, believing that economic opportunities would be better in the North.

Rev. Dr Angelique Walker-Smith, regional president of the World Council of Churches, speaks at an event titled ‘Faith for Fossil Free Future.’ Credit: IPS

“Upon our arrival, we discovered that we just couldn’t breathe.”

As one of eight regional presidents representing the World Council of Churches, Walker-Smith says for the World Council of Churches in over 105 countries, over 350 million adherents, and over 350 national churches all over the world, supporting the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty “is all about the issue of injustice, life and life more abundantly.”

“We are saying yes to the transition from fossil fuels to renewable life-giving energy.”

Kumi Naidoo, a prominent South African human rights and environmental justice activist and the President of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, says if the goal is renewable life-giving energy, the world has been going the wrong way for the past 30 years.

“If you come home from work and see water coming from the bathroom, you pick up the mop. But then you realized you left the tap running and the sink stopper on. What will you do first? Of course! You’ll turn off the water and pull the stopper. You will not start mopping the floor first.”

“For 30 years since the time science told us we need to change our energy system and many of our other systems, what we’ve been doing is mopping up the floor. If fossil fuels—oil, coal, and gas—account for 86 percent of what drives climate change, then we must turn off the tap.”

Masahiro Yokoyama was speaking at an event titled Faith for a Fossil-Free Future co-sponsored by Soka Gakkai International. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Naidoo was speaking at an event titled ‘Faith for Fossil Free Future’ co-sponsored by several organizations, including Soka Gakkai International (SGI), Laudato Si’ Movement, GreenFaith—a global interfaith environmental coalition and EcoJudaism, a Jewish charity leading the UK Jewish Community’s response to the climate and nature crisis.

He spoke about the contradiction of the climate talks at the doorsteps of the Amazon, while licensing for drilling is still ongoing in the Amazon even as the people in the Amazon protest, calling for a fossil-free Amazon.

Continuing with the thread of contradictions, Naidoo said, “Some of you might be shocked that even though fossil fuels are 86 percent of the cause of climate change, it took 28 years before the words ‘fossil fuels’ could even be mentioned in the COP document. It is as absurd as Alcoholics Anonymous holding 28 years of conferences before they get the backbone to mention alcohol in an outcome document. If we continue on this path, we'll warm up the planet to the point where we destroy our soil and water, and it becomes so hot we can't plant food. The end result is that we'll be gone. The planet will still be here. And the good news is, once we become extinct as a species, the forests will grow back, and the oceans will recover.

“And actually, staying with that analogy, can you imagine how absurd it is that the largest delegation to this COP this year, last year, and every year is not even the host country?

“It’s not even Brazil—for every 25 delegates that are attending the COP, one of them is from the fossil fuel industry. That’s the equivalent of Alcoholics Anonymous having the largest delegation to its conference annually from the alcohol industry.”

People, groups and movements of different faiths and consciousness are increasingly raising their voices in robust support of a rapid fossil fuel phase-out, a massive and equitable upsurge in renewable energy, and the resources to make it happen—in the form of a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Naidoo says the treaty is “a critical success ingredient for us not (only) to save the planet, but to secure our children and their children’s future, reminding ourselves that the planet does not need any saving.

“If we continue on this path, we warm up the planet to the point where we destroy our soil and water, and it becomes so hot we can’t plant food. The end result is that we’ll be gone. The planet will still be here. And the good news is, once we become extinct as a species, the forests will grow back, and the oceans will recover.”

This treaty is a proposed global agreement to halt the expansion of new fossil fuel exploration and production and to phase out existing sources like coal, oil, and gas in a just and equitable manner.

The initiative seeks to provide a legal framework to complement the Paris Agreement by directly addressing the supply side of fossil fuels.

Its ultimate goal is to support a global transition to renewable energy and is supported by a growing coalition of countries, cities, organizations, scientists, and activists. More importantly, it has multi-faith support.

Masahiro Yokoyama of the SGI, which is a diverse global community of individuals in 192 countries and territories who practice Nichiren Buddhism, spoke about the intersection between faith and energy transition and why the fossil fuel phase-out cannot wait.

“The just transition is also about how young people in faith can be the driving force to transformations.”

“So, a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, in my view, is not only about phasing out other fossil fuels but it also represents an ethical framework.”

“It’s a way to move forward while protecting people’s livelihoods and dignity within the context of the environment and also the local business and economies. So, a just transition is not merely a technical issue but a question of ethics, inclusion and solidarity,” Masahiro Yokoyama said.

The most pressing issue at hand is how to implement the treaty in the current environmental context.

“The pathway that we are following is a pathway that has been followed before. We are not going to negotiate this treaty within the COP or within the United Nations system. We’re going to do what the Landmine Treaty did.

“The landmine treaty was negotiated by 44 countries outside of the UN system and then brought to the UN General Assembly for ratification. The second question that people ask, justifiably, is, what about the powerful exporting countries, for example?” Naidoo asked.

“They’re not going to sign it. And to that we find answers in the landmine treaty. Up to today, the United States, Russia and China have not signed the Landmine treaty. But once the treaty was signed, the social license to continue as business as usual was taken away. And you saw a drastic change.”

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

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Excerpt:

By External Source
Nov 18 2025 (IPS)

 
I greet the particular Churches of the Global South gathered at the Amazonian Museum of Belém, joining the prophetic voice of my brother Cardinals who have taken part in COP 30, telling the world with words and gestures that the Amazon region remains a living symbol of creation with an urgent need for care.

You chose hope and action over despair, building a global community that works together. This has delivered progress, but not enough. Hope and determination must be renewed, not only in words and aspirations, but also in concrete actions.

The creation is crying out in floods, droughts, storms and relentless heat. One in three people live in great vulnerability because of these climate changes. To them, climate change is not a distant threat, and to ignore these people is to deny our shared humanity. There is still time to keep the rise in global temperature below 1.5°C, but the window is closing. As stewards of God’s creation, we are called to act swiftly, with faith and prophecy, to protect the gift He entrusted to us.

The Paris Agreement has driven real progress and remains our strongest tool for protecting people and the planet. But we must be honest: it is not the Agreement that is failing, we are failing in our response. What is failing is the political will of some. True leadership means service, and support at a scale that will truly make a difference. Stronger climate actions will create stronger and fairer economic systems. Strong climate actions and policies, both are an investment in a more just and stable world.

We walk alongside scientists, leaders and pastors of every nation and creed. We are guardians of creation, not rivals for its spoils. Let us send a clear global signal together: nations standing in unwavering solidarity behind the Paris Agreement and behind climate cooperation.

Let this Amazonic Museum be remembered as the space where humanity chose cooperation over division and denial.

And may God bless all of you in your efforts to continue caring for God’s creation. In the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit. Amen.

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

The closing ceremony held against the backdrop of the ancient Roman ruins, the Colosseum Credit: Community of Sant'Egidio

By Katsuhiro Asagiri
ROME / TOKYO, Nov 4 2025 (IPS)

In the shadow of Rome’s Colosseum — once a monument to imperial violence — religious leaders from across the world gathered this week to deliver a message that felt both ancient and urgent: peace must once again become humanity’s sacred duty.

Colosseo Credit: Kevin Lin, INPS Japan

The meeting concluded Tuesday evening with Pope Leo XIV presiding over a ceremony that was equal parts prayer service and political statement.

 

“War is never holy,” the pope said. “Only peace is holy — because it is willed by God.”

 
A Call for Moral Courage

Speaking beneath the Arch of Constantine, Pope Leo urged governments and believers alike to resist what he called “the arrogance of power.”

“The world thirsts for peace,” he said. “We cannot allow people to grow accustomed to war as a normal part of human history. Enough — this is the cry of the poor and the cry of the earth.”

Hirotsugu Terasaki, vice president of Soka Gakkai with Pope Leo XIV. Credit: Vatican News

They stood together in silence as candles were lit around the ancient amphitheater — small lights flickering against the stone, symbolic of a shared prayer for reconciliation.

Faith and Accountability

The pope’s speech drew a clear line between faith and political responsibility.

“Peace must be the priority of every policy,” he said. “God will hold accountable those who failed to seek peace — for every day, month and year of war.”

Those words, delivered as fighting continues in Ukraine and Gaza, carried a deliberate edge. The Vatican under Leo XIV has increasingly positioned itself as a moral counterweight to political paralysis on global crises — speaking of peace not as abstraction but as obligation.

Pope John Paul II Credit: Gregorini Demetrio, CC BY-SA 3.0

Lessons From Assisi

This year’s meeting marked nearly four decades since John Paul II convened the first interreligious gathering for peace in Assisi in 1986. Since then, the Sant’Egidio Community has maintained that dialogue among faiths can temper political divides.

“We have dared to speak of peace in a world that speaks the language of war,” said Marco Impagliazzo, the group’s president. “To close the paths of dialogue is madness. As Pope Francis said, the world suffocates without dialogue.”

Session on the Dignity of Life

Earlier Tuesday, Soka Gakkai delegation took part in Session 22 titled “Justice Does Not Kill: Abolishing the Death Penalty,” held at the Austrian Cultural Forum.

Professor Enza Pellecchia of the University of Pisa, representing Soka Gakkai, took the stage and spoke about the movement’s efforts to abolish the death penalty, referring to the words of its founder, President Daisaku Ikeda, from his dialogue with the British historian Dr. Arnold Toynbee.

“The sanctity of life cannot be judged by guilt or merit — all lives are equal. Therefore, no one has the right to take a life, even in the name of justice. Accepting the death penalty is a form of institutionalized violence that assigns different values to human life, and President Ikeda has described it as ‘a manifestation of the prevailing tendency in modern times to devalue life”.

Professor Enza Pellecchia of the University of Pisa, representing Soka Gakkai, delivering her speech during the Forum titled “Justice Does Not Kill: Abolishing the Death Penalty,” held at the Austrian Cultural Forum. Credit: Seikyo Shimbun

Professor Pellecchia said that President Ikeda’s humanistic philosophy deeply resonates with Pope Leo XIV’s recent statement that “one cannot claim to be pro-life while accepting the death penalty or any form of violence.” Both, she noted, confront the same moral error — the belief that some lives are expendable.

When Religion Refuses Silence

For decades, the Colosseum has hosted symbolic gatherings for peace. Yet this year’s ceremony, participants said, carried a sharper urgency. The wars in Europe and the Middle East, the displacement of millions, and rising authoritarianism have all given moral language new weight.

“Peace begins with the transformation of the human heart,” said Terasaki of SGI. “Interfaith cooperation is not symbolic — it’s a method for changing history.”

A Plea That Still Echoes

As night fell, the trumpeter Paolo Fresu performed a mournful solo. Children stepped forward to deliver a Peace Appeal to diplomats and officials — a reminder that the next generation will inherit the choices made now.

The pope’s final words were brief, almost whispered:

“God wants a world without war. He will free us from this evil.”

The candles continued to burn as the crowd dispersed — a fragile constellation of light against the ruins of Roman empire, and a quiet act of defiance in a world still learning to dare peace.

This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

INPS Japan

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Kathmandu’s Singha Durbar in flames

By Jan Lundius
ROME, Oct 2 2025 (IPS)

In the Global South, where people under the age of 18 comprise more than 50 percent of the population, youth activism is increasing rapidly. Youngsters are more agile and volatile than older people, less restrained by family, prestige and work. However, many suffer from marginalisation, lack of employment, and poverty. Furthermore, insecurity and limited life experience make young people an easy target for manipulating and unscrupulous politicians, criminal networks, and religious fanatics.

Students and young citizens come together by using social media to make their presence felt and mount protests in public spaces. The role of new media technologies as an organising tool has led besieged authorities to ban online platforms, though imposed restrictions have rather than contain protests accelerated them.

Rebellious youth generally belong to the Gen Z, which refers to “digital native”, the first generation fully immersed in a digital world, with constant access to internet and social media. An upbringing that has shaped their world view, making them independent, pragmatic and focused on social impact.

South Asia has recently experienced massive protest movements involving crowds of young people. In July 2022, after an economic collapse in Sri Lanka, a rebellion forced its president to flee the country. In July 2024, upheavals ended the long rule of Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh, and in September this year, violent protests in Nepal forced Prime Minister Khadga Oli’s government to resign.

Even though specific incidents triggered these upheavals, they were all due to long-term, shared grievances evolving from stark wealth gaps, rampant nepotism, and unlimited corruption. Above all, youngsters protested against members of powerful dynasties, favouring a wealthy and discredited political elite.

Sri Lankans were in 2022 faced with a galloping inflation, daily blackouts, as well as shortages of fuel, domestic gas, food, medicines, and essential imports. Amid massive desperation, huge crowds of mostly young people did on 25 March take to the streets under the slogan Aragalya, Struggle.

Political power had by then become embedded within the Rajapaksa dynasty. From 2005 to 2022, two brothers – Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, had alternately shared the presidency and prime minister post, while another brother headed their political party; a fourth was speaker of the parliament, and other relatives occupied influential political positions.

While Gotabaya Rajapaksa served as defence minister, he was credited with ending the twenty-six-year-long civil war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. After churches and luxury hotels in April 2019 had been targeted by ISIS-related suicide bombers, killing 270 people, Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who at the time were in opposition, accused the current government of leniency. When Gotabaya ran for the presidency the same year, he based his campaign on his record as a militant leader, embracing a Sinhalese-Buddhist nationalism inspired by his brother Mahinda’s ethno-nationalist rhetoric, favouring the Buddhist establishment. Gotabaya was elected with an overwhelming majority and six ministries were then headed by members of the Rajapaksa clan.

Most Aragalaya protesters considered their personal hardships to be a result of the mismanagement and corruption of the Rajapaksa-led government. They demanded that the president be deposed and a thorough “system change” brought about. After appointing an astute insider, Ranil Wickremesinghe, as acting president, Gotabaya Rajapaksa fled to Singapore. Wickremesinghe’s government refused to hold elections and persistently portrayed Aragalaya as a chaotic movement, captured by militants, fascists, and terrorists.

Several Aragalaya supporters were wary of being used by partisan or militant groups, particularly those with leftist ideologies which had a long history of organizing protests and strikes. One exception could have been the leftist National People’s Power (NPP), established in 2019. The 2024 elections, which Wickremesinghe had been forced to accept, was won by a NPP coalition lead by Anura Dissanayake.

So far, Dissanayake and his NPP coalition have not introduced any radical political or economic changes. They have largely continued the Wickremesinghe government’s economic and foreign policies, raising questions about the extent to which the NPP coalition is willing, or able, to depart from established governance patterns and deliver the systemic change that has been promised. Deep set divisions and ethnic-religious tensions continue to harass the nation and NPP is apparently trying to tread lightly to avoid stirring up any violent disaccord.

The same could be said about Bangladesh, where an interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus seems to be cautious not to cause any antagonistic violence. Yunus’ group of personal supporters and experts presides over a nation with a chilling rise in mob violence and political discord; women are often being targeted, as well as there are reports of attacks on religious minorities.

The formerly dictatorial, but secular and highly corrupt political party, the Awami League, has been banned and democratic elections are promised by the interim government in February 2026. Some are optimistic about democratic elections, described by Yunus as becoming the most “beautiful elections ever”. However, others are unsure if elections will actually be held within a political scenario where violence is a common-day affair.

In Bangladesh, it was a quota system for jobs that forced youngsters into the streets. It was mainly students who led the protests. Student politics had for several years been ferocious, especially since religious and political fractions used them as a mobilising force. Violent feuds within educational institutes had killed many and seriously hampered the academic atmosphere.

Student anger became unified through a common resentment of reserved positions in the Bangladesh Civil Service (BCS), a cherished field of government service. The reserved positions were destined to “freedom fighters, i.e. veterans from the 1971 liberation war, as well as their children and grandchildren. Protests erupted in full force on 1 July after the Supreme Court in June 2024 had reinstated a 30 percent quota reserved for veteran descendants, generally interpreted as an intent by the governing party to favour its traditional supporters.

Bangladesh became a sovereign nation in December 1971, after a war against Pakistan, which was supported by India. Sheik Mujibur Rahman was until his assassination in 1975 president and prime minister. Following further turmoil with counter coups, General Ziaur Rahman eventually took over as president; he was in May 1981 assassinated in yet another coup. Ziaur Rahman’s widow, Begum Khaleda Zia, served from 1991 to 1996 as the second female prime minster in the Muslim world (after the Pakistani Benazir Bhutto) and again between 2001 and 2006, when Bangladesh, according to the Corruption Perceptions Index was listed as the most corrupt country in the world. Following the end of her government’s term, a military-backed caretaker government charged Khaleda Zia and her two sons with corruption and in 2018 she was sentenced to 17 years in prison.

Sheikh Hasinah, daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was prime minister between 1996 and 2001, and again from 2009 to 2024, following several controversial elections. Her tenure as prime minister was marked by economic mismanagement, rampant corruption, leading to a rising foreign debt, increased inflation, youth unemployment, banking irregularities and an enormous wealth gap. The Financial Times reported that more than an estimated USD 200 billion was allegedly plundered from Bangladesh during Sheikh Hasinah’s time as prime minister, with a lot of these money ending up in countries such as the UK.

As the case had been in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, several members of the Nepalese political elite considered themselves as privileged and not accountable, while favouring family members and supporters to syphon wealth from overprized building endeavours.

Khadga Prassad Oli, a communist who began his political career as “spokesman for the oppressed”, seemed to be unaware of the anger accumulating around him within a nation where some two thousand men and women daily left to look for livelihoods in other countries (remittances from Nepalis working abroad constitute a third of the country’s GDP). Of those who stayed behind, more than 80 percent work in the informal sector, while youth unemployment in the formal sector is more than 20 percent.

On 4 September this year, the government ordered authorities to block 26 social media platforms, including Facebook, X, YouTube, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit, Signal and Snapchat, for not complying with a deadline to register with the country’s ministry of communication. The measure was explained as a means to tackle fake news, hate speech, and online fraud.

By then, youngsters had with increasing anger accessed platforms where politicians’ children posted photos of their opulent existence, awash with designer clothes, luxury holidays, and lavish parties. The close down of all media platforms, except the Chinese TikTok, further inflamed the resentment of Nepalese youth.

Soon Kathmandu was burning – Singha Durbar, i.e. Nepal’s administrative headquarters; the health ministry; the parliament building; the Supreme Court; the presidential palace; the prime minister’s residence, offices of the governing communist party, and the Kathmandu Hilton, were all set ablaze.

Nepal, the oldest sovereign, and until 2008 only Hindu state in South Asia, was for 250 years, under a strict caste system, ruled by the Shah dynasty. After internal power struggles and murders within the “Royal House of Gorkha” the monarchy was abolished and it was only in 1990 that it had ceded partial power to political parties. After that, a series of failing civilian governments gave in 1996 rise to a “Maoist” insurgency, which took sixteen thousand lives.

The leader of that rebellion, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, was in 2008 elected prime minister. However, he and his erstwhile revolutionaries proved incapable of improving Nepalese living standards and soon indulged themselves in corruption. After the September Gen Z-led upheaval a caretaker Prime Minister has been appointed. Sushila Karki, has a good record after being Nepal’s first female Chief Justice, between 2016 and 2017.

While new leaders seem to have emerged in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal, the general public is now asking itself if these recently arrived politicians will be more prudent, corruption free and restrained in controversial actions, than their predecessors.

Much of the outcome depends on the “big brother” in the area – The Republic of India, where millions of migrant workers from Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka reside and work. Indian democracy has, with all its shortcomings, been characterized by a collective political discourse in which concerns of a diversity of all Indians could find a space. However, under prime minister Modi we now witness the rise of Hindu nationalism, rooted in homogeneity and exclusion, questioning who really belongs in the Hindutva community, while marginalizing those who don’t, among them migrants, Muslims, and many others. A dangerous polarization that could worsen the situation in neighbouring countries, particularly considering the huge number of their emigrants being present in a country prone to discriminate against them, as well as forcing them back to a tumultuous situation in their countries of origin.

This is part 1 of an analysis of the connection between youth movements and political change, part 2 will analyse how youth-led revolutions have changed political scenarios globally.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Filippo Grandi, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, addresses the high-level conference of the General Assembly on the situation of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 1 2025 (IPS)

On September 30, the United Nations (UN) convened a high-level meeting on the situation of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar shortly following the end of the 80th session of the General Assembly (UNGA80). The conference was an opportunity to draw global attention once more to the Rohingya refugee situation with dialogue from UN officials, world representatives and civil society organizations.

Since the 2017 military crackdown on the rights and citizenship of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, over one million refugees have fled to Bangladesh, most settling in Cox’s Bazar which became the world’s largest refugee camp. Despite repeated repatriation efforts by the Bangladeshi government, ongoing insecurity in Myanmar makes a safe return impossible, with refugees still at risk of persecution and discrimination.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres noted that Rohingya Muslims and minorities face widespread insecurity and discrimination, especially in Rakhine State. “Minorities in Myanmar have endured decades of exclusion, abuse and violence,” Chef de Cabinet Courtenay Rattray said, delivering Guterres’ statement on his behalf. “The Rohingya have been stripped of their right to citizenship, targeted by hate speech, terrorized with deadly force and destruction, confined to displacement camps in Myanmar, with severely limited freedom of movement and little access to education and health services.”

Rattray added that minorities are routinely subjected to forced displacement, conscription, aerial attacks, and extrajudicial killings. Sexual and gender-based violence remain pervasive, with women and girls facing heightened risks of trafficking, child marriage, and other forms of exploitation.

With humanitarian aid budgets shrinking and conflict escalating in Myanmar, delegates discussed mechanisms to ensure the protection of Rohingya refugees and minorities, as well as strategies to facilitate a safe and dignified return home. Many speakers urged for increased accountability measures, in hopes of addressing the root causes of insecurity in Myanmar and ending the cycle of impunity.

“To create a conducive environment for repatriation, first and foremost we must end this military dictatorship and its atrocities against civilians, and we all need to double every effort to build trust and unity among us,” said Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun, Permanent Representative of Myanmar to the UN. “Resolving the situation of Rohingya Muslims and Other Minorities in Myanmar will not be possible unless we address the root cause. We can yield results only by acting together to end the military dictatorship, its unlawful coup, and its culture of impunity.”

Numerous member state and civil society representatives also emphasized the need for stronger accountability measures, warning of significant risks to regional stability. Stavros Lambrinidis, Ambassador of the European Union (EU) to the UN, noted that tensions have grown considerably between refugees and host communities, with minors often joining armed groups, risking further violence in the region.

“This crisis is not only a Myanmar crisis,” said Nabhit Kapur, the Permanent Observer of the Pan-African Intergovernmental Agency for Water and Sanitation in Africa (WSA) to the UN. “Its implications stretch far beyond borders, affecting regional peace, stability, and trust in the very foundations of multilateralism…The longer uncertainty prevails, the greater the risk of radicalization, human trafficking, and destabilization across the region.”

Several speakers also underscored the urgency of increased funding, particularly for essential services such as food assistance, protection, and education, which are vital in enabling a dignified return to Myanmar. The World Food Programme (WFP) warned that if additional funding is not secured soon, Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh risk falling into acute food insecurity, with monthly food rations potentially being reduced to just USD 6 per person.

Dylan Winder, a representative of the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), informed the room about conditions in the Cox’s Bazar settlement, describing the situation as “fragile” and entirely dependent on humanitarian assistance. “Families continue to live in shelters beyond capacity and are exposed to disasters. Protection and security risks are serious and growing. And the hard truth is that shrinking funding is accelerating these risks—threatening food rations, healthcare, including maternal and child health, and water and sanitation services—driving disease, violence, and trafficking, and pushing families toward dangerous coping strategies.”

Bangladesh’s Chief Advisor, Muhammad Yunus, stressed that Bangladesh cannot bear this burden alone as it already faces the challenge of supporting a densely populated nation and cannot “afford to allow employment of Rohingyas inside Bangladesh”. Refugees continue to face severe shortages of resources along with alongside reoccurring security challenges, such as clashes with host communities. “We are forced to bear huge financial, social and environmental costs. Criminal activities, including narco-flows into Bangladesh through Rakhine, threaten our social fabric,” Yunus said.

Speakers also emphasized the need for a comprehensive political framework that guarantees minority rights and citizenship, and fosters inclusion, particularly for women and children—the most vulnerable among the persecuted population.With Rohingya Muslims rendered stateless and largely silenced, many underscored the urgency of ensuring their meaningful representation in decisions that will shape their future.

“The 2021 military coup halted democratic aspirations of Myanmar’s people and the Rohingya’s hopes to participate in shaping Myanmar’s future,” said the Ambassador for International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) to the UN. “The Rohingya crisis is not only a humanitarian and human rights crisis; it is a crisis of democracy and inclusion…Without inclusion, there can be no reconciliation; without democracy, there can be no justice.”

While this conference was meant to center the direct perspectives of Rohingya refugees from the camps, very few of the speakers were refugees or came from the camps. The conference did not include statements from Rohingya refugees currently living in the camps. In previous years, Bangladesh and the UN had sponsored trips for Rohingya refugees to represent themselves in discussions that could shape their own futures. This year, there were none, with Bangladeshi officials citing difficulty in obtaining clearance and security concerns.

“Peace in Myanmar rests on the recognition that the Rohingya are equal members of Burmese society, equally deserving of education, citizenship, human rights and justice,” said the Representative of the Independent Diplomat to the UN. “True action has been lacking. As diplomatic experts and activists have convened in these halls, the Rohingya have remained stateless, displaced, and denied their own fundamental rights. The gap between our stated principles and our collective responsibility has allowed atrocities to continue with impunity and it deepens the suffering of far too many people.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Maung Sawyeddollah, Founder of the Rohingya Students Network, addresses the high-level conference of the General Assembly on the situation of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías

By Naureen Hossain
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 1 2025 (IPS)

The international community convened for a high-level meeting at UN Headquarters, this time to mobilize political support for the ongoing issue of the persecution of the Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar.

On Tuesday September 30, representatives from Rohingya advocacy groups, the UN system and member states convened at the General Assembly to address the ongoing challenges facing Rohingya Muslims and the broader context of the political and humanitarian situation in Myanmar.

UN President of the General Assembly Annalena Baerbock remarked that the conference was an opportunity to listen to stakeholders, notably civil society representatives with experience on the ground.

“Rohingya need the support of the international community, not just in words but in action,” she said.

Baerbock added there was an “urgent need for strengthened international solidarity and increased support,” and to make efforts to reach a political solution with unequivocal participation from the Rohingyas.

“The violence, the extreme deprivation and the massive violations of human rights have fueled a crisis of grave international concern. The international community must honor its responsibilities and act. We stand in solidarity with the Rohingya and all the people of Myanmar in their hour of greatest need,” said UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

In the eight years since over 750,000 Rohingyas fled persecution and crossed the border into Bangladesh, the international community has had to deal with one of the most intense refugee situations in living memory. Attendees at the conference spoke on addressing the root causes that led to this protracted crisis—systematic oppression and persecution at the hands of Myanmar’s authorities and unrest in Rakhine State.

Muhammad Yunus, Chief Adviser of the interim Government of Bangladesh, addresses the high-level conference on the situation of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elias

The military junta’s ascension in 2021 has only led to further unrest and instability in Myanmar and has made the likelihood of safe and sustained return far more precarious. Their persecution has only intensified as the Rohingya communities still residing in Rakhine find themselves caught in the middle of conflicts between the junta and other militant groups, including the Arakan Army.

At the opening of the conference, Rohingya refugee activists remarked that the systemic oppression predates the current crisis. “This is a historic occasion for Myanmar. But it is long overdue. Our people have suffered enough. For ethnic minorities—from Kachin to Rohingya—the suffering has spanned decades,” said Wai Wai Nu, founder and executive director of the Women’s Peace Network.

“It has already been more than eight years since the Rohingya Genocide was exposed. Where is the justice for the Rohingyas?” asked Maung Sawyeddollah, founder of the Rohingya Student Network.

For the United Nations, the Rohingya refugee crisis represents the dramatic impact of funding shortfalls on their humanitarian operations. UN Secretary-General António Guterres once said during his visit to the refugee camps in Bangladesh back in April that “Cox’s Bazar is Ground Zero for the impact of budget cuts”.

Funding cuts to agencies like UNICEF and the World Food Programme (WFP) have undermined their capacity to reach people in need. WFP has warned that their food assistance in the refugee camps will run out in two months unless they receive more funding. Yet as of now, the 2025 Rohingya Refugee Response Plan of USD 934.5 million is only funded at 38 percent.

Volker Türk, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, addresses the high-level conference of the General Assembly on the situation of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elias

“The humanitarian response in Bangladesh remains chronically underfunded, including in key areas like food and cooking fuel. The prospects for funding next year are grim. Unless further resources are forthcoming, despite the needs, we will be forced to make more cuts while striving to minimize the risk of losing lives: children dying of malnutrition or people dying at sea as more refugees embark on dangerous boat journeys,” said Filippo Grandi, UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

As the host country of over 1 million refugees since 2017, Bangladesh has borne the brunt of the situation. Chief Advisor Muhammad Yunus said that the country faces its own development challenges and systemic issues with crime, poverty and unemployment, and has struggled to support the refugee population even with the help of aid organizations. He made a call to pursue repatriations, the strategy to ensure the safe return of Rohingyas to Rakhine.

“As funding declines, the only peaceful option is to begin their repatriation. This will entail far fewer resources than continuing their international protection. The Rohingya have consistently pronounced their desire to go back home,” said Yunus. “The world cannot keep the Rohingya waiting any longer from returning home.”

Along with the UN, Myanmar and Bangladesh, neighboring and host countries also have a role to play. Regional blocs like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are also crucial  in supporting the Rohingya population as well as leading dialogues with other stakeholders across the region.

“In my engagements with Myanmar stakeholders, I have emphasized that peace in Myanmar will remain elusive until inclusive dialogue between all Myanmar stakeholders takes place,” said Othman Hashim, the special envoy of the ASEAN Chair on Myanmar. “For actions within Myanmar, the crucial first step is stopping the hostilities and violence. Prolonged violence will only exacerbate the misery of the people of Myanmar, Rohingya and other minorities included.”

“Countries hosting refugees need sustained support. Cooperation with UNODC [UN Office of Drugs and Crime], UNHCR, and IOM [International Organization for Migration] must be deepened,” said Sugiono, Indonesia’s foreign minister.

Supporting the Rohingya beyond emergency and humanitarian needs would also require investing resources in education and employment opportunities. Involved parties were encouraged to support resettlement policies that would help communities secure livelihoods in  the long-term, or to extend opportunities for longterm work, like in Thailand where they recently granted long-staying refugees the right to work legally in the country.

“Any initiative for the Rohingya without Rohingya in the camp, from decision making to nation-building is unsustainable and unjust. The UN must mobilize resources to empower Rohingya. We are not only victims; we have the potential to make a difference,” said Sawyeddollah.

As one of the few Rohingya representatives present that had previous lived in the camps in Cox’s Bazaar, Sawyeddollah described the challenges he faced in pursuing higher education when he applied to over 150 universities worldwide but did not get into any of them. He got into New York University with a scholarship, the first Rohingya refugee to attend. He reiterated that universities had the capacity to offer scholarships to Rohingya students, citing the example of the Asian University of Women (AUW) in Chittagong, Bangladesh, where it has been offering scholarships to Rohingya girls since at least 2018.

The conference called for actionable measures that would address several key areas in the Rohingya refugee situation. This includes scaling up funding for humanitarian aid in Bangladesh and Myanmar, and notably, pursuing justice and accountability under international law. Türk and other UN officials reiterated that resolving the instability and political tensions in Myanmar is crucial to resolving the refugee crisis.

Kyaw Moe Tun, Permanent Representative of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to the UN, blamed the military junta for the country’s current state and called for member states to refuse supporting the junta politically or financially. “We can yield results only by acting together to end the military dictatorship, its unlawful coup, and its culture of impunity. At a time when human rights, justice and humanity are under critical attack, please help in our genuine endeavour to build a federal democratic union that rooted in these very principles.”
IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

 
CIVICUS discusses North Korea’s closed civic space with Hanna Song, Executive Director of the Database Center for North Korean Human Rights (NKDB). Based in Seoul, South Korea, NKDB documents systematic human rights violations in North Korea through testimonies from escapees, and has built the world’s largest private database of such abuses.

Hanna Song

What North Korean human rights violations has NKDB documented?

When NKDB first began documenting violations in 2003, testimonies focused overwhelmingly on survival during the ‘Arduous March’ of the 1990s, a period of severe famine that killed hundreds of thousands of North Koreans. People described the collapse of the food distribution system, with families torn apart and entire communities struggling with famine. At the time, violations were framed through the lens of survival – the right to food and life – revealing the state’s neglect of basic needs.

Over time, as more escapees shared their experiences, it became clear these violations weren’t limited to famine periods but were part of a systematic pattern of abuse. The landmark 2014 United Nations (UN) Commission of Inquiry report solidified this understanding. It documented widespread violations, from political prison camps to enforced disappearances, persecution on political and religious grounds and torture, and concluded that crimes against humanity were – and continue to be – perpetrated by the North Korean state.

There has been little improvement in the years since. The government has tightened information restrictions, further isolating people from the outside world. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated this isolation, closing borders, worsening economic hardship and reducing the already small number of defections, making testimony collection harder. Most recently, the regime’s decision to dispatch young soldiers to Russia has raised additional alarm, as it has exposed minors and young adults to forced labour and potential involvement in armed conflict.

Despite evolving circumstances, the underlying reality remains unchanged: North Korea continues to operate a system of control that denies people the most basic rights and freedoms.

How does NKDB monitor human rights violations?

North Korea permits no independent human rights monitoring or reporting within its borders. Even the UN has never been granted investigative access despite repeated requests. This complete isolation means monitoring organisations must rely on escapee accounts, making testimonies from defectors and refugees indispensable windows into a society the regime keeps hidden.

NKDB conducts secure and confidential interviews with escapees after they have resettled in South Korea. There are around 34,000 people. We document experiences ranging from arbitrary detention and torture to forced labour and religious persecution. Although the sharp decline in recent defections has reduced new testimonies, the information we collect remains critical. When combined with satellite imagery, open-source intelligence and other remote monitoring tools, these first-hand accounts allow us to identify patterns of repression and preserve survivor voices for history and accountability.

Through this work, we’ve built the largest private database on North Korean human rights abuses, containing over 88,000 documented cases based on interviews with more than 20,000 people. This database forms the foundation for UN reports, government policy and international advocacy, and lays the groundwork for future transitional justice processes.

But we don’t stop at documentation. We have in-house counsellors and social welfare workers who provide psychosocial support to escapees after they share their testimonies. For many, recounting traumatic experiences is retraumatising. We don’t abandon them after the interview process, but provide them ongoing counselling and practical support to help them process their experiences, heal and rebuild their lives. In this way we have preserved critical evidence while preserving the dignity and wellbeing of those who entrust us with their stories.

How has civil society documentation influenced policy and international awareness?

Civil society documentation has profoundly influenced international attention and responses to North Korea’s human rights situation. For instance, NKDB’s research on overseas workers has highlighted the critical intersection between security and human rights. While the focus is often on sanctions or weapons proliferation, our work ensures North Korean people’s rights aren’t forgotten, even amid emerging Russia-North Korea ties.

By documenting how North Korean workers are exploited abroad – through wage confiscation, movement restrictions and state surveillance – we provide evidence for human rights-based policy approaches. In a context as closed as North Korea, civil society testimonies and evidence form the foundation for major human rights reports by governments, UN special rapporteurs and international bodies. Without this documentation, there would simply be no reliable record of the scale, scope or persistence of human rights abuses in North Korea. Our work preserves truth, amplifies the voices of survivors and keeps the international community accountable to its responsibility to act.

What has been the impact of recent US funding cuts?

US withdrawal has caused a huge crisis. For two decades, the USA played a unique role in sustaining the global movement for truth, justice and accountability for the people of North Korea. It was the only government that provided consistent and large-scale support for documenting human rights abuses in North Korea. In the absence of alternative funding, this support enabled much of the North Korean human rights movement to exist. Now that movement is facing its greatest crisis since it began in the 1990s.

For escapees who depend on civil society organisations (CSOs) for therapy, counselling and reintegration support, this freeze has meant a loss of essential services. It has also weakened the ability of survivor empowerment groups and information dissemination organisations to train defectors as advocates, challenge the regime’s information blockade and bring credible evidence to the international community. In our case, the suspension of funding threatens the infrastructure we have built since 2003.

The impact is also symbolic: it sends North Korean escapees and victims who have risked everything to tell their stories the chilling message that their voices don’t matter.

Impacts go far beyond civil society. Human rights documentation challenges the secrecy, denial and impunity on which authoritarian regimes thrive. It provides credible evidence that informs international pressure, prevents the regime rewriting history and generates the intelligence needed to understand the regime’s inner dynamics in the absence of conventional diplomacy. All that infrastructure –databases, testimonies, training programmes and survivor networks — is at risk of being dismantled.

How are you adapting and finding alternative resources?

Faced with declining funding and challenging conditions, NKDB and other CSOs have adopted multiple adaptation strategies. Collaboration is central: by working together with other CSOs, academic institutions and advocacy groups, we pool expertise, share methodologies and sustain initiatives despite disruptions.

We’ve also actively engaged with the public to build grassroots support. Our public exhibition in Seoul makes North Korean escapee stories tangible for residents and international tourists. By translating statistics into human-centred experiences, the exhibition reminds visitors of the issue’s urgency while encouraging broader community engagement and cultivating supporters who can advocate and contribute in the long term.

What urgent actions should the international community take?

Given these critical realities, the international community must prioritise restoration and expansion of funding for advocacy, documentation and research. Adequate support ensures CSOs maintain capacity, pursue high-impact initiatives and respond to emerging crises like young soldiers’ deployment to Russia.

Beyond funding, capacity development support is crucial, including training in digital security and evidence verification. The international community must facilitate access to decision-making forums where civil society findings directly inform policymaking through UN bodies and diplomatic engagements.

Critically, human rights and security are deeply intertwined. Documentation provides real-time intelligence on North Korea’s internal dynamics, essential for informed diplomacy. The international community should ensure human rights remain central in broader diplomatic efforts.

Finally, cross-border collaboration among CSOs, governments and academic institutions must be strengthened. This amplifies credible evidence while sustaining networks capable of long-term monitoring. It ensures the human rights ecosystem survives political uncertainty and funding disruptions. To prevent years of progress unravelling, the international community must act decisively, strategically and urgently.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Instagram

SEE ALSO
North Korea: ‘Since Kim Jong-un came to power, the surveillance and security system has increased dramatically’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Bada Nam 18.Oct.2023
North Korea: ‘It is time for the international community to adopt a ‘human rights up front’ approach’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Greg Scarlatoiu 06.Oct.2023
North Korea: ‘Many women escape to experience the freedoms they are denied’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Kyeong Min Shin 07.Nov.2022

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Charlie Weimers with EU flag and the Sweden Democrat’s party symbol, a bluebell.

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Sep 19 2025 (IPS)

On September 11, Charlie Weimers, a Swedish Member of the European Parliament and active within the European Conservatives and Reformists Group, rose up during a Parliamentary session and asked for a minute of silence to honour the memory of Charlie Kirk, who the day before had been shot and killed during a political meeting at the Utah Valley University in the U.S.

“Madam President, dear colleagues, the murder of political activist Charlie Kirk, a husband, loving father and patriot has shocked the world. We must strongly condemn political violence and rhetoric that incites violence. Will you stand with me in reflection and prayer in his honour, and I yield the rest of my time for a moment of silence.”

Charlie Weimers began his political career as a member of the Swedish Chrisitan Democrat Party, but later switched to the Sweden Democrats, a nationalist, right-wing populist party, which in spite of efforts to tune it down finds its roots in Neo-Nazi fringe organizations. It is now Sweden’s second largest political party with more than 20 percent of the electorate behind it.

There is nothing wrong in condemning murder political violence and defend freedom of speech, but this cannot hinder us from scrutinizing who is canonized as a victim of radical aggression. Charlie Kirk was 33 years old when he was murdered, leaving a wife and two small children behind. He had admitted that when he in 2012 started Turning Point USA, which eventually would become a rich and powerful organization, he had “no money, no connections and no idea of what I was doing.” At that time, Kirk had dropped out of college and been rejected by The U.S. West Point Military Academy. Nevertheless, he had rhetorical gifts for countering progressive ideas, being sensitive about cultural tensions, and endowed with an aptitude for making provocative declarations that resonated with frustrated college audiences, who followed and agreed with his web postings. Kirk’s frequent college rallies eventually attracted tens of thousands of young voters, as well as the attention and financial support of conservative leaders. President Trump was not wrong when he declared that:

The Great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead. No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie.

After his death Kirk has been praised for showing up at campuses where he talked with anyone who would approach him. Conservative journalists have declared him to be one of the era’s most effective practitioners of persuasion. Kirk’s message was readily embraced by youngsters who accepted his view that Democrats had spent hundreds of billions of dollars on illegal immigrants and foreign nations, while the young “lost generation” of the U.S. had to pinch their pennies, but would not be able to own a home, never marry, and even be forced to work until they died, abused and childless. However, he also gave them hope, telling these unfortunate youngsters that they did not have to stay poor and accept being worse off than their parents. They just had to avoid supporting corrupt political leaders, who were lying to them only to take advantage of their votes. Kirk assured his young audience that it is an undeniable fact that cultural identity is disappearing, while sexual anarchy, crime and decadence reign unabated, private property is a thing of the past, and a ruling “liberal” class controls everything. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, was probably right when she said that Kirk had inspired millions of young people “to get involved in politics and fight for our nation’s conservative values.”

Kirk allied his Turning Point USA not to any poor radical fringe groups, but to conservative, wealthy donors and influencers. He preached a “Christian Message” well adapted to several members of such groups, declaring that Turning Point USA was dedicated to “recruiting pastors and other church leaders to be active in local and national political issues.”

Kirk fervently defended the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, i.e. “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed “, declaring that it was worth “a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can keep a Second Amendment which protect our other God-given rights”.

However, Kirk was not happy about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed “discrimination based on race, colour, religion, sex, or national origin in employment, education, and public accommodations.” He stated that the Civil Rights Act was a “huge mistake” and declared that if the majority of Americans were asked if they respected the Civil Rights Act the answer would have been a “no”. Adding the caveat that “I could be wrong, but I think I’m right.”

Undoubtedly, there was a racist ingredient in Kirk’s ideology. He did for example state that the concept of white privilege was a myth and a “racist lie”. In October 2021, he launched an Exposing Critical Racism Tour to numerous campuses and other institutions, to “combat racist theories”, by which he meant the propagation of an understanding of the relationships between social conceptions of race and ethnicity, social and political laws and mass media, all of which Kirk considered to be propaganda and an unfounded brainchild of liberal Democrats. He blamed the DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programmes for threatening U.S. competitiveness and security, even claiming that upon sitting in a plane and realising that the pilot was “Black”, he could not help thinking “’Hey, I hope he’s qualified”.

Like most populist, “patriotic”, European right-wing political parties, not the least the Sweden Democrats, though they nowadays try to hide it more carefully than before, Kirk endorsed the so-called “great replacement theory”. This way of thinking assumes that powerful, nefarious actors, for some obscure reason, are trying to replace an upright indigenous, generally white-skinned population with immigrants of “doubtful” origin. Kirk did not even hesitate to state that Democrats supposedly wanted to make the U.S. “less white”.

Kirk also argued that humans have no significant effect on global climate change and joined antivax activists by, among other statements, calling the mandatory requirements for students to get the COVID-19 vaccine “medical apartheid”. Kirk was outspoken when it came to claim that Trump’s loss in the president elections of 2022 was due to fraud, supported the “stop the steal” movement and denied that the violent attacks on the Capitol were an insurrection.

Opposing political violence and supporting free speech does not mean that you have to sanctify a victim like Charlie Kirik, who after all was a racist and an incendiary agitator against underprivileged groups, as well as he degraded scientists who warned against climate change and vaccine denial. It is not defensible that such a voice, no matter how despicable it might be, is silenced by violence and murder. However, we cannot refrain from pointing out the great harm the kind of agitation Kirk devoted himself to can cause. As an educator, I have often been forced to experience how children suffer from racism and bigotry preached and condoned by influencers like Charlie Kirk. Accordingly, to sanctify such persons and tolerate their prejudiced ideology is hurtful and dangerous.

Furthermore, let us not be fooled by deceitful propaganda trying to convince us that Charlie Kirk’s so called “debates” were neither aggressive, nor mendacious. They were brutally provocative; opponents were shouted down, or belittled. The rhetoric was hateful, contempt was poured out over women, Black people, immigrants and Muslims, queer and trans people. Liberals were branded as enemies, science demeaned. And, yes – Charlie Kirk turned to young people, who felt frustrated, marginalized and despised, telling them that he wanted to give them hope and a will to fight injustice. But at what price? Based on what truth? Incitement to violence and contempt for humanity might be safeguarded in the name of free speech, but it should never be accepted and defended. It must be attacked through an unconstrained press based on facts, a well-founded science, and an unfaltering respect for human rights.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Atomic Bomb Dome by Jan Letzel and modern Hiroshima. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

By Katsuhiro Asagiri
TOKYO / ASTANA, Aug 7 2025 (IPS)

Eighty years ago, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki left a lasting reminder to humanity of the inhuman nature of nuclear weapons. Kazakhstan, too, is a nation deeply scarred by nuclear tests conducted during the Soviet era. Having covered the activities of Soka Gakkai International (SGI) in Kazakhstan—including its support for exhibitions and documentary productions on nuclear abolition in Astana—, INPS Japan recently interviewed Zhanna Shayakhmetova, editor-in-chief of The Astana Times, a leading English-language newspaper in the country that continues to convey messages of disarmament and peace to the world. In the interview, Shayakhmetova spoke about the role of religious leaders who will gather in Astana from around the world this September, the importance of passing on memories to younger generations, and the responsibility journalism holds in this endeavor.

Interview with Zhanna Shayakhmetova, the editor-in-chief of The Astana Times

Q: This August marks the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – tragic events that continue to remind the world of the catastrophic consequences of nuclear weapons. Amid ongoing conflicts and rising geopolitical tensions among nuclear-armed states, the Doomsday Clock now stands at just 89 seconds to midnight. While civil society movements are intensifying their calls for disarmament, achieving broader and sustained public awareness—especially among younger generations—remains a pressing challenge. In this context, Kazakhstan will host the 8th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions in September, an initiative known for promoting interfaith dialogue and tolerance. What potential do you see in the role of religious leaders in advancing peace and nuclear disarmament, particularly through education and moral leadership?

Zhanna Shayakhmetova

A: The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrate the horrifying, destructive power of nuclear weapons. These explosions have a lasting impact on humanity. In one of his interviews, activist Karipbek Kuyukov said, “it was a moment of shame for the international community and of horror for the people of Japan. It is a moment upon which we should forever shine a light to ensure that nuclear weapons are never used to kill again.” Kuyukov is among the 1.5 million Kazakh people who have suffered as a result of the 456 nuclear tests conducted over 40 years at the Soviet Union’s Semipalatinsk Test Site. He was born without arms as a result of his parents’ exposure to those tests before Kazakhstan shut down the site in 1991. Kuyukov is an internationally recognized non-proliferation activist and painter, whose works capture the suffering of the victims of nuclear weapon testing.

Religious leaders hold a special and consequential position when it comes to advancing peace and nuclear disarmament. That’s why Kazakhstan’s hosting the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions is very timely and deeply significant. Our country has taken bold steps toward disarmament. The gathering will bring together faith leaders and convey a powerful message that peace is not just a political goal, but also a spiritual one. If world leaders can speak with a united voice, especially to young people, they can shift the narrative from fear and apathy to one of responsibility and hope.

7th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions Group. Credit: Secretariate of the 7th Congress

Q: Japan has undertaken extensive efforts to preserve the memory of its nuclear past through peace museums, education, and the testimonies of hibakusha (atomic bomb survivors). In your view, how important is it for Kazakhstan to similarly preserve and communicate the experiences of those affected by Soviet-era nuclear testing? What methods do you consider most effective in ensuring these stories are remembered and passed on to future generations?

Stronger Than Death Monument, Semey

A: I believe it’s vital that Kazakhstan continues to preserve and tell the stories of those affected by Soviet-era nuclear testing. These are not just historical facts; these are lived experiences that have shaped our communities, particularly in areas like Semei. The generations continue to feel the physical and emotional toll of these explosions.

I consider personal storytelling and education effective methods. Documentaries and photo exhibitions in schools and public spaces can bring stories to life for younger generations who may not be familiar with this part of the past. Students can connect on a human level through literature, films and digital media by integrating survivor testimonies into school curricula.

As journalists, we have a responsibility to keep these stories visible, and not just on anniversaries, but as part of an ongoing dialogue about peace. Kazakhstan has a powerful story to tell, and we can’t let it fade in silence.

One of the touching stories we covered was about Tore Naerland from Norway, who co-founded Bike for Peace in 1977. After losing his eyesight as a teen, he chose to dedicate his life to helping others. While biking across the world, he met a Hiroshima survivor whose life inspired him to focus on the nuclear disarmament movement. Stories like his remind us why these conversations still matter.

Karipbek Kuyukov

Q:Kazakhstan has gained international recognition for its leadership in nuclear disarmament – becoming the first nation to close a major nuclear test site and voluntarily relinquish its atomic arsenal. How do you see the role of Kazakh media, including The Astana Times, in raising global awareness of this legacy and in promoting Kazakhstan’s contributions to disarmament and non-proliferation?

A: At The Astana Times, we’re committed to reporting accurately and consistently on disarmament. Our newsroom supports fact-based coverage on the nuclear file, and we see it as our mission to amplify Kazakhstan’s continued contribution to global non-proliferation efforts.

We’ve also made space for the next generation. We regularly publish young voices on this topic and have worked with advocates like social scientist Marzhan Nurzhan, who contributed articles to increase public awareness about the nuclear legacy consequences.

From left to right: Izumi Nakamitsu, Akan Rakhmetullin and Christopher King. Credit: Nagima Abuova / The Astana Times

Our correspondent Nagima Abuova covered the Third Meeting of States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) on March 3 – 7, 2025, at the UN Headquarters in New York. It was a proud moment for us, the Astana Times was the only English-language Kazakh outlet reporting directly from the event, and First Deputy Foreign Minister Akan Rakhmetullin chaired the meeting.

We also look ahead. This September, our journalist Aibarshyn Akhmetkali will represent Kazakh media at the Science and Technology Conference series (SnT2025) in Vienna, hosted by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO). It’s another opportunity to put Kazakhstan’s voice on the global stage and build momentum for a world free of nuclear testing.

Kazakhstan has something meaningful to contribute to the global disarmament dialogue, and we at The Astana Times are committed to ensuring the world hears it.

Semipalatinsk Former Nuclear Weapon Test site. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri

Q:Both Japan and Kazakhstan advocate strongly for a world free of nuclear weapons. From your perspective, how can journalism contribute to strengthening international solidarity among nuclear-affected communities and to advancing global disarmament efforts, such as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW)? What responsibilities do media professionals hold in fostering informed public dialogue on these issues?

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, signed 20 September 2017 by 50 United Nations member states. Credit: UN Photo / Paulo Filgueiras

A: Journalism is key in connecting nuclear-affected countries and advancing global efforts such as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). Kazakhstan and Japan share a tragic history with nuclear weapons, and that shared experience creates a basis for solidarity between governments and people.

Our responsibility as professionals is to shine light on these human stories. We have a responsibility to give voice to survivors, activists, and scientists whose lived experiences often get overshadowed by politics. We help people globally to understand and see the nuclear weapon consequences that are personal, generational and unjust. By reporting on events such as the TPNW meetings and CTBTO conferences, and by publishing the voices of young people and expert perspectives, we contribute to a more informed and engaged public.

INPS Japan

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 4 2025 (IPS)

The prospect of New Yorkers electing their first Muslim Mayor, come November, has ignited a rash of paranoid statements by right-wing US politicians, including Islamophobia– the irrational fear and hatred against Islam and Muslims.

Last week, a Republican politician caricatured America’s iconic Statue of Liberty wearing a burqa– an outer garment worn by some Muslim women that covers the entire body and face. But that internet meme, spreading across social media, was deleted after protests.

And another right-winger falsely warned that Zohran Mamdani, who last month won the Democratic Mayoral primary, may introduce the Islamic sharia law into the statute books of New York city’s five boroughs—with adulterers stoned to death in public.

If that punishment becomes a reality, one cynic jokingly predicted, New York may run out of stones—as once recounted about the fallout from Sharia law in a sandy Middle Eastern desert kingdom.

Meanwhile, President Trump, not surprisingly, jumped into the fray dismissing Mamdani as “a Communist lunatic.” That remark was a grim reminder of the spread of “McCarthyism” in the US in the early 1950s: a campaign against alleged Communists in the US government and other institutions.

Led by Senator Joseph McCarthy, the campaign, which falsely accused scores of politicians and Hollywood celebrities as “Communists”, was labeled the “search for reds under every bed”.

The 33-year-old Mamdani, a Democratic socialist and a social media star, is currently a member of the New York State Assembly from the 36th district, based in the New York city borough of Queens.

At the primary elections last month, he defeated Andrew Cuomo, the thrice-elected Governor of New York state. Mamdani’s father is a professor at the prestigious Ivy League Columbia University and his mother the celebrity award-winning movie producer Mira Nair.

Mamdani was born in Kampala, Uganda and his middle name Kwame was a tribute to Kwame Nkrumah, a political theorist and revolutionary, who served as Prime Minister of the Gold Coast (later Ghana) and President, from 1957 until 1966.

Mamdani migrated to New York City when he was seven years old and graduated from the Bronx High School of Science and later earning a bachelor’s degree in Africana studies from Bowdoin College.

Dr James E. Jennings, President, Conscience International, told IPS: “If New York is really a global city, having a Muslim mayor should be a welcome development. A quarter of the world’s population and almost 10% of New York’s citizens are Muslims. Where else but in the Big Apple could the United States better demonstrate our founding principles of liberty and justice for all? he asked.

First, the horror of September 11 fascinated the world, then New York’s most disreputable playboy took charge in Washington with global repercussions. Perhaps now an exemplary US citizen like Mamdani, who happens to be a Muslim, could lead our current politics in a more rational and moral way. His election might help repair frayed ties with the world’s 50 Muslim-majority countries and lead US politics out of its current anti-immigrant jingoism, said Dr Jennings.

Prejudice against Muslims, he pointed out, is hopelessly entangled with the politics of the Middle East. A clear voice like Mamdani’s is needed to speak out for justice and repudiate the “attack first” mentality of the Netanyahu-Trump cabal that keeps the US involved in unnecessary wars and fuels the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC).

“Those in New York’s Jewish community who deplore the Likud Party’s abandonment of Israel’s founding principles and repudiate the genocide in Gaza have apparently already decided to vote for the progressive candidate”, said Dr Jennings.

Ian G. Williams, President Foreign Press Association (FPA), told IPS Mamdani’s biggest electoral asset is that when asked, he answers questions directly and factually without looking over his shoulders to see what the funders and PACs think. (Political action committees and super PACs play significant roles in federal election campaigns by raising and spending money to influence elections.)

“No hedging, no pandering no Clintonesque squirming about what the meaning of “is” is. Voters will respect the courage even if they are not totally onside with the message”, said Williams former speechwriter for Neil Kinnock, whose speeches derailed Joe Biden’s 1988 Presidential run when he was caught out in unacknowledged plagiarism.

The turning point was when he fielded the “gotcha” question and redirected it against the other candidates paralyzed by fear of AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States.).

When asked about going to Israel, in effect, he challenged them to explain WHY a mayor of a city with so many problems would take time off to visit an Eastern mediterranean state committing war crimes. In many ways this was more effective than chanting on a stage at Glastonbury.

It is less than a lifetime ago that JF Kennedy’s candidacy was dubious because he was a Catholic. The bigots who evoked Zohran’s Muslim background while applauding applied dogma from Opus Dei in SCOTUS are irrelevant, declared Williams, a former President of the UN Correspondents’ Association (UNCA).

Dr Ramzy Baroud, a journalist and Editor of The Palestine Chronicle, told IPS the attacks on Mamdani, a principled man with a solid following among people who are seeking value-based politics, are a strange amalgamation of all the tropes of the past: those that accompanied the McCarthyism era, those pertaining to any criticisms of Israel, and those that preceded and intensified after the September 11, 2001, attacks.

“This hodgepodge of accusations, he said, lacks a central theme, though the real, often unstated fear is that Mamdani is a danger to the ruling classes, frankly on both sides. They are simultaneously accusing him of being a communist, an Islamist, a crazy person, and an antisemite, among a long list of ridiculous accusations”.

This reflects not only the overriding racism and foolishness that continues to control political discourse in the U.S., but also a degree of desperation, said Dr Baroud.

“The fallout of this madness is that they are repeating the same lines that many Americans are fed up with and no longer accept or tolerate. In other words, the attacks on Mamdani could very much be the reason behind his potential victory in the New York Mayoral race, which in turn will further elevate and make more meaningful the overall political discourse”.

The current level of so-called political debate is arguably the most debased in history, and it seems to be getting worse with time, where the president of what is supposed to be one of the greatest democracies in the world is making physical threats to arrest and deport popular politicians for disagreeing with him. This will bode very badly for the future in the country, thus highlighting the need for Mamdani-like politicians, declared Dr Baroud.

Norman Solomon, executive director, Institute for Public Accuracy and national director, RootsAction, told IPS a gradual trend of lessening racism and increasing anti-racism in the United States, especially among younger Americans, has been a major factor in making possible Mamdani’s primary victory.

Likewise, overall, a reduction of ethnocentrism and increasing affirmation of multiculturalism in urban areas – contrary to the very real racism and xenophobia led by Donald Trump – have opened the door to electoral progress by progressives who are not white and do not fall into the category of Judeo-Christian heritage.

This is all to the good for the health of the society, and all to the good for the prospects of victory for genuinely compassionate and forward-looking political leaders like Zohran Mamdani.

But the big backlash against Mamdani’s victory and what it represents has just begun, he warned. “This is a longstanding kind of reactionary bigotry that has always been a motor force for cruelty and systemic injustice in this country”.

Mamdani’s win is a highly encouraging event that could foreshadow great progress for social justice and against Islamophobia in the United States.

Yet the hostility that this progress has provoked tells us that powerful attitudes and forces for bigotry are surging to roll back essential progress, declared Solomon, author, “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Kassym-Jomart Tokayev paid tribute to the victims with a minute of silence. Credit: Akorda

By Katsuhiro Asagiri
TOKYO / ASTANA , Jun 4 2025 (IPS)

On the windswept steppe west of Astana, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev led a solemn ceremony this week to mark Kazakhstan’s Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Political Repressions and Famine—an annual reflection on one of the nation’s darkest chapters.

The ceremony was held at the ALZHIR Memorial Complex, a former Stalin-era camp where nearly 8,000 women—wives of those declared “enemies of the state”—were once imprisoned.

“The lessons of history must never be forgotten,” Tokayev declared, referring to the Stalin-era policies that left deep scars on Kazakhstan’s cultural and intellectual life.

Credit: Map of Gulag locations in Soviet Union, Public Domain

Kazakhstan’s experience forms part of the broader story of Stalinist repression, which extended well beyond Russia’s borders. After Japan’s surrender in 1945, an estimated 560,000 to 760,000 Japanese prisoners of war and civilians were forcibly relocated and detained across Soviet territory. Among them, about 50,000 were sent to camps in what was then the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic (now Kazakhstan). In camps such as Spassky near Karaganda, many perished under harsh forced labor and brutal conditions.

Kazakh citizens suffered even greater losses. In the early 1930s, famine caused by Stalin’s agricultural collectivization policies and the forced destruction of the traditional nomadic way of life claimed as many as 2.3 million Kazakhs. This was followed by purges in which countless intellectuals and landowners were executed or exiled.

Migration of Kazakh People due to theFamine in 1932 – 33.

Since gaining independence in 1991, Kazakhstan has sought not only to confront this painful legacy but also to embrace the vision of a multiethnic and multifaith society rooted in tolerance. Its constitution guarantees equality for all ethnic and religious groups, and more than 300,000 victims have been officially rehabilitated. Declassified archives continue to shed new light on this era.

But Kazakhstan’s progress is not merely about reconciliation with the past. It has also chosen to make tolerance and dialogue central pillars of its national identity.

As I wrote in a 2023 INPS Japan article, Kazakhstan’s leadership has placed global interfaith dialogue at the heart of its foreign engagement. The Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions, launched in 2003, has become a signature platform bringing together leaders from Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths for sustained dialogue.

7th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions Group Photo by Secretariate of the 7th Congress

Palace of Peace and Reconciliation. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri

Hosted at the iconic Palace of Peace and Reconciliation, the Congress reflects Kazakhstan’s role as a bridge between East and West and its commitment to promoting peaceful coexistence, mutual respect, and dialogue.

This approach holds particular relevance in a world increasingly fractured by sectarian conflict and geopolitical tensions. Kazakhstan’s efforts to transform a history marked by division and repression into a model of inclusion and cooperation offer valuable lessons for the global community.

Such values were echoed by Pope Francis, who attended the 7th Congress in 2022. In his closing address, the pontiff stated, “Religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility or extremism, but instead become a beacon of hope for peace.” He emphasized the importance of interreligious dialogue and coexistence.

Semipalatinsk former Nuclear test site. Credit: Katsuhiro Asagiri

This commitment to nuclear disarmament also extends to interfaith diplomacy. Since the 6th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions in 2018, Kazakhstan has worked closely with Soka Gakkai International (SGI) of Japan and the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), advancing a shared vision of peace, dialogue, and the abolition of nuclear weapons, grounded in the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons use and the testimonies of Hibakusha, while promoting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and deepening international cooperation.

A Group photo of participants of the regional conference on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and nuclear-free-zone in Central Asia held on August 29, 2023. Credit: Jibek Joly TV Channel

The ALZHIR Memorial itself continues to bear witness to the injustices of the past. Its preserved barracks and “Arch of Sorrow” leave a powerful impression on visitors.

Yet as this week’s remembrance ceremony and Kazakhstan’s ongoing interfaith efforts make clear, the country is determined to build a future grounded in tolerance, justice, and peace.

“Such injustices must never be repeated,” Tokayev affirmed—a principle that now informs both Kazakhstan’s domestic policies and its multi-vector diplomacy aimed at fostering dialogue and harmony on the international stage.

Katsuhiro Asagiri is the President of INPS Japan and serves as the director for media projects such as “Strengthening awareness on Nuclear Weapons” and SDGs for All” In 2024, he was honored with the “Kazakhstan Through the Eyes of Foreign Media” award, representing the Asia-Pacific region.

This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres and Bangladesh Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus attend an iftar party in the Ukhiya refugee camp, at Cox’s Bazar in Bangladesh, where about a million Rohingya refugees have lived since fleeing the violence in Myanmar. Credit: Gazi Sarwar Hossain/PID

By Rafiqul Islam
COX’S BAZAR, Bangladesh, Mar 15 2025 (IPS)

When United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres appeared before the Rohingya refugees wearing a traditional white panjabi, a costume of Muslims, to join an iftar party in Ukhiya refugee camp, thousands who had gathered waved to welcome him.

Seeing such solidarity from the Guterres for their long plight, many Rohingya people, who were fasting in the holy month of Ramadan, were emotional, and many shed tears.

The UN chief joined the solidarity iftar party with thousands of Rohingya Muslims in the refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar on Friday to express his solidarity with them. Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus also attended the iftar.

“Every Rohingya went to the iftar party to hear good news from the UN chief – good news to return to our homes in Myanmar. We all want to go back to our home of origin,” Rohingya youth, Ro Arfat Khan told IPS.

Before joining the iftar party, Guterres visited a learning centre in Ukhiya camp and exchanged views with Rohingya children. The children told the UN chief that they want to go back to their home in Myanmar, requesting that he helps ensure their safe and dignified return.

Guterres spoke to Rohingya women and imams and also visited the Rohingya cultural centre to get messages from the forcibly displaced refugees.

During his visit to the refugee camp, the UN secretary-general said in this year’s Ramadan visit, he got two clear messages from Rohingyas – they want to go back to Myanmar and better conditions in camps.

He said the international community should do everything to re-establish peace in Myanmar and to end discrimination and persecution of the Rohingyas.

Aid Cuts to Worsen Situation  

Thousands of Rohingya refugees turned up to the solidarity iftar, where UN secretary-general António Guterres and Bangladesh Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus pledged to continue to find a solution to their plight. Credit: Gazi Sarwar Hossain/PID

Due to a critical funding shortfall for its emergency response, the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) said it would have to halve its per-person monthly allocation for food for Rohingyas in Bangladesh from USD 12.50 to USD 6 per day from April 1.

“Unfortunately, recently, dramatic cuts in humanitarian aid were announced by the United States and by several other countries, mainly in Europe, and because of that, we are at risk of cutting the food rations in this camp,” Guterres said.

He pledged that the UN would continue efforts to mobilise funds for Rohingyas to avoid a situation in which people would suffer even more and where some people could even die.

“I have to confess that we are on the verge of a deep humanitarian crisis with the announced cuts by several countries of their financial assistance; we are facing a dramatic risk, a risk to reduce the food rations to the Rohingya refugees to a level that would be 40 per cent of 2025,” he said.

He predicted that an unmitigated disaster may occur due to aid cuts and appealed to the international community, saying it had an obligation to invest to support Rohingyas in Bangladesh to ease their plight.

“We will do everything to solve the problem of food rations,” Guterres added.

Recalling that the international community has a special obligation to ensure aid reaches Rohingya refugees, he said the world has not “forgotten them”.

“That is why the cuts by the international community of the aid to Rohingya refugees are unacceptable,”  said Guterres. “I repeat: Cox’s Bazar is ground zero for the impact of budget cuts on people in desperate need, and we must do everything to make sure that that does not happen.”

Resilient Rohingyas

According to him, the forcibly displaced, over one million Rohingyas, who took shelter in Bangladesh after extreme violence against them in 2017, are resilient, but they need the world’s support.

The UN chief said that many Rohingya Muslims arrived in Cox’s Bazar camp after massacres in Rakhine state and decades of discrimination and persecution, escaping brutal human rights violations that triggered widespread anti-Muslim hate.

“Rohingya refugees have come here for what people anywhere seek: protection, dignity, safety for them and their families.”

Guterres said he was inspired by the courage of Rohingyas and moved by their determination. He listened to harrowing accounts of their ordeals in Myanmar and their journeys to Bangladesh.

“They want to go home – Myanmar is their homeland. And returning in a safe, voluntary, and dignified manner is the primary solution to this crisis,” he said.

Guterres urged the Myanmar authorities to take steps in accordance with international humanitarian law to prevent communal tension and violence, and create an environment for the safe and dignified return of Rohingyas to their home of origin in Rakhine state.

“But the situation in Myanmar remains dire, including in Rakhine state. Until the conflict and systematic persecution end, we must support those who need protection here in Bangladesh,” he added.

Noting that the solution must be found in Myanmar, Guterres said the UN will continue efforts to ensure the voluntary, safe and sustainable return of all Rohingya refugees to Myanmar.

“Until then, I urge the international community not to reduce the support to Rohingya refugees,” he added.

Reviving Hopes

After the iftar on Friday, Bangladesh Chief Adviser Prof Yunus delivered his speech in the local dialect, which Rohingya refugees interpreted as a message of solidarity.

“The UN Secretary-General has come to resolve the suffering of the Rohingyas. Not this Eid, (but) I hope, the Rohingyas will be able to celebrate their Eid in their country next time.”

He said if necessary, they will have to fight with the whole world to bring the Rohingyas back to their home of origin.

“During the Eid, people visit the graves of their dearest relatives. The Rohingyas do not even have that opportunity,” the Bangladesh chief adviser said.

Abdur Rahman, who sheltered in the Cox’s Bazar camp in 2017, said around 100,000 Rohingyas were supposed to join the iftar party on Friday, but over 300,000 gathered there to get good news about their return to Myanmar.

“We all – from children to the old – want to go back to our homes. The UN chief’s visit inspired us,” he said.

Ro Arfat said sometimes the Rohingya people become hopeless as they have no state and no home now.

“But, the visit of two dignitaries – the UN chief and the chief adviser – helps us revive our hopes about our home return. This hope has returned to our mind,” he added.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Pavitra Nandagiri—one of the highest-ranking transgender spiritual leaders at Maha Kumbh, the largest religious gathering on earth in Prayagraj, India. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

By Stella Paul
PRAYAGRAJ, India, Feb 18 2025 (IPS)

Despite a blazing sun and growing heat, Pavitra Nandagiri sits on a cot smiling. Clad in a saffron robe and headgear with her forehead painted with turmeric and vermillion, Nandagiri is a Mahamandaleshwar—one of the highest-ranking monks of the Kinnar Akhada (Transgender Arena) at the Maha Kumbh, the world’s largest religious gathering currently underway in northern India.

As a steady stream of visitors pours in to touch her feet, Nandagiri raises her right hand and touches their heads in a gesture of accepting their respect and blesses them.

Just a few hours ago, she had taken part in the special, ceremonial snan (bathing) in the Sangam—a place with mythological significance where three holy rivers—Ganga, Jamuna and Saraswati—are believed to have met. Taking a dip in the confluence of these rivers is considered by Hindus as the most sacred act of one’s lifetime.

The ceremonial bathing is led by the most important of the living Hindu saints and godmen who follow a strict order of hierarchy. On Wednesday morning (February 12), the fourth ceremonial bathing of the 45-day Maha Kumbh was held. Fifteen transgender spiritual leaders, including Nandagiri, marched along with the Naga Sadhus and Aghoris—the legendary saints with ash-covered bodies, matted hair, and minimalistic clothing. Together, they bathed in the river with the holy chant of “Har har Mahadev” (Hail Shiva) while saints of other sects waited for their turn.

A devotee prays at the Maha Kumbh Sangam, where three rivers are believed to have converged. While two of the rivers—Ganges and Yamuna—are visible, the third river, Saraswati, is said to be hidden underneath. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

Later, inside the Kinnar Akhada, trans gurus receive visitors while some are seen performing some rituals and meditating along with Aghori ascetics. Asked how the partnership between the third highest order of the religious saints and the trans leaders came to be, Nandagiri says that it had been in the making since 2015 and culminated in a functioning collaboration during this year’s Maha Kumbh, which happens once every 12 years. She, however, does not share other details except that perhaps what brought together the two sects is their shared denouncement of worldly pleasure and embracing of a life free from its wealth and other complexities.

Transgender-Inclusive Kumbh: Conditions Apply

At the Kumbh, Akharas are organized into various sects, primarily categorized based on their philosophical orientation and the deity they worship. The two main sects are Shaiva Akharas, dedicated to Lord Shiva, and Vaishnava Akharas, devoted to Lord Vishnu. Each Akhara operates under a hierarchical structure, typically led by a Mahant (chief) or Acharya (spiritual leader) who oversees the spiritual and administrative functions.

The inclusion of the transgender Acharyas in the Kumbh, especially as a part of the highly revered Juna Akhada of the group of the Naga Sadhus, however, has not been completely free of controversies. Some have disputed their claim of embracing a minimalistic life and accused them of indulging in a game of power and authority considered unbefitting for true sainthood.

On January 24, the community ushered in a former film actress called Mamta Kulkarni as one of its top leaders, which led to protests by many both from within the trans community and leaders of other Hindu sects, who described it as a public relations stunt. Baba Ramdev—a well-known yoga guru—called it a violation of the Hindu religious ethos. Some gurus went as far as threatening to boycott the next Kumbh—to be held in 2037—if the Kinnar Akhada is not excluded from the ritual bathing.

Kalyani Nandagiri—another top-ranking trans guru who opposed the actress’s inclusion—was physically attacked by unidentified assailants on February 12.

A monk at the Transgender Arena within the Maha Kumbh. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

Despite these deep divisions and acts of violence, Pavitra Nanndgiri remains hopeful of the community’s future.

“People say a lot of things; some wrongs also happen. But such small issues should not be highlighted much. We are here today, and we will be here then (in the next Kumbh),” she says, sounding more like a peace advocate.

A Different Picture

While inside the Kinnar Akhada, trans gurus are busy receiving and blessing visitors; outside, on the street, a small crowd of men is seen surrounding a young trans man dancing to the fast beats of music.

“This is Launda Naach,” says Ajeet Bahadur—a local theater artist. “It’s a common form of rural entertainment here, performed typically by cross-dressing trans men.”

The audience of Launda Naach is typically male. It is said to have started at a time when women were not allowed to dance in public because of orthodox social norms. However, today the moves of a Launda Naach performer are often sleazy and according to Ajeet Bahadur, the dancers are often sexually exploited, and their performance is rarely seen as art.

“Their lives are unbelievably miserable; there is little respect for their art, all eyes are on their bodies and exploitation and poverty are a constant part of their lives,” says Bahadur, who has studied the lives of Launda Naach performers for some time.

Aside from Launda Naach performers, thousands of other trans men and women in India struggle to earn a living. They are usually seen begging on the street and inside public transport, while many are also often accused of extorting money from small businesses such as shopkeepers in local markets. Not surprisingly, the presence of a trans person in India usually evokes a mix of fear and contempt instead of the deep respect that is on display in the Kinnar Akhada of the Kumbh. Will the elevated status of the gurus here lead to any change in the social status of the common trans people?

Priyanka Nandagiri, a transgender monk, says that it cannot be guaranteed. “Broadly, the transgender community in India is divided into two groups: the Sanatani and the Deredaar. We are the members of the Sanatani group who have always been immersed in religious activities, while the Deredaar are the ones who have chosen a different lifestyle, such as performing dances on the street and at social events like weddings, etc. So, we have always been following separate paths,” she explains.

Dwita Acharya and Mohini Acharya—two other trans monks—nod in agreement: “It will depend on what life they choose,” they say in unison.

”If they want to follow our path (the Sanatani), they will get that recognition but if they want to continue with their usual Deredaar lifestyle, then people will continue to view them accordingly.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Credit: Berit Kessler/shutterstock.com

By Ramesh Thakur
Jan 14 2025 (IPS)

 
A regime built on terror, ruled by fear and sustained by foreign proxy forces crumbled in less than a fortnight. In the end, the foundations of the House of Assad (1970–2024) rested on the shifting sands of time. In the good ol’ days, despots could retire with their plundered loot into comfortable lifestyles in Europe’s pleasure haunts. No longer. The reverse damascene expulsion has seen the Assads scurry to safety to Moscow.

The beginning of the end of the Assad dynasty can be traced back to Hamas’s brutal attacks of 7 October 2023. Its objectives were to kill, rape, torture kidnap and subject to public humiliation on the streets of Gaza as many Israelis as possible.

Its political calculations sought to undermine Israelis’ confidence in their government’s ability to protect them; provoke retaliatory strikes on the densely populated Gaza strip that would kill large numbers of civilians held as involuntary human shields, and inflame the Arab street, enrage Muslims around the world and flood the streets of Western cities with massive crowds shouting pro-Palestinian/Hamas slogans; disrupt the process of normalisation of relations with Arab states; dismantle the Abraham Accords; and isolate Israel internationally.

It’s fair to say that Hamas has won the propaganda war. Israel has never before come under such sustained international censure in the UN Security Council, General Assembly, Human Rights Council, World Court and International Criminal Court. It’s also been heavily criticised in many previously supportive Western capitals, streets and campuses including Australia.

There are still some 100 hostages captive in Gaza. Israeli soldiers are still being killed and wounded. Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis retain residual capacity to launch rockets and drones into Israel.

Yet, Israel has achieved impressive military successes in fighting throughout Gaza followed by Lebanon. Hamas and Hezbollah have been decimated as fighting forces, with their military commanders and leaders decapitated with targeted assassinations and improvised explosive devices placed in pagers and walkie talkies. Iran has been humiliated, lost its aura of invincibility and seen the destruction of its entire strategy of trying to bleed Israel to death through a thousand cuts inflicted by proxies.

The military outcome thus is a complete reset of the local balance of power to Israel’s advantage. The reason for this is strategic miscalculations by Hamas. It launched the attacks of 10/7 unilaterally, hoping to draw fraternal groups into the war. Only Hezbollah half did so by firing rockets but without committing ground troops.

The second strategic miscalculation by Hamas was to underestimate Israel’s will and determination. This is Israel’s longest war. Israel stayed steadfast on destroying Hamas as a capable military force and governing power in Gaza; relegated the rescue of hostages to a highly desirable but subordinate goal; destroyed Hezbollah and ejected it from southern Lebanon; and checkmated Iran as the over-the-horizon military threat to Israel via its two powerful proxies in Gaza and Lebanon.

A further consequence was to remove the props holding up the Assad regime in Damascus and leave it exposed and vulnerable to overthrow by the well-armed and strongly motivated jihadist rebels. PM Benjamin Netanyahu is right to claim that Israel’s ‘blows inflicted on Iran and Hezbollah’ helped to topple Assad.

The new strategic balance sees the Israeli centre emerging much stronger amidst the ruins of the anti-Israel axis of resistance. The underlying reason for this is precisely the scale, surprise factor and depraved brutality of October 7. This broke beyond repair the endless loop of Hamas and Israeli policies of attack, retaliate, rinse and repeat when desired. Only a new balance of power could restore deterrence-based truce resting on certain Israeli retaliation and Israeli dominance at every level of escalation.

International calls for immediate and unconditional ceasefire and urgings not to go into Rafah proved counterproductive, I believe, for two reasons. For one, given the monstrous scale of 10/7, to Israelis they separated true from fair-weather friends. For another, Western youth and countries, under the impact of changing electoral demographics with mass influxes of radicalised Middle Eastern Muslims, were deserting Israel and softening on fighting antisemitism in their own populations. This drove home the realisation that time was against Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah had to be removed as security threats now or never.

However, post-Assad Syria is highly combustible. Syria is not a nation-state but a tattered patchwork quilt of different sects with a blood-soaked history of feuding. The rebels are diverse in tribe, race and religion and backed by different foreign actors with their own agendas. The chances are that après victory will come the deluge of warring factions and Syria descends once more into killing fields.

The dominant rebel group is Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), whose roots go back to al Qaeda and the Islamic State. Its leader is Abu Mohammed al-Jolani who has had a US $10 million FBI bounty on his head since 2017 as a terrorist. The HTS’s base is the 75 percent Sunni population, with the remaining one-fourth split between Shiites, Kurds, Christians, Druze, Ismailis, Armenians and Alawites.

Israelis cannot assume that Syrians are immune to the Jew hatred that animates many Muslims in the region. Guided by its own precautionary principle, Israel has pre-emptively destroyed much of Syria’s weaponry, chemical weapons infrastructure and arms-production facilities and taken control of the demilitarised buffer zone in the Golan Heights.

The experiences of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya after their humanitarian liberations into freedom and democracy in the 2001–11 decade should give Panglossian optimists on a ‘new Syria’ a reality check.

Ramesh Thakur, a former UN assistant secretary-general, is emeritus professor at the Australian National University and Fellow of the Australian Institute of International Affairs. He is a former Senior Research Fellow at the Toda Peace Institute and editor of The nuclear ban treaty: a transformational reframing of the global nuclear order.

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

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

In 2021, the Senegalese novelist Mohamed Mbougar Sarr became the first writer from sub-Saharan Africa to be awarded the Prix Goncourt, France’s oldest and most prestigious literary prize.

Literature

His novel, La plus secrète mémoire des hommes, The most Secret Memory of Men, tells the story of a young Senegalese writer living in Paris, who by chance stumbles across a novel published in 1938 by an elusive Senegalese author named T.C. Elimane. This author had once been hailed by an ecstatic Paris press, but had then disappeared from view. Elimane had before every trace of him had vanished, been accused of plagiarism. After losing a legal process connected with the plagiarism charge, Elimane’s publisher had been forced to withdraw and destroy all available copies of The Labyrinth of Inhumanity. However, a few extremely rare copies of the novel remained, profoundly affecting anyone who happened to read them. The novel’s main protagonist (there are several others) eventually became involved in a desperate search for the illusive Elimane, who had left some rare imprints in France, Senegal and Argentina.

A reader of Sarr’s multifaceted, exquisitely written novel is confronted with a choir of different voices mixing, harmonizing and/or contradicting each other. The story turns into a labyrinth, where boundaries between fiction and reality become blurred and lose ends remain unravelled. Sarr moves in an ocean of world literature. It seems as if he has read everything worth reading and allusions are either in plain sight, or remain invisible. Ultimately, the novel investigates the limits between myth and reality, memory and presence, and above all the question – what is storytelling? What is literature? Does it concern the “truth”, or is it constructing a parallel version of reality?

A disturbing issue shimmers below the surface of the intriguing story. Why were two excellent West-African authors before Sarr severely scrutinized and condemned for plagiarism? Why were they accused of not being “African” enough? Are African writers doomed to linger within a shadowy existence as exotic curiosities, judged from the outside by a prejudiced literary establishment, which persistently consider African authors, except white Nobel laureates like Gordimer and Coetze, either as being exotic natives, or epigons of European literature?

The most Secret Memory of Men has a disturbing prehistory, echoing real-life experiences of the Guinean writer Camara Laye and the likewise unfortunate Malian Yambo Ouologuem.

At the age of 15, Camara Laye came to Conakry, the French colonial capital of Guinea, to attended vocational studies in motor mechanics. In 1947, he travelled to Paris to continue his studies in mechanics. In 1956, Camara Laye returned to Africa, first to Dahomey, then to the Gold Coast and finally to newly independent Guinea, where he held several government posts. In 1965, after being subject to political persecution, he left Guinea for Senegal and never returned to his home country.

In 1954, Camara Laye’s novel Le regard de Roi, The Radiance of the King, was published in Paris and at the time described as “one of the finest works of fiction to come out of Africa”. The novel was quite odd, and remains so, particular since its main protagonist is a white man and the story develops from his point of view. Clarence has, after in his home country having failed at most things, recently arrived in Africa to seek his fortune there. After gambling all his money away, he is thrown out of his hotel and in desperation decides to pursue a legend stating that somewhere in the inner depths of Africa a wealthy king can be found. Clarence hopes that this king might provide for him, maybe give him a job, and a purpose in life.

Laye’s novel becomes an allegory for man’s search for God. Clarence’s journey develops into a road to self-realisation and he obtains wisdom through a series of dreamlike and humiliating experiences; often harrowing, sometimes lunatically nightmarish, though the story is occasionally lightened by an absurd and alluring humour.

However, some critics asked if this really was an African novel. The language was beguilingly simple, but the allegorical mode of telling the story made critics assume that it was tinged with Christianity, that the African lore was “superficial”, and the narrative style “kafkaesque”. Even African authors considered that Laye “mimicked” European literary role models. The Nigerian author Wole Soyinka characterized Le regard de Roi as a feeble imitation of Kafka’s novel The Castle, implanted on African soil and within France suspicions soon arose that a young African car mechanic could not have been able to write such a strange and multifaceted novel as Le regard de Roi.

This unkind and even mean criticism became increasingly vociferous, deprecating what was actually an intriguing work of genius. The harassment continued until a final blow was delivered by an American professor. Adele King’s comprehensive study The Writing of Camara Laye did in 1981 “prove” that Le regard de Roi actually had been written by Francis Soulé, a renegade Belgian intellectual who in Brussels had been involved in Nazi- and Anti-Semitic propaganda and after World War II had been forced to establish himself in France. According to Adele King, Soulé had together with Robert Poulet, editor at Plon, the publisher that issued Le regard de Roi, concocted a story that his novel actually had been written by a young African, thus securing its success. To support her theory, Adele King presented an exhaustive account of Camara Laye’s life in France, tracing his various acquaintances and coming to the conclusion that Laye had been paid by Plon to act as the author of Le regard de Roi.

Among other observations Adele King stated that Laye’s novel was of an “un-African nature, with a European sense of literary form”, thus indicating Francis Soulé’s handiwork. This in spite of Soulé’s very meagre literary output (King mentions that he had in his ”youth dabbled in exotic writing”) and the fact that Laye wrote several other, very good novels.

Among other indications that Laye could not have written Le regard de Roi, King argued that the novel’s “Messianic message” sounded false, originating as it did from an African Muslim. She thus ignored that Laye came from a Sufi tradition where similar notions abounded and when it came to the “kafkaesque” flavour of the novel, which is far from being overwhelming – why could not a young African author living in France, like so many others, have been inspired by Franz Kafka’s writing?

Notwithstanding, through these and many other shaky assumptions King concluded that Le regard de Roi had been written by the otherwise almost unknown Francis Soulé and her verdict became almost unanimously accepted. It did for example in 2018 prominently appear in Christoffer Miller’s popular and otherwise quiet good book Impostors: Literary Hoaxes and Cultural Authenticity.

Another resounding condemnation of an excellent West-African author occurred in 1968 when the groundbreaking and original novel Le devoir de violence, Bound to Violence, after a short time of praise was smashed due to accusations of plagiarism. Le devoir de violence dealt with seven centuries of violent history of an African, fictious kingdom (actually quite akin to present-day Mali). In a feverish first-rate, free flowing language the novel does not shy away from depicting extreme violence, royal oppression, religious superstition, murder, corruption, slavery, female genital mutilation, rape, misogyny, and abuse of power. All intermingled with episodes of real love and harmony, but there is no doubt about Yambo Ouologuem’s opinion that a powerful, age-old and corrupt African elite enriched itself and prospered through its collaboration with an equally corrupt and brutal colonial power, all done for their respective gain.

Quite expectedly, Ouologuem arose violent reactions from authors adhering to the concept of négritude, denoting a framework of critique and literary theory developed by francophone intellectuals, who stressed the strength of African solidarity and notions about a unique African culture. Ouologuem provided the négritude movement with his own denigrating term – negraille, accusing négritude authors of ingraining servility and an inferiority complex in Africa’s black population. He accused such authors of depicting Africa as a ridiculous Paradise, when the continent in fact had been, and was, just as corrupt and violent as its European counterpart. Ouologuem also wondered why an African writer could not be allowed to be as critical, outspoken and politically improper as, for example, the French authors Rimbaud and Céline.

The final judgment that befell Ouologuem was delivered by the generally admired Graham Greene, who launched a lawsuit against Ouologuem’s publisher accusing the African author of plagiarizing parts of Greene’s novel It’s a Battlefield. Greene won the lawsuit and Ouologuem’s novel was banned in France and the publisher had to see to the destruction of all available copies of it. Ouologuem did not write another novel, he returned to Mali where he in a small town directed a youth centre, until he withdrew in a secluded Muslim life as a marabout (spiritual advisor).

Considering the framework of Ouologuem’s entire and quite mindboggling novel, Graham Greene’s reaction appears to be petty, if not outright ridiculous. The plagiarism was limited to a few sentences describing a French mansion, which in itself was quite absurd within its African setting, and the description is clearly quoted with a satirical intention (in his novel Greene described a slightly ridiculously decorated apartment of an English communist).

The condemnation of Laye’s, and in particular Ouologuem’s novels may be discerned as an inspiration to Mohamed Sarr’s novel. Sarr writes about a young African author finding himself in a limbo between two very different worlds, Senegal and France, while he has found home and solace in literature, a world within which he has discovered a real gem, his talisman – Elimane’s novel. However, the bewildered young man’s pursuit of the man behind the book turns out to be in vain, and so is probably also his search for himself in this labyrinth that constitutes our life and the world we live in.

Sarr’s novel reminds us of the fate of two other West-African authors before him, who were accused of not being “genuine”, of being “plagiarists”, thus Sarr also succeeds in asking us what is genuine in a floating globalized world?

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Damage of airstrikes on Beirut Southern area in the October escalation. Credit: UNICEF/ Dar al Mussawir - Ramzi Haidar

By Randa El Ozeir
TORONTO / BEIRUT , Dec 17 2024 (IPS)

Sixty-four days of unrelenting war machine by Israel against Lebanon put my entire beliefs and ethos to a painful test: my sincerity in promoting social justice, human rights, integrity, patriotism, spirituality and, philosophically speaking, universal human values of love, peace and non-violence.

Undergoing collective injustice, large-scale explosions targeting electronic portable devices, sophisticated weaponry attacks that disregard your homeland sovereignty and war crimes gives you the right to be angry. Intentional and malicious infringement entitles you to fight and militantly defend yourself and your country. Wouldn’t you have the right to avenge based on “eye-for-an-eye” response?

The answer is never straightforward, single dimensional or conclusive. A risk of cognitive dissonance is inevitable. An inner turmoil might emerge. How can we justify ourselves as anti-war and pro-peace while rooting for the “victory” of our assaulted homeland?

Killing in the battlefield is expected and commonly accepted. Since the dawn of human history, soldiers and fighters have been carrying out their duties towards their countries/nations when involved in power struggle, turf war, and land protection against invasion and amputation.

But murdering unarmed civilians and children is never justified under any given pretext, especially after humanity declared leaving back dark ages and medieval barbaric practices.

A Broken Moral Compass

Our today’s world is facing an ethical impasse that threatens our very unity and human cooperation. An entity like The United Nations is facing difficult existential questions. A universal broken moral compass brought a deep feeling of dislodged certainties, disappointment and helplessness.

In the midst of the war on Lebanon – some might argue it was simply an extension of the then ongoing armed conflict between Hezbollah and Israel that erupted on 8 October 2023 – I faced though emotions while trying to balance personal, ideals and peaceful views of the world and a dormant Lebanese identity overshadowed by a Canadian identity that carries its own problem whenever indigenous voices come out to remind us of colonial legacy.

Creation of Israel, as a colonial state, is a fresh memory due to continual war crimes against indigenous people, Palestinians in this case. What still unfolds in Gaza is no exception in practice, although it is exceeding by far anything the modern world has seen after World War II (WWII).

“The Israeli occupation is a moral crime, one that has been all but covered by the West”, writes the American author, journalist and activist, Ta-Nehisi Coates, in his recent book “The Message”.

Complexities of extreme alliances, divisions and political allegiance shifts across the Middle East throughout its long history are undeniable, and the region earned a reputation of uncertainty, volatility and animosity.

Our homeland lays on the intersection of being the absolute, tangible reality of our existence’s centre and symbolizing the aspiration and the transcendent ideation of belonging.

Hollow Words Facing Mass Destruction

During the last blood-shed and destructive offensive of Israel against Lebanon, patriotism took hold of my daily life. I adopted a tunnel vision, focused solely on that nightmarish crisis.

An incessant wave of agonising waiting and deep sadness engulfed my reality to the point of living an almost out-of-body experience. Words became hollow, fell short of describing the heart’s turmoil with the mass destruction and conceited attitude of the assaulting country.

Every waking hour was dedicated to following the news, hysterically checking on my family there, as assumingly was the Lebanese Diaspora’s state.

Patriotism could feel magnified when we are abroad. As much as I longed to be fully included in the situation, I was not there to live the real fear of the direct physical danger, the Israeli’s digital rights violations and the misleading and inadequate warnings for civilians.

Lebanese people know inside-out what war means. We recognize its ugly face. We lived through many episodes, dating back to 1860. We witnessed colonial, civil, proxy and resistance wars.

Resistance in Lebanon opposing Zionism and West imperialism has been deeply ingrained in the country’s core story with different names and players depending on the political and military circumstances. Hezbollah appeared as a resistance and military movement during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 that killed 14,000 Lebanese and Palestinians, stayed the course throughout the 18-year Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon that sustained significant human wounds – including the Qana Massacre in April 1996-, liberated the occupied land in 2000 and emerged triumphant from 2006 Israeli war.

Retracing the ascent of Hezbollah, its affiliation with Iran, the dominant role it has been playing on the Lebanese political stage and its regional size is beyond my scope of expertise. Fighting for the ousted Syrian dictator Bashar Al-Assad was its dramatic moral fall. However, it would be unfair to completely strip this party of its essential component, the national resistance.

Although I have never been ideologically close to Hezbollah, I was inundated with a poignant sorrow when Hassan Nasrallah, the party’s third secretary general, was assassinated in one of the heaviest Israeli airstrikes. He was loosely likened to Che Guevara in many Arab minds and embodied activism and identification with social justice. His assassination brought back vividly my adolescence and early adulthood opinions and political leanings.

Remnants of sectarian divisions and clashes surface at each unstable occasion, proving how religion impacts politics and making the country vulnerable to an imminent internal conflict. Not this time! Different Lebanese parties and religious sects endeavored to protect civil peace and defeated plan(s) to drive a wedge between the country’s components. Occasionally, as a journalist, it felt frustrating to see some national media outlets’ approach in adopting repeatedly implicit and explicit impure key messages.

Geography is destiny. Lebanon, the 10452 km2, will always have a border with Israel. We are very optimistic the 27-November-2004 ceasefire agreement, that ended a 13-months conflict, will hold in the face of the frequent Israeli violations until the UN Security Council resolution 1701 gets fully re-implemented.

Randa El Ozeir, is a Canadian-Lebanese journalist who writes on health issues, women’s rights and social justice.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Large numbers of Bangladeshi Hindus protested for recognition and protection amid escalating violence in Bangladesh in July 2024.

By IPS Correspondent
UNITED NATIONS, Dec 11 2024 (IPS)

Bangladesh has been in the midst of a deepening political crisis and a significant social divide since August 5 when the former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled the country following a mass uprising led by students. Diplomatic relations between India and Bangladesh have since soured and given way to a considerable amount of disinformation, especially surrounding the persecution of the Hindu population.

Hindus make up approximately 8 percent of Bangladesh’s population of 170 million people. The Bangladeshi Hindu community is known to have largely sided with Sheikh Hasina’s deposed Awami League political party, which has generated anger and violence in several parts of the country.

During Sheikh Hasina’s regime, India had been a strong ally of Bangladesh. Following the fall of her government, India has not shown support for Bangladesh’s new interim government. This, coupled with India continuing to host Sheikh Hasina in their country, has led to the deterioration of good relations between India and Bangladesh.

“The angst (between India and Bangladesh) is not restricted to the corridors of power but will and has found its way to the streets. Therefore, the targeting of Hindus may be rooted in religious discrimination but one cannot unlink the common man’s anger at India’s ‘protecting Hasina at all costs’ policy even at the cost of souring the bi-lateral relationship,” says Kumkum Chada, an Indian author and political journalist with Hindustan Times, an Indian-English language daily newspaper based in Delhi.

In the transition from Sheikh Hasina’s FALL to the establishment of the interim government, the ongoing violent student-led protests saw an increase in intensity. This resulted in hundreds of civilian casualties and thousands of arrests. On November 17, Muhammad Yunus, Chief-Advisor of Bangladesh’s interim government, informed reporters that roughly 1500 civilians were killed during the protests.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) released a report that detailed the various human rights concerns that arose in the period of heightened social insecurity. According to the analysis, there were reports of arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, assault, and sexual violence directed toward female protestors.

Additionally, on August 5 and 6, several Hindu houses, temples, and businesses experienced attacks, vandalizations, and lootings in 27 districts of Bangladesh. Internet services and communication channels faced significant disruptions, which has made it difficult for officials to determine the exact number of Hindu casualties. However, officials have stated that Hindu deaths only make up a small portion of the total number of casualties.

Although there has been much disinformation in the media surrounding the frequency of the attacks on Hindus, it should be noted that they still do occur. An IPS correspondent reached out to a member of the Hindu community, the sister of a Hindu attorney in Bangladesh who had been critically injured in a hate crime.

“On November 25, my older brother was attacked by a group of Islamic extremists. He’s currently in a coma at Dhaka Medical Hospital. We feel unsafe and we don’t have the expenses to keep up his treatment. We are afraid of the possibility of hospital neglect. The administration urged that we stay quiet. Extremists are threatening attorneys and the police are destroying CCTV footage,” said the sister, who did not want to be identified by name out of fear of reprisals.

A brother of another Hindu victim also spoke to our correspondent and offered some insight into the social climate of Bangladesh. “The attacks haven’t stopped since August. Although they are not as frequent as the media claims, they definitely still occur. There’s a lot of fear within our communities. We feel afraid to go outside and have received threats of violence. The government and police are not supporting us,” he said.

OHCHR Spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani stated that OHCHR does not have a monitoring mandate in Bangladesh beyond August 15. However, the office is currently in discussions with the Bangladeshi government to conduct an independent human rights study. “This would be helpful in providing an objective picture and countering misinformation and incitement,” Shamdasani said.

The Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council claimed that the attacks were motivated by a communal hatred for religious minorities. However, the Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance, a coalition of 23 Hindu organizations, conducted a fact-finding mission and found that the attacks were motivated by mob violence and political retribution.

“There may be an element of minorities, particularly Hindus, being targeted due to their faith. But many Hindus had links to the Awami League, because historically it has been the party that protected minorities, so they may have been targeted for their political affiliations,” said Thomas Kean, a senior consultant on Bangladesh and Myanmar at the Crisis Group.

Since August, news coverage of violence against Hindus by Indian mass media has generated significant debate, with Bangladesh claiming disinformation and the use of anti-Islamic sentiments to propel false and sensationalized narratives that illustrate a wide-scale Hindu genocide occurring in Bangladesh.

Disinformation on the persecution of Hindus not only harms the majority of Bangladeshi civilians but also has a detrimental impact on the Hindu minority as well. “We are concerned about the politicization of minorities, particularly Hindus, through misinformation and disinformation that has been spreading, as this exposes them to risks and undermines genuine concerns,” Shamdasani told an IPS correspondent.

According to an investigation conducted by Rumor Scanner, a Bangladeshi fact-checking organization that has been verified by the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN), 49 Indian media outlets have issued at least 13 false reports between August 12 to December 5.

Despite few new reports of violence against Hindus coming from verifiable investigations, Indian mass media continues to report on alleged abuses as if they are still occurring on a large scale in Bangladesh.

On August 7, The Wire, a Indian non-profit news outlet that is independent from India’s government, released an interview with Rashna Imam, an advocate for the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. Imam described the recent reports from the Indian press as “completely unwarranted and baseless”, adding that the lootings and vandalisms occurred “to an extent” for around one month. Imam adds that based on the statistics available, the current social situation is “under control.” Dr. Yunus also described the reports from the Indian press as “exaggerated.”

The investigation from Rumor Scanner debunked a host of reports, images, and videos that have circulated in the press since July. One viral video was broadcasted by multiple Indian media outlets, claiming that a Hindu man was protesting for his son who went missing in the wake of hostilities. Rumor Scanner identified the protestor as Babul Howlader, who is actually a Muslim. Furthermore, his son had not gone missing during the protests, he had been missing since 2013.

Another viral video on X (formerly known as Twitter) claimed to show a violent temple attack in Bangladesh. Rumor Scanner confirmed that this video was actually taken in India during idol immersion.

Additionally, several reports from Indian news agencies referenced an alleged arson attack on a Hindu temple. However, Prothom Alo, the leading Bengali-language daily newspaper in Bangladesh, found that the attack took place at an Awami League office near the temple.

Many Indian and Bangladeshi Hindu news websites have reported the estimated death toll as the number of Hindus attacked or killed in the protests. The Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council reported that in the days following Sheikh Hasina’s resignation, there were at least 2,010 incidents of violence against Hindus, such as attacks on Hindu temples, houses, and businesses. These statistics have yet to be corroborated.

Hundreds of India-based X accounts circulated posts using hashtags such as #AllEyesOnBangladeshiHindus and #SaveBangladeshiHindus. Many of these posts included inflammatory language, hate speech directed toward Bangladeshi Muslims, misleading photos and videos, as well as false statistics.

Bangladesh has had a difficult time refuting disinformation spread by Indian mass media due to the sheer strength of India’s press sector. India currently has over 500 million satellite channels and 70,000 newspapers, making it the biggest newspaper market in the world. Bangladesh has a comparatively weaker press sector, having around 3,000 printed media outlets.

This is also partially fueled by the stronger presence of social media in the lives of the Indians than for Bangladeshis. India has the highest number of Facebook, X, and Instagram users in the world. All of these platforms are known for being hubs for misinformation. According to a study conducted by the World Population Review , as of 2024, India boasts approximately 467 million social media users. Bangladesh has roughly 53 million social media users.

Additionally, language barriers have hindered the visibility and reach of Bangladesh’s media. India has many newspapers and magazines printed in both Hindi and English while Bangladesh has far fewer newspapers printed in both Bangla and English.

According to a study by the WPR, India also has around 265 million English-speaking citizens while Bangladesh only has 29 million. This indicates that there are far more English-speaking journalists for India’s press sector. It is for these reasons that Western audiences are far more likely to be impacted by Indian news.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Even as India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri reached Bangladesh amid strain in ties over attacks on Hindu minorities, he carried with him a bag of complaints: it sure was not a good will mission. It was one where India has focused on its discomfort, rather anger, over the persecution of Hindus under the new regime in Bangladesh.

Kumkum Chadha

The Indian Government has specifically mentioned the attack on a Puja mandap in Tantibazar, Dhaka and theft at the Jeshoreshwari Kali temple at Satkhira during Durga Puja 2024.

Tensions were further heightened after the arrest of a Hindu monk who had recently been expelled from the International Society of Krishna Consciousness, widely known as ISKCON or the Hare Krishnas. He was arrested on charges of sedition.

In turn, thousands of Hindu monks marched to the Bangladesh border in West Bengal; protestors attacked a Bangladeshi consulate in the Indian state of Tripura.

To link these incidents with recent political developments in Bangladesh would be a grave mistake. Behind this upsurge lies a bloody history and a seething anger against India.

The Hindu minority in Bangladesh has historically faced persecution, particularly from more extremist elements. That the common man on the streets of Bangladesh nurses a strong anti-India sentiment is a given. India has been seen as an “overbearing neighbour” particularly by the younger generation in Bangladesh who felt that the now ousted government under Sheikh Hasina was subservient to India: “an unequal relationship” to quote many.

Fast forward to the present and the situation is dismal, to say the least.

As a nation and a neighbour India has done little to assuage feelings or balm wounds. Therefore to say that it is the anti Hasina elements that are fuelling unrest and attacks would be missing the wood for the trees.

One must acknowledge and accept that India went overboard in its support for the government under Sheikh Hasina at the cost of ignoring all others. That is why when she was ousted and an interim government under Dr. Mohammed Yunus took power, India was not viewed as a reliable ally. If anything, the historical ties between the two countries have weakened as never before. Add to this the perceived marginalization of Muslims under a pro Hindu BJP government in India and the alienation is kind of complete.

On this count one cannot fault the current dispensation given that it has facts on its side.

History apart, recent developments too provide enough ammunition to the current regime and the people in Bangladesh to nurse an angst against India.

And on this, one has to begin from the beginning.

For starters, the asylum to Sheikh Hasina. It is no one’s case to even suggest that India should have turned away a former Prime Minister in distress, Sheikh Hasina or any other. Giving her refuge was, as some put it, “an honourable thing” for any neighbour to do. What is under the scanner is her extended stay.

For record, when Hasina landed in India after being driven out from a country she had ruled for 15 long years, it was said to be a temporary refuge. She had sought asylum in the United Kingdom which hit a road bloc due to a technicality.

As of now the “temporary stay” seems to have extended to a permanent one. When India’s Foreign Minister informed the Indian Parliament of her sudden arrival in Delhi in August, he did indicate that the initial request by Hasina was “for the moment only”. That the moment has extended into months with no signs of an immediate resolution is another matter.

The fact that India does not have any policy for refugees allows the government to be flexible in its response. Critics see it using this as a “convenient route” to let Hasina stay for as long as she wants. Fingers are being pointed at the Indian government not moving an inch to engage with stakeholders for Hasina’s extradition. At least visibly. This and for good reasons is enough to upset the Yunus regime in Bangladesh and write off India as “an adversarial neighbour”.

Worse still, Sheikh Hasina’s political statements against the current regime in Bangladesh from Indian soil strengthens the perception that India is adding fuel to fire.

In a virtual address ahead of Misri’s visit to Bangladesh, Hasina accused the Yunus regime of being “fascist” and one that has allowed a free run to terrorists.

In her 37 minute address Hasina made a specific reference to attacks on minorities. By doing this, she not only echoed the concerns of the Indian government but positioned herself as being one which is parroting concerns that India is attempting to tackle diplomatically and bi-laterally.

At this junction one is constrained to ask: Why is the Indian Government not restraining Sheikh Hasina? Why is it allowing her to muddy the political waters? Why is it letting the Indian soil be a convenient platform for political speak ? And why is it letting Hasina hit out at a regime that India has to mend a completely fractured relationship with?

These questions and the angst is not restricted to the corridors of power but will and has found its way to the streets. Therefore the targeting of Hindus may be rooted in religious discrimination but one cannot delink the common man’s anger at India’s “protecting Hasina at all costs” policy even at the cost of souring the bi-lateral relationship.

Therefore, India needs to recalibrate its approach and policy towards Bangladesh before its ties reach an all-time low leading to a confrontational situation.

Kumkum Chadha, an author and senior political journalist with Hindustan Times

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau