For streetside sellers of artificial jewelry and for recyclers toiling under the increasingly torrid temperatures caused by climate change, innovative insurance means not all is lost when their wares are ruined or it is too hot to work. But is this a panacea or an opportunity for the authorities to ignore their responsibilities to the poorest workers of India?

By Naomi Myint Breuer
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 26 2025 – The Trump administration announced on June 23 that a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Iran had been reached following 10 days of conflict between the two nations and the United States’ bombardment of three nuclear sites in Iran. The establishment of the ceasefire will return focus back to the conflict between Israel and Palestine and the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

The United Nations estimates that 610 Iranians and 28 Israelis were killed due to the exchange of strikes between Israel and Iran. With the cessation of the conflict, the region can recover from these damages, as well as come closer to stability, peace and a chance to focus on their already existing humanitarian crises.

Amid fears of an escalating global conflict, humanitarian organizations expressed concern about the far-reaching humanitarian implications in regions such as Gaza and the West Bank, where conditions are already dire. With the ongoing blockade in Gaza, civilians are unable to acquire food, clean water, humanitarian aid, healthcare and fuel. These regions have also been subject to routine bombardment by Israel, and conditions worsened after some communities were impacted by the strikes between Israel and Iran, according to American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA).

“Nothing since WWII can equal it, with bombs deliberately targeting hospitals and civilians and UN agencies like the World Food Program and World Health Organization being blocked,” James E. Jennings, president of Conscience International and Executive Director of U.S. Academics for Peace, told IPS.

The 10 day conflict between Israel and Iran led to increased military raids, arrests, violence and damage to infrastructure. The period shifted focus away from Palestinians, reducing donations and advocacy.

The ceasefire and potential de-escalation of tensions between its neighbors should bring the international focus back to Palestine’s humanitarian crisis.

With Iran severely weakened, former New York University (NYU) international relations professor Dr. Alon Ben-Meir says the country will not be able to support its Axis of Resistance in the near future. He predicts Iran will attempt to come to an agreement with the U.S. in regard to its nuclear program. Israel, on the other hand, is now in a powerful position as it has diminished Hamas’, Hezbollah’s, and now Iran’s threat against them, according to Ben-Meir.

“Sadly, Israel’s triumphant assault on Iran may further embolden Netanyahu to try to attain his ‘total victory’ in Gaza, which, in my view, is elusive at best,” Ben-Meir said.

Israel seemed to confirm this prediction.

“Now the focus shifts back to Gaza—to bring the hostages home and to dismantle the Hamas regime,” Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, the Israeli military chief, said.

With Iran and Hamas temporarily out of the equation, Ben-Meir said Trump has a chance to demand an end to the conflict between Israel and Palestine and “to think in terms of changing the dynamic” of the conflict.

Ben-Meir said that only if Trump pushes for an end to the war can a resolution be reached. Yet, he said that while Netanyahu remains in power, it is unlikely that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will end, which will still leave the region in an unstable state.

“Although this will not lead to a regional peace that would include all the players, it has created a more positive regional atmosphere,” he said.

Ben Meir also predicts that the cessation of tensions with Iran is unlikely to change the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

“Netanyahu is riding high and will relent only if Trump tells him to stop using humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians in Gaza to pressure Hamas to release the remaining hostages,” he said.

The UN Security Council held an emergency meeting on June 22 after the U.S. struck Iranian nuclear sites. Following pushing for peace in the region, the UN Secretary-General António Guterres praised the ceasefire.

“I urge the two countries to respect it fully,” Guterres wrote on X. “The fighting must stop. The people of the two countries have already suffered too much.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

By James E. Jennings
ATLANTA, USA, Jun 26 2025 – Chest thumping “Mission Accomplished” claims by President Trump that he ordered the world’s biggest conventional bombs to be dropped on a sleeping nation of 90 million people, were premature. To top it off he bragged that Iran’s nuclear capacity was devastated and that the whole nation fired “not a single shot” back.

That rosy scenario was greatly tempered a couple of days later when the US Defense Intelligence Agency reported that Iran’s nuclear program was set back only a few months. And the New York Times listed the doppelganger effect of echoing the Bush Administration’s claim of “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq, when in fact years of struggle and loss followed.

The US withdrew from Iraq not with a bang but a whimper. Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) as Bush alleged.

At least George W. Bush had the decency to wait awhile before making his widely mocked “Mission Accomplished” claim after invading Iraq, which proved to be ten years premature. The US attack on Iran on June 21 was based on the same kind of hallucinatory paranoia about a non-existent nuclear bomb threat as had fueled the Iraq War hysteria in Washington in 2003.

Both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the President’s own Director of National Intelligence denied that Iran has either a nuclear weapons program or enough high-grade uranium to produce a bomb.

Even the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and Trump’s pal in Jerusalem, Bibi Netanyahu, admit that 60% enrichment is not 90%, the percentage required to make a bomb.

Administration advocates are therefore reduced to claiming that the US bombed Iran solely on “suspicious intentions,” which is exactly what the George W. Bush Administration used as a pretext to attack a practically defenseless Iraq in 2003.

A criminal charge based on a that claim would get the plaintiff tossed out, if not laughed out, of every courtroom in the United States.

The marvelously choreographed US stealth attack on Iran, long urged by Israel, was based on protecting not just Israel’s security, but its total domination of the Middle East with US backing. There are two things wrong with that policy. Neither a secure ally in Jerusalem nor a steady partner in Washington supports it.

Israel is a tiny country in a vast area and cannot hope to forever dominate the countries around it, as a glance at the map will demonstrate. The thin margin in the Israeli Knesset is sure to be unstable. Then too, American support is variable, depending on public attitudes, budget constraints, a volatile Congress, and events and political parties that change over time.

The main reason for the 2003-2011 war, that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, was false. The claim of the G.W. Bush Administration that the US faced the threat of a “mushroom cloud” over Washington was a wild fantasy. Vice President Cheney went so far as to say that there is “no doubt” that Iraq already has WMD.

The idea that Iraq somehow supported the 9/11 attacks against the US was also untrue. None of the reasons given for the war were true—all were lies. The evidence was available and plain to see, but the war was started anyway.

The world was shocked when Israel went ahead and attacked Iran, presumably with a green light from Mr. Trump, only a few days before diplomatic talks were scheduled to begin. That deception is reminiscent of the deadly Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor that brought the United States into WW II while diplomacy was being simultaneously offered in Washington.

The fact is that this war has been advocated and planned for decades by Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu. If you use the WW II test for which side is guilty of blatant aggression, Hitler and his Axis allies in Tokyo or Roosevelt, you would say Hitler and Tojo.

Today the shoe is on the other foot. Israel and the United States, acting in concert, have indeed launched an illegal war of aggression (which defenders call “choice”) against Iran. No matter how many talking heads and newspapers cheer the attack, it was still illegal.

The UN charter has been breached and the American Constitution violated. What are US citizens going to do about it?

Violence cannot make friends, bring peace with 90 million Iranians whose sovereignty has been violated, or enable Israel to rule the Palestinian people. Their watchword is sumud, steadfast resistance.

IPS UN Bureau

Excerpt:

James E. Jennings, PhD is President of Conscience International

By Jennifer Xin-Tsu Lin Levine
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 26 2025 – United Nations member states this week reiterated their commitment to the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity—at a time when world powers are failing to meet these obligations.

On the 20th anniversary of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, the UN held a Plenary Meeting to discuss the landmark commitment to the doctrine. Although many speakers praised the policy’s work on prevention capacity, members largely criticized the inconsistency and hypocrisy of states that have failed to adhere to the doctrine’s guidelines.

The representative from Slovenia criticized the Security Council permanent members’ veto power on issues addressing genocide and human rights violations, arguing that the veto slows the quick response needed for such issues when people’s dignity is threatened. She further suggested that there should be no veto power from Permanent Members in cases where R2P is involved.

This statement, although not explicitly, calls out the United States and the Russian Federation, the two Permanent Member states who have exercised their veto power in the past year—for the US, in regard to the Middle East and Palestine specifically, and for Russia, in regard to Sudan and South Sudan.

This critique is not new; the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) coalition of small and medium-sized states proposed a “Code of Conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes,” which, according to the R2P website, “calls upon all members of the Security Council (both permanent and elected) to not vote against any credible draft resolution intended to prevent or halt mass atrocities.” As of 2022, 121 member states and two observers have signed.

By reframing the protection of civilians from mass atrocities as a governmental duty and responsibility, R2P was created after inadequate responses to genocide in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.

Although the initiative has been successful for mediating in regions like The Gambia and Kenya, as Secretary-General António Guterres noted in his report entitled “Responsibility to Protect: 20 years of commitment to principled and collective action,” R2P has failed to push the UN towards action in places like Syria or Myanmar, where veto deadlock prevented aid or policy change.

Another hindrance to R2P’s efficacy, as both Slovenia and a representative from Australia noted, is what the latter referred to as general impunity and lack of accountability for many states.

Criticizing sanctions and dismissal of international court rulings such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), this statement may have been in response to US sanctions towards four ICC judges after the court opened investigations concerning both the US and Israel’s military actions.

Neither nation recognizes the ICC’s authority, making them not subject to ICC rulings.

In a statement from the White House, President Donald Trump said, “The United States will impose tangible and significant consequences on those responsible for the ICC’s transgressions, some of which may include the blocking of property and assets, as well as the suspension of entry into the United States of ICC officials, employees, and agents, as well as their immediate family members, as their entry into our Nation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

Multiple representatives reaffirmed their respect for impartial judicial rulings and international courts and tribunals in the General Assembly meeting despite verbal and economic pushback from some of the most influential member states.

The R2P’s most glaring inconsistency between principle and implementation lies in the conflict in Gaza. The representative from Indonesia highlighted the genocide against Palestine as “the R2P’s most urgent test,” urging member states to revive the sanctity of international law and restore trust in the UN’s ability to enforce their policy. As trust in the UN has waned, many feel a growing pressure to re-legitimize the institution through their actions, particularly regarding crimes against humanity.

As one representative noted, “History will judge us all.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

By Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Jun 25 2025 – Poland’s embattled Prime Minister Donald Tusk emerged bruised but still standing after his government survived a parliamentary vote of confidence on 11 June. He’d called the vote, which he won by 243 to 210, just days after the presidential candidate of his Civic Platform (PO) party suffered an unexpected defeat.

Karol Nawrocki, an independent nationalist conservative backed by the former ruling Law and Justice Party (PiS) defeated liberal pro-European Union (EU) Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski in a nail-biting presidential runoff. The result offers a broader test of Poland’s democratic resilience that could have implications across the EU.

The electoral blow

Nawrocki’s path to victory was anything but predictable. The 42-year-old former president of Poland’s Institute of National Remembrance had never held elected office before emerging as PiS’s chosen candidate. Yet his populist message resonated with frustrated voters.

Economic grievances provided fertile ground for nationalist appeals. Despite Poland’s relatively low unemployment, youth unemployment of over 10 per cent is an understandable source of anxiety for younger voters. Increasingly, they’re reacting by rejecting mainstream political offerings.

This helped cause the fragmented results of the 18 May first round. Trzaskowski won only 31.36 per cent of the vote and Nawrocki took 29.54 per cent. The combined vote share of right-wing candidates – Nawrocki and far-right politicians Grzegorz Braun and Sławomir Mentzen – exceeded polling expectations. Braun and Mentzen took over 21 per cent between them, thanks to the support of many young voters.

The 1 June runoff saw Nawrocki win 50.89 per cent to Trzaskowski’s 49.11 per cent, a margin of under two percentage points. Nawrocki took 64 per cent of the rural vote while Trzaskowski commanded 67 per cent in urban centres – an established geographic divide that reflects an enduring ideological division between a conservative, nationalist Poland and its liberal, cosmopolitan counterpart.

Election interference

Disinformation is helping fuel polarisation. The election campaign unfolded against a backdrop of foreign interference concerns that echoed troubling developments across the region – particularly in Romania, where the Supreme Court cancelled the 2024 presidential election due to evidence of Russian interference.

Just days before the first round, Poland’s Research and Academic Computer Network discovered evidence of potentially foreign-funded Facebook ads targeting all major candidates. According to an investigation by fact-checking organisation Demagog, TikTok was flooded with disinformation, particularly but not exclusively against Trzaskowski. The platform’s algorithm displayed far-right content twice as often as centrist or left-wing content to new users, with pro-Nawrocki videos appearing four times more frequently than pro-Trzaskowski content. Over 1,200 fake accounts systematically attacked Trzaskowski, while another 1,200 promoted Nawrocki.

The influence operation extended beyond individual character assassination to sowing distrust in the democratic process and sharing broader far-right narratives. Fake accounts systematically promoted anti-Ukrainian sentiment and anti-immigration conspiracy theories.

Donald Trump also gave Nawrocki an unprecedented level of support: he received him at the White House just before the election and sent his Homeland Security Secretary to campaign for him in Poland as she attended the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). This year, CPAC, a US conservative platform, held two international events, in Hungary and Poland. The Polish one, timed to coincide with the runoff, offered a clear indication of how the nationalist far right has become internationalised.

Institutional paralysis

The viability of Tusk’s ideologically diverse coalition and his own political future have been called into question by the result. With critics in the Civic Coalition blaming the election defeat on the government’s communication failures and Tusk’s personal unpopularity, the confidence vote became a key test.

But even though Tusk has survived the confidence vote, it will be a tall order to implement the reforms needed to restore the democratic institutions that came under strain during the PiS administration. In eight years in power, PiS dismantled judicial independence, made public media its propaganda mouthpiece and undermined women’s rights by introducing one of Europe’s harshest anti-abortion laws. The new government’s attempts to reckon with this legacy had already been hampered by outgoing President Andrzej Duda, who used his veto power to block key reforms. Nawrocki will continue that, leaving Tusk unable to realise his promises to Polish voters and the EU.

The European Commission had counted on Tusk completing promised judicial reforms as it unlocked billions in pandemic recovery funds frozen over rule-of-law concerns during PiS rule. With progress now unlikely, the Commission faces the difficult decision of whether to maintain its funding even if the government’s unable to deliver promised changes.

Beyond the EU, Nawrocki’s foreign policy positions threaten to complicate Poland’s previously staunch backing of Ukraine. Although supportive of continued aid, Nawrocki has pledged to block any prospects of Ukraine joining NATO and prioritise Polish interests over refugee support.

High stakes

The razor-thin margin of victory in the presidential election, combined with record turnout of 72.8 per cent, tells a complex story of a divided society. While high participation suggests robust civic engagement, the deep polarisation reflected in the results reveals faultlines that extend far beyond conventional political disagreements.

The outcome offers further evidence that, when economic grievances aren’t addressed, institutional trust is allowed to erode and information environments are left vulnerable to manipulation, opportunistic politicians will exploit social divisions and anti-establishment anger.

For Poland, the coming years will test whether democratic institutions can withstand the pressures of sustained political deadlock. Poland faces potential institutional paralysis that could further erode public trust in democratic governance. Poland’s institutions will need to try to demonstrate their continuing effectiveness, and civil society and independent media will need to maintain their credibility, to help protect and nurture democratic values.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact [email protected]

By Sania Farooqui
BENGALURU, India, Jun 25 2025 – It has been 33 years since peacebuilding was formally recognized within the United Nations system, by the then UN Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali, who defined it as a long-term structural work aimed at preventing the recurrence of violence, setting the stage for the UN’s ongoing efforts to address the root cause of conflict and not just its consequences. “Post-conflict peacebuilding is the action to identify and support structures which will tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict,” Boutros-Ghali said.

Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, Founder of International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN)

As we move forward, the current times have seen escalating conflicts, rising authoritarianism, and the erosion of multilateral norms, a time when global peace and security architecture is being tested like never before. “Peace is not the absence of war, it’s the presence of justice, it’s the presence of inclusion, and leadership,” said Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, Founder of International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) to IPS News. According to her, the global peace infrastructure, particularly the United Nations, was built at a time when wars were largely interstate and diplomacy could occur between heads of state.

“Our entire system for peace and security was designed for interstate war. Wars today are often internal, asymmetrical, and increasingly state-non-state indistinct,” Sanam says. The change has outpaced mechanisms meant to manage it.

While the UN and the other multilateral institutions are still at the center, Sanam points out their shortcomings. “When great powers violate the rules, no one can hold them back,” she states. The fragility of international standards has been made clear by the immobility of international institutions in the face of aggression by the great powers, and that has has exposed the weakness of international norms.

“If we did not have the UN, we’d need one now”, Sanam says. However, she stresses that transformation is desperately needed, not just for institutions but also for mentality.

She argues that there is a clear choice: adopt inclusive, people-centered peacebuilding that leverages the legitimacy and abilities of actors closest to the ground or stick with a top-down, formulaic approach that hasn’t worked to address current crises.

“Today’s challenges include but are not limited to rising geopolitical tensions among nuclear-armed major powers, a seemingly inevitable climate catastrophe, technological changes that have the potential to remake every aspect of life, and the increasing powers and capabilities of non-state actors to reshape sub-national, national, and international affairs,” states this research by the Atlantic council.

The 2024 Multilateralism Index Report by International Peace Institute states that it is widely acknowledged that the multilateral systems are facing a series of crisis, and that international action in response to the wars in the Middle East, Ukraine, Sudan and Myanmar, and beyond has been largely confined to humanitarian assistance rather than peacemaking.

According to the report, and the surveys it conducted, majorities of people in most countries still have favourable views of the UN, want their country to be more involved in the UN, and believe the UN has made the world a better place. Majorities also agree that the UN promotes human rights, peace, democracy, action on infectious diseases and climate action. At the same time, perceptions of the UN varied widely by region, from strong support in Northern Europe and southeast Asia to low levels of trust across much of Latin America and the Middle East.

Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, the former president of Liberia, spoke about “Liberia’s story” in a video message during a recent event at the UN Headquarters commemorating the 20th anniversary of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). She said that it was a story of suffering, but also of hope.

The former president and Nobel Peace Prize winner stated, “a country that was once brought to its knees by a protracted struggle now stands as a testament to what is achievable when national will is matched by international solidarity.” “Liberia’s journey to peace could not be walked alone,” she stated, highlighting the role played by the international community through the UN and its peacekeeping Mission UNMIL, the African Union, the European Union, the regional bloc ECOWAS, and other organizations.

The United Nations peacebuilding architecture – which comprises of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO), and the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) marks its fourth review this year which is mandated by general Assembly resolution 75/201 and Security Council Resolution 2558. This review comes at a time of significant geopolitical divisions and escalating risks of conflict in many parts of the world, underscoring the urgent need to act on recommendations from current and past reviews.

“If I were in charge, I’d take this moment of UN reform as a real opportunity,” says Sanam. The opening line of the UN Charter, “We the people of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”, holds immense power. She argues that now is the time to put women, peace and security at the center of global peacemaking. “These agendas came from war zones. Women and youth are the most affected and also the most active in peacebuilding.” Sanam envisions peacebuilding as an ecosystem where the UN, states, international players, and local actors are all necessary, as each has a specific role to play. “Peace is a choice, but it’s a choice that takes courage, commitment, and creativity. It takes hearing from those too often ignored and believing in the ability of local actors to drive change,” Sanam says.

With more conflicts than any time in the last 30 years, and a record number of displaced persons worldwide, the stakes could not be higher. This conversation is not merely a breakdown of what is wrong – it’s a call to reimagine what peace could be, and who gets to build it.

Sania Farooqui is an independent journalist and host of The Sania Farooqui Show, a platform dedicated to amplifying the voices of women in peacebuilding and human rights.

IPS UN Bureau

Excerpt:

Sanam Naraghi Anderlini on UN Reform and Civilian Power

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 25 2025 – On June 23, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) released their State of the Climate in Asia 2024 report, detailing the acceleration of the climate crisis in Asia. The report underscores the rapid rises in temperatures recorded across the continent and their implications on economies, ecosystems, and livelihoods.

According to WMO, 2024 was recorded as the hottest year in human history, marked by “widespread and prolonged” heatwaves. Additionally, 2024 was the first time global temperatures exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial temperatures, marking a significant setback for the goals in the 2015 Paris Agreement.

“It is essential to recognize that every fraction of a degree of warming matters,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo. “Whether it is at a level below or above 1.5C of warming, every additional increment of global warming increases the impacts on our lives, economies and our planet.”

The climate crisis has been particularly pronounced in Asia, which has warmed at nearly double the rate of the rest of the world. Throughout 2024, Asia has experienced widespread natural disasters and extreme weather patterns, as well as the hottest marine heatwaves ever recorded. Additionally, glaciers are melting at an unprecedented rate, while sea levels in the Pacific and Indian Oceans have risen well above the global average.

“The State of the Climate in Asia report highlights the changes in key climate indicators such as surface temperature, glacier mass and sea level, which will have major repercussions for societies, economies and ecosystems in the region. Extreme weather is already exacting an unacceptably high toll,” said Saulo. She added that immediate action is needed to save lives and ensure planetary longevity.

According to the report, Asia experienced extreme heat events throughout 2024, as well as several new record-highs in temperature across the continent. Powerful and persistent heatwaves were recorded in Southeast Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East, with Myanmar reaching a record-high temperature of 48.2°C. From April to November, extreme heat patterns loomed throughout East Asia, with Japan, Korea, and China reporting monthly average temperature records being broken one after the other.

In a 2025 assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it is projected that cold extremes will occur less frequently while heat extremes will become more common in the coming decades. The Japan Meteorological Agency reports that areas in South and Southeast Asia, as well as the region spanning from the Indian Ocean to the western North Pacific, are projected to face “above-normal temperatures”, along with heightened risks of manmade fires and compromised air quality.

The WMO report also states that these extreme heat patterns in Asia are to have a significant adverse effect on the cryosphere. The High-Mountain Asia (HMA) region, located on the Tibetan Plateau, contains the largest mass of glacial ice outside of the north and south poles, spanning nearly 100,000 square kilometers of glaciers. Over the course of 2024, extreme heat patterns in the area resulted in a significant loss of glacial ice, with the Urumqi Glacier No.1 in Tian Shan experiencing its greatest loss in mass since 1959.

Additionally, the oceanic region in Asia has experienced significant ocean surface warming over the past few decades, which entails the disruption of numerous marine ecosystems, biodiversity loss, and reduced ocean health. Average sea temperatures in Asia have increased by roughly 0.24°C annually, which is nearly double the global average rate.

WMO estimates that between August and September 2024, roughly 15 million square kilometers, or one-tenth of the Earth’s entire ocean surface, was impacted by ocean surface warming, with the northern Indian Ocean and the waters surrounding Japan being especially affected. Furthermore, low-lying coastal communities residing by the Pacific and Indian Oceans are at heightened risks of flooding due to rampant sea level rises in those areas.

Throughout 2024, natural disasters and extreme weather events have ravaged communities across Asia, destroying critical civilian infrastructure, claiming thousands of lives, and wiping out livelihoods. Last July in northern India, violent landslides following a monsoon resulted in over 350 deaths. Two months later, severe flooding in Nepal killed over 246 people and resulted in damages of civilian infrastructure exceeding USD 94 million. In China, heatwaves triggered droughts that damaged over 335,200 hectares of crops, which is worth approximately $400 million USD.

WMO underscores the importance of anticipatory action and monitoring to build up resilience in vulnerable communities in Asia. A successful example of this was seen following the floods in Nepal last September, in which early flood monitoring systems enabled civilians to evacuate beforehand and allowed humanitarian workers to access the hardest-hit areas promptly and effectively.

“This is the first time in 65 years that the flooding was this bad. We had zero casualties thanks to preparedness and rescue measures, but the damage was extensive,” said Ramesh Karki, the Mayor of Barahakshetra, a municipality in Eastern Nepal.

In May of this year, climate experts, stakeholders, and policymakers convened in Singapore for the 2025 Climate Group Asia Action Summit, in which they discussed ways to fight the climate crisis and assist vulnerable communities in Asia. Most agreed that the implementation of sustainable practices is the most effective way to offset carbon emissions and reduce global temperatures.

“We should join hands to promote the sustainability of the global renewables industry…Vigorously developing renewable energy has become an important measure to help countries speed up green development and slow down global climate change,” said Yuechun Yi, the First Deputy Director-General of the China Renewable Energy Engineering Institute.

Furthermore, a host of experts agreed that it is imperative that governments have access to cutting-edge data on the acceleration of the climate crisis so that they can implement anticipatory measures to prevent large-scale disasters.
“To be resilient, the measures need to be hyper local. You need to look at local conditions. What’s happening on the ground? You need more computational power to get data at the level. Google is working with national authorities to provide information to help communities become more resilient,” said Spencer Low, the Head of Regional Sustainability at Google Asia-Pacific (APAC).

IPS UN Bureau Report

By José Antonio Ocampo
BOGOTA, Colombia, Jun 25 2025 – Leaders heading to the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development taking place in Sevilla, Spain, from 30th June to 3rd July, know full well that they are operating in a moment of crisis.

They can see that public financing is not merely constrained, it is choked, and that the social consequences, already severe, risk becoming catastrophic. What leaders need to understand is not that they are in a hole, but that there is a way out. They can overcome the financing crisis and replace the doom loop of austerity with an upward spiral of social and fiscal success.

The scale of change in financing that is needed to overcome the crisis requires that the very welcome agreements set to be made at the gathering in Sevilla mark not an end point, easing pressures, but a starting point, enabling profound reform. The only realistic response to this crisis is a systemic one.

Leaders need not only to put in place debt relief for overindebted developing countries, including reductions in principals and in interest payments. They need to work to create a permanent institutional mechanism for sovereign-debt restructuring. They need to enable a major expansion of long-term, low-cost financing through regional and global development finance institutions.

José Antonio Ocampo

Leaders need not only to strengthen coordination to prevent tax avoidance. They need to work, through the negotiations for the United Nations framework convention on international tax cooperation, to reallocate taxation rights fairly among all countries where multinational firms do business. They need to raise the global effective minimum tax on multinationals’ profits, and to introduce minimum standards for the taxation of the richest individuals.

Leaders need not only to halt the freefall of development financing. They need to work to redesign financing for the twenty-first century. Embodying hope that a transformation can be realised is the growing momentum for global public investment. Colombia, Chile, Norway, South Africa and Uruguay are amongst the countries leading the call.

South Africa’s leadership of the G20’s Development Working Group has even named “global public goods and global public investment” as its “number one priority”, “aimed at the construction of a new architecture of international cooperation”.

Over fifty civil society organisations are also backing the call for global public investment, including the International Treatment Preparedness Coalition, Southern Voice, CIVICUS, and Global Citizen. A new multistakeholder commitment to advance the implementation of global public investment will be a key initiative in the financing conference’s flagship Sevilla Platform for Action.

Global public investment provides a new approach for how countries can think about, organise, and oversee the financing of global challenges. It is rooted in three principles: all benefit from the outcomes; all contribute according to their means; all decide together.

The first principle of global public investment, that all benefit from the outcomes, demonstrates that international cooperation in financing is not charity, it is collective self-interest. We need each other; we can’t afford not to cooperate with each other to achieve shared goals.

The second principle, that all contribute according to their means, helps to show everyone playing their part, which is essential both for ensuring backing and for reshaping countries’ relationships, status and power.

The third principle, that all decide together, enables equality and quality in the direction and oversight of resourcing.

The global public investment approach recognises that the crisis we are in is not only fiscal but ultimately political – a crisis of multilateralism, of collective action. It meets the world’s need for a more effective way for countries to collaborate, and for a more effective way to justify why they do. It shows that looking out for each other is how we protect ourselves; it demonstrates that through pooling of resources everyone wins out.

Though the current crisis in financing was exacerbated suddenly this year, it has been building for much longer. For years, leaders have been struggling to mobilise and structure the resourcing of public goods. But they need to resist the temptation to lower ambition. They cannot afford to settle for approaches that have been shown to not deliver. Retreating from public financing, or retreating from international cooperation, will only worsen the impacts of the global crisis.

The evidence is clear that private financing, though vital, cannot replace public financing. So too, the record shows that national action, though central, is insufficient for protecting global public goods. For the challenges we face, building a new international architecture based around global public investment is both necessary and feasible.

Global public investment harnesses both the power of mutual interest – that we are interdependent – and the power of mutuality – that we achieve more by working together. It is an approach whose time has come.

Sevilla is just the start.

IPS UN Bureau

Excerpt:

José Antonio Ocampo is Former UN Under-Secretary-General; Former Minister of Finance of Colombia; Professor at Columbia University and Member of the UN Committee for Development Policy

By External Source
KABUL, Jun 25 2025 – It was a sunny winter day in Kabul. I decided to step out and take a stroll around my surroundings. With my long dress and hijab on, I left the house. Since I was not too far from home, I did not need the company of a Mahram, a male guard, by my side – a strict restriction placed on Afghan women by the Taliban.

Life in the city was bustling, children selling plastic bags by the roadside while ordinary people went about in various ways.

As I walked, my eyes caught a sign that indicated a restaurant for women only, serving a variety of local and national dishes. I was intrigued, given that in a city filled with numerous hotels and restaurants, mostly run by men, this particular one was operated by women catering to only women customers.

I decided to pursue further. The sign took me fifteen stairs deep into the basement of a building, where the women working in the restaurant could not be seen from outside.

From Home-Kitchen Hustle to Full-Blown Restaurant

I was met by a woman who friendly welcomed me. As I sat in the restaurant, memories of the past flooded my mind. I had visited restaurants with my family and friends prior to the Taliban takeover of our country. There used to be laughter, we shared meals and enjoyed each other’s company without fear or restriction.

We could sit together, converse openly, and enjoy life, free from the oppressive atmosphere that now defines our current situation. Those days were full of joy and possibility, and the memories are among the happiest I have ever had; now they feel like a distant, almost unreachable past.

A waitress snapped me back to the present as she took my order. I was curious to know how the women had managed to set up a workplace outside home in the heart of Kabul.

One of the proprietors who wanted to remain anonymous narrated the story: “My daughter and I were driven by unemployment and poverty into preparing delicious food at home and selling it online at low price”.

“The business gradually flourished, even though initially we made many mistakes”, said the young woman, a law degree holder, forced by the Taliban to abandon further studies.

After saving 800,000 Afghanis, and an additional 100,000 European Union support, they decided to start their own restaurant. The rented place has a fully equipped kitchen and a large hall for customers.

Inside the beautifully decorated walls, girls are busy preparing dough for bolani, a thin-crusted flat bread widely consumed in Afghanistan often filled with potatoes, leeks, grated pumpkin, or chives.

Due to the Taliban crack down on women outside home, the restaurant has become a lifeline to most of the women working there, who recently lost their jobs.

Among them is Wahida, a young girl who said she lost her job as an office worker. “It has been over three years since my colleagues and I lost our jobs with the arrival of the Taliban,” she said, adding, “I was left wondering what to do”.

But now with the opening of the women-only restaurant by the two enterprising women, she and ten of her colleagues, have had a salaried job for the past one month.

And that was precisely one of the motivations for Farhard and her mother opening the restaurant – creating jobs and providing financial independence for women who had been thrown out of jobs by the Taliban.

“Women’s work outside the home has brought great hope to the women working in our restaurant, because they can support their families with their salaries”, said Farhard.

“Besides that”, she continued, “a restaurant is a good source of income and reintroduces the culture of cooking authentic Afghan food for people in the most beautiful way possible”.

They are licensed by the Ministry of Commerce and their customer base is steadily increasing. The proprietors provide training in catering and service to applicants before hiring them.

Navigating the Tightrope of Taliban Rules

Ever since the Taliban burst onto the political scene four years ago with indiscriminate ban on women from working outside home, Afghan women are exploring income-generating business options. Tailoring and custom-made dressmaking are among the most common, while the restaurant sector also provides a viable alternative for many others.

This women-only restaurant can only operate because it strictly follows all Taliban rules. It’s located in a basement to ensure that no women can be seen from outside, as women are not allowed to work outside or eat in public with men.

They pay monthly taxes to the Taliban, all staff are women, and they follow hijab and other religious regulations set by the Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice.

Yet in spite of the great lengths, which women take to generate incomes, the Taliban are still looming not far behind.

“Officials from the so-called Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice conduct weekly inspection visits to our restaurant,” complains Wahida.

The inspections, she says, “ensure that all the women are wearing their hijabs properly, with their faces covered, and dressed in the appropriate long dress, as the regulations demand”.

Apart from that, they thoroughly check the entire restaurant to ensure no men are working there, since women are strictly forbidden to work in the same place as men.

To the women working in the restaurant, these inspections are undoubtedly viewed as unnecessary harassment. They feel scrutinized and yet powerless to fight against it.

However, Wahida has a message for the brave Afghan women: “Don’t despair, find the small niches the private sector allows, and keep moving forward.”

Excerpt:

The author is an Afghanistan-based female journalist, trained with Finnish support before the Taliban take-over. Her identity is withheld for security reasons

By External Source
Jun 25 2025 (IPS-Partners)

 
The Commonwealth Climate Access Hub responds to the needs of its member countries, including their most vulnerable people to build resilience and climate-smart communities.

The hub, which started with USD 10 million ten years ago, now has supported countries to unlock close to USD 500 million in climate finance and has half a billion dollars worth of projects in the pipeline.