By Tanka Dhakal
BLOOMINGTON, USA, Jun 23 2025 – Asia is heading towards more extreme weather events with a possibility of heavy toll on the region’s economies, ecosystems, and societies, says the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

The WMO’s State of the Climate in Asia 2024 report released today says Asia is currently warming nearly twice as fast as the global average, fueling more disaster-prone weather events.

In 2024, Asia’s average temperature was about 1.04°C above the 1991–2020 average, ranking as the warmest or second warmest year on record, depending on the dataset. The warming trend between 1991 and 2024 was almost double that during the 1961 to 1990 period.

Report highlights the changes in key climate indicators, including surface temperature, glacier mass, and sea level, which will have major impacts in the region. “Extreme weather is already exacting an unacceptably high toll,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo.

In 2024, heatwaves gripped a record area of the ocean. Sea surface temperatures were the highest on record, with Asia’s sea surface 10 years period warming rate nearly double the global average.

Report says that sea level rise on the Pacific and Indian Ocean sides of the continent exceeded the global average, increasing risks for low-lying coastal areas.

“The work of National Meteorological and Hydrological Services and their partners is more important than ever to save lives and livelihoods,” Saulo said.

Asia land temperatures. Source: World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

Water Resources Are in Danger and Causing Destruction

State of the glaciers, which are regarded as water storage for most of the region, is facing an existential threat. Reduced winter snowfall and extreme summer heat caused decisive damage to glaciers in the central Himalayas and Tian Shan Mountain range. 23 out of 24 glaciers suffered mass loss, leading to an increase in hazards like glacial lake outburst floods and landslides and long-term risks for water security.

The High-Mountain Asia (HMA) region, centered on the Tibetan Plateau, contains the largest volume of ice outside the polar regions, with glaciers covering an area of approximately 100,000 square km. It is known as the world’s Third Pole. Over the last several decades, most glaciers in this region have been retreating. Which is increasing the risk of glacier lake outburst floods (GLOFs).

Community in Thame village in the Mt. Everest region in Nepal is still recovering from the disaster caused by a small glacial lake outburst flood in August 2024, while living in fear of a similar disaster.

From the high Himalayas to coastal areas in Asia experiencing destructive weather events. Extreme rainfall caused great damage and heavy casualties in many countries in the region, tropical cyclones left a trail of destruction, and drought added heavy economic and agricultural losses.

The report included a case study from Nepal, showing how important early warning systems and anticipatory actions are to prepare for and respond to climate variability and change. In late September 2024, Nepal experienced heavy rainfall that led to severe flooding and landslides across the country.

According to the government data, the disaster claimed at least 246 lives and left 218 people missing. Damages to energy infrastructure are estimated at 4.35 billion Nepali rupees, while the agricultural sector faced a loss equivalent to 6 billion Nepali rupees. Reports note that early warning systems and preparation for anticipatory actions helped limit human casualties. But the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM) in Nepal highlighted the urgent need for a tailored, impact-based flood forecasting system at the national level.

Extreme heat events

In many parts of Asia, extreme heat is becoming a concerning issue as countries like India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan in South Asia are already dealing with heat waves. In 2024, prolonged heat waves affected East Asia from April to November.

According to the report, Asia is the continent with the largest landmass extending to the Arctic and is warming more than twice as fast as the global average because the temperature increase over land is larger than the temperature increase over the ocean.

In 2024, most of the ocean area of Asia was affected by marine heatwaves of strong, severe, or extreme intensity—the largest extent since records began in 1993.  During August and September 2024, nearly 15 million square kilometers of the region’s ocean were impacted—one-tenth of the Earth’s entire ocean surface.

“The purpose of the report is not only to inform. It is to inspire action,” said president of WMO Regional Association Dr. Ayman Ghulam.

He highlighted the need for stronger early warning systems, regional collaboration, and greater investments in adapting transboundary water and climate risk management.

“We must ensure that modern science guides decision-making at every level,” Ghulam said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

By David L. Phillips
LONDON, Jun 23 2025 – A deal between the US and Iran is possible if Iran’s bottom line — its right to nuclear enrichment — and Israel’s bottom line, guarantees that Iran will never have a nuclear bomb are met. This “win-win” outcome would require Donald Trump’s personal engagement. With weapons turned to plowshares, Trump would be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize.

For sure, it’s hard to imagine a path forward in current circumstances. The region is embroiled in conflict. Iran has been humiliated by Israel’s attack. Its nuclear program has been seriously damaged. Israeli air power has destroyed air defenses, incapacitated Iran’s missiles, and killed its military leaders and scientists.

Israel’s actions in the past year have changed the balance of power, neutralizing Hezbollah, Hamas and eliminating the Pro-Iranian Assad regime in Syria.

Javad Zarif, Iran’s former foreign minister and nuclear negotiator, often spoke to me about “Persian pride.” To move forward, a peace deal would have to address Iran’s battered psyche and Israel’s sense of vulnerability.

I envision a deal that would allow Iran to maintain its enrichment facility deep underground at Fordo. The International Atomic Energy Agency would need unfettered access to Fordo ensuring that enrichment was capped at 7 percent, well below the level needed for a nuclear bomb.

Iran’s nuclear program has been set-back as a result of Israeli strikes. Natanz and other enrichment facilities have been damaged and would be permanently dismantled. The Isfahan nuclear complex, which includes a uranium-conversion facility turning “yellowcake” into uranium hexafluoride, has been disabled by Israel’s air strikes and would be decommissioned.

The Tehran Research Center, which manufactures advanced rotors for enrichment, is destroyed. So is the workshop at Karaj, where other uranium enrichment components were manufactured.

Missile and drone attacks are another concern. The US would give security guarantees guarding against such attacks. It would commit to providing Israel with additional Thermal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery systems, an effective mobile surface to air interceptor that shoots down incoming ballistic missiles at a distance of 1,800 miles. Iran’s missile system has been degraded but it is not destroyed.

For the foreseeable future, the US would deploy an aircraft carrier group in the Arabian Sea. Each carrier has more than 60 war planes that can deter missiles and drones strikes. Fighter jets already deployed in the region would also be available for Israel’s defense.

Netanyahu wants Trump to use the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), a “bunker buster”, to take out the Fordo facility. Ford is buried deep underground in a mountain side. Only the US has bunker busters to disable Fordo’s enrichment process.

A bunker buster is designed to penetrate hardened targets using precision-guided 30,000-pound bombs armed with a 5,300-pound warhead. More than one bomb will be needed to disable Fordo. The mission’s success is uncertain. Fordo adjoins a base of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRGC). Its air force could take down the B2 planes needed to deliver bunker buster ordinance.

Trump is under pressure from Netanyahu to attack Fordo. So far, Trump is keeping his options open. Trump insists on Iran’s “complete surrender”. The Ayatollah says Iran will never “grovel” to Washington. It is unlikely that Iran will waive a white flag. Resistance and martyrdom are at the core of Shiite beliefs.

Iran has signaled it is ready to meet US negotiators and discuss a ceasefire. An agreement would commit the US to never use bunker busters unless Iran weaponized its nuclear program.

Iran’s belligerent posture may change when the Iranian people take stock of the regime’s mismanagement. The Iranian people are fed up with their pariah status. Trump’s decision not to intervene would increase the prospects of Iran’s home-grow democratic transition, the best guarantor of peace.

The deal could reap economic and diplomatic benefits. An agreement could catalyze reform across the region, including progress in Gaza. A ceasefire leading to an independent Palestinian state could result in Saudi Arabia’s decision to join the Abraham Accords and normalization of relations with Israel.

Is this positive vision possible? If we can imagine it, we can make it a reality.

Peacebuilding would start with a deal to fully, finally and verifiably eliminate the possibility that Iran’s nuclear program would be used for anything but peaceful purposes.

Current events in the Middle East are nothing short of disastrous. They can, however, be a catalyst for transformation. Only the US can lead this process, and only Trump has the chutzpah to try it.

IPS UN Bureau

Excerpt:

David L. Phillips is an Academic Visitor at St. Antony’s College at Oxford University (September 2025). He was formerly a Senior Adviser at the State Department.

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 23 2025 – When billionaire Elon Musk, a former short-lived advisor to President Donald Trump, was mandated with the task of decimating the federal bureaucracy and laying off thousands of staffers, he was famously pictured carrying a hacksaw to symbolize his cost-cutting agenda.

Perhaps it is now the turn of the United Nations for slashing—the UN80 Initiative– but no one is armed either with a hacksaw or a mini chain saw.

A UN Task Force is currently exploring staff layoffs, merging of several departments and relocating UN agencies from high-cost duty stations, including New York and Geneva, to lower-costs cities.

Meanwhile the Geneva-based UN refugee agency announced its own restructuring last week: “In light of difficult financial realities, UNHCR is compelled to reduce the overall scale of its operations”.

“We will focus our efforts on activities that have the greatest impact for refugees, supported by streamlined headquarters and regional bureau structures,” said Filippo Grandi, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

As part of the agency’s broader cost-cutting measures, UNHCR has had to close or downsize offices worldwide and implement a nearly 50 percent reduction in senior positions at its Geneva headquarters and regional bureau.

In total, approximately 3,500 staff positions will be discontinued. Additionally, hundreds of colleagues supporting UNHCR on a temporary basis have had to leave the organization due to the funding shortfall.

Overall, UNHCR estimates a global reduction in staffing costs of around 30 percent.

Throughout the review exercise, decisions were driven by the overarching priority to maintain operations in regions with the most urgent refugee needs, the refugee agency pointed out.

Regarding staff cutbacks in the Secretariat, UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters last week that no UN department will be exempted from layoffs.

Asked whether the 20 percent cuts were inevitable, he said: “This process is ongoing. It is across the board in the Secretariat, and including in the Secretary-General’s own office”.

“I think his own office is not exempt from it. I spoke to (Under-Secretary-General for Policy) Guy Ryder yesterday, and we hope to have him, and other senior colleagues come and brief you in- person”.

Asked if the Spokesperson’s office is included in the cutbacks, he said: “The need to reduce is across the board– and no office is exempt”.

But the ultimate decision on restructuring will depend, as it does on key policy issues, on approval by the UN’s Administrative and Budgetary Committee (Fifth Committee), with final ratification by the 193-member General Assembly, the UN’s highest policy making body.

In a memo to staffers last week, the UN Staff Union (UNSU) in New York reminded “all colleagues that no decisions regarding the proposed changes have been approved by the General Assembly (GA) at this time.”

“The information shared is preliminary and non-binding, intended solely to prepare you for potential outcomes should the General Assembly endorse the proposals later this year.”

“We urge all colleagues to interpret such communications with caution and to remain aware that final authority rests with the General Assembly, whose decisions are still pending.”

A lingering question remains: will the GA rubber-stamp the decisions of the Secretary-General and his Task Force — or also heed to complaints from staffers and staff unions?

In the memo to staffers, Narda Cupidore, President, 48th Staff Council, UNSU, New York, outlined “the basic premise of potential proposals being made in line with the Secretary General’s instructions to achieve a reduction of 15% – 20% of the UN’s regular Budget for 2026”.

The memo reads:

• “Relocation of Functions: Some functions may be moved from New York to lower-cost duty stations where the UN already has operational infrastructure.
• Consolidation of Functions: Certain administrative services, may be consolidated for efficiency. Functions might be affected by the proposal to consolidate
• Discontinuation of Functions: Some functions may need to be discontinued, requiring a review of both vacant and encumbered posts to determine options.

What this Means for STAFF:

• Direct Impact: Some staff may be asked to relocate, work in different time zones, or see their roles evolve. A few may face the possibility of separation.
• Transparency and Support: Staff will be fully informed of decisions affecting them, given adequate notice, and supported through reassignment, relocation, separation entitlements, or other mitigation measures.
• Emotional Toll: Even those not directly affected may experience stress and uncertainty.
• Engagement and Communication: The organization commits to transparency, open communication, and treating staff with dignity and respect. Measures will include town halls, team meetings, individual consultations, and collaboration with staff representatives.

Management proposes that staff will be supported as follows:

• Transparency and Communication: Staff will be kept informed about decisions, options, and timelines. Managers are tasked with maintaining open lines of communication.
• Engagement Activities: Regular town halls, smaller team meetings, and individual consultations will be held to address concerns and provide guidance.
• Support Measures: Staff will receive assistance through reassignment, relocation, separation entitlements, or other mitigation measures. The organization will work closely with staff representatives to ensure rights and well-being are prioritized.
• Dignity and Respect: The process will be handled with care, treating everyone with humanity and respect.“

Looking Ahead

The UNSU says it appreciates the sharing of this important communication to staff. We continue to advocate for full transparency, consistent and clear communication, and call on all Secretariat entities to uphold this standard without exception. UNSU remains on standby for the proposed collaboration.

“UNSU continues to raise its concern about the realism of the aggressive timeline, the thoroughness of the analysis in such a short time frame; the reason for the specific established quota of cuts; the lack of clarity on the financial cuts and their impacts; as well as the effects on the productivity and quality of our outputs.

UNSU remains fully committed to supporting all colleagues during this period of uncertainty. We strongly encourage you to engage with staff representatives, share your concerns, and report any inconsistencies or challenges you may encounter.

This is very important because in the environment of the Delegation of Authority (DoA) Head of Entities may have differing interpretations of directives, thereby creating the risk of inconsistent implementation.

During this confusing and chaotic time, please do not hesitate to reach out to the Union – as your feedback is essential to ensuring that issues are addressed effectively and equitably.

UNSU will be attending the upcoming Staff Management Committee Meeting in Kosovo, from 23-28 June 2025 and will report on the outcome of that meeting.

If you have experienced inconsistencies, have questions, or wish to share your perspective, please reach out to your staff representative.

For offices without designated representation, the UNSU leadership is your point of contact and stands ready to advocate on your behalf. You can also submit feedback directly to [email protected].

Together, we will ensure that your voice is heard and your rights are protected.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

By CIVICUS
Jun 23 2025 –  
CIVICUS discusses the closure of offices of the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Mexico with members of Integral Human Rights In Action (DHIA), a Mexican civil society organisation (CSO) that promotes and defends human rights in contexts of mobility.

In May, the UNHCR announced it would be closing four of its 12 offices in Mexico due to funding cuts following Donald Trump’s decision to freeze US$700 million in funding to the agency. This will result in around 200 people losing their jobs and a 30 per cent reduction in the UNHCR’s global operational capacity. Mexico received almost 80,000 asylum applications in 2024, and this reduction in institutional capacity comes at a time when demand for protection services is intensifying, placing a disproportionate burden on CSOs with limited resources.

What are the consequences of the closure of UNHCR offices?

The reduction in the UNHCR’s presence has created multiple crises. The closure of several offices has drastically limited refugees’ access to counselling, legal support and basic services such as medical care. However, the impact goes further: the UNHCR funds the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance, and reduced support could seriously weaken the agency’s ability to respond to the increase in asylum applications, particularly given the significant backlogs it was already experiencing.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that the National Migration Institute has also stopped issuing visitor cards for humanitarian reasons. This leaves many refugees without immigration documentation, exposing them to arbitrary detention and hindering their access to formal employment. In many cases, this leads them to abandon the asylum application process altogether. While applications were resolved in three days to six weeks in 2024, there are currently cases where the wait exceeds three months. This is part of an institutional setback that threatens the exercise of fundamental rights.

What risks do refugee women and girls face?

Refugee women and girls often experience a cycle of violence that is not broken by migration. They flee their countries of origin to escape gender-based violence, but this violence continues along migration routes. During transit, they lack access to sexual and reproductive healthcare, including menstrual products, antenatal care and family planning services.

On arrival in Mexico, they encounter further obstacles in their quest for childcare, continued education and decent employment. These difficulties are exacerbated by the absence of local support networks that could facilitate their integration.

How is civil society responding?

In the face of funding cuts, Mexican civil society has taken a leading role in the humanitarian response. Civil society’s strength lies in its in-depth knowledge of the context and refugees’ needs, which enables it to tailor its services to diverse groups.

However, the impact of the funding cuts is undeniable. Many of these organisations were previously supported by the UNHCR and provided legal advice during the asylum application process, significantly increasing chances of success.

In this context, Mexico needs the support of the international community, particularly the states that have adopted the Cartagena Declaration – the regional framework for the protection of refugees in Latin America – to strengthen regional cooperation and ensure the protection, integration and regularisation of displaced people. At the same time, the Mexican state must take responsibility and allocate resources to address human mobility, fulfilling its international commitments with a long-term vision.

What are the local financing alternatives?

Mexico has mechanisms that could be activated. One option would be to reactivate the public calls for proposals of the National Institute for Social Development, a scheme in which CSOs compete for funds to help migrants and refugees. For this to work, these calls must be governed by the principles of transparency, shared responsibility and citizen participation.

There are also more innovative state models. In Chihuahua state, for instance, the Chihuahua Business Foundation and the Trust for Competitiveness and Citizen Security have successfully channelled business funds into state-supervised trusts via taxes. These resources fund services in areas such as education, food and public safety, which are awarded through public calls for proposals. This model could be replicated in other parts of Mexico to create a national network of alternative financing.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
The disappeared: Mexico’s industrial-scale human rights crisis CIVICUS Lens 22.Apr.2025
Mexico’s first female president: an opportunity for change CIVICUS Lens 21.Jun.2024
Migration in the Americas: a dream that can turn deadly CIVICUS Lens 15.Apr.2024

By Sarah Strack and Christelle Kalhoule
SEVILLE, Spain , Jun 23 2025 – Can the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) be a turning point? The stakes are high. The international financial system—so important to each and every one of us—feels out of reach and resistant to change, because it is deeply entrenched in unjust power imbalances that keep it in place. We deserve better.

Under its current form, the Compromiso de Sevilla – the outcome document of FFD4 adopted on June 17 ahead of the conference – reads like a mildly improved version of business as usual with weak commitments. To avoid being derailed, decision-makers at FFD4 must act with clarity and courage, and here’s why.

With predatory interest rates, the international financial system is pushing hundreds of millions into misery as several nations continue to be shackled by a deepening debt crisis. While millions struggle without adequate food, healthcare, or education – basic services and rights – their governments must funnel billions to creditors.

Shockingly, 3.3 billion people – almost half of humanity – disproportionately in Global South nations, live in countries where debt interest payments outstrip education, health budgets and urgent climate action. This imbalance is particularly pernicious toward women, who bear the brunt of the failure of the gender-blind global financial architecture. This system fails to acknowledge and redistribute care and social reproduction responsibilities, resulting in women, especially those located in the Global South, lacking access to adequate essential services and decent jobs.

“The current model of international cooperation is not working, and its financing is also not working while we are facing a series of interconnected crises,” says Mafalda Infante, Advocacy and Communications Officer at the Portuguese Platform of Development NGOs, sharing their recently released Civil Society Manifesto for Global Justice calling for change and a restoration of fairness at FFD4 and beyond.

“Gender equality perspectives are absolutely central to how we understand global justice and financial reform, because let’s be clear: the current system isn’t neutral. It produces and reinforces inequalities, including gender-based ones. The debt crisis and climate emergency disproportionately affect women and girls, especially in the global south. We’ve seen it again and again when public services are cut, when healthcare is underfunded or when food systems collapse, it’s women who carry the heaviest burden. But at the same time, feminist economics also offer solutions. They challenge the idea that GDP growth is the ultimate goal. They prioritise care, sustainability and community well-being. They demand that financing should be people-centered and rights-based and accountable as well. So the role of civil society has been to bring these ideas into the FFD4 space to connect macroeconomic reform with everyday realities and to insist that justice – economic, climate, racial, gender justice – is indivisible,” Infante adds.

FFD4 offers an opportunity to reimagine a financial architecture that can be just, inclusive, and rights-based. This is not a technical summit for experts alone. It is the only global forum where governments, international institutions, civil society organisations, community representatives and the private sector sit together to shape the future of global finance, and it’s happening after 10 years since the latest edition in Addis Ababa.

But there are realities that decision-makers just can’t shy away from. While some powerful countries borrow at rock-bottom rates, other nations face interest charges nearly four times higher. We must thus ask ourselves: is this really a pathway to truly sustainable development or a continuation of profound financial injustices through something akin to “financial colonialism” ?

“Many countries like us in the South, are totally concerned that there can be no development with the current debt situation not discussed. The issue of debt vis-a-vis taxes is vitally important. The money that countries are collecting from the domestic mobilization of resources is all channeled to self-debt servicing. And debt handcuffs social policy. Without these resources, these countries cannot deliver on public services like health and education. There can be no way of improving people’s social indicators without addressing the question of debt stress,” says Moses Isooba , Executive Director of the Uganda National NGO Forum (UNNGOF).

Forus is attending FFD4 as a global civil society network with one clear message: the current model must change.

We call for a radical transformation of global finance that moves away from a system that enables “tax abuse” and outsized influence from a powerful few.

A crucial step for transformation is creating a UN Convention on Sovereign Debt to fairly and transparently restructure and cancel illegitimate debt, as many countries spend more on debt than on essential services.

In today’s context of shrinking development aid, the role of public development banks is ever more important in support of Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement on climate change. Forus therefore calls on public development banks to work in partnership with civil society and community representatives through a formal global coalition and local engagement to ensure development finance is locally-led and reflects the real needs of people, rooted in consent and mutual trust.

Official development assistance (ODA) must be protected and increased, reversing harmful aid cuts that damage civil society as well as urgent and basic services. The UN has warned that aid funding for dozens of crises around the world has dropped by a third, largely due to the decrease in US funding slashed US funding and announced cuts from other nations.

Finally, governments should support a new UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, adopting gender-responsive, environmentally sustainable fiscal policies while disincentivizing polluters and extractive industries.

“Development financing must not perpetuate cycles of debt, austerity, and dependency. Instead, it must be grounded in democratic governance, fair taxation, climate justice, and respect for human rights. It’s also crucial to promote inclusive decision-making by strengthening the role of the United Nations in global economic governance, countering the dominance of informal and exclusive clubs such as the OECD,” says Henrique Frota, Executive Director of the Brazilian Association of NGOs (ABONG) and former C20 Brazil Chair.

FFD4 must ensure that there is a genuine space for civil society engagement, where all voices are heard and can influence financial decision making, to strengthen accountability and transparency, and to promote greater inclusion.

“The voices of the communities most affected should be included, otherwise large-scale development projects are not sustainable. Local communities and local civil society are the point of contact to make implementation more inclusive,” says Pallavi Rekhi, Programmes Lead at Voluntary Action Network India (VANI), reinforcing that FFD4 must shift from vague aspirations to binding, systemic reforms that rebalance power and serve justice.

“Don’t take stock of what has been done. Instead, look at what has not yet been done at this conference and you will see the immense challenges that lie ahead for the future of our planet,” says Marcelline Mensah-Pierucci, President of FONGTO, the national platform of civil society organisations in Togo.

“The continuous cycle of unfairness and social inequality must come to an end. The time to act is now,” adds Zia ur Rehman, Chairperson of Pakistan Development Alliance.

For many, the road to Sevilla has been long and hard and still, the world’s majority are left behind on this journey. The hard work continues after FFD4 on the need for bold leadership, real action and transformative change that can lead to a more effective and responsive global financial architecture.

IPS UN Bureau

Excerpt:

Sarah Strack, Forus Director and Christelle Kalhoule, Forus Chair

By Friday Phiri
BONN, Jun 20 2025 – In recent years, there has been growing evidence of how climate change is impacting human health in several ways.

The Lancet Countdown has been producing ‘eye-popping’ reports, highlighting  how climate change is breaching health thresholds across multiple indicators—heat, disease vectors, food security, air quality, and socioeconomic stability.

With record-breaking heat threats exposing individuals to dangerous heat compared to pre-industrial expectations; worsening environmental stressors in the form of droughts and flooding, exposing people to heightened risks of waterborne and vector-borne diseases; and the cost of extreme weather events running into billions of dollars globally, the global community is being called upon to act swiftly.

Without urgent, health-centered transformation in energy, finance, health systems, urban planning, and governance, the world is not just delaying action—it’s fueling a global health crisis, the 2024 Lancet Countdown report warns.

Like other sectors, Africa’s health is highly vulnerable to climate impacts and in dire and urgent need of adaptation strategies. A quick perusal of the 2024 State of Africa Climate Report released in May, 2025, by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reveals how extreme weather and climate change impacts are hitting Africa the hardest.

The report highlights several health-related impacts of climate change in Africa, ranging from extreme heat events leading to serious heatwaves; flooding and landslides resulting in displacements and loss of lives; food and nutrition insecurity emanating from prolonged droughts; and tropical cyclones leaving a trail of destruction and loss of lives, among others.

These health-related impacts underscore the urgent need for climate adaptation strategies to mitigate risks and protect vulnerable populations across Africa. ​

“The State of the Climate in Africa report reflects the urgent and escalating realities of climate change across the continent,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo. “It also reveals a stark pattern of extreme weather events, with some countries grappling with exceptional flooding caused by excessive rainfall and others enduring persistent droughts and water scarcity.”

“WMO and its partners are committed to working with Members to build resilience and strengthen adaptation efforts in Africa through initiatives like Early Warnings for All,” she said. “It is my hope that this report will inspire collective action to address increasingly complex challenges and cascading impacts.”

Armed with such devastating information, African climate change negotiators at the UN Climate conference in Bonn, Germany, are calling on parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to take the climate and health nexus seriously and consider mainstreaming it into the main agenda items of climate negotiations, in addition to the health sector target in the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) framework.

“The African Group of Negotiators reaffirms that Africa experiences some of the most severe climate change impacts on human health and health systems, despite contributing minimally to global greenhouse gas emissions. With African countries already having very precarious health systems, climate change impacts exacerbate and overwhelm these systems, putting lives at risk. Urgent help and adaptation support is needed for countries. We call for ambitious and urgent collaboration of parties to address these multifaceted challenges in a holistic manner,” said Dr. Richard Muyungi, Chair of the African Group of Negotiators on Climate Change (AGN).

The AGN is the mandated negotiating group, which represents all 54 African countries in the UNFCCC processes.

In his opening statement at the Bonn Climate Conference, Muyungi said the group was prepared to work with other parties to spearhead the climate and health agenda and called for the initiation of mandated dialogues on human health and climate change from COP30 and beyond.

Meanwhile, African civil society continues to raise its voice on the importance of climate finance for Africa’s adaptation.

“It is unfortunate that developed parties continue to evade their obligation to provide climate finance as enshrined in Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement. This is the hallmark of the climate convention, without which we might as well forget about these negotiations. It is becoming increasingly frustrating that the climate finance agenda item continues to cause serious divisions, including the agenda fight that we have, once again, witnessed here in Bonn. But this should not be the case because both the convention and the Paris Agreement are clear on developed parties’ obligation to provide finance,” said Mithika Mwenda, Executive Director of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).

Climate financing and capacity-building support through health systems strengthening have, likewise, dominated recent discussions in the climate and health sub-sector.

At a side event hosted by the Rockefeller Foundation, Wellcome Trust, and the World Meteorological Organization during the 78^th World Health Assembly in Geneva, investments in early warning systems were a key agenda.

Desta Lakew, Group Partnerships and External Affairs Director at Amref Health Africa, highlighted the existing gaps and the need for investments.

“Our early warning systems are not keeping pace. Investments in early warning, data, and information systems lag behind, forcing our governments to continue relying on outdated technologies and equipment that fail to capture and transmit real-time weather information to the public,” said Lakew. “This undermines the public’s preparedness, leading to avoidable losses of both property and lives. We therefore need to strengthen climate-health data systems, surveillance, early warning, and climate risk assessment by enhancing capacity to detect, predict, monitor, and respond to climate-sensitive health risks through improved data integration, early warning systems, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments.”

“At Amref, we believe in community investment; that’s why we are actively working with governments in Africa to build the technical capacity required for health systems adaptation and resilience to climate impacts. We thus advocate for financing that puts community-centered initiatives at the heart of climate adaptation of health systems,” added Lakew.

Local communities’ involvement is touted as the starting point for climate action. And the    Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) is leading local communities’ climate adaptation action through the promotion of agroecology.

The Alliance argues for and promotes the practice as a panacea to local farmers’ climate-related production and nutrition security challenges.

“Rooted in traditional knowledge and biodiversity, agroecology promotes healthy soils, thriving ecosystems, and resilient food systems,” says Bridget Mugambe, AFSA Programme Coordinator.

Mugambe argues that agroecology and health are deeply interconnected. “With thriving ecosystems free from chemical inputs, local farmers are guaranteed well-nourished crops, rich in nutrients and devoid of harmful residues, contributing to better human health,” she points out.

“At its core, agroecology respects cultural diversity and traditional food systems, which are central to promoting healthy diets rooted in local, indigenous foods that have nourished African communities for generations.”

As the climate talks continue, what is clear is that health voices calling for total inclusivity are getting louder each passing day, particularly due to the growing list of health-related impacts underscoring the urgent need for climate adaptation strategies to protect vulnerable populations across Africa.

The author is Climate Change Health Advocacy Lead at Amref Health Africa

IPS UN Bureau Report

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Jun 20 2025 – Having attended hundreds of anti-government protests in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, Gvantsa Kalandadze is no stranger to police intimidation and violence.

Police brutality has become common at the daily protests that have taken place in the city since the end of last year, when the autocratic government of the Georgian Dream party said it was stopping the country’s process of integration into the EU.

Kalandadze has seen others fall victim to police brutality and experienced it on more than one occasion herself—soon after leaving a protest in December last year, she was pushed to the ground and kicked viciously by a group of officers for questioning the arrest of a man in the street, and during another gathering a few weeks later, she was knocked out when officers pushed her and other protestors into a ditch.

But when the protests began, police violence against protesters seemed indiscriminate; research by rights group Amnesty International suggests that women protesters are now being targeted specifically and are facing escalating violence and gender-based reprisals.

Kalandadze says she is not surprised by the news.

“It’s true. The police are aggressive and they harass women both verbally, using demeaning terms such as ‘slut,’ ‘daughter of a whore,’ and others, and threaten us with rape and assault,” she says.

Amnesty’s research details the police’s methods to target women, which involves increasing use of gender-based violence including sexist insults, threats of sexual violence and unlawful and degrading strip searches against women involved in protests.

“We have spoken to people personally about what they experienced at the hands of the police, such as being forced to undergo strip-searches and threats of rape during detention,” Denis Krivosheev, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, told IPS.

The group’s research also highlights individual cases of this abuse, including cases of women being violently restrained by officers, forced to strip naked, denied access to medical treatment, threatened with rape, and subjected to sexual insults.

Amnesty says these abuses not only violate Georgian law, which prohibits full undressing during searches, but also international human rights law and standards aimed at safeguarding human dignity and protecting people from gender-based violence.

“Forcing someone to completely strip naked [in detention] is against both international and Georgian law, yet despite this, the police are forcing protesters to do this. It is clearly a deliberate police policy, despite it being against the law,” said Krivosheev.

While Amnesty says it has spoken to numerous women about such abuse, Krivosheev said, “the number [of women who are victims of this targeting] is far more than we have been able to document simply because many victims are scared to speak out about what happened to them.”

Female protesters who spoke to IPS confirmed that police harassment of women at protests was widespread, but also that it was often used to provoke a specific response, and not always just from women.

“The thing is that women are never violent at protests; they would never attack police, and the police are insulting us—usually with sexual slurs like saying we’re all sluts, bitches, whores, and insults about oral and anal sex—to try and provoke us into doing something that would get us arrested or force the men around us to try and protect us and do something that will get those men arrested,” Vera*, who has attended scores of protests in Tbilisi, told IPS.

“I know multiple women who were physically pushed, dragged, or detained. Some were insulted with misogynistic language. A few were groped during arrests—and that isn’t isolated… many of us know someone personally who’s experienced this abuse,” Tamar*, a civil rights campaigner from Tbilisi who has attended scores of protests, told IPS.

She added that police were even cooperating with, or at least tolerating, criminals abusing women protesters.

“The police have used violence—tear gas, water cannons, rubber bullets, and physical force—but that’s only part of the story. What’s even more disturbing is the presence of organized criminal gangs. These groups operate with impunity, clearly coordinated, yet the police don’t intervene. They specifically target women activists—chasing them, splashing green substances on their faces, shouting threats, and trying to scare them off the streets.

“I was personally hit in the head with a stone by one of these thugs. When I asked a police officer for help, he sarcastically told me to ask my ‘fellow democratic fighters’ who did it, as if it had come from among the people protesting. There’s zero accountability when the violence comes from those orchestrated to look like random citizens. It’s a deliberate tactic to terrorize protesters, especially women, while maintaining official deniability,” she said.

Many female protesters believe the reasons behind the targeting of women are rooted in not just the role women are playing in the current protests but also the “misogynist tendencies” of many officers.

“There is also a culture of toxic masculinity that goes hand in hand with the conservative part of society—the police are angry that women are taking the initiative [in protests]—female participation in the current protests is a lot larger than ever before—and that causes their aggression. The police see (or, at least, saw at the beginning) women at protests as ‘inferior’ compared to men and think they will be easier to break morally and easier to overpower physically.

“Another factor is the sexual deviations of individuals in the police force—when they feel power over the women after detaining them, their perversion takes over,” Vera explained.

Others put it down to how police perceive women as a serious threat to their authority.

“I think that the real reason the police are targeting women is that women are truly fearless in these protests. They are very resilient and persistent and always on the frontlines. They have actually physically saved a lot of men from the hands of violent police. I truly believe that the police feel threatened by them,” Paata Sabelashvili, a rights campaigner in Tbilisi who has taken part in protests, told IPS.

He added, though, that “in light of the misogyny and sexism among police officers, this is, sadly, not unexpected, and I fear it will only get worse in the future.”

While Amnesty has called on Georgian authorities to immediately end all forms of gender-based reprisals and all unlawful use of force by law enforcement, investigate every allegation of abuse during the protests, and ensure accountability at all levels, neither the group itself nor protesters who spoke to IPS, believe that is likely to happen soon.

“There is little hope under the current government for accountability and effective investigation [of police abuse during protests],” said Krivosheev.

Local media have reported that investigations into complaints made by women about the violence and threats they have faced from police at protests have largely gone nowhere, as have investigations by the Special Investigation Service, which is tasked with independently investigating crimes committed by police, despite hundreds of reports of police violence in 2024 alone.

The government has not commented on claims of women protesters being targeted by police, but in the past it has justified police action at protests as being a response to violence from protesters and has claimed, without evidence, that the protests are being funded from abroad.

But while women protesters are suffering from abuse and harassment by police, the tactics appear to be galvanizing female participation in protests.

“These gender-based reprisals may have been aimed at scaring women into giving up, but that has not been the case. Women have continued protesting, and if anything, even more intensively. Many women continue to speak up about how the police are treating them,” said Krivosheev.

Kalandadze says that despite her experiences, she will not stop attending protests.

“The day the government announced it would suspend Georgia’s EU integration, I decided to join the street protests, and the violent suppression began the same night. Since then, I have attended every protest where protesters have been in danger—every gathering where the police special forces were called in. Even today, I take part in every protest where police forces are mobilized,” she says.

Vera pointed out that although the size of street protests in Tbilisi has grown smaller, they continue on a daily basis.

“The fact that there is some kind of protest in the capital every day is discomfiting for the government and also serves to ensure that the regime is not legitimized in the eyes of the country’s former western partners. There are lots of female activists and the leaders of the protest marches are always women. We have shown so much resilience. We believe in each other. This country is ours,” she said.

Tamar was even more defiant.

“When women lead, especially in a patriarchal society, it destabilizes the whole narrative. It’s not just about political dissent; it’s about cultural control. Yes, I fear things may get worse before they get better. But we aren’t taking a step back,” she said.

*Names have been changed for their safety.

IPS UN Bureau Report

By Andrew Firmin
LONDON, Jun 20 2025 – On a resounding 79.4 per cent turnout, South Korean voters have delivered a clear mandate for change. Lee Jae-myung of the centrist Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) decisively won the 3 June election, becoming the country’s new president after a turbulent time for South Korean democracy.

Just six months before, South Koreans took to the streets to defend their democracy when President Yoon Suk Yeol tried to impose martial law. Their determination to protect democratic institutions paved the way for electoral change, proving once again that South Koreans deeply value hard-won freedoms.

Failed coup

The road to democratic renewal began with an unprecedented constitutional crisis. Yoon, of the centre-right People Power Party (PPP), had won the presidency in 2022 by the narrowest of margins, benefiting from a backlash against the country’s emerging feminist movement. But his success wasn’t long lived: the PPP suffered a heavy defeat in the 2024 parliamentary election. Hamstrung by a DPK-controlled National Assembly, the besieged Yoon took an unprecedented gamble. On 3 December, he declared martial law.

Yoon claimed his decision was motivated by the need to combat ‘pro-North Korean anti-state forces’, attempting to conflate political opposition with support for the totalitarian menace across the border. Yoon allegedly instructed the military to launch drones into North Korea. He also ordered the army to arrest several political leaders, including Lee and the head of his own party, Han Dong Hoon, and sent troops to try to stop the National Assembly meeting.

Most South Koreans saw this for what it was: an attempt by a failing president to hang onto power through undemocratic means. Their response was immediate and overwhelming. People flooded the streets, massing outside the National Assembly. As the army blocked the gates, politicians climbed fences. Some 190 lawmakers managed to get in, unanimously voting to repeal the martial law declaration.

Yoon made a televised apology but a few days later issued a statement of defiance, insisting his decision had been legitimate and pledging to ‘fight to the end’. The end came quickly. An impeachment vote suspended his presidency. His impeachment trial concluded on 4 April, with the court ordering the end of his presidency and a fresh election. Yoon is now on trial on insurrection charges. His arrest on 15 January followed a dramatic failed attempt on 3 January, when Yoon supporters and his security blocked access to the presidential palace, leading to violent clashes. Protests have continued both for and against Yoon.

Campaign issues

Lee has benefited from the public appetite for change. His campaign tacked rightwards, deemphasising some of the more progressive policies he’d previously championed, such as basic income for young people. This positioning helped win over former PPP supporters appalled by Yoon’s actions and the party’s continuing failure to condemn them.

Lee comfortably beat PPP candidate Kim Moon-soo. But another important factor was a split in the vote on the right: a more conservative party, the Reform Party, had broken off from the PPP and captured 8.3 per cent of the vote. Had these two reunited, they could have prevailed despite Yoon’s dismal record in office.

The martial law crisis dominated the campaign, but it wasn’t the only issue. Economic matters were important for many voters, with South Korea’s once-mighty economy faltering and high living costs and inequality becoming pressing concerns. These worries were exacerbated by the threat of US tariffs: South Korea, the fourth-biggest steel exporter to the USA, faces 50 per cent tariffs.

Political polarisation seems sure to continue following a bruising election campaign that saw the two main candidates accuse each other of planning to destroy democracy. Lee, who survived an assassination attempt in 2024 and faces death threats, campaigned under heavy security. One crucial test of his presidency will be whether he can heal these divides.

Challenges ahead

Lee however enters office carrying his own baggage, in the form of corruption allegations. In 2023, he was indicted on multiple charges over alleged collusion with property developers when he was mayor of Seongnam city. In November 2024, he received a one-year suspended sentence for making false statements about his relationship with the former head of the Seongnam Development Corporation.

A retrial is pending following an appeal, postponed until 18 June to take place after the election; a guilty verdict could have prevented Lee standing. Lee insists the charges against him are politically motivated, but the trial could bring further uncertainty and a potential constitutional crisis.

On the international front, Lee faces the challenge of repairing relations with the USA. The White House made a bizarre comment hinting at Chinese election interference, apparently picking up on far-right disinformation and attempts by the defeated candidates to paint Lee as a China sympathiser.

Relations with North Korea will present perhaps the biggest foreign policy challenge. DPK politicians typically focus on dialogue and bridge-building, and Lee promises to resume the cross-border dialogue that halted under Yoon.

While anything that promotes peace is welcome, civil society that campaigns on North Korea’s dire human rights situation and works with defectors will be on the lookout for potential restrictions. Under the last DPK government from 2017 to 2022, relations with North Korea thawed but civil society groups working on North Korean issues experienced heightened pressure. The government tried to ban the practice of activists using balloons to send humanitarian supplies and propaganda across the border. Civil society will be hoping the new administration doesn’t follow suit.

Time to build bridges

Lee can expect to face little short-term political opposition. Yoon’s actions have left the PPP in disarray and the next parliamentary election isn’t due until 2028. But Lee’s honeymoon isn’t likely to last long. Economic anger could drive more people to embrace regressive politics. In globally tough times, Lee will need to both offer political stability and deliver meaningful economic success.

That’s a difficult task, but there’s a key asset that can help. South Koreans have demonstrated they value democracy. South Korea’s civil society is active and strong. The new administration should commit to working with and nurturing this civic energy.

South Korea’s December resistance proved what people won’t tolerate. Now comes the harder task of building what many will embrace: a more stable, equitable democracy.

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

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

By Peter Bofinger
WURZBURG, Germany, Jun 20 2025 – In a recent speech, Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank (ECB), articulated a clear desire for the euro to play a more significant role as an international currency.

This, she argued, could bring substantial benefits to the euro area: ‘It would allow EU governments and businesses to borrow at a lower cost, helping boost our internal demand at a time when external demand is becoming less certain.

It would insulate us from exchange rate fluctuations, as more trade would be denominated in euro, protecting Europe from more volatile capital flows. It would protect Europe from sanctions or other coercive measures.’

Lagarde’s aspiration is that a greater reserve role for the euro would bestow upon Europe some of the so-called ‘exorbitant privilege’ that has, until now, been exclusively enjoyed by the United States.

This ambition stands in stark contrast to the views expressed by the Deutsche Bundesbank (the German Federal Bank) several decades ago, which in 1972, explicitly referred to ‘the Deutsche Mark as a reluctant reserve currency.’

A double-edged sword

The term ‘exorbitant privilege’ was coined in the 1960s by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, then the French minister of finance. It describes the unique position of the United States, which allows it to sustain a permanent current account deficit without triggering an exchange rate crisis.

The underlying mechanics are straightforward: when a country imports more than it exports, its liabilities to the rest of the world increase. Exporters abroad accumulate higher deposits denominated in the importing country’s currency.

If these exporters are unwilling to increase their exposure to a deficit country, they typically sell their export receipts on the foreign exchange market, exchanging them for deposits in their own currency.

Consequently, the currency of the deficit country depreciates. If the country fails to address its deficit, the exchange rate will continue to depreciate, risking a currency crisis.

This dynamic changes significantly with the ‘exorbitant privilege’. Foreign investors are willing to increase their holdings of US Treasuries by exchanging US dollar deposits, thereby financing the current account deficit without the dollar depreciating.

Therefore, it is a complete misconception for President Donald Trump to interpret the US current account deficit as exploitation of the United States by the rest of the world. As he once stated, ‘The United States of America is going to take back a lot of what was stolen from it by other countries.’

The opposite is true: The current account deficit has enabled US citizens to enjoy a higher standard of living, financed by the rest of the world through the purchase of US government IOUs. Over the past two decades, the current account deficit and the amount of Treasuries purchased by foreigners have moved in roughly tandem.

If Lagarde is now arguing that Europe could benefit from such a privilege by increasing the reserve role of the euro, one must recognise that Europe and the euro area have, until now, typically been current account surplus countries.

As long as this fundamental situation remains unchanged, Europe does not require the ‘privilege’ of foreigners purchasing euro-denominated government securities.

Given this entirely different current account position, it is unclear whether Europe would genuinely benefit from making euro government bonds more attractive as foreign exchange reserves.

If foreigners were to increase their holdings of euro-area government bonds, they would need to purchase euro deposits on the foreign exchange market against other currencies. This would lead to an increase in the effective exchange rate of the euro, resulting in a deterioration in the price competitiveness of euro-area producers.

It was precisely this fear that prompted the Bundesbank to adopt a cautious approach to an increased reserve currency role for the D-Mark in the 1970s.

Therefore, when discussing the ‘exorbitant privilege’, it is crucial to recognise its dual nature. For a currency area with a structural deficit, it prevents the currency from depreciating. For a currency area with a structural surplus, however, it causes an appreciation of the currency, which can have negative effects on its price competitiveness.

Switzerland provides a compelling example. Traditionally, it has maintained a structural current account surplus. The Swiss franc enjoys a strong reputation as a global reserve currency, leading to permanent capital inflows. To prevent the destabilising appreciation of its currency, the Swiss National Bank has had to purchase massive amounts of foreign currencies.

With reserves exceeding $900 billion, it is now the third-largest holder of foreign exchange reserves in the world, surpassed only by China and Japan. A significant portion of these reserves is invested in government bonds.

It would be ironic if the ECB, by increasing the reserve role of the euro, had to intervene to prevent a depreciation of the dollar and invest these funds in Treasuries.

A fundamental deficiency

However, if the aim is to increase the international role of the euro, it is necessary to determine how to boost this process. Since its introduction in 1999, the euro’s share of global exchange reserves has stabilised at approximately 20 per cent after some fluctuations. The euro has not, however, benefited from the decline in the US dollar’s share, which has fallen from over 70 per cent to under 60 per cent.

Instead, other currencies such as the Swiss franc, the pound sterling and the Japanese yen have been able to increase their position as reserve currencies. Therefore, it is unclear whether the euro would benefit from future shifts in international investors’ portfolios away from the US dollar due to ‘Trumpian policies’.

In her speech, Lagarde described the ‘economic foundation’ of a reserve currency role as a virtuous circle between ‘growth, capital markets and international currency usage’. She explained, ‘The development of US capital markets boosted growth… while simultaneously establishing dollar dominance. The depth and liquidity of the US Treasury market in turn provided an efficient hedge for investors.’

Lagarde believes that ‘Europe has all elements it needs to produce a similar cycle’ and concluded: ‘If we truly want to see the global status of the euro grow, we must first reform our domestic economy.’ The ‘reforms’ she outlined included the usual suspects: completing the Single Market, enabling start-ups, reducing regulation, and building the savings and investment union.

Surprisingly, she did not mention the most obvious obstacle to the euro playing a more prominent international role. While US capital markets offer a total treasury supply of $28.3 billion, the euro area’s government bond market remains a patchwork of larger and smaller national issuers. The largest volume is provided by the French market, totalling €3.3 billion.

It would be naïve to believe that this fundamental deficiency of European capital markets could be overcome by ‘structural reforms’ or by the more homeopathic measures for completing the capital market union.

However, Lagarde also offered a promising step forward: joint financing of European public goods, particularly defence. This would help to increase the supply of truly European safe assets.

In sum, there is no obvious case for increasing the role of the euro as a global reserve currency. If the ECB wants to allow ‘businesses to borrow at a lower cost, helping boost our internal demand’, it must simply reduce its policy rate further.

In addition, the fundamental flaw of a segregated market for European government bonds is very difficult to overcome. Nevertheless, attempts to finance European public goods with jointly issued bonds will undoubtedly lead in the right direction.

This is a joint publication by Social Europe and IPS Journal.

IPS UN Bureau

Excerpt:

Peter Bofinger is professor of economics at Würzburg University and a former member of the German Council of Economic Experts

By Kizito Makoye
DAR ES SALAAM , Jun 19 2025 – On the vast plains of Tanzania’s Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA), the sight of young Maasai men in bright shawls, wielding sticks as they herd cattle, has long symbolized peaceful coexistence with nature. These herders, moving in harmony with zebras and wildebeests, are inseparable from the landscape. But today, that very identity—nurtured for generations—is under siege.

What is happening in Ngorongoro, a UNESCO World Heritage Site renowned for its ecological and cultural value, is nothing short of a systematic purge of a people who have lived in harmony with nature for centuries.

Since 2022, the Tanzanian government has pushed to relocate tens of thousands of Maasai from Ngorongoro to Msomera, a remote, arid village some 600 kilometers away. Though officials label this as a “voluntary relocation” to protect fragile ecosystems, the reality is far more troubling. This is not conservation—it is dispossession.

As someone who has spent years reporting on Indigenous communities across East Africa, I know that the Maasai are not intruders—they are stewards. Their bomas (thorn-fenced homesteads), rituals, and grazing practices form a sustainable way of life attuned to the rhythms of nature. What’s happening now is an assault not just on their homes, but on their identity.

I’ve watched with growing anguish as this distinctive ethnic group is being driven to the margins—not by war or famine, but by state policies cloaked in the language of “development” and “protection.”

Ask anyone who has visited Ngorongoro: humans and wildlife coexist here in a delicate, thriving balance. The region supports more than 25,000 large animals—including lions, elephants, and the critically endangered black rhinoceros.

Ngorongoro also houses archaeological treasures like Olduvai Gorge, dubbed the “Cradle of Humankind.” It is a place where conservation, archaeology, tourism, and Indigenous rights once coexisted through a multiple land-use model. That balance is now collapsing.

The government’s plan to relocate over 100,000 Maasai is riddled with failures. A recent fact-finding mission revealed the dark side of this relocation effort. Families were lured with promises of fertile, uninhabited land and better services. What awaited them instead was dry land with no pastures, contested plots already claimed by locals, and salty, insufficient water.

Cattle—the backbone of Maasai livelihood—have died in large numbers. Health clinics barely function. Schools are overcrowded. Families are squeezed into identical three-room concrete houses, stripped of the communal structure that defines Maasai society.

Community consultation was shallow or entirely absent. Traditional leaders were sidelined. Compensation procedures lacked transparency. Ultimately, people were presented with a false choice: remain in Ngorongoro and face a withdrawal of services, or leave and risk cultural extinction.

This is part of a disturbing global trend known as “fortress conservation,” where Indigenous people are cast as threats to biodiversity rather than its protectors. But for whose benefit? Tourism revenue? International praise?

In my years of reporting, I’ve met Maasai elders who speak with reverence about their sacred lands. These pastures are not mere grazing grounds—they are the lifeblood of ceremonies, rites of passage, and spiritual rituals. To strip the Maasai of their land is to erase their very essence.

I fear the disappearance—even death—of the Maasai culture. Msomera cannot sustain their way of life. There is no room for their bomas, no pastures for cattle, and no sacred spaces for rituals. The village is too arid, its soils unable to support pastoralism. Many cows have already perished.

I’ve learned from credible sources that social services in Ngorongoro were deliberately withdrawn to coerce the Maasai into relocating. Schools, clinics, and even water services were dismantled. Development funds meant for Ngorongoro were diverted elsewhere. Flying Medical Services, once a lifeline in this remote region, was abruptly halted. Building permits for toilets and classrooms were revoked. This is not conservation. It is institutionalized punishment.

The government’s claim that overpopulation threatens the conservation area collapses under scrutiny. While Maasai homes are being dismantled, tourist lodges are multiplying. Roads to investor compounds are paved and maintained. Roads to villages? Neglected. If ecological preservation is truly the goal, why accommodate investors while evicting Indigenous residents?

The people of Ngorongoro were denied participation in decisions that affect their lives. Their leaders were ignored. Their legal rights to consultation—enshrined in both Tanzanian and international law—were trampled.

The situation in Msomera paints a bleak picture. More than 48 families remain without housing. Those who have homes are packed into identical structures, regardless of family size. Health facilities are almost nonexistent. Schools are overwhelmed. Tensions are rising as original residents challenge the allocation of land.

Let’s be honest: this is not a voluntary relocation. It is a politically calculated operation—one that wears the mask of sustainable development while bulldozing human dignity.

As the world finally acknowledges the critical role of Indigenous knowledge in combating climate change, Tanzania appears to be turning its back on one of its most knowledgeable communities. The Maasai’s way of life—marked by mobility, traditional water harvesting, and sustainable grazing—is precisely what we need more of, not less.

As journalists, we must continue to expose these contradictions. We must challenge the narratives crafted by bureaucrats and investors. We must amplify the voices of the marginalized.

To policymakers, I say this: you cannot conserve nature by destroying its oldest custodians. You cannot build sustainability on the ruins of a culture. And you cannot earn credibility while ignoring the cries of your own citizens.

What is urgently needed is a moratorium on all evictions. Relocation must be paused. Compensation must be fair, participatory, and transparent. Above all, Indigenous land rights must be upheld—not overridden by state power.

True conservation is rooted in partnership, not punishment. In dialogue, not displacement.

As climate threats grow, the world is realizing what the Maasai have known for centuries: that living with nature, not against it, is the only path forward. Tanzania must not squander this wisdom.

There is still time to change course. Until then, the Maasai will resist—and I will continue to write. Because in the face of such injustice, silence is complicity.

Notes: Makoye is a Tanzanian journalist and environmental advocate with extensive experience covering Indigenous rights, conservation, and climate justice issues across East Africa.

This opinion piece is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Excerpt:

The removal of tens of thousands of Maasai from Ngorongoro to Msomera is part of a disturbing global trend known as “fortress conservation,” where Indigenous people are cast as threats to biodiversity rather than its protectors.