By Tariq Rauf
VIENNA, Austria, Aug 7 2025 – On 16th July this year I was at the University of Chicago, attending a Nobel Laureate Assembly, and visited the site where at 15:25 PM local time on 2 December 1942, the nuclear physicist Enrico Fermi achieved the first self-sustaining atomic fission chain reaction.

Three years later, at precisely 5:30 PM on 16 July 1945, the nuclear age began with the detonation of the “Trinity” nuclear explosive device over the New Mexico desert.

At approximately 8:15 AM Hiroshima time on 6 August 1945, the US Air Force unleashed the “Little Boy”, a 9,700-pound uranium gun-type bomb, over the city. While no one will ever know for certain how many died as a result of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima, it is estimated at least 70,000 people perished as a result of initial blast, heat and radiation effects.

Three days later, on 9 August 1945, at 11:02 AM, the US Air Force at an altitude of 1,650 feet detonated the plutonium device “Fat Man”, with an estimated explosive yield of 21,000 tonnes (kilotons), about 40 percent greater than that of the Hiroshima bomb. It is estimated that about 40,000 people perished initially, with 60,000 more injured.

By January 1946, the number of deaths in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki exceeded more than 150,000, with perhaps ultimately twice that number dead within the ensuing five years.

Between 16 July 1945 and 3 December 2017, it is estimated that 2,121 nuclear test detonations involving 2,476 nuclear explosive devices have been carried out by ten States – in chronological order: USA, USSR, UK, France, China, India, Israel/South Africa, Pakistan and North Korea.

Though the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) prohibits all nuclear test detonations, in all environments, and has been signed to date by 187 States and ratified by 178, it still languishes having not entered into force.

In particular, entry-into-force depends on 44 named States to have ratified. Nine such States are holding up entry into force: alphabetically, China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, and USA. Indonesia was the latest among this group of 44 States to have ratified in February 2012 – since then not a single State among the remaining nine has taken any steps to sign and/or ratify the CTBT, placing its future in doubt.

While the CTBT prohibits all nuclear testing once in force, nevertheless it has created a powerful global norm against further nuclear test detonations. On the other hand, all nine current nuclear-armed States are modernizing their nuclear explosive devices (warheads), in one way or another, and their nuclear weapon engineers and scientists direly would like to resume some limited explosive testing to validate new designs and certify older existing ones.

Only the CTBT stands in their way. Were any one of the nine nuclear-armed States to resume nuclear test detonations, it is quite probable that others would follow. Though not confirmed, it is speculated that pressure to test nuclear devices likely is strongest in India, followed by Russia, China, North Korea, Pakistan and the United States.

The United States and Russia both have advanced technical programmes utilizing quantum computing for advanced simulation and testing to non-explosively certify existing nuclear warheads for safety and reliability, and validate new designs. Nonetheless, nuclear warhead designers ideally would like to detonate new designs for certification, safety and reliability.

In conclusion, the moratorium on nuclear test detonations is hanging by a slender thread in these troubled times of exacerbated tensions between the United States versus China and Russia, India versus China and Pakistan, and North Korea in the Korean Peninsula. Were there to be “friendly” nuclear proliferation by States such as Germany, Poland, or South Korea; or new nuclear States to emerge such as Iran and Taiwan (China), the spectre of nuclear explosive testing once again could arise.

We are living in lawless times internationally, of might over right; it remains a perilous challenge to sustain existing global nuclear arms control and disarmament norms including those against nuclear test detonations.

The views expressed in this article are personal comments by Tariq Rauf, former Head of Verification and Security Policy at the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Aug 7 2025 – On August the first, the Italian daily La Repubblica published an interview with David Grossman, Israel’s most renown author and supporter of a “two-state solution”, as well as an outspoken critic of Israel’s violence against Palestinian civilians.

Israeli presence on the West Bank. The orange and red patches are what remains of Palestinian controlled areas.

Grossman’s interview received international attention and was quoted by respected newspapers like The Guardian, Le Figaro and Haaretz. It was emphasized that so far, few Israeli intellectuals have reacted against what is happening in Gaza. The New Yorker reminded that wars waged by the U.S. in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan transpired in far-away places, unlike the current destruction of lives and cities taking place close to Israel. In some places, Israelis might hear explosions, see attack planes and missiles thundering past, while they quietly enjoy their drinks by the beach. How is it possible that so many Israelis are able to indifferently accept that tens of thousands of innocent people are being mutilated and killed in their close vicinity?

Grossman suffers from crimes against humanity committed in the name of Israel, a country where he was born and learned to love. A nation for which his twenty-one years old son Uri lost his life while fighting in Lebanon. During his entire life Grossman has strived for understanding between Palestinians and Israelis. However, he has been forced to experience how people instead of helping each other to achieve peace and prosperity, have armed themselves while preaching vengeance and death. Grossman states that surrendering to fear and hate is much easier than trying to promote empathy and conciliation. He does not deny that Hamas acted in a deplorable manner when its members on the 7th of October 2023 crossed the border and spread terror in Israel. However, after that date many of Grossman’s friends have abandoned their earlier liberal and tolerant convictions and fallen victims to fear and chauvinism.

According to Grossman “Israel’s curse began with the occupation of the Palestinian territories in 1967. We became militarily strong and fell into the temptation of our absolute power and the idea that we can do anything.” He states that up until now he has been reluctant to use the word “genocide”, which for a Jew is “an avalanche word; once you utter it, it just keeps growing, like an avalanche. And it brings even more destruction.” Can a Jew, a Jewish state, really commit genocide? A terrible crime that their close of kin suffered less than hundred years ago? Grossman says that unfortunately the word has to be uttered loud and clear – Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. “It breaks my heart, but I have to say it now.” Fear and power madness brought Israel to a breaking point where so many have lost their respect for the lives and welfare of others. Grossman knows that many Israelis and Palestinians “have our heart in the right place, but it beats in a world without any heart at all.”

The day after the Grossman interview, Liana Segre, 95 years old and an Auschwitz survivor, reacted in the same paper: “It must be clear that Israel is neither the heir, nor the representative of the European victims of the Shoah, which must not be used as a shield to justify its excesses, and neither should the behaviour of the Israeli state be used as a pretext for returning to hating the entire Jewish people.” It ought to be possible to criticize Israel’s killing of innocent civilians without being accused of being an antisemite. Grossman’s use of the term “genocide” for what is currently happening in Gaza is actually defensible and ought to be disconnected from allusions to anti-Semitism, regardless of what Netanyahu’s regime might imply. It is actually he and Trump who misuse words by throwing the epithet “anti-Semite” in the face of anyone who questions the slaughter of civilians in Gaza.

While addressing the thorny issue of Israeli-Palestinian relations one might pay attention to the history of Hamas. The Hamas movement was founded in 1987. For years, various governments led by Benjamin Netanyahu tried to create a rift between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. His idea was to prevent PLO from advancing toward the establishment of a Palestinian state. Accordingly, Hamas was upgraded from being just one of many terror groups to become an organization with which Israel held indirect negotiations via Egypt, discreetly allowing it to receive infusions of cash from abroad, while increasing the number of work permits granted to Gazan labourers, who kept money flowing into Gaza. Since 2018, Israel also allowed millions in Qatari cash to enter Gaza. Apparently, Israeli policy was to treat the Palestinian Authority as a burden and Hamas as an asset. This while Hamas grew stronger and stronger until its terrorists crossed the border to Israel, slaughtering hundreds of Israelis and kidnapping 251, to be used in exchange för Hamas prisoners held in Israel. Since then, as of 30 July 2025, over 62,700 people (60,785 Palestinians and 1,983 Israelis) have been reported killed, according to the Gaza Health Ministry and Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Among them 217 journalists and media workers and 224 humanitarian aid workers, including 179 employees of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

Considering the great number of civilian casualties, it might be opportune to emphasize what opponents to the Hamas regime often have stated: “The world thinks that Gaza is Hamas and Hamas is Gaza.” Actually, during Hamas reign in Gaza it has always been dangerous to speaking out against the Organization. In polls taken before 7th of October 2023, 44 percent of Gazans claimed they had no trust at all in the Hamas government, while 23 percent had “not a lot of trust.” Only 29 percent expressed either a great deal or quite a lot of trust in Hamas. When it came to Hamas’ corruption, 72 percent stated they believed there was a large amount of corruption in government institutions, and only a minority thought Hamas was taking meaningful steps to address the problem.

Hamas consolidated its power in the Gaza strip through the Battle of Gaza in 2007, a brief civil war between Fatah (the largest faction of the multi-party PLO). Fatah lost and its officials were either taken as prisoners, executed, or expelled, while the Palestinian territories came to be divided into two entities – the West Bank, governed by the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and the Gaza Strip governed by Hamas. In March 2019, Gaza witnessed widespread protests, reflecting dissatisfaction with the severe living conditions, which were marked by a 70 percent unemployment rate among young people. Dozens of individuals, including activists, journalists, and human rights workers were beaten, arrested and subjected to home raids.

While considering Nethanyahu’s, and to a certain degree successful, policies to sabotage Palestinian efforts to constitute a two-state solution his support to Israeli settlements on the West Bank might be added. These settlements have been constructed on lands that Israel has occupied since the Six-Day War in 1967. All these settlements are illegal under international law.

As of January 2023, there were 144 settlements on the West Bank, including 12 in East Jerusalem. The West Bank is also hosting at least 196 so called outposts, settlements not officially authorized by the Israeli government. Over 450,000 Israeli settlers reside in the West Bank, while 220,000 live in East Jerusalem. The presence of settlements and Jewish-only bypass roads creates a fragmented Palestinian territory, seriously hindering economic development and freedom of movement for Palestinians. The Israeli Government spends more than double per citizen in the settlements than it does on citizens within Israel.

In March 2024, the Israeli government announced that it was planning to construct more than 3,300 new homes in the West Bank. This while, according to the UN, since October 7, 2023 at least 964 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank. During the same period, more than 2,900 home demolitions were carried out. In January this year, Israel launched a major military operation called “Iron Wall”, forcibly displacing 30,000 Palestinians in the West Bank.

It is easy to forget the individuals behind the statistics. Two days before Grossman’s interview was published in La Repubblica, Awdah Hathaleen, a Palestinian activist and journalist who helped to make the Oscar-winning documentary No Other Land, was killed. A settler had been driving a bulldozer trough land belonging to Palestinians in the village of Umm al-Khair, south of Hebron and close to an Israeli settlement. The vehicle was destroying trees and cultivated land. When a Palestinian resident approached to ask the driver to stop, he knocked him down with the blade of the bulldozer. Residents began to throw stones. Yinon Levi, a well-known, militant settler, who by Donald Trump had been removed from a U.S. sanctions list, was captured on a video wildly firing his gun at the Palestinians. Awdah Hathaleen, who was standing a distance away from the confrontation, was hit by a bullet and died immediately.

The Israeli government is currently punishing an entire population for the misdeeds of a violent, corrupt regime, which it earlier had been supporting. The Netanyahu regime thrives in a climate of fear and violence. The Israeli war on the civil population of Gaza is accompanied by the defense of what actually appears to be ethnic cleansing. A suspicion supported by Netanyahu’s flagrant disregard for international law in his support to illegal settlements on Palestinian territory and his portrayal of every critic as an anti-Semite, thus hiding the misdemeanors of his regime behind an abuse of the memory of the millions of Jews who perished in European genocides. The crimes of Netanyahu’s regime contribute to an increasingly powerful and unsavory anti-Semitism. A nasty situation in which sensible individual voices like Gossman’s barely can be distinguished.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Kizito Makoye
AWAZA, Turkmenistan, Aug 7 2025 – Once relegated to the periphery of Africa’s economic map due to their lack of coastline, the continent’s landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) are now reframing their geographic constraints as gateways to opportunity.

At the Third United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries held this week in Awaza, Turkmenistan, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) launched a bold positioning paper calling for a narrative shift—from “landlocked” to “land-linked”.

“Land-linked flips the narrative: inland countries become bridges, not barriers,” said Samuel Doe, UNDP’s Resident Representative in Ethiopia. “With the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs) can turn geography into a competitive edge—moving goods, services, and data faster and more affordably across Africa and beyond.”

The strategy, which aligns with the Awaza Programme of Action (2024–2034) and the African Union’s Agenda 2063, advocates for transformative investments in connectivity, innovation, regional integration, and climate resilience—framing LLDCs as essential players in Africa’s socio-economic revival.

Turning Isolation into Centrality

Historically hampered by their remoteness from ports, Africa’s 16 LLDCs face high transportation costs, low trade volumes, and heavy reliance on primary commodity exports. However, that narrative is quickly evolving.

The UNDP report highlights key success stories:

• Rwanda’s Kigali Logistics Platform now acts as a regional trade hub, linking inland transport to ports in Kenya and Tanzania.
• Uganda’s Standard Gauge Railway and revamped Malaba–Kampala corridor are repositioning the country as East Africa’s inland logistics centre.
• Ethiopia, long without direct access to the sea, has capitalised on its modern air transport system and the Ethio-Djibouti Railway to cut freight times from 72 to just 12 hours.

“As we gather here in Awaza, we stand at a pivotal moment,” said Doe. “Africa’s LLDCs are becoming dynamic land-linked economies at the heart of the continent’s socio-economic resurgence.”

Between 2013 and 2024, Zambia, Botswana, and Zimbabwe led LLDC export performance with average annual exports of USD 9.3 billion, USD 6.4 billion, and USD 4.5 billion, respectively. Though LLDCs contribute only 1.1% to global trade, they are increasingly vital to Africa’s regional value chains, supplying copper, gold, coffee, sugar, and textiles across the continent.

Digital Leapfrogging and Innovation

Technology is helping LLDCs leapfrog logistical bottlenecks. The report notes that digital services, fintech, and e-commerce are boosting access to markets, especially for micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs).

“Innovation is a key enabler of the land-linked transformation we are embarking on,” said Doe.

Countries like Rwanda have piloted blockchain systems to streamline customs and reduce border clearance times by up to 80 percent. In Ethiopia, blockchain is helping producers meet EU agricultural export standards, while Uganda is experimenting with AI-driven crop forecasting.

Still, digital gaps remain. Internet penetration in African LLDCs hovers at 20 percent, but UNDP sees this as “a growth opportunity” rather than a constraint.

Powering Trade Through Energy and Infrastructure

Energy access remains another stumbling block. In many LLDCs, especially in the Sahel, electricity coverage is under 20 percent. Yet with vast renewable potential—especially solar and hydro—countries are beginning to tap into cross-border energy markets.

Projects like the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, the North Core Transmission Line, and the Southern African Power Pool are expected to transform regional energy trade, powering industries and reducing export costs.

“Many LLDCs are rich in solar and hydro resources,” noted Doe. “We must harness this to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and drive value-added exports.”

Physical connectivity is also central. While transport costs remain higher than in coastal states, they are being offset by strategic investments like intermodal corridors, dry ports, and rail-air hubs. These are designed not only to move goods but also to facilitate the integration of LLDCs into Global Value Chains (GVCs).

Opening Markets, Expanding Horizons

Perhaps the most significant development for Africa’s LLDCs is the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The trade pact, which covers a market of 1.3 billion people, offers reduced tariffs and harmonised trade rules.

The UNDP paper projects a 10 percent rise in exports for countries like Rwanda by 2035, thanks to AfCFTA-driven investments in agro-processing, manufacturing, and green industries.

LLDCs such as Eswatini, Lesotho, Niger, and Malawi are already seeing over 30 percent of exports going to other African countries, a sign of deepening regional integration. Eswatini, in particular, sends 88% of its exports within the continent.

Climate Resilience as Economic Imperative

Amid this economic momentum, climate change remains a serious threat. From worsening droughts in Chad to flooding in Burkina Faso, African LLDCs are disproportionately affected.

The report urges countries to mainstream climate resilience into trade systems and infrastructure. This includes climate-proofed transport corridors, solar-powered cold chains, and sustainable irrigation.

“To unlock their full potential, we must mobilise diverse financing, shift from low-value sectors, and build climate-smart infrastructure,” said Ahunna Eziakonwa, UNDP Regional Director for Africa.

To sustain momentum, the UNDP calls for the creation of an African LLDC Platform under the African Union. This would monitor progress, facilitate cross-country learning, and promote South-South cooperation, especially in infrastructure and digital trade.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById({js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By ElsaMarie D’Silva
MUMBAI, India, Aug 7 2025 – It’s a quiet code with a loud message: “Ask for Angela.”

In bars and clubs across the UK, women have been informed to discreetly use this phrase if they feel unsafe – a signal to staff that they need help escaping a situation with a man that could escalate. It is a clever, compassionate intervention that has been adopted widely. But during a recent trip to the UK to share my work on making public spaces safer for women, I noticed something odd. Many men proudly brought up this initiative as proof that progress was being made. And I could not help but think: Why should women have to ask for Angela, when men never have to ask for Alex?

This isn’t just about a phrase. It’s about who we expect to carry the burden of safety. Why is it normal for women to strategize for survival, while men are congratulated for simply not being a threat?

But their very existence also reveals a deeper, more disturbing truth: we have normalized unsafe spaces for women and marginalized genders. Instead of asking how to help women escape, shouldn’t we be questioning why these dangers persist at all?

Initiatives like “Ask for Angela” are well-intentioned and essential. They provide immediate recourse in environments where harm can unfold in seconds. But their very existence also reveals a deeper, more disturbing truth: we have normalized unsafe spaces for women and marginalized genders. Instead of asking how to help women escape, shouldn’t we be questioning why these dangers persist at all?

We need to stop placing the burden of safety on women.

We have built a culture that rewards men for not being the problem, instead of challenging them to become part of the solution. Misogynistic jokes, casual harassment, controlling behavior – these are still seen as harmless by many. Worse, they often go unchallenged in friend groups, sports locker rooms, workplaces, and even political circles. If we want change, men must be active disruptors of these norms, not passive bystanders.

There is a growing recognition that this must change. The Mayor of London’s “Maaate” campaign, launched in March 2022, is a brilliant example. It speaks directly to men using humour and familiarity, the way you might call out a mate at the pub.

The campaign uses short videos showing everyday scenarios where inappropriate behaviour begins to cross the line, encouraging men to step in early. No finger-wagging. Just an honest reminder that silence is complicity. It ran across social media, the Transport for London network, and men’s sports platforms to reach its intended audience where they already are.

Similarly, Women’s Aid’s haunting “He’s Coming Home” ad, released during the 2022 FIFA World Cup, flips the beloved chant into a chilling reminder: for many women, major football tournaments coincide with spikes in domestic abuse.

The short film shows a woman’s growing anxiety as her partner returns home, juxtaposed with the rising cheer of fans watching the match. It was part of a broader awareness campaign that reached millions on digital and television platforms. These campaigns succeed because they do what society has long avoided: they make men look inward, not just outward.

So how do we stop asking for Angela?

We start by making misogyny socially unacceptable. The culture of sexist banter, objectifying language, and dismissive attitudes toward women’s discomfort must lose its currency. Imagine a world where laughing at a rape joke did not make you more popular, but made everyone step away from you at a party.

That’s the kind of peer pressure we need. Cultural norms are shaped by what people around us accept and reject. If you want to create safer spaces, start by making harmful behavior embarrassing, not entertaining.

Second, we must invest in prevention, not just protection. Interventions like “Ask for Angela” are crucial safety nets. But we also need to stop people from falling in the first place.

That means shifting attitudes through comprehensive education in schools, workplace training, accountability in leadership, and media that portrays healthy masculinity. It also means funding programs that foster empathy, emotional intelligence, and non-violent conflict resolution from an early age.

Third, we need to engage men early, often, and consistently. Boys are not born violent or entitled. But they grow up steeped in messages about dominance, control, and silence. If we don’t challenge these narratives, they become habits.

Creating safe spaces for men to reflect, unlearn, and relearn is critical. This isn’t about shaming men. It is about empowering them to step into a new kind of leadership: one based on respect, not power.

We also need to normalize “calling in” rather than “calling out.” The goal isn’t to cancel, it is to educate and shift behavior. When a friend says something inappropriate, it should be natural to say, “Maaate, that’s not on,” instead of letting it slide. Men listen to other men. So, we need more of them using their influence in private moments, not just performative posts online.

To be sure, safety codes are lifelines. And until we eliminate violence altogether, they will remain necessary. But our goal should be a world where women don’t have to code-switch for survival, where they can dance, date, drink, and dream without calculating exit routes.

So next time someone praises “Ask for Angela,” ask this: What are we doing to ensure no one has to ask at all?

It is time to stop applauding the lifeboats and start building ships that don’t leak in the first place.

ElsaMarie D’Silva is the Founder of Red Dot Foundation and creator of Safecity, a global platform that crowdsources data on gender-based violence to inform safer cities. She is an Aspen New Voices Fellow, Yale World Fellow and a Visiting Fellow at the Centre for Protecting Women Online, Open University UK.

By Mario Osava
RIO DE JANEIRO, Aug 7 2025 – Residents near the port of Itajaí in southern Brazil celebrated the arrival of 7,292 electric and hybrid vehicles from China aboard the ship BYD Shenzhen on May 28 as a “historic event,” with unloading taking four days. 

It was a record in maritime vehicle transport, but similar operations had already occurred in Brazil and other Latin American countries. A year earlier, the port of Suape in northeastern Brazil received 5,459 units also from BYD, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer.”China has been pivotal… Beyond providing more affordable vehicles, its technological leadership and mass production capacity have shaped global trends.” —Cristóbal Sarmiento.

China’s automotive industry, led by BYD, is the decisive factor driving electric mobility in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Over the past four years, the number of light electric vehicles in the region has nearly doubled annually, with a 187% jump in 2024, reaching 444,071 by the end of December, according to the Latin American Energy Organization (Olade), whose data excludes non-plug-in hybrids.

This is relatively small, representing only 0.7% of the world’s electric vehicle fleet and 0.3% of the region’s total light vehicles, as noted in Olade’s technical report in May. But it signals great expansion potential, now being fueled by Chinese vehicles.

Lower prices and improving quality make Chinese units competitive amid growing demand for transport electrification in the region, according to Fitzgerald Cantero, Director of Studies, Projects, and Information at Olade.

With their exports to the U.S. and the European Union (EU) practically blocked by 100% and 45.3% tariffs, respectively, Chinese electric vehicles see Latin America as “an attractive market” that remains open, along with Asia, he reasoned.

Industrial Hub of Camaçari in Bahia, northeastern Brazil, where BYD built its plant for producing electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles, batteries, and auto parts. Spanning 460 hectares, it allows for expansions to double production to 300,000 vehicles per year. Part of the facilities were purchased from U.S. automaker Ford, which left the country. Credit: BYD

Renewable Energy and Lithium as Attractions 

An additional Latin American attraction is its abundance of renewable energy, Cantero told IPS by phone from Quito, Olade’s headquarters. Using sustainable electricity is essential to meet the goal of decarbonizing transport and reducing planet-warming emissions.

Moreover, some countries in the region are rich in minerals needed for vehicle electrification, such as lithium for batteries, copper for electrical components, and rare earths containing 17 chemical elements used in magnets for electric car motors, wind turbines, and other strategic technologies.

Thus, the region has become a priority for China, the automotive superpower where 12.87 million electric passenger vehicles were sold in 2024, plus 2.2 million exported—figures close to half of all new cars sold domestically and abroad, according to data compiled by Olade.

China’s leadership is more than absolute, as the next powers—the EU and the U.S.—produced only 2.4 million and 1.1 million electric vehicles, respectively, in 2024, according to the International Energy Agency.

Olade estimates that China accounted for over 75% of global electric vehicle sales. This share is likely to grow, as the European market has stagnated and the U.S. has rolled back its environmental policies.

“The (U.S.) electric vehicle industry has been discouraged by new legislation, which will have a dramatic impact on consumer preferences,” said Margaret Myers, director of the Asia and Latin America Program at the Inter-American Dialogue.

Meanwhile, China is boosting exports of its production surplus, particularly to Global South markets with fewer import restrictions, she noted.

For China, “electric vehicle production is part of a broader effort to improve its economy and secure dominance in key industries, including EVs and their batteries, renewable energy, artificial intelligence, bioscience, and other priorities,” Myers concluded to IPS from Washington.

Electric trucks made in China at the second edition of the International Chinese Auto Expo, held from July 24 to 27 at an events center in Santiago, Chile. These cargo vehicles began operating in large mining facilities and urban areas in Chile and are now becoming more widespread nationwide. Credit: Orlando Milesi / IPS

Large Markets Concentrate Sales 

For now, Latin America remains a net importer. Brazil and Mexico are the largest markets, accounting for 73.6% of electrified vehicle sales (including fully electric, plug-in hybrid, and non-plug-in hybrid models) in the region, according to data from the Latin American Association of Automotive Distributors (Aladda), headquartered in Buenos Aires.

Their share of the population is much smaller. Brazil, with 212 million people, and Mexico, with 130 million, make up just 51.2% of Latin America and the Caribbean’s 668 million inhabitants.

Argentina, in fourth place with 47 million people, does not rank among the top eight in motor transport electrification. Colombia, the third most populous with 53 million, is also third in Aladda’s ranking.

Colombia and Chile lead in electric buses, with 1,590 and 2,600 operating in their cities as of December 2024, respectively, according to Olade. Brazil, despite its much larger population, has only 900—far fewer than Chile, a country of just 18.5 million people.

A Chinese electric vehicle charges its battery at a dealership in south-central Mexico City. Sales of Chinese-made electric vehicles have grown in this Latin American country due to their lower prices compared to Western brands and financing options. Credit: Emilio Godoy / IPS

Three Waves

“The evolution of electromobility in Chile had its first wave between 2017 and 2020, focused on public transportation—specifically electric bus systems,” recalled Cristóbal Sarmiento Laurel, Director of Energy and Sustainable Development at the private Diego Portales University.

The goal was to introduce the new technology in a “more feasible way, since buses operate on controlled routes and schedules, making charging planning easier,” he explained. BYD was the key player in this phase.

The second wave, starting in 2021, saw a “steady rise in sales of light hybrid and fully electric vehicles, with growing market presence from Chinese manufacturers like BYD, Maxus, JA, DFSK, and Changan, which quickly gained ground in the domestic market,” he added.

“China has been pivotal in this journey. Beyond providing more affordable vehicles, its technological leadership and mass production capacity have shaped global trends. For Chile, this relationship isn’t just a commercial opportunity but also a concrete way to accelerate the energy transition,” Sarmiento emphasized.

“Transport accounts for 33.3% of Chile’s energy consumption, according to the National Energy Balance, and relies almost entirely on fossil fuels”, therefore, electrification helps mitigate climate change, Sarmiento told IPS in Santiago.

“Not using fossil fuels is a solution,” but electrified cars “promote individual mobility rather than transforming transportation systems or boosting public transit,” noted Antonio del Río, a researcher at the Renewable Energy Institute of Mexico’s National Autonomous University.

More electric buses—whether Chinese or from other origins—are the way forward, he argued. “The cost per kilometer for an electric vehicle is 60% lower than a conventional car,” he said to IPS in Mexico City.

By the end of 2024, Mexico had only 780 electric buses, according to Olade data—half as many as Colombia, or a quarter per capita.

Assembly line of electric and hybrid vehicles at BYD’s Camaçari plant in northeastern Brazil, which will initially produce 150,000 vehicles annually with potential to double output. The electric vehicle market has grown rapidly in Brazil and Latin America over the past four years. With mass domestic production, Brazil could become an export hub for these advanced-technology vehicles. Credit: BYD

Mexico mirrored the region’s surge in electrified vehicle sales, which reached 412,493 units in 2024, up 174.9% from 2022, according to Aladda. Brazil led growth among major countries with a 256.2% increase, while Mexico saw 142.2%.

Despite the sharp rise, electrified vehicles still represent a small share of total sales: 8.1% regionally on average, 6.8% in Brazil, and 6.1% in Chile in 2024. Colombia stands out at 25.8%.

The most dramatic two-year growth—665.3% regionally—was in plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), followed by pure electric vehicles (EVs) at 403%. Non-plug-in hybrids (HEVs) lost momentum in Brazil but grew in Mexico, Chile, Colombia, and Peru, especially in 2024.

Another notable trend is the diversity of Chinese brands—23 in both Mexico and Chile. Chile has 52 brands total, including Chinese and others, according to Rodrigo Salcedo, president of Chile’s  Electric Vehicle Trade Association (Avec).

The influx of new brands has heightened competition, bringing more options, models, and prices that are gradually approaching those of conventional cars. However, “there’s a gap,” lamented Salcedo, pointing to the lack of information, workshops, and trained technicians for maintenance—except for buses, which benefit from Chinese technicians in Chile.

BYD cars for sale and test drives at an Itavema dealership, a BYD sales network, in Botafogo, a traditional middle-class neighborhood in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

Third Wave 

Meanwhile, a third wave of electric mobility is emerging in the region, following the initial phases of electric buses and the mass availability of light vehicles at falling prices. This new phase involves the establishment of assembly plants, including Chinese ones.

In Brazil, two Chinese automakers have begun local production of electrified vehicles. BYD (short for Build Your Dreams) started production in July at its assembly plant in Camaçari, Bahia, rolling out three models—one fully electric and two plug-in hybrids. And GWM (Great Wall Motors) is set to begin production this semester in Iracemápolis, São Paulo.

Symbolically, both manufacturers took over former plants of traditional automakers—Ford (U.S.) and Mercedes-Benz (Germany), respectively.

While Chinese-branded cars have been produced in Brazil since 2017 (such as those from the Caoa-Chery joint venture in Anápolis, Goiás), their electrified models, introduced in 2019, were limited in volume.

BYD’s plant marks a new era, designed to assemble 150,000 units annually initially, with plans to double that capacity. The project also includes battery and auto parts production, along with a logistics system, explained Mauro Pereira, general superintendent of Camaçari’s Industrial Development Committee (Cofic).

Cofic manages the Camaçari Industrial Park to create the best operating conditions for 88 local companies, including BYD.

“BYD is putting Brazil at the forefront of vehicle technology,” Pereira stated, anticipating 20,000 direct jobs and triple that in indirect employment. The plant could also turn Brazil into an export hub for vehicles and components, including batteries, to Latin America and possibly Europe.

The Camaçari plant benefited from land incentives and tax breaks, but the real driver was Brazil’s import tariffs on electric vehicles, introduced in January 2024. Starting at 10% (slightly higher for hybrids), they will gradually rise to 35% by 2027.

Chinese new-energy vehicles are cutting costs with advanced, efficient, and intelligent technologies—”they’re smartphones on wheels,” said Thiago Sugahara, VP of the Brazilian Electric Vehicle Association and GWM’s institutional relations manager. Users can control and monitor their cars remotely and safely via smartphone, he explained.

“An electric car is a battery with four wheels,” quipped Ana Lia Rojas, head of Chile’s Renewable Energy and Storage Association (Acera), highlighting both the vehicle’s key component —still  costly—,  and their potential to support power grids.

Colbert Marques, a sales consultant at Itavema (a BYD dealership network), noted that Chinese manufacturers halved EV prices. Today, models start at just over US$20,000, forcing Western brands to slash prices to stay competitive.

Buyers of EVs and hybrids “are more informed and tech-savvy, even older ones,” he observed, confident in his decision to switch to BYD in 2023, having driven traditional vehicles for 18 years.

With contributions from Orlando Milesi (Chile) and Emilio Godoy (Mexico)