By James E. Jennings
ATLANTA, USA, Sep 16 2025 – In a long past due move, the UN General Assembly voted 142-10 to approve a plan called “The New York Declaration” that hopes to revive the long dead Two State Solution for Palestinian Independence.

Many observers may see it as a welcome initiative to curtail Israel’s century-long colonial project in Palestine. The declaration was proposed by France, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Canada and a gaggle of other countries as way to establish a Palestinian state on the West Bank of the Jordan River.

But it is a cruel deception.

Just last year the UN General Assembly demanded that Israel end its so-called “security operations” in Gaza before the end of this month of September, 2025. Israel has ignored the deadline and has no intention of complying.

Nothing approaching peace for Palestine is likely to happen, no matter the overwhelming vote at the UN General Assembly. Why? Because creating a virtual state in Palestine is not a real state and therefore does not solve the problem.

The clever leaders from this group of countries, most of them apparently sincere, have figured out a way—in the absence of a realistic plan to restrain Israel—to merely kick the can of peace down the road. But it doesn’t mean it will happen.

It may be designed to attenuate Palestinian suffering and limit Israel’s endless denial of human and political rights, but it cannot succeed by prolonging the already decades-long and miserably failed “Peace Process.” The Oslo process took thirty years, and peace is farther away than ever.

You either have peace, or you don’t. It cannot be a process. Although post-war peace negotiations are sometimes long and tedious, if intentions are sincere the shape of an agreement takes only minutes to define and outline. Any meaningful agreement, whether between individuals or nations, requires a straightforward statement of goals and adherence to the principles of equality, and justice.

Yet despite UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ frequent statements that Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank Is illegal under international law and must stop, and bombing civilians is illegal and must stop, those standards are not being faced honestly by the coalition of nations operating now as “The New York Declaration.”

None of the great nations involved in this latest initiative are calling for Israel to withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank, much less to stop the genocide immediately. Why not?

The intent of this diplomatic maneuver led by France, the UK, Canada, and other countries is to avoid these pressing demands, not implement them. Rather, if the UN vote does succeed in getting Israel to temporarily stop bombing the hapless civilians in Gaza, the world can expect a great follow-up hubbub about a “Peace Process” for Palestine that may last years but will in fact sideline the principled demands of the General Assembly’s September 12 Resolution.

That in fact may be the point of this initiative, as sincere as President Macron and the others may be. The threat of UK Prime Minister Starmer to recognize a Palestinian state in September is hollow and just the same: to distract from the UN General Assembly’s demands by signing on to a “process” that will never end. It’s a good guess that, like Lucy in the Peanuts Cartoon, he will pull the football away in the nick of time, leaving Palestine like Charley Brown flat on the ground.

Creating a virtual state, not a real one, is just playing into Netanyahu’s hands. The key nations leading the agreement have not labeled Israel’s actions in Gaza genocide as they should or called for an immediate halt to the killing and starvation.

Neither have the three leading military suppliers, Germany, the UK, and France, stopped sending weapons and technical military support components to Israel.

And for what? Not for advancing justice or even humanity, much less Palestinian political rights, but to smoothly guide the international community to an endorsement of Israel’s genocide in Gaza and its military control of the entire Middle East.

They imagine that the countries of the Middle East, led by Saudia Arabia’s murderous crown prince Muhammad bin Salman, aka MBS, will eventually allow the Western powers to confirm Israel’s military hegemony in Gaza and the West Bank.

The vision endorsed by these leading countries fails to call Israel to account for its genocide in Gaza or its de facto takeover of the West Bank. If implemented, the people of Palestine will become merely “hewers of wood and drawers of water,” in the Biblical phrase, for Israel’s triumphant military umbrella over the Middle East region.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States will be free to make money, and the US will pay for Gaza’s reconstruction. The world can expect a great hubbub about the “Peace Process” in the coming months that will sideline the principled demands of the General Assembly’s Resolutions.

What will happen to the people in Gaza is left out of the calculation. Be warned. Pay attention. It is a cruel deception.

James E. Jennings is President of Conscience International, a former aid worker in Gaza, and a longtime advocate for Palestinian human and political rights.

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 Heather Lynne Taylor-Strauss and Eiichiro Takinami
BANGKOK, Thailand, Sep 16 2025 – Over the past two decades, foreign direct investment (FDI) has been the single largest and most stable source of external development capital in Asia and the Pacific (see Figure).

In 2022 alone, FDI flows into the region exceeded US$300 billion, outpacing official development aid (ODA), remittances and portfolio investment flows. Even in 2023, when global investment slowed under higher interest rates and geopolitical uncertainty, FDI into the region remained close to $290 billion.

Figure: External capital inflows to developing countries in Asia and the Pacific

Source: Created by ESCAP based on World Development Indicators, UNCTAD, and IMF data.

For a region facing a $1.5 trillion annual financing gap to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), this is more than a statistic. It is a reminder that the future of development finance and achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development depends on whether countries can effectively attract and channel FDI.

From the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (AAAA) in 2015 to the most recent Sevilla Commitment agreed at the International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), the global community is aligned to leveraging FDI for sustainable development. In fact, the Sevilla Commitment elevated the role of FDI.

While the AAAA positioned FDI as complementary to public finances for sustainable development, the Sevilla Commitment identified FDI as a key source of development capital, devoting an entire subsection to scaling up FDI.

ODA, portfolio investments and remittances all play important roles. But none match the stability, scale or transformative power of FDI. While ODA is vital for humanitarian and social priorities, donor budgets are increasingly squeezed by competing demands such as defence spending and climate adaptation.

Portfolio investments represent a large volume but are more susceptible to global economic events and often seek short-term returns. Personal remittances are stable and sustain household welfare. However, remittances are primarily consumption-oriented and often are not channelled to building productive capacity. FDI is different. It can build renewable energy plants, expand digital infrastructure, and create jobs. It is not just money flowing in; it is productive capital tied to long-term development.

Nonetheless, not all FDI is equal. Its impact depends on whether investments are effectively channelled towards SDG priorities. To accomplish this, investment promotion agencies (IPAs), with their mandates to promote, attract, and facilitate FDI, play a crucial role. With the right strategies and tools, IPAs can ensure that the FDI contributes to sustainable development needs.

The following three areas are particularly important for action by the IPAs.

1. Aligning and implementing IPA’s investment attraction strategies with SDGs.

IPAs need to create medium-term investment promotion and attraction strategies that are aligned with their SDG priorities. This involves IPAs finding their country’s “niche” target sectors to attract investments.

Aligning strategies with the SDGs is essential because many corporate investors now value alignment as part of their ESG investment criteria. Over the past several years, ESCAP has supported its member States in developing and implementing practical, targeted investment promotion and attraction strategies. These projects have enabled IPAs to narrow their focus, identify niche opportunities, and connect with high-potential investors.

2. Leveraging regional cooperation on investment promotion.

While IPAs often compete for investors, regional cooperation can be even more powerful—especially in attracting cross-border investments that require scale. By pooling markets and aligning promotion efforts, countries can present themselves not as fragmented destinations but as part of a larger, integrated investment destination. This approach not only makes the region more attractive to global investors but also enables each country to highlight its comparative strengths within wider value chains.

ESCAP has been at the forefront of advancing such cooperation. In South East Asia, the ASEAN Regional Investment Promotion Action Plan (RIPAP) 2025–2030 was endorsed by all ASEAN member States as the first region-wide initiative to jointly promote investment opportunities.

In Central Asia, ESCAP and the International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation launched the Boosting Exports through FDI programme, which helps countries attract investment that strengthens regional value chains and to become more competitive. Regional collaboration of this kind demonstrates that cooperation—not just competition—can unlock larger, more sustainable flows of FDI.

3. Developing impact measurement tools.

Developing and utilizing impact measurement tools can help IPAs demonstrate how their work is contributing to advancing the SDGs. With database systems and tools, IPAs can track growth in sectors like green industries or progress on digital transformation, making their impact more visible. For example, Investment Fiji has tailored its Customer Relationship Management system to more effectively monitor how the investment they have helped facilitate contributes to the SDGs.

As traditional development aid budgets plateau, FDI remains the most stable and transformative capital for building productive capacity. FDI has already been instrumental in driving SDGs in areas such as transitioning to clean energy, accelerating digital connectivity, and generating decent jobs needed for inclusive growth. But to fully realize this potential, governments and IPAs must be strategic, collaborative and impact-driven.

ESCAP stands ready to support its member States and their IPAs in developing and implementing FDI promotion and attraction strategies aligned with SDGs.

Heather Lynne Taylor-Strauss is Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP; Eiichiro Takinami is Junior Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP.

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 , Sep 16 2025 – The theater of diplomacy can be more revealing than the speeches. Under a scorching Caspian sun in Awaza, two marines lowered their flags with the precision of a ballet. The green silk of Turkmenistan, folded into a neat bundle before the UN’s blue-and-gold standard, fluttered briefly and vanished into waiting hands.

Delegates squinted in the glare. A security guard, drained after days of marathon negotiations, whispered, “We made it.” The applause that followed carried an implicit bet that geography would no longer condemn 32 landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) to economic stagnation.

“This is not the end,” Rabab Fatima, the UN’s top envoy for LLDCs, told the assembled diplomats. “It is the beginning of a new chapter for the LLDCs. LLDCs may be landlocked, but they are not opportunity-locked.”

Her words capped four days of bargaining that produced the Awaza Political Declaration and a ten-year Programme of Action—promising structural economic transformation, regional integration, resilient infrastructure, climate adaptation, and the mobilization of financing partnerships. But whether these ambitions become asphalt, fiber-optic cable, and trade corridors depends on what happens next—starting with the LLDC Ministerial meeting on September 26, on the sidelines of the 80th UN General Assembly.

“For the first time, we have a programme of action for the LLDCs, which includes a dedicated priority area on climate action and disaster resilience,” Fatima said. “As we all know, digital technology is reshaping how the world learns, trades, governs and innovates. The Awaza Programme of Action puts digital transformation at its core through investment in science, technology and affordable infrastructure for e-learning, e-governance and e-commerce.”

The geography tax

Being landlocked remains one of development’s oldest handicaps. More than 600 million people live in LLDCs. Their exports must cross at least one international border—and often several—before reaching a port. Transport costs can be twice as high as those of coastal economies, eroding profit margins and discouraging investment.

Dean Mulozi, a delegate from Zambia, put it bluntly: “It’s not just that we’re far from the sea. It’s that the world’s arteries don’t reach us easily. We are always waiting—for fuel, fiber-optic cable, containers, investment.”

The Declaration seeks to unblock those arteries: freer transit, harmonized customs, integrated transport corridors, and digital transformation—policies designed to cut border delays, lower costs, and attract investors. For countries such as Rwanda and Burundi, this is not rhetoric. Rwandan coffee growers lose profits as trucks crawl over narrow mountain roads toward Tanzania’s Dar es Salaam port. Burundian tea producers navigate customs regimes that can turn a week’s delay into financial ruin.

Ambition Versus Reality

The Awaza Programme includes a proposed Infrastructure Investment Finance Facility, with a headline USD 10 billion commitment from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. In theory, this could carve reliable corridors linking East Africa’s heartlands to the African Continental Free Trade Area. In practice, similar pledges have evaporated in the past when political will or money ran dry.

Five priorities dominate the blueprint: doubling manufacturing output and services exports; deepening trade integration; building transport links; embedding climate resilience; and mobilizing partnerships with development banks and private investors. Fatima called it “a blueprint for action, not just words,” but the distance between the two is long.

Rwanda and Burundi: Land-Linked Potential

Consider Rwanda, which has embraced digital innovation and ranks among Africa’s top reformers in business climate. Yet moving a container from Kigali to Dar es Salaam costs more than shipping it from Dar es Salaam to Shanghai. Blockchain pilots between Rwanda and Uganda have already reduced border clearance times by 80 percent, but scaling such reforms requires regional cooperation—the very essence of Awaza’s call for “land-linked” thinking.

Burundi faces even starker challenges. Political instability has disrupted transit agreements with neighbors. Poor road maintenance and limited rail options mean Burundian manufacturers pay a hidden geography tax on every exported item. A coordinated East African transport corridor—funded under Awaza’s financing facility—could halve transit times and cut spoilage for perishable goods.

Testing the Promise Divine

The first test comes on September 26, when ministers meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. They are expected to name national coordinators, align budgets, and press for LLDC concerns at COP30 and UNCTAD XVI. As Turkmenistan’s foreign minister, Rashid Meredov, warned, the network of coordinators will make or break implementation.

The Climate Conundrum

LLDCs are among the most exposed to climate shocks: droughts paralyze Sahelian farmers, cyclones sever southern Africa’s trade routes, and glacial melt threatens Central Asia’s water supplies. Rwanda and Burundi, reliant on rain-fed crops, can see a single flood wipe out a season’s earnings. Awaza’s plan for an LLDC Climate Negotiating Group aims to amplify their voice at global talks. Shared hydropower grids and renewable energy corridors, if built, could stabilize supply chains and keep factories running.

Digital Detours

Physical infrastructure is not the only hurdle. Maria Fernanda, a Bolivian tech entrepreneur, captured the digital struggle: “Sometimes it feels like the internet is slower here because it has to climb mountains like we do.” Fiber-optic networks and regional data hubs—central to the Awaza agenda—could level the digital playing field. Rwanda’s ambition to be East Africa’s data hub and Burundi’s expansion of mobile banking are previews of what “land-linked” economies could look like.

The Politics of Pipelines

Awaza was also about geopolitics. Turkmenistan used its role as host to burnish its neutrality and to tout hydrogen energy schemes, circular economy frameworks, and Caspian environmental projects. Landlocked development, it signaled, is not merely a technical problem but a diplomatic one. Transit states and inland economies must cooperate, not compete, over corridors and pipelines.

As one UN development official observed, “Land-linked flips the narrative: inland countries become bridges, not barriers. With AfCFTA, LLDCs can turn geography into a competitive edge—moving goods, services, and data faster and more affordably across Africa and beyond.”

Bringing Civil Society and Youth to the Table

One innovation at LLDC3 was the deliberate inclusion of youth and grassroots activists “not outside the halls, but right here in the meeting rooms.” This multistakeholder approach could ensure that local voices—such as Rwandan farmers’ cooperatives or Burundian women traders—shape the policies affecting them. But inclusion must be sustained beyond Awaza’s photo ops.

From Awaza to Action

The Ministerial meeting will likely spotlight three urgent tasks:

Operationalizing the Finance Facility—Without timely disbursements, promised corridors and digital highways will remain on paper.

Integrating LLDC Priorities into Global Agendas—Ensuring COP30 and UNCTAD XVI address LLDC vulnerabilities.

Ensuring Accountability and Transparency—Regular progress reports, perhaps modeled on climate COP stocktakes, could keep momentum alive.

Fatima’s closing words resonate: “Let us make the promise of ‘land-linked’ not only a phrase but a new way of life.”

A Fragile Opportunity

For Mazhar Amanbek, the Kazakh trucker whose apples rot at customs, and for Burkinabe grain shipper Mohamad Oumar, Awaza’s words must become tarmac and telecoms. For Rwandan cooperatives betting on premium coffee exports, or Burundian entrepreneurs seeking markets beyond their borders, the declaration could mean the difference between subsistence and prosperity.

The UN will be pressed to broker the deals and financing that can make LLDCs competitive. These inland nations are not short of resources or ambition—minerals, fertile soils, and human talent abound. The challenge is converting potential into prosperity.

As the blue UN flag was folded under the Caspian sky, the marines’ boots clicked on the promenade, and the heat bent the air into shimmering waves. Awaza’s delegates boarded planes carrying a slender sheaf of paper with an outsized ambition: to turn geography’s oldest curse into an engine of shared growth.

The world’s attention will now shift to New York, where LLDC ministers must prove Awaza was not a mirage. If they seize the moment, the next decade could see East African trucks rolling on new highways, fiber cables humming under deserts, and landlocked nations from Bolivia to Burundi trading on equal terms. If not, the folded flags of Awaza will join the archive of fine promises that melted under a scorching sun.

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(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’);