By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 28 2025 – The Trump administration’s hostile attitude towards Western Europe—and the threat to pullout of the 32-member military alliance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) – signifies the danger of losing the longstanding protection of the US nuclear umbrella over Europe.

Jana Puglierin, director of the German office of the European Council on Foreign Relations, was quoted as saying: “Trump may, or may not, want to leave NATO officially, but he has every means to undermine NATO”.

Trump’s antagonism towards NATO also extends to the 27-member European Union (EU), which he said, was created, “to screw the US.”

The widespread speculation, in the current political climate, is whether the UK and France could provide nuclear protection to Western Europe—or will countries like Germany, Poland and the Nordics be forced to go nuclear?

The New York Times said last month that Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland , with its long history of Russian occupation, might eventually develop its own nuclear weapon.

Of the world’s approximately 12,331 nuclear warheads, roughly 9,604 are in the military stockpiles for use by missiles, aircraft, ships and submarines. The remaining warheads have been retired but are still relatively intact and are awaiting dismantlement, according to FAS.

The world’s nine nuclear-armed states are the UK, US, Russia, France, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel.

Both UK and France have only 515 warheads compared to about 3,700 in the American arsenal, with an additional 1,300 waiting to be de-activated.

Tariq Rauf (former Head of Verification and Security Policy, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told IPS “for some time now, I have believed that NATO’s European members have failed to integrate Russia into a common European security architecture”.

It is a concerning reality that some of the new members of NATO, former East bloc countries, have endeavoured to get some form of revenge for the wrongs inflicted upon them by the USSR, and have found ways to provoke Russia which in turn has led to bad behaviour by Russia.

“Now the proverbial chickens have come home to roost and a shooting war has been going on for three years. US pull back from Europe has long been on the books, President Trump is the latest US leader who seems to let the Europeans fend for themselves. Eighty years after the end of WW2, EU economies are thriving but their foreign policy remains confused and now there are concerns about “friendly proliferation”.

The Polish president, Rauf pointed out, has openly voiced interest in developing own nuclear weapons if the US does not station nuclear weapons in his country. Interestingly, this did not elicit any concerns from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or other countries as Poland is a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Both France and the UK still labour under delusions of being global powers and have pretensions of providing “extended deterrence” to their European friends as the US distances itself.

In the UK, Prime Minister Starmer is cutting support to pensioners and other social programmes, as well as overseas development assistance, to fund new nuclear-missile submarines and maintaining an arsenal of about 260 operational nuclear weapons.

In France, President Macron is reversing President de Gaulle’s policy and is openly offering to bring in EU countries under a French nuclear “umbrella”, even as the economy declines and social problems increase.

While France has about 300 operational nuclear warheads, it has permanently closed and dismantled it nuclear weapon test sites and facilities to make nuclear material for nuclear weapons.

Germany has reversed policy as well and will again host US medium-range nuclear-armed ballistic missiles; as will the UK which will bring back US nuclear-armed bombers.

The 55-year old NPT system is on the verge of collapse and it that happens the result will be a cascade of nuclear proliferation in Europe and the Asia-Pacific, warned Rauf.

Jackie Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation, Oakland, California, told IPS talk of a potential “Eurobomb” goes back decades, but it has escalated sharply since the Trump administration’s antipathy towards its NATO allies has caused some of them to question the reliability of the U.S. commitment to Article 5 of the 1949 NATO treaty.

Article 5, at the heart of the treaty, commits NATO states to help out any member that comes under armed attack, with the response they deem appropriate, including military responses, widely understood to include the U.S. ‘nuclear umbrella’.

In 2020, French President Macron called for a ‘strategic dialogue’ on ‘the role of France’s nuclear deterrent in [Europe’s] collective security.’ In an attempt to open discussions on this issue with Germany, France repeated the offer in 2022, but there were no takers.

Last month, Macron offered to ‘open the strategic debate’ with interested European countries to determine ‘if there are new co-operations that may emerge’.” Officials from Germany, Poland, Denmark, Lithuania, and Latvia have welcomed Macron’s call for a strategic dialogue, which would also aim to include nuclear-armed UK.

“Donald Trump’s wildly erratic pronouncements and behavior makes it impossible to predict how the U.S. will react. But clues might be found in Project 2025, widely seen as the playbook for the second Trump administration,” she said.

Project 2025 seeks to ‘Transform NATO so that U.S. allies are capable of fielding the great majority of the conventional forces required to deter Russia while relying on the United States primarily for our nuclear deterrent, and select other capabilities while reducing the U.S. force posture in Europe’.

While Trump threatened to withdraw the U.S. from NATO during his first term, the U.S. government as a whole is deeply committed to NATO, as is illustrated by the fact that in 2024 Congress passed, and President Biden signed, a law – supported by then Senator/now Secretary of State Marco Rubio, requiring that a withdrawal from NATO be approved by Congress.

“I think it’s unlikely, though not impossible, that the Trump administration will pull the U.S. out of NATO”, said Cabasso.

But, in light of the Russian Federation’s ongoing illegal war of aggression in Ukraine with its attendant drumbeat of nuclear threats, and a U.S. ally increasing seen as unreliable, a number of former and current European government officials and politicians have called for some form of an independent European nuclear force.

Such a development would violate the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and other applicable laws. But more alarming is the growing normalization of nuclear threats and legitimization of nuclear proliferation suggested by its proponents.

At a time when all of the nuclear armed states are qualitatively and, in some cases, quantitatively upgrading their nuclear arsenals, a new multipolar arms race is underway, and the dangers of wars among nuclear armed states are growing. Adding more nuclear-armed actors to the world stage is a truly terrifying prospect.

Germany and other NATO members should rebuff any suggestion of acquiring nuclear weapons and take the lead in rejecting reliance on nuclear weapons, use every diplomatic means at their disposal to lower the temperature with Russia and bring the Ukraine war to an end, and promote negotiations among nuclear-armed states to begin the process of nuclear disarmament.

Instead of engaging in a strategic dialogue about a potential Eurobomb, European leaders should be engaging in a dialogue to commence negotiations on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Europe, ultimately to include Russia. It’s very difficult to imagine in these dark times, but as Albert Einstein said, ‘Imagination is everything. It is the preview of life’s coming attractions’.

Elaborating further, Rauf also pointed out that the 1996 nuclear-test-ban treaty languishes and still is not in force, nuclear explosive testing moratoria seemingly are hanging by a thread. We are now in a much more precarious situation regarding accidental or deliberate nuclear war, than even in the worst times of the Cold War. Political leadership is absent – the challenges seem beyond the ken of today’s leaders who are desperately flailing for solutions.

It is well past time to dial back the confrontational rhetoric and heed the call of the UN Secretary-General addressing the UN Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, “The nuclear option is not an option at all. It is a one-way road to annihilation. We need to avoid this dead-end at all costs. Humanity is counting on us to get this right. Let us keep working to deliver the safe, secure and peaceful world that every person needs and deserve.”

In an article published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) last January, Dr Wilfred Wan and Dr Gitte du Plessis, point out that in July 2024 Norway’s Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace signed a contract with the Norwegian Defence Materiel Agency (NDMA) for the development of a next-generation ‘supersonic strike missile’, as part of a collaborative project between Norway and Germany first announced in November 2023. The plan is for the new manoeuvrable naval strike missile, dubbed the Tyrfing, to be operational in 2035.

This is just one of several recent high-profile efforts involving Nordic states that aim to enhance European conventional capabilities in order to deter aggression and maintain strategic stability.

Others include Finland’s announcement, in May 2024, that it is acquiring Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range (JASSM-ER) weapons from the United States, which comes on top of its 2021 order of US F-35 combat aircraft. Around the same time, Sweden announced that it would provide Ukraine with early warning and control aircraft equipped with its Erieye radar system. This is expected to represent a ‘big force multiplier’ for Ukraine’s F-16 combat aircraft.

These moves in the Nordic region reflect broader European trends in the development and deployment of advanced conventional precision-strike capabilities. Investments in longer-range, manoeuvrable missiles and delivery systems—including the Tyrfing and the planned deployment on German soil of US hypersonic systems and ground-launched missiles that would have been prohibited under the now-defunct Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty)—contribute to the spectre of a ‘new missile crisis’ in Europe.

Planned upgrades to European global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) will further bolster the ability of these weapon systems to rapidly locate, target and ultimately destroy targets.

For the Nordic states, and especially for new NATO members Finland and Sweden, Russia’s war in Ukraine has provided clear justification for such developments. They are seeking both to demonstrate solidarity with other NATO members and to strengthen the alliance’s conventional capabilities in order to complement the extended US nuclear deterrent. But these decisions have many implications—and come with risks—that European policymakers may not have fully considered.

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

IPS UN Bureau Report

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

“As the son of a haenyeo, a traditional Korean female diver, I grew up by the sea, often watching the ocean with my mother. Captivated by the beauty and majesty of the sea, I chose to study marine science and have devoted my entire career to the ocean,” said Do-hyung Kang, Minister of the Ministry […]

By Patrick Rosenow and Kirsten Hartmann
BERLIN, Germany, Apr 28 2025 – For the first time ever in its history, the United Nations Peacekeeping Ministerial (PKM) will take place in Berlin from 13 to 14 May. The aim of the meeting is to discuss the future of UN peace missions. These biennial meetings serve as a gauge of the continuing political support for such missions, which are, of course, just one of the tools in the UN’s comprehensive ‘toolkit’ for handling conflict — alongside general conflict prevention, mediation missions and peacebuilding measures.

But the need for reform is clear: the planning, execution and successful completion of peace missions are beset with challenges. The last major UN peacekeeping mission to be initiated was the MINUSCA in the Central African Republic in 2014.

Although existing missions are regularly extended, other players are increasingly gaining in importance, particularly regional and sub-regional organisations. The success of UN missions continues to be limited, while the number of conflicts worldwide is on the increase.

Changes in conflict dynamics, for example as a result of new threats such as disinformation, provide additional complications for their work. Nevertheless, UN peacekeeping missions are regarded as one of the most cost-efficient and effective instruments in international conflict management. They are proven to reduce direct violence against civilian populations and therefore continue to be irreplaceable.

In light of the increasing challenges, the upcoming PKM in Berlin will discuss new, more flexible models for future peacekeeping. In the Pact for the Future in September 2024, the UN Member States had already tasked Secretary-General António Guterres with developing suggestions to reform UN peacekeeping. Such missions are therefore currently a hot topic. And it is worth taking a look at Germany’s role in all this.

A crucial role

The first National Security Strategy (NSS), published in 2023, emphasised Germany’s wish to assume responsibility for international crisis management. In practice, however, its commitment continues to be limited, especially when it comes to personnel. Russia’s attack on Ukraine has shifted security policy priorities towards defending the country and the alliance.

The lack of a substantive German commitment to UN peacekeeping would, however, be fatal. The country’s participation is crucial for several reasons — not only because of the need for well-trained staff and for logistics, transport and high-value skills and competencies, but also for political credibility.

Those who want to influence and have a say in the future of peace missions also need to take responsibility on the ground. The Final Report by the Afghanistan Commission of Inquiry calls for the UN system to be strengthened by better crisis management, more financial resources and realistic, prioritised mandates.

This can only succeed if ‘peace missions receive relevant support from Germany, in terms of both materials and people’. To date, however, personnel on the ground has been in short supply.

Until its withdrawal in 2023, the UN mission in Mali was Germany’s last substantial – albeit selective – peacekeeping engagement. Currently, Germany’s contribution is largely limited to the maritime components of the UNIFIL Mission in Lebanon.

Although Germany is traditionally a reliable participant in the financing of UN deployments, its field presence was always limited — with its political influence suffering as a result. On many occasions, the participation of German troops has paradoxically even declined when Germany was represented for two years on the UN Security Council.

There has therefore been a gap between ambition and reality for a long time now. This contradiction is also evident in the National Security Strategy. On the one hand, it claims: ‘The army’s core mission is to defend the country and the alliance; all tasks are subordinate to this mission.’

On the other hand, it declares that ‘we will strive to ensure that United Nations peacekeeping missions are endowed with a clear political mandate and the necessary resources.’ As it is, the foreign policy message remains ambivalent — and points to a continuing need for clarification in the political decision-making process.

Three key challenges

Overall, three key challenges are hindering Germany’s commitment to the UN.

Firstly, the German public remains fundamentally sceptical about Germany playing a more significant role in international crisis operations. Despite the mantra-like declaration of wanting to take more responsibility, the new government needs to provide more convincing arguments to justify such deployments.

As so many of these missions take place far away from the reality of people’s lives at home, there is a real need for open, clear communication on the importance of multilateral action — without ignoring critical voices. At all times, German participation must, of course, be carefully assessed and the chances of success evaluated together with national and international partners.

Secondly, the army continues to be underfunded despite the so-called ‘Zeitenwende’ (or turning point) and constitutional change. Any sustainable improvement requires stable financing commitments and structural reforms — also when it comes to personnel. For this to happen, the defence budget needs to grow in the long term and structures need to be adapted — also in view of the suspension of compulsory military service.

The new government should therefore do one thing without abandoning the other: the defence of the country and of the alliance needs to be considered in tandem with deployments in trouble spots. Ultimately, the NSS emphasises that German security ‘[is] linked to the security and stability of other regions of the world’.

Thirdly, the civil sector lacks the political will and suitable structures to play a more forceful role. Although the 2021 Coalition treaty promised that crisis prevention and civil crisis management would be strengthened, this aspiration has, in practice, remained largely unfulfilled. For example, in March only 12 German police officers were deployed in UN peace missions — despite long-standing targets for growth in this area.

Alongside diverging interests between the federal and state governments, career incentives for international deployments are also in short supply. As a comparison, more than 280 German police officers are currently deployed with Frontex — a clear sign of the political priorities.

Given the global changes in UN peacekeeping, Germany should participate fully in the upcoming reform discussions, contribute its own ideas and, in particular, provide concrete resources. The Peacekeeping Ministerial in May offers an important opportunity to lend visibility to Germany’s political engagement, to help shape the future of UN peacekeeping and to pledge binding contributions.

Ultimately, Germany must prove that it is serious about UN peacekeeping if it is to again apply in 2026 for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council for 2027/2028 — and emphasise strengthening UN peacekeeping in its candidacy.

Yet, sustainable support may not be limited to ministerial or Security Council meetings. Germany should systematically push ahead with its commitment to peace and security within the whole UN architecture, for example in its current role as chair of the Peacebuilding Commission or in the General Assembly, whose presidency the country will assume in September.

Germany should generally continue to drive forward the closer integration of peace consolidation and peacekeeping — politically, structurally and operationally. The ministries involved should therefore define the goals of Germany’s participation in UN-led peace operations — with binding schedules and personnel and financial commitments.

These goals should also be coordinated with NATO and EU strategic processes to ensure international coherence and division of labour. Such voluntary commitments can also be included in the revised crisis guidelines (originally from 2017).

The new government needs to act urgently — not only on account of crises in peace operations but also because of the increase in cross-border security threats. In a period of multiple crises, Germany cannot afford to take a backseat when it comes to security policy. The impact of the current conflicts will be felt here sooner or later.

Dr Patrick Rosenow is editor-in-chief of the magazine Vereinte Nationen, published by the United Nations Association of Germany (UNA-Germany, DGVN). His work focuses on the United Nations, multilateralism, and peace and international security.

Kirsten Hartmann is a policy officer in the Europe and International Politics programme at the Bundeskanzler-Helmut-Schmidt-Stiftung. She studied international relations and peace studies in Erfurt, Cali, Tübingen and Haifa.

Source: International Politics & Society (IPS), Brussels.

IPS UN Bureau

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

Ahead of the 10th Our Ocean Conference, with the theme “Our Ocean, Our Action,” comes a global call to protect the world’s oceans. The conference starts tomorrow (April 28) and ends on Wednesday and takes place in Busan, Korea. On Jeju Island, situated south of the Korean Peninsula and west of southern Japan, a community […]

By External Source
KABUL, Apr 25 2025 – “Even if our murals don’t change much, they will surely leave a mark – at least on the mind of one Taliban member who sees them.” These words from Afghan women activists reflect the bold and creative tactics they continue to use in their resistance against the Taliban’s oppressive regime.

In guerrilla-style operations, a group of young women choose a location together, spending hours surveilling it to ensure Taliban forces are not nearby. Once the location is deemed safe, they write their messages on the walls and immediately disperse in different directions, sometimes avoiding their homes for several hours to throw off any possible surveillance that might have been trailing them.

“Three core principles serve as the motivation in our remobilization, to rid us of tyranny”, declares the Purple Saturdays Movement, name of the group waging the secret campaign. They are encapsulated in a three-word slogan: Right, Justice and Freedom.

Undeterred by the risk of brutal torture or arrest, the movement continues its protests inside Afghanistan in confined places and in different forms.

“Women in Afghanistan have organized widespread protests and activities against the Taliban’s policies over the past three years,”, says Maryam Marouf Arwin, head of the Purple Saturdays Movement. “Their efforts have had a significant impact globally and regionally, preventing many countries from recognizing the Taliban’s self-proclaimed government.”

When barred from protesting in public, Afghan women continue their resistance behind closed doors. Credit: Learning Together.

Established on August 17, 2021, exactly two days after the Taliban took control of the country, Arwin says the Purple Saturday Movement, is the beginning of a new leap of hope at the height of despair. It has raised its voice against all Taliban orders and has held its protests, both on the streets and behind closed doors.

The movement is guided by the conviction that all Afghan people have been victims of the Taliban’s brutal regime. Therefore, their central goal is to achieve equal rights, justice and freedom for all Afghan citizens irrespective of gender, religious convictions and ethnic background.

In their latest street protests, the movement has demanded strong resistance against Taliban policies, and called for approval of the arrest warrant for the leader of the Taliban, Hibatullah Akhundzada and Abdul Hakim Haqqani, the head of the Taliban’s Supreme Court issued by the International Criminal Court.

Previously they have organized both individual and group protests in public and behind closed doors, speaking out against the Taliban’s decision to shut down educational institutions and all other repressive policies the brutal Islamist regime has targeted on women.

“We are committed to continue our struggle despite the Taliban’s brutal repression,” the group defiantly declares, “our goal is to end the Taliban’s rule and ensure social justice in the country”.

The movement contends that Sharia law is an excuse to eliminate women, and that the Taliban regressive rule is implemented under the guise of religion to oppress the people of Afghanistan. Nevertheless, they maintain that events in the past three years have proved that women of Afghanistan will not surrender and be isolated.

The Purple Saturdays Movement asserts that, “Considering the actions of the Taliban against the people of Afghanistan, particularly women, vulnerable ethnic groups, and religious minorities over the past 20 years, especially their conduct in the last three years, it is evident that the Taliban are neither susceptible to change nor flexibility.”

As outlined by Arwin, the movement’s activities include street protests, individual and collective demonstrations in confined spaces, wall inscriptions, social media hashtags, crafting declarations and resolutions, publishing reports, writing articles, and making appearances across various media.

She however, states that, “the standard for protests is not designated to take place only on the street. Protests have taken place in many countries for years, she points out, but they weren’t always on the roads, but nevertheless, the world has seen and welcomed such protests and recognized them. However, according to her, the protests of Afghan women have gone unnoticed whether held on the streets, in closed spaces, or on social media.”

The Taliban’s repression has become truly horrific. Recent reports make every family cringe when their daughter goes out to protest. Faced with arrest, rape, and sexual harassment by the Taliban, no one dares to let their daughters onto the streets. “For the safety of our members, we are forced to hold individual protests in closed settings and on social media,” Arwin says.

The women of Afghanistan stand firm: discrimination against women must not be tolerated. Credit: Learning Together.

In that regard, she is appealing for political and diplomatic support from governments of the European Union and the United Nations, to take a clear and decisive stance against crimes against humanity and oppression of Afghan women.

“We ask you to make our voices heard widely in the media and international forums.”

With the Taliban regaining control, the people of Afghanistan, especially women, religious minorities, and vulnerable ethnic groups, have once again returned to the dark and oppressive days in the past when Taliban made their first appearance as rulers in the country.

In the very first days of regaining control of Kabul in August 2021, the Taliban declared war on the women of the country. Since then they have issued dozens of decrees and orders, which have eviscerated all fundamental human rights from women throughout the country.

“From the first moment of oppression, our movement has fought against the darkness and will continue to fight until we achieve freedom,” Arwin concludes.

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 Tafadzwa Munyaka
HARARE, Apr 25 2025 – Across Africa, giving is not just an act of charity; it’s a deep-rooted tradition embedded in culture, community, and mutual care. The concept of giving has evolved through generations, often taking on forms that are as diverse as the continent itself.

African giving practices emphasize collective well-being over individual gain, creating a web of support that binds communities together in times of need. One dimension has remained constant in African giving practices and that is the fact that the giving does not come from excess but rather, on the prevailing need.

The Spirit of Ubuntu: community before self

At the heart of many African cultures lies the philosophy of Ubuntu, a term that translates roughly to “I am because we are.” It emphasizes interconnectedness and mutual respect, where the welfare of one is seen as the welfare of all.

Ubuntu is often practiced through giving, both in material and emotional forms. Whether it’s offering food to a neighbour, providing shelter for the homeless, or sharing wisdom with younger generations, Ubuntu encourages individuals to look beyond themselves and work for the common good.

In many African societies, this sense of communal responsibility extends beyond close family ties. Giving to the broader community — the village, the extended family, or even strangers — is seen as a deeply moral duty.

African giving practices emphasize collective well-being over individual gain, creating a web of support that binds communities together in times of need. One dimension has remained constant in African giving practices and that is the fact that the giving does not come from excess but rather, on the prevailing need

The underlying belief is simple yet profound anchored on the idea that when one person prospers, they have a responsibility to share their success with others. This strengthens the social fabric and ensures that no one is left behind, even in times of hardship.

For example, I remember vividly from my childhood how, during times of bereavement, the entire neighbourhood would mobilize around the grieving family. Relatives of the deceased would go from household to household, collecting whatever anyone could offer — be it a few coins, a bag of mealie-meal, cooking oil, or even just a bunch of vegetables.

These small yet meaningful contributions would be pooled together to feed mourners, assist with funeral arrangements, or purchase essentials for the burial.

The act of giving, no matter how modest, was never questioned — it was expected, because in that moment, the burden of loss was shared by all. Another common example is that of supporting children’s education whereby the extended family chips in to ensure the child does not drop out of school – some even sell their prized livestock to cover that gap.

Informal and formal forms of giving

1. Social networks and informal giving

In many African countries, informal giving practices play a significant role. This often occurs through social networks that span family, friends, and neighbours. These networks create a system of reciprocity, where individuals help each other with the understanding that the favour will be returned when needed.

These exchanges can range from lending money to providing emotional support during difficult times. This is in direct contrast to the ever-expanding compliance regime imposed by donors.

One widely practiced form of informal giving is the susu (in West Africa) or stokvel (in Southern Africa), which is a form of communal savings. A group of people agree to contribute a set amount of money regularly, and each member takes turns receiving the lump sum of contributions.

It is common cause that the informal financial institutions have long served as essential vehicles for collective economic empowerment, particularly in contexts where access to formal banking and credit systems is limited or exclusionary.

These informal savings schemes are not only practical for financing projects but also serve as a tool to strengthen bonds of trust and solidarity within communities.

There is no attendant expectation of demonstrating results, impact or accounting for how the money received was utilised. This relieves pressure and gives greater autonomy to the individuals to attend to their most pressing needs in ways they deem fit.

This autonomy is particularly empowering in African contexts where formal giving models — often shaped by donor-driven paradigms — can be rigid and administratively burdensome.

By contrast, as an example, susu and stokvel systems recognize the dignity and agency of individuals, allowing them to respond flexibly and swiftly to their most pressing concerns.

They also demonstrate the collective ethic of support and solidarity that underpins many African cultures — where giving is not a matter of surplus charity, but a deliberate investment in mutual upliftment.

The enduring popularity of such models speaks not only to their practicality but also to their cultural resonance. In many ways, they are emblematic of an African philanthropy that is people-centred, trust-based, and deeply rooted in lived realities.

2. Giving through faith and religion

Religion plays a central role in African societies, and giving is often a key practice in religious communities. Tithing, or the practice of giving a portion of one’s earnings/farm produce to the church or mosque, is common across the continent. However, it’s not just about financial contributions. Giving to others in need, whether through offering time and skills is seen as a way to fulfil religious duties.

In many African communities, faith-based organizations are instrumental in mobilizing resources for community development. These organizations often run programs focused on education, health, and poverty alleviation, with support from both local and international donors.

3. Giving for special occasions

Life events such as births, weddings, funerals, and other significant milestones often prompt collective giving. In some cultures, it’s customary to give in the form of cash or material gifts, while in others, the giving may take on a more symbolic form, such as providing labour or sharing knowledge.

These practices not only help support those undergoing major life events but also reinforce the sense of community and solidarity.

For instance, in Zimbabwe, the practice of contribution is often used to gather support for funerals or weddings, and this tradition reflects the notion that it is important to help one another during times of joy or sorrow.

The role of African philanthropy today

In contemporary Africa, traditional giving practices continue to flourish, albeit in new forms. Many African billionaires and business leaders have embraced philanthropy, using their wealth to address issues such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development.

Figures like Aliko Dangote, Strive Masiyiwa, and Mo Ibrahim have made significant contributions to various causes, showcasing a modern extension of the African spirit of giving.

However, giving in Africa is not limited to the wealthy. Everyday people continue to donate time, skills, and resources to causes that matter to them. Whether it’s through crowd-funding platforms or local charity events, African communities continue to demonstrate resilience and ingenuity in finding ways to support one another.

Challenges and the Future of African Giving

While the practice of giving remains strong, there are challenges facing African philanthropy. The continent’s vast wealth inequality, economic instability, and the pressure of large-scale development needs can sometimes hinder the full potential of giving practices.

Additionally, there are concerns about the role of international aid, which, though well-meaning, can sometimes undermine local giving traditions by creating dependency rather than empowering local solutions.

That said, the future of African giving seems to be one of empowerment and sustainability. Increasingly, there is a push to support initiatives that build local capacity, empower communities, and create lasting impact. This means focusing on education, health, and business development — areas where giving can help transform lives for generations to come, for example.

A tradition that endures

African giving practices are an integral part of the continent’s rich cultural tapestry. They reflect a profound understanding of the importance of community, shared responsibility, and mutual aid.

Whether through informal social networks, religious tithes, or large-scale philanthropy, giving remains a cornerstone of African life, serving as a reminder that true wealth is found not in the accumulation of possessions but in the well-being of the collective.

As the world continues to evolve, the spirit of African generosity will undoubtedly remain a force for positive change — a testament to the enduring power of human connection and compassion.

By Rajat Khosla
GENEVA, Apr 25 2025 – As the G20 Health Working Group convened in KwaZulu-Natal under South Africa’s presidency earlier this year, a central question echoed across plenaries: How can we accelerate universal health coverage (UHC) in an increasingly unequal world?

With more than half of the global population- over 4.5 billion people, lacking access to essential health services, the answer must begin with those who are most systematically left behind: women, children, and adolescents.

The State of UHC: Lagging and uneven progress

Despite some progress, we are off track to meet SDG target 3.8 on UHC. The UHC service coverage index improved only marginally from 65 to 68 between 2015 and 2021, and has stagnated thereafter. Worse still, the number of people pushed into extreme poverty due to out-of-pocket (OOP) health costs stands at a staggering 1.3 billion globally.

These financial shocks do not fall evenly. Women, children, and adolescents are particularly vulnerable to catastrophic health expenditures due to their higher health needs and frequent exclusion from social protection mechanisms.

For example, an analysis by Save the Children in 2024 found that 1 in 5 children would be born without skilled attendance, a study by WHO notes that a high proportion of SRHR-related services (including family planning, maternal care, and adolescent health) inadequately prioritized in UHC plans and are paid for out-of-pocket.

Rajat Khosla

Gaps in WCAH Coverage: An Overlooked Priority

Essential WCAH services—those that save lives and reduce inequity—are too often omitted or underfunded in national UHC benefit packages. For instance, a review of essential packages of health services found that in 17 countries (of 51 surveyed) that have defined lists of essential interventions only 1 fully includes all nine essential SRHR service bundles recommended by UNFPA in their UHC schemes.

Even when included nominally, coverage is often partial. For example, contraceptive services may be listed in UHC packages but not covered by public financing—leaving costs to women and families. Adolescents, in particular, face acute gaps in services. An estimated 1.2 million adolescents die each year, largely from preventable causes. WHO has committed to integrating adolescent-responsive health services into primary care.

These gaps are not the result of technical limitations—they are political choices. And in an era where the cost of inaction is measured in lost lives and missed opportunities, these are choices we cannot afford to maintain.

Equity: The Litmus Test of Progress

Equity must become the defining lens of the G20’s health agenda. Even where national progress has been made, coverage remains deeply unequal. For instance, a study of 25 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, found children from the wealthiest households more likely to receive essential immunizations than those from the poorest in 23 countries.

In urban slums and rural areas alike, adolescent girls face structural barriers to accessing SRHR services due to stigma, cost, and lack of youth-friendly care.

Across conflict and humanitarian settings, women and children face some of the worst health outcomes but receive the least investment. Aggregate data masks these realities. The promise of UHC cannot be fulfilled without disaggregated monitoring and targeted interventions that prioritize those furthest behind.

A Call to Recenter WCAH in UHC

G20 countries wield immense influence in global health financing and governance. As such, they must:

–Embed Comprehensive WCAH Services in UHC Schemes: Ensure all essential SRHR services are included, fully financed, and protected from OOP costs.

–Expand Equity-Focused Monitoring: Disaggregate UHC indicators by age, gender, income, and geography to make inequities visible and actionable.

–Invest in Primary Health Care (PHC): PHC systems must be equipped to deliver integrated, people-centered WCAH services, with strong community health components.

–Drive Global Leadership and Domestic Commitment: Align financing, governance, and accountability structures to support WCAH as a non-negotiable pillar of resilient health systems.

South Africa, which leads the G20 this year also heads the Global Leaders Network (GLN) for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health providing much required southern led global leadership on this issue.

A Defining Moment

This is more than a policy debate. It is a defining moment for global solidarity and justice at a time when these values are under attack. Women, children, and adolescents represent not only a demographic majority—but also the majority of those excluded, underserved, and overburdened by weak health systems.

To build health systems that are truly equitable, inclusive, and sustainable, G20 leaders must put WCAH at the center of the UHC agenda. Not as an afterthought—but as a foundational priority.

We urge the G20 to seize this opportunity—to invest where it matters most, and to ensure that no woman, no child, and no adolescent is left behind.

Rajat Khosla is the Executive Director of the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health (PMNCH).

IPS UN Bureau

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

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 25 2025 – The US State Department, in a wide-ranging political re-structuring of its policies, will eliminate 132 domestic offices, lay-off about 700 federal workers and reduce diplomatic missions overseas.

The proposed changes will also include terminating some of the funding for the United Nations and its agencies, budgetary cuts to the 32-member military alliance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and revamping 20 other international organizations, including the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Against the backdrop of the annual Spring Meetings (April 21-26) of the two Washington-based institutions, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent called for “major overhauls” of both institutions.

According to a report in the New York Times April 24, Bessent’s comments “come at a moment of concern among policy makers that the Trump administration could withdraw the US entirely from the Bank and the Fund”

At a side event, however, Bessent said the US had no plans to withdraw from the two institutions, but is seeking to expand US leadership.

Critical of IMF’s disproportionate time and resources on climate change, gender and social issues, he said: “These issues are not the IMF’s mission.”

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Marco Rubio complained April 22, that the State Department, in its current form, is “bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission in this new era of great power competition”.

https://www.state.gov/building-an-america-first-state-department/

Over the past 15 years, he said, the Department’s footprint has had unprecedented growth and costs have soared. But far from seeing a return on investment, taxpayers have seen less effective and efficient diplomacy.

The sprawling bureaucracy created a system more beholden to radical political ideology than advancing America’s core national interests, declared Rubio.

Click here to view the new organizational chart for the U.S. State Department [82 KB]. The Department says it will implement the changes methodically over the next several months.

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS it is hard to assess the short- and long-term adverse implications of the White House’s proposed 50% budget cuts to the State Department, major international organizations and across key diplomatic and security institutions.

Whereas a periodic review of these international organizations is necessary for streamlining their operations, cutting unnecessary expenditure, and reducing the often-inflated bureaucracy, putting all these vital organizations on the chopping block without due review and auditing is shortsighted and highly damaging to the US, he argued.

“But then again, there is no surprise here. Trump is on a rampage, and there are no adults in the room to warn him that such careless actions only harm the US’s global standing and interest, which by far outweighs any expenditure”.

Asked about the impact of the proposed changes on the United Nations, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters April 23: “We have seen the Bureau of International Organization will remain, but we have not had any contact at that level to see how that may impact us”.

Currently, the US owes about $1.5 billion to the UN’s regular budget. And, between the regular budget, the peacekeeping budget, and international tribunals, the total amount the US owes is a hefty $2.8 billion.

But a hostile White House is unlikely to pay its outstanding dues since it has already withdrawn the US from the UN Human Rights Council, the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Climate Treaty, while threatening to pull out of UNESCO and the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestine Refugees in the Near East.

The exceptions include the International Atomic Energy Agency and the International Civil Aviation Authority, which will remain funded.

A State Department leaked memo also calls for a total cut in funding for international peacekeeping missions, citing “recent mission failures” without providing details.

Meanwhile, according to a CNN report April 17, the Trump administration is looking at closing nearly 30 overseas embassies and consulates as part of the proposed changes to its diplomatic presence abroad.

An internal State Department document recommends closing 10 embassies and 17 consulates. Many of the posts are in Europe and Africa, though they also include ones in Asia and the Caribbean.

They include embassies in Malta, Luxembourg, Lesotho, the Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and South Sudan. The list also includes five consulates in France, two in Germany, two in Bosnia and Herzegovina, one in the United Kingdom, one in South Africa and one in South Korea.

The document proposes that the closed embassies’ duties be covered by outposts in neighboring countries.

State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce would not comment on the internal document or on plans to drastically cut the State Department.

“I would suggest that you check with the White House and the President of the US as they continue to work on their budget plan and what they submit to Congress,” Bruce told reporters last week.

“The kinds of numbers and what we tend to see is reporting that is early or wrong, based on leaked documents from somewhere unknown,” she said.

Analyzing the ramifications of the new US policies, Dr Ben-Mier told IPS what is beyond the pale is the White House’s utter lack of consideration for how such closures strain relations with America’s European partners because the contemplated withdrawal of US engagement erodes trust, vital to maintaining a durable and healthy relationship.

As troubling is the White House’s shortsightedness in gauging how such cuts open the door for China to enhance its geopolitical dominance, especially in Africa and Asia. On top of that, he said, the financial cut would significantly reduce cultural exchange programs, which are vital to maintaining long-term partnerships.

“NATO member states may resist filling the funding gap, precipitating conflicts over defense spending while slowing NATO’s ongoing modernization plans and its readiness to respond to any unexpected crisis”.

Should the cuts be put in place, said Dr Ben-Mier, the Alliance may well pursue an independent security framework, thereby rupturing transatlantic unity while reducing the US’ leverage and lessening its role in shaping NATO’s mission.

Further review of the proposed cuts shows that slashing diplomatic staff could delay crisis responses because layoffs of local employees, who comprise two-thirds of mission staff, would severely undermine regional know-how and the capacity to address emerging threats like pandemics or conflicts.

“Financial cuts to the United Nations and its Agencies will cause instant cash deficits, which would disrupt humanitarian aid and health programs. We have already seen similar impacts from the Trump administration’s previous elimination of funding for USAID”.

Several critically important agencies, including WHO, UNICEF, and UNRWA, would stop vaccinations, food assistance, and disaster relief.

Here, too, China and Russia would rush to fill the vacuum and expand their influence in the UN agencies, which could potentially alter international obligations and norms, particularly about human rights and climate change. In addition, cuts to the UN would weaken its ability to coordinate responses to pandemics or conflicts.

In addition, he pointed out, defunding UN peacekeeping in various countries, including Lebanon, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cyprus, Kosovo, and Haiti, could compel these peacekeeping forces to withdraw, which could cause instability and potentially renewed conflict. Peacekeeping has historically been a cost-effective approach, and cuts could force costlier military interventions later.

“To be sure, such proposed cuts are utterly irresponsible and would have profound long-term and short-term implications. They undermine crisis response abilities and risk diminishing the US’ global leadership, which inevitably cedes ground to adversaries like Russia and China.”

It is hoped that the majority Republican-run Congress will see the light and reject the outlandish planned cuts, as this would only isolate the US while undercutting its influence and have a lasting impact on the US’ global standing, declared Dr Ben-Mier.

IPS UN Bureau Report

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

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR, Apr 25 2025 – Abdul Majeed Mir strolls leisurely among the purple crocus flower rows in Pampore’s saffron fields as the morning mist hovers low over them. His family has been growing this valuable spice, called “red gold,” for many generations, but now his hands go through the harvest mechanically. There is a noticeable lack of the typical commotion of tourists haggling over saffron packets.

Mir rubs a pinch of the fragrant stigma between his fingers and sighs, “This should be our best season in years.

“Who will buy it now, even though the yield is great? Most tourists left within hours of the attack.” His gaze moves over the deserted roadside stands where merchants would typically vie for customers’ attention.

While the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 lasted less than 30 minutes, its effects will be felt for years to come. Twenty-six people were killed and numerous others were injured when four gunmen opened fire at one of Kashmir’s most visited tourist spots. Local employees like Adil Shah, a 32-old pony-wala who was the only provider for his elderly parents, as well as honeymooners and vacationing families, were among the victims.

The attack ratcheted up tensions between India and Pakistan, with New Delhi’s response being to revoke visas, close a border crossing and suspend the Indus Water Treaty. The region has been in dispute between the two countries and China since, and in 2019 India revoked the self-governing special status for Jammu and Kashmir. Islamabad closed its airspace to India and warned that interference in the water supply will be considered an act of war.

Locals in Kashmir protesting against the Pahalgam terror attack. This is the first attack on tourists in the region’s recent history. Credit: Supplied

The exodus started as word got out about the massacre. Dal Lake houseboats filled up in a matter of hours. As houseboat owner Tariq Ahmed remembers, “Guests were packing one minute and photographing the sunset the next. All twelve of my boats were empty by midnight.

His voice cracks as he adds, “They didn’t even wait for breakfast. Just left in whatever transport they could find.”

The statistics present a bleak picture. Within 48 hours, 90 percent of scheduled tourist reservations were cancelled. More than 2,000 tour packages were cancelled. The immediate losses are estimated by the hospitality industry to be more than fifteen million dollars. However, there are innumerable human tragedies playing out in slow motion behind these figures.

Arif Khan, owner of a souvenir shop in Srinagar’s Lal Chowk market, puts unsold walnut wood carvings back in their boxes. Wiping dust from an elaborately carved jewelry box, he explains, “April to September is when we earn our entire year’s income.”

“I’ll have to pull my kids out of school if tourists don’t come back.” As he puts another unsold item back on the shelf, his hands shake.

Tourism is just one aspect of the crisis. Shopian apple grower Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Khan strolls through his orchard. He looks at a young flower on one of his apple trees and remarks, “Nearly a third of our direct sales come from tourists.

“They purchase boxes to take home after visiting the orchards. Without them…” he ponders as he gazes down the endless rows of trees that symbolize his family’s livelihood.

Indian army cordoning off the tourist spot where the attack happened that claimed the lives of more than 27 civilians. Credit: Supplied

The timing of the attack couldn’t have been worse for the farmers of Kashmir. This was meant to be a recovery season following years of droughts and erratic weather patterns brought on by climate change. Pampore has the highest saffron yield in recent memory. There were lots of apple blossoms in Shopian. Farmers now have to deal with the possibility of their harvests rotting in warehouses as the tourism industry collapses.

Master carpet weaver Mohammad Yusuf works alone in his quiet workshop in downtown Srinagar’s handicraft district. Usually, a dozen craftspeople would be working, and the sound of looms would fill the air. Only Yusuf is left today. He runs his fingers across a partially completed carpet and says, “I had to let everyone go.

“No orders if there are no tourists. Since my showroom hasn’t seen any customers in three days, how can I pay wages?”

The psychological toll is equally devastating. In Pahalgam, where the attack occurred, hotelier Imtiyaz Ahmad sits in his empty lobby.

“We had just finished renovations,” he says, staring at the vacant reception desk. “New furniture, new linen, everything ready for peak season.” His investment of nearly USD 50,000 now seems like a cruel joke. “The banks won’t care that there was an attack. The loans still need to be paid.”

Mass Exodus of tourists being witnessed from Kashmir. A view of jam-packed Kashmir airport. Credit: Supplied

For pony-walas and shikara operators, the situation is even more dire. These daily wage workers have no savings to fall back on. “I used to earn eight hundred rupees a day [10 USD] taking tourists on rides,” says pony-wala Bashir Ahmad. “Now I’m lucky if I make fifty rupees carrying firewood.”

He gestures to his two ponies standing listlessly in the shade. “How do I feed them? How do I feed my family?”

The human cost extends beyond economics.  The image of a young bride sitting beside her husband’s lifeless body has become seared into the national consciousness. Their honeymoon, meant to be the beginning of a life together, ended in a hail of bullets. Similar stories echo across India as families mourn loved ones who went to Kashmir seeking beauty and found only tragedy.

Yet amid the despair, there are glimmers of hope and humanity. Local residents opened their homes to stranded tourists, offering food and shelter free of charge. Doctors tirelessly worked around the clock to treat the wounded. “This is not who we are,” says college student Aisha Malik, who helped coordinate relief efforts. “We want the world to know the real Kashmir—the one of hospitality and peace.”

As the sun sets over Dal Lake, the silence is deafening. Where there should be laughter and the splash of oars, there is only stillness. The houseboats sit empty. The shikaras remain tied to their docks. The souvenir shops have turned off their lights.

Abdul Majeed Mir walks home through his saffron fields, the day’s harvest in his basket.

“We survived the worst of the conflict in the 1990s,” he says. “We’ll survive this too.”

But the uncertainty in his eyes betrays his words. For Kashmir’s tourism-dependent economy and for the thousands of families who rely on it, the coming months will be a test of resilience unlike any they’ve faced before.

“The terrorists may have only pulled their triggers for minutes, but the echoes of those gunshots will reverberate through Kashmir’s valleys for years to come. In the empty hotels, the silent markets, and the untrodden paths of what was once a paradise for travelers, the true cost of violence becomes painfully clear. It’s measured not just in lives lost, but in dreams deferred, livelihoods destroyed, and a people’s faith in the future shaken to its core,” Showkat Ahmad Malik, a fruit grower from Kashmir’s Anantnag, told Inter Press Service.

Tourism accounts for 6.98 percent of the state’s GDP and is  considered a key sector of Kashmir’s economy; 80 percent of Kashmir’s population, which is 12.5 million, is directly or indirectly dependent on it.

IPS UN Bureau Report

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

By Humberto Márquez
CARACAS, Apr 25 2025 – Reduced to a marginal oil producer over the past decade, Venezuela has suffered another blow as United States president Donald Trump ordered punitive measures to blockade and further restrict the country’s oil exports.

Venezuelan crude will likely navigate the fringes of global oil trade and finance, flowing toward Asian markets as the government seeks to avoid financial suffocation—possibly without ruling out new negotiations with Washington.”Revenues will drop significantly because PDVSA will struggle to produce, obtain diluents, and won’t have the capacity to invest in projects.” — Francisco Monaldi

“Venezuela has been very hostile to the United States and the Freedoms which we espouse. Therefore, any Country that purchases Oil and/or Gas from Venezuela will be forced to pay a Tariff of 25% to the United States on any Trade they do with our Country,” Trump wrote on his media platform Truth Social on March 24.

Simultaneously, Trump revoked licenses allowing U.S. firms Chevron and Global Oil Terminals, Spain’s Repsol, France’s Maurel & Prom, India’s Reliance, and Italy’s Eni to operate in Venezuela.

The foreseeable outcome “will be a drop in oil production—possibly over 100,000 barrels per day—with lower revenues and difficulties in placing crude on the black market,” Francisco Monaldi, a fellow at Rice University’s Baker Institute’s Center for Energy Studies, told IPS.

Venezuela, which once produced three million barrels (159 liters each) per day in the early 2000’s, has seen a decline since 2013, falling below 400,000 barrels in 2020.

Until the beginning of this century, Venezuela was a major oil producer and exporter, thanks to the vast reserves in the Maracaibo Lake basin in the west. Although underground reserves remain enormous, production has declined, and the country has lost its leading role in the global hydrocarbon market. Credit: Mdnava / Fe y Alegría

This is a stark contrast to its history as the world’s second-largest producer and top exporter a century ago, a co-founder of OPEC in 1960, and still home to the largest crude reserves—over 300 billion barrels.

The collapse of the industry and state-owned PDVSA resulted from a mix of dwindling investments, neglected maintenance, erratic management, and bad deals—all amid economic and social collapse and intense political strife.

Moreover, corruption has reached such heights that several former Energy Ministers and presidents of PDVSA have been imprisoned, while others are fugitives abroad. According to the Venezuelan chapter of Transparency International, the amounts that “evaporated” without ever reaching state coffers add up to tens of billions of dollars.

Additionally, Washington imposed escalating sanctions on Venezuelan political and military leaders, with severe effects on PDVSA’s supplies and operations, the Central Bank, and other state entities.

GDP shrank to a quarter of its early-2000s level, hyperinflation reached six digits, income-based poverty hit 90%, and eight million Venezuelans—one in four—left the country.

However, since 2022, Washington’s green light for Chevron and other foreign firms helped production recover to 760,000 barrels per day in 2023, 857,000 in 2024, and 913,000 in March 2025, according to OPEC’s secondary sources.

Chevron accounted for 25% of this output, with PDVSA handling the rest. The U.S. firm also facilitated the import of 50,000 barrels of diluent daily to blend with Venezuela’s heavy crude, In order to improve and facilitate refining.

“It is assumed PDVSA will take over Chevron’s fields, but a drop is inevitable,” Andrés Rojas, editor of Venezuelan oil journal Petroguía, told IPS.

An oil tanker docks at the Waidiao terminal in Zhejiang province, eastern China. The Asian giant is the primary destination for Venezuelan oil, and this flow may increase as Venezuela loses its U.S. market due to new sanctions imposed by President Donald Trump. Credit: Zhejiang Municipal Government

The impact 

Monaldi explains that of Venezuela’s 700,000 daily exportable barrels, half went to “licensed destinations” (mainly the United States, Europe, and India), while the rest went to China (as debt repayment) and Cuba.

Economist Asdrúbal Oliveros, head of Ecoanalítica, consulting firm, estimates Venezuela will lose over US$3 billion this year from Chevron’s withdrawal, leaving external revenues at no more than US$13 billion for its 29 million people.

Government “revenues will plummet because PDVSA will struggle to produce (due to shortages of materials and spare parts), secure diluents, and invest in projects,” Monaldi said.

The expert explains that PDVSA will have to return to the black market, using practices such as transferring crude oil at sea or in the Strait of Malacca in Southeast Asia to vessels different from those originally dispatched.

This way, the oil reaches its destination, usually China, labeled as being produced in Malaysia or another part of the world.

However, these distant and complicated routes have the dual effect of increasing costs—including freight and insurance—and reducing revenue, as the oil must be sold at discounts of 30% or more compared to prices on the regular market.

Meanwhile, the trade, economic, and financial shock triggered by Trump’s tariff storm this month is driving oil prices down, with current benchmarks like West Texas Intermediate (WTI) at US$63 and North Sea Brent at US$67 per barrel.

Oil transfers between tankers take place offshore or near international trade hubs, such as the Strait of Malacca in Asia. This method, though riskier and costlier, is used as a black-market mechanism to evade sanctions like those imposed by Washington on Venezuela. Credit: Verdemar

Black market challenges 

In April of this year, two oil tankers—the Bahamian-flagged Carina Voyager and the Marshall Islands-registered Dubai Attraction—loaded 500,000 and 350,000 barrels of crude, respectively, at Venezuelan terminals. The oil was initially meant to be transported by Chevron to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

However, the vessels had to turn around and return to Venezuelan ports after state-run PDVSA realized it would not be able to collect payment for the shipments due to Washington’s sanctions. The cargoes will now be diverted to Venezuela’s top Asian client: China.

“PDVSA has done this since 2019 with Russian and Iranian support, using two or three intermediaries to deliver the loads,” Rojas noted.

In addition to the higher costs stemming from intermediaries, longer distances, and increased risks, Rojas points out that Venezuelan crude is heavier than benchmark Brent and WTI oils, meaning its price per barrel is roughly US$10 lower.

Monaldi notes that even if China disregards Washington’s threat to hike tariffs on Venezuelan oil imports—or Malaysia, where much of this black-market trade flows—risk premiums will rise, and Venezuela will bear the brunt by receiving insufficient diluents for its heavy crudes.

The Carina Voyager, one of the Bahamian-flagged tankers chartered by Chevron in April to transport Venezuelan crude to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, had to turn around and return its cargo. PDVSA made the decision after realizing payment would be impossible due to Trump’s sanctions. Credit: Sun Enterprises

“The situation is extremely complicated, and this will likely push the Venezuelan economy—which had been experiencing modest growth in recent years (2.6% in 2023 and 5.0% in 2024, according to the Venezuelan Finance Observatory)—back into recession, possibly as early as 2025,” the expert warns.

Monaldi adds that the recession will come alongside a sharp depreciation of the bolívar against the dollar (already over 50% since January) and, consequently, higher inflation, which Ecoanalítica estimates could reach 189% this year.

In this new game, even American oil importers lose out—they had benefited from cheaper Venezuelan crude, which allowed them to free up United States oil volumes for higher-priced exports to third countries, Rojas noted.

He also points out that Chevron’s withdrawal “hurts communities like Soledad” (a town of 35,000 in southeastern Venezuela), where a health center relied on support from the corporation as part of its social responsibility program.

And, as a final blow to Venezuela’s setbacks, two South American neighbors—once net importers of its oil—have now joined the thriving club of exporters welcomed by Washington: Brazil, which produces 3.4 million barrels per day, and Guyana, now pumping 650,000 barrels daily.