Category Archives: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

‘Historic Win’: UN Members to Start Talks on ‘Inclusive and Effective’ Global Tax Standards

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Jessica Corbett from Common Dreams

Tax justice advocates around the world on Wednesday celebrated the unanimous adoption of a resolution to “begin intergovernmental discussions in New York at United Nations Headquarters on ways to strengthen the inclusiveness and effectiveness of international tax cooperation.”


The U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) resolution on the “promotion of inclusive and effective international tax cooperation at the United Nations” was spearheaded by the African Group —which is composed of the continent’s 54 member states—and comes after about a decade of delays on the topic at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

“We note that the OECD has played a role in these areas,” a representative of the Nigerian delegation to the U.N. reportedly said Wednesday. “It is clear after 10 years of attempting to reform international tax rules that there is no substitute for the global, inclusive, transparent forum provided by the United Nations.”

“The African Group urges countries to remain committed to the development of inclusive tax instruments at the United Nations and encourage the OECD to play a supporting role in this regard,” the Nigerian representative continued.

After the resolution was adopted, Global Alliance for Tax Justice executive coordinator Dereje Alemayehu declared that “this is a historic win for the tax justice and the broader economic justice movement and a big step forward to combat illicit financial flows and tax abuse.”

“African countries stood together and made historic strides, breaking through the long-standing blockade by the OECD countries,” Alemayehu added. “Shifting power from the OECD is paramount to end the exploitation and plunder of developing countries.”

Tax Justice Network chief executive Alex Cobham similarly commended member nations “on their bold action today to move rule-making on global tax into the daylight of democracy at the U.N.,” highlighting that “the adopted resolution will now open the way for intergovernmental discussions on the negotiation of a U.N. tax convention and a global tax body.”

A proposed amendment to the resolution from the United States that would have cut the mention of “the possibility of developing an international tax cooperation framework or instrument that is developed and agreed upon through a United Nations intergovernmental process” was defeated.

Cobham emphasized that the resolution moved forward despite the fact that “the OECD has been unprecedentedly aggressive in its lobbying.”

“Some OECD countries spoke in favor of the organization’s role after the resolution’s adoption, but… the OECD’s two-pillar tax proposal is on life support, with even the organization’s own members… struggling to defend its work,” he said. “Work which has failed to deliver after nearly a decade of promises and work which has left countries losing $483 billion in tax to tax havens a year; and work which has been widely identified as exclusionary by countries outside the core membership of rich countries. Ultimately, this only confirms the importance of moving tax rule-making to a globally inclusive and transparent forum at the United Nations.”

(Article continued on the right column)

Question for this article:

Opposing tax havens and corruption: part of the culture of peace?

(Article continued from the left column)

Though it was backed by more than 100 countries and jurisdictions last year, the OECD’s international tax reform framework has been called “skewed-to-the-rich and completely unfair,” with critics warning that its 15% global minimum tax for multinational corporations is “way too low.”

“Fears that the OECD process had stalled grew over the summer after the nation of Hungary blocked a 15% minimum corporate tax from being adopted in the European Union,” The Hill reported Wednesday. Experts said the timing of the UNGA resolution was tied to “the delay on the OECD provision that stipulates where a corporation can be taxed for the use of its products as well as frustration from lower-income countries about the amount of that tax.”

According to news outlet:

“There’s a document that’s supposed to be coming out in December outlining which unilateral measures will need to be abandoned, including digital services taxes,” Daniel Bunn, president of the Tax Foundation, a Washington think tank, said in an interview. “The goal is to have a multilateral treaty ready for signature middle of next year.”

On the amount that corporations can be taxed—which is known as Pillar Two within the agreement—E.U. finance ministers are set to meet again in December.

“The language of their announcement is that they’re going to be ‘aiming for agreement’ on Pillar Two, but it’s not clear that that’s certain. Hungary has been holding things up,” Bunn added.

Other analysts in Washington say that the interests of developing countries are not given proper consideration in the OECD’s framework, an oversight that could further delay a final deal.

Tove Maria Ryding, tax coordinator at the European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad), said Wednesday that “some rich countries are still holding on to the archaic idea that they can keep global rule-making on tax under the control of the OECD—also known as the rich countries’ club.”

“But today’s vote shows that at the end of the day, they know they cannot stop the development towards inclusive, transparent, and U.N.-led tax governance, which is already highly overdue,” Ryding argued. “The OECD-led governance is coming to an end—both because it was deeply unjust and biased in favor of a few rich countries. But also because the OECD has so blatantly failed to stop international tax abuse.”

While welcoming the success of the resolution on Wednesday, Pooja Rangaprasad at the Society for International Development warned that “the post-adoption statements by some developed countries have made it clear that the road ahead will be challenging.”

“However, it is in the interest of all countries to fix an outdated international tax system that is bleeding hundreds of billions of dollars in much-needed resources and public revenue,” Rangaprasad said. “The fight continues in holding all our governments accountable to agree to an effective U.N. tax convention that will ensure wealthy corporations and elites pay their fair share in taxes.”

Cobham of Tax Justice Network stressed that “the intergovernmental discussions next year will be crucial in setting the path for this new era of international tax. It is vital that countries in each region of the world follow the African leadership that underpinned this success, and engage together to generate common positions on an ambitious agenda.”

The Elders welcome historic breakthrough on loss and damage at COP27, but call on G20 leaders to phase out fossil fuels faster

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

A press release from The Elders

The agreement reached at COP27 in Egypt shows that solidarity and co-operation between nations on the world’s most pressing issues is possible through negotiation and compromise, even in testing times. But the world needs urgent actions, not just carefully crafted words, to avoid climate catastrophe.


Photo: Rafapress/Shutterstock

We welcome governments’ reaffirmation of the need to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5℃,  the historic breakthrough on financial help for countries experiencing loss and damage caused by climate change, and the pressure COP27 has added for bold reform of the international financial system to generate more climate finance.

We now call on G20 leaders in particular to build on this restored foundation of cooperation to implement the changes needed, before it is too late. It is time for governments to turn their commitments into real change, not more promises that are broken. 

With the 1.5℃ limit reinforced in the final COP27 agreement, following similar commitments at the G20 summit last week, world leaders now have a clear mandate to redouble efforts to reduce global emissions by 43% by 2030. This will require bold leadership at home to convince citizens and businesses that the costs of inaction outweigh the costs of action, and reform of the multilateral development banks to generate more money to support countries most in need of help.

We welcome the recognition that renewables are the answer to the energy crisis, but regret that not all governments could agree the necessity of phasing down fossil fuels to keep 1.5℃ alive, notably Saudi Arabia and Russia. Disappointingly, developed countries failed to follow up on their COP26 pledge to double adaptation finance by agreeing a roadmap for delivery. At future COPs, climate science must drive decisions, and commitments must be kept.

We welcome the USA and China’s renewed dialogue at the G20 and COP27. We call for sustained leadership from the world’s two largest economies and emitters, and for all G20 countries to reduce emissions more rapidly and accelerate their phase out of fossil fuels by transitioning faster from coal, oil and gas to renewable energy. We urge accelerated financing of just transition partnerships in South Africa, Indonesia and elsewhere to ensure this change happens across all major emitters.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Sustainable Development Summits of States, What are the results?

Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?

(Article continued from the left column)

We commend youth activists, indigenous communities, other civil society organisations and businesses who refused to allow governments to backtrack on the Paris Agreement and COP26 commitments to 1.5℃. Their persistence, in spite of unacceptable state restrictions on civic space in Egypt, reminds us why COPs should be open and inclusive, with hosts abiding by their human rights commitments. The climate crisis affects us all, and everyone’s voice should be heard in finding solutions to it.

The outcome of COP27 demonstrates the potential for multilateral negotiations to deliver tangible results, sometimes against predictions. But this was only a partial success. There is no room for complacency, given the continuing increases in global emissions and extreme weather events around the world.

Mary Robinson, Chair of The Elders and former President of Ireland, said:

“In a year of multiple crises and climate shocks, the historic outcome on loss and damage at COP27 shows international cooperation is possible, even in these testing times. Equally, the renewed commitment on the 1.5℃ global warming limit was a source of relief. However, none of this changes the fact that the world remains on the brink of climate catastrophe.

“Progress made on mitigation since COP26 in Glasgow has been too slow. Climate action at COP27 shows we are on the cusp of a clean energy world, but only if G20 leaders live up to their responsibilities, keep their word, and strengthen their will. The onus is on them.

“All climate commitments must be transformed into real-world action, including the rapid phase out of fossil fuels, a much faster transition towards green energy, and tangible plans for delivering both adaptation and loss and damage finance. We avoided backsliding and made progress in Sharm El-Sheikh. Now leaders must stop sidestepping and fulfil their promises to safeguard a liveable future.”

Graça Machel, Deputy Chair of The Elders and first Education Minister of Mozambique, said:

“This was the ‘African COP’, and at COP27 in Sharm-el-Sheikh the multiple crises of food, energy and the impacts of climate change on vulnerable nations were at the forefront of discussions. Though there were restrictions on civil society in Egypt, people living on the frontlines of the climate crisis still made their voices heard: their cries for a loss and damage fund for nations devastated by climate impacts were heeded. Now rich countries must deliver on their promises and ensure the funding starts to flow as quickly as possible.”

Ban Ki-moon, Deputy Chair of The Elders and former UN Secretary-General, said:

“Richer countries – particularly those in the G20 – must continue to come together to address the threat posed by the climate crisis, and to seek solutions inside and outside the UNFCCC system. We have seen signals of solidarity on tackling climate change at COP27, but these signals must evolve into meaningful actions that benefit the most vulnerable. COP27 is part of a process, not an endpoint.”

In COP27 Speech, Lula Vows to Make Amazon Destruction ‘A Thing of the Past’

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Kenny Stancil from Common Dreams

Leftist Brazilian President-elect Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva vowed Wednesday to halt deforestation of the Amazon and to establish a special ministry to protect Indigenous forest dwellers from human rights abuses.


Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the president-elect of Brazil, speaks at the COP27 summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt on November 16, 2022. (Photo: Christophe Gateau/picture alliance via Getty Images)

During a  speech  at the United Nations COP27 climate conference in Egypt—his first on the international stage since he  defeated  Brazil’s outgoing far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, just over two weeks ago—Lula  said  that “there’s no climate security for the world without a protected Amazon,” roughly 60% of which is located in Brazil.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?

Latin America, has it taken the lead in the struggle for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the left column)

Parts of the Amazon, often referred to as the “lungs of the Earth” due to its unparalleled capacity to provide oxygen and absorb planet-heating carbon dioxide, recently  passed  a key tipping point after Bolsonaro  intensified  the destruction of the tropical rainforest during his four-year reign. According to one  estimate , Bolsonaro’s regressive policy changes are responsible for the eradication of as many as two billion trees in South America’s largest nation.

“This devastation [of the Amazon] will be a thing of the past,”  said  Lula, who previously served as Brazil’s president from 2003 to 2010 and takes office again on January 1. “The crimes that happened during the current government will now be combated. We will rebuild our enforcement capabilities and monitoring systems that were dismantled during the past four years.”

Most of the deforestation that occurred under Bolsonaro was illegal, propelled by logging, mining, and agribusiness companies that often used violence to run roughshod over Indigenous inhabitants of the Amazon.

“We will fight hard against illegal deforestation,” the 77-year-old Lula, a member of the Workers’ Party, continued. “We will take care of Indigenous people.”

“I’m here to tell you that Brazil is back in the world. Brazil is emerging from the cocoon to which it has been subjected for the last four years,” added Lula, who drastically reduced deforestation and channeled an economic boom into downwardly redistributive programs that  curbed inequality  when he governed Brazil earlier this century.

Peace Through Tourism had a Family Meeting with You included

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by  Juergen T Steinmetz in eTurboNews

Family meetings are usually private, but the family of the International Institute for Peace through Tourism thinks tourism is a global family and you should be included.

Supporters, Board-members and followers of the International Institute for Peace Through Tourism (IIPT) organization met virtually last week as a “global family” meeting arranged by the World Tourism Network and eTurboNews.

Louis D’Amore founded IIPT 34 years ago and expressed his commitment to welcome 1000 peace parks. Currently, IIPT has established peace parks in every continent except Antarctica

The family meeting heard chapter updates from around the world including Jamaica, Australia, Iran, and welcomed a new chapter in the Maldives.

Listen to the podcast.

Family meetings are usually private, but the IIPT board decided to make last week’s virtual meeting public. Peace Through Tourism after all is a Global Family of peace-loving members of the travel and tourism industry anywhere.

IIPT family members attending included Dr. Taleb Rifai, former two-time secretary-general of the UNWTO, Ajay Prakash , VP & President of IIPT India, Kiran Yadov, VP and Co-founder IIPT India, Diana McIntyre, president of the Caribbean Chapter, Gail Parsonage, president IIPT Australia, Fabio Carbone, IIPT Ambassador at Large and President IIPT Iran, Philippe Francois, CEO World Association for Hospitality and Tourism Education& Training, Juergen Steinmetz, Founder World Tourism Network and CEO of the Travel News Group, Maga Ramasamy, President IIPT Indian Ocean Islands, Ms. Mmatsatsi, President IIPT South Africa, Bea Broda, film-maker, Mohamed Raadih , IIPT Maldives Chapter President, among others.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can tourism promote a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

The International Institute for Peace through Tourism (IIPT) was born in 1986, the International Year of Peace, with a vision of travel and tourism becoming the world’s first global peace industry and the belief that every traveler is potentially an “Ambassador for Peace.” The IIPT First Global Conference, Tourism: A Vital Force for Peace, Vancouver 1988, with 800 delegates from 68 countries was a transformative event. At a time that most tourism was ‘mass tourism’, the Conference first introduced the concept of ‘Sustainable Tourism’ as well as a new paradigm for a “Higher Purpose” of tourism that gives emphasis to the key role of tourism in fostering travel and tourism initiatives that contribute to international understanding; cooperation among nations; an improved quality of environment; cultural enhancement and the preservation of heritage; poverty reduction; reconciliation and healing wounds of conflicts; and through these initiatives, helping to bring about a peaceful and sustainable world. IIPT has since organized some 20 international conferences and global summits in different regions of the world with a focus on actual case studies that demonstrate and promote these values of tourism.

In 1990, IIPT pioneered the role of tourism in poverty reduction by identifying potential projects in four countries of the Caribbean and three in Central America. Following the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development (Rio Summit in 1992), IIPT developed the world’s first Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism and in 1993, conducted the world’s first international study on Codes of Conduct and Best Practices for Tourism and Environment. IIPT’s 1994 Montreal Conference: “Building a Sustainable World through Tourism” was the first major international conference on sustainable tourism.  The Conference was instrumental in the World Bank beginning its support for tourism projects aimed at poverty reduction in developing nations. Other development agencies followed and by 2000, tourism’s role in poverty reduction became widely recognized.

The Amman Declaration resulting from IIPT’s Global Summit in Amman, Jordan 2000 was adopted as an official document of the United Nations. Similarly, the Lusaka Declaration on Sustainable Tourism Development, Climate Change and Peace, resulting from the IIPT Fifth African Conference, 2011, was adopted by UNWTO and broadly circulated. The Conference also resulted in a book publication: Meetng the Challenges of Climate Change to Tourism and was instrumental in the UNWTO 20th General Assembly being co-hosted by Zambia and Zimbabwe. The IIPT Global Symposium, 2015 in Johannesburg, South Africa honored the legacies of Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. IIPT has also had featured events each year since 1999 at World Travel Market, London – the past four years at ITB, Berlin and several manor Chapter conferences and events in the Caribbean, Australia, India, Jordan, Malaysia and Iran.

In 1992, as part of Canada 125 celebrations commemorating Canada’s 125th birthday as a nation, IIPT conceived and implemented “Peace Parks across Canada.” 350 cities and towns from St. John’s, Newfoundland across five time zones to Victoria, British Columbia, dedicated a park to peace on October 8 as the nation’s Peace-Keeping Monument was being unveiled in Ottawa and 5,000 Peace Keepers passing in review.  Of the more than 25,000 Canada125 projects, Peace Parks across Canada was said to be the “most significant.” Since then, IIPT international peace parks have been dedicated as a legacy of each of IIPT’s international conferences and global summits. Noteworthy IIPT International Peace Parks are located at Bethany Beyond the Jordan, site of Christ’s baptism; Victoria Falls, one of the seven natural wonders of the world; Ndola, Zambia, site of U.N. Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold crash en route to a peace mission in the Congo; DMedellin, Colombia, dedicated on Opening Day of the UNWTO 21st General Assembly; Sun River National Park, China; and the Uganda Martyr’s Catholic Shrine, Zambia.

‘Big Win’ for Climate: EU Parliament Backs Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Julia Conley from Common Dreams licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.)

Just a year after angering climate campaigners by voting down a resolution to call for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, the European Parliament on Thursday overwhelmingly approved the measure, demonstrating that “momentum is growing”  in the push for a global, rapid shift away from planet-heating oil, gas, and coal.

450 members of the body  voted for the resolution and 119 opposed it—a reversal of last year’s vote in which just 168 approved of the resolution and 510 opposed it.

“This is a major development in the global push for a fossil fuel treaty,” said the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, an international campaign group.

The resolution outlines the Parliament’s demands for the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27), which is scheduled to begin in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt on November 6.

Included in  the resolution  is language demanding that “all parties must make financial flows—public and private, domestic and international—compatible with the path towards the 1.5°C target in the Paris Agreement; reiterates the need to urgently end fossil fuel subsidies” and that encourages nations represented in the European Parliament “to work on developing a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty.”

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Sustainable Development Summits of States, What are the results?

Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?

(Article continued from the left column)

Such a treaty would end all new coal, oil, and gas production; phase out existing production infrastructure, which is responsible for 80% of fossil fuel emissions over the last decade; and  ensure a just transition  to “enable economic diversification” and “support every worker, community, and country.”

E.U. members must “stand ready to contribute to closing the gap necessary to limit global warming to 1.5°C, in a just, socially balanced, fair, and cost-effective way, while taking into account aspects of global fairness and equity and the E.U.’s historical and current responsibility for the emissions causing the climate crisis,”  reads  the resolution.

“We welcome this resolution,”  said  Tzeporah Berman, chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative. “Phasing out fossil fuels is now clearly the test for climate leadership at COP27 in Egypt. It is not a transition if we are growing the problem. If we are going to break free from the tyranny of oil we need countries to cooperate to stop the expansion of fossil fuels.”

The resolution was passed just over a month after the World Health Organization  led  a coalition of global public health experts calling for a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty on the grounds that the continued extraction of coal, oil, and gas poses “serious global health risks.”

Youth climate leaders made a  similar call  in June, and more than 100 Nobel laureates, 69 cities, and more than 1,700 civil society groups have  supported the push for such an agreement.

Last month, Vanuatu  became  the first nation state to officially call for a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty during the U.N. General Assembly.

By joining the tiny Pacific island nation, which is vulnerable to rising sea levels and other impacts of the climate crisis, in supporting the treaty “the E.U. can stand on the right side of history,”  said  Tasneem Essop, executive director of Climate Action Network International.

“The momentum behind a treaty to keep fossil fuels in the ground in a fair and timely fashion is phenomenal and growing,”  said  Andrew Simms of the Rapid Transition Alliance.

Economic Commission of Central African States: First biennial for a culture of peace

. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from Digital Congo

The College of Advanced Studies in Strategy and Defense (CHESD) has been hosting since Friday, October 14, 2022, the biennial of the Economic Commission of Central African States (ECCAS) for a culture of peace.

Placed under the theme: “APSA@20: challenges and prospects for silencing the guns in Central Africa: Retrospection and prospective analysis”, this conference is organized in partnership with the Government of the DRC, the United Nations Development Program ( UNDP) and with the support of CHESD led by Major General Augustin MUBIAYI MAMBA, the African Center for the Constructive Resolution of Conflicts (ACCORD), the Institute for Security Studies (ISS), UNESCO, the ‘OIF, CICIBA, CERDOTOLA.

It also provides an opportunity for participants to reflect on better coordination of efforts at continental, regional and local level for the realization of the African Union’s Agenda 2063 on democracy, good governance, and a peaceful and secure Africa. .

In her speech, the Resident Representative ai of the UNDP, Mrs. Rokya Ye NDIENG indicated that:

“The theme of this conference, namely ‘Culture of Peace’ presents three essential opportunities to participants. First, it is the opportunity to assess existing approaches, tools and systems for conflict management at all levels, then, the need to propose concrete recommendations to improve strategies for strengthening peace and security and finally, the imperative to formulate a roadmap to “Silencing the guns” by 2031, in Central Africa (…)”.

(article continued in right column)

(Click here for a version of this article in French.)

Question for this article:

Can the African Union help bring a culture of peace to Africa?

(article continued from left column)

She continued: “The dynamics of conflicts on the continent have changed in recent years. New threats have emerged, such as climate change, pandemics and cybersecurity. They require adapted, coherent and concerted responses. these conflicts have also evolved and their modi operandi have changed, such as pirates, terrorists and criminal organizations (…)”

“(…) the African peace and security architecture created by the African Union in collaboration with the Regional Economic Communities must respond to these challenges which are becoming increasingly complex in order to prevent, manage and resolve conflicts on the continent (…) the UNDP supports the strategic vision of the African Union declined through the 2063 Agenda for a prosperous and peaceful Africa.

This vision contributes to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16 aimed at “promoting the advent of peaceful and inclusive societies for the purposes of sustainable development, ensuring access to justice for all and establishing, at all levels, effective, accountable and open institutions (…) there can be no sustainable development without peace and stability. The prevention and peaceful resolution of conflicts are therefore necessary conditions for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainable Development, particularly in the context of the Central African sub-region marked by political, economic, social and security fragilities (…)”, she specified.

Additionally: “(…) a holistic approach to conflict prevention is essential if we want to build and root a culture of peace on the continent and more particularly in Central Africa. Building peace through building inclusive, peaceful and resilient societies presupposes the establishment of functional conflict prevention and resolution mechanisms at all levels with a view to strengthening the African peace and security architecture. youth to continental, regional, national and local peace efforts is an imperative (…)”

In addition, the President of the Commission, Gilberto da Piedade Verissimo, for his part, welcomed the holding of these meetings which is in line with finding a lasting peace in Central Africa.

It should be noted that this first biennial, the closing of which takes place this Saturday, October 15, 2022, brings together high-level participants from the region and around the world, youth and women’s groups, civil society organizations, NGOs and Representatives of various United Nations entities.

The “Fihavanana” of Madagascar: corruption or culture of peace?

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

Translated and edited for CPNN from a post of July 30, 2022 on Blogger.com.

We will not stop repeating it, we must fight against corruption before corruption fights against us. Because not to act is to approve and to approve it amounts to showing non-assistance to a country in danger. And as corruption becomes a way of life on the Big Island, more and more people are pointing the finger at Fihavanana.

In its traditional use Fihavanana is a Malagasy cultural concept based on mutual aid that maintains a culture of peace and harmony by avoiding or resolving family disagreements, in the neighborhood or across the country.


Photo from the article The Fihavanana: Myths and Realities of a Value that Guarantees Social Peace

(click here for the original french version of this article.)

Question for this article:

Opposing tax havens and corruption: part of the culture of peace?

It’s a big problem that this collective way of thinking is now in the service of corruption. It threatens to lobotomize the Malagasy at the cost of a common value.

Mutual aid is being diverted towards bribes; officials in charge receive compensation to make procedures more flexible or to make requests favorable. The bribes are justified by the desire to maintain the “Fihavanana”. It is no longer even a question of avoiding disagreements, they will rather use it to make favoritism, priority to acquaintances in the neighborhood. Who care about skill and effort! Positions and places will go first to family members. It is nepotistic “Fihavanana”.

Some go so far as to falsify data to favor their relatives, risk their work for corruption. But ironically, is it really better to lose money than to lose family as the Malagasy proverb says?

The blame should not be on the “Fihavanana” but in the use that one makes of it. A culture of peace cannot be harmful. But a fight against corruption is necessary so that the “Fihavanana” regains its traditional meaning instead of corrupting a national value, a culture that characterizes Madagascar. And even if the country has made some progress by going from 149th in 2020 to 147th in 2021 on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI), the fight is even becoming cultural.

(Thank you to Jay Ralitera for sending this article to CPNN)

Nigeria: Reps Push For ‘Silence The Guns’ Implementation

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Philip Nyam in New Telegraph

The House of Representatives recently passed a resolution calling on the executive to immediately implement the “silence the guns” peace policy of the African Union (AU). PHILIP NYAM reviews the roadmap

Worried by growing conflicts and widespread insecurity across the continent, the African Union met in Lusaka, Zambia in 2016 and drew a master roadmap of practical steps to silence guns in Africa by the year 2020. Six years after, the implementation of the roadmap titled “Lusaka Master Roadmap 2016” has been beset by challenges and Nigeria, the biggest black nation on earth is yet to fully integrate the policy.

It was in view of this that the House of Representatives last month passed a resolution to impress on the government to speed up the process of its implementation. The House resolution came barely after the meeting of the African Union Commission in Lusaka, Zambia, between June 6 and 8 brought together participants from the relevant departments of the AU Commission, Divisions within the Political Affairs, Peace and Security Department, representatives from RECS/RMs, representatives of the African Union Mechanism for Police Cooperation (AFRIPOL), African Centre for the Study and Research on Terrorism (ACSRT) and Economic, Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC) and representatives of AUC partners supporting silencing the guns project such as the UN Department of Political and Peace-building Affairs.

The meeting finalised an implementation plan that will guide the operationalisation of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework of the AU Master Roadmap Silencing the Guns AU and Regional Economic Communities converge to finalise the implementation plan and road map on practical steps to silence the guns in Africa. This is in addition to adopting the terms of reference of an AURECs/ RMs Steering Committee on Silencing the Guns. The meeting also agreed on the establishment of the Steering Committee including the relevant departments of the AUC and focal points/officers in each REC/RM to follow up and coordinate activities related to the STG Initiative.

It also served as a collaborative platform to facilitate regular exchanges between the AU, RECs/RMs, Civil Society Organisations, academia, the private sector and other stakeholders that have a role to play in the implementation of the Silencing the Guns Master Roadmap. Explaining why the implementation had to be postponed from 2020 to 2030, the Coordinator of Silencing the Guns under the Political Affairs, Peace and Security at the African Union Commission, Mr. Advelkader Araoua, said that “the extension of the life span of the AU master roadmap on practical steps to silence the guns in Africa to the year 2030, is a test of our ability to deliver on our commitments to free the African continent from wars, civil conflicts, humanitarian crises, human rights violations, gender-based violence, and genocide.” Also, the Head of Governance, Peace and Security at the COMESA Secretariat, Ms. Elizabeth Mutunga stressed the need to continuously assess the external environment in developing an implementation plan for the monitoring and evaluation.

“Emerging and unpredictable factors, that have not necessarily originated from our region are having a very big impact on the peace, conflict and security dynamics of our region,” she noted. The motion It was after the meeting that the House of Representatives passed a resolution pushing for the implementation of the roadmap. In a motion titled “Need to adopt and implement the “Silencing the Guns” Road Map, Hon. Ahmed Munir noted that “Silencing the Guns 2030” is a flagship roadmap project adopted in Lusaka, Zambia in 2016 by the African Union with the aim of realising a Conflict-Free Africa by the year 2030. He said that the concept of silencing the guns was borne out of the observation that the African Continent is the scene of numerous violent conflicts that make the desired economic and political integration of the continent difficult. As part of the AU’s Agenda 2063, the AU sought to ensure that Africa is characterised by peace, political tolerance and good governance.

Hon. Munir expressed concerns that initially, the roadmap was to be achieved by 2020 of which the continent fell short and the goal was further extended to 2030 “cognisant that peace and security matters across Africa are interwoven and the continent cannot afford to further miss the 2030 set target.” In adopting the motion, which was unanimously endorsed, the House urged the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to fully embrace the report and ensure relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDA’s) key into the roadmap. The lawmakers also urged the office of the National Security Adviser to fully adopt the report and cascade it down to other relevant security agencies.

Synopsis of the roadmap

The African Union Master Roadmap of practical steps to silence guns in Africa by the year 2020 better known as the Lusaka Master Roadmap 2016 entails the following. The continuing insecurity, instability, disruption of political harmony, erosion of social cohesion, destruction of the economic fabric and public despondency in various parts of Africa call on the Peace and Security Council (PSC) to play a locomotive role in spearheading strategic interventions to put this sad situation to an end.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Can the African Union help bring a culture of peace to Africa?

(continued from left column)

Most crises and violent conflicts in Africa are being driven by poverty, economic hardships, violation or manipulation of constitutions, violation of human rights, exclusion, inequalities, marginalisation and mismanagement of Africa’s rich ethnic diversity, as well as relapses into the cycle of violence in some post-conflict settings and external interference in African affairs. Undoubtedly, these challenges can be overcome, as long as the correct remedies are idenpletified and applied.

It is in this context that the PSC convened a Retreat that was dedicated to the theme: Practical Steps to Silence the Guns in Africa by the Year 2020, from 7 to 9 November 2016, in Lusaka, Zambia. The Retreat regrouped the PSC Member States, representatives of the Economic, Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC), the AU Commission, Regional Economic Communities/ Regional Mechanisms for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution (RECs/RMs), Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), the Committee of Intelligence and Security Services of Africa (CISSA) and the Regional Centre on Small Arms (RECSA).

This was all the more urgent given the central thrust of Agenda 2063 and the overall AU Vision of building a peaceful, stable, secure, integrated and prosperous Africa, and the essence of Agenda 2030 on sustainable development goals. Notably, the 4th aspiration of Agenda 2063, which is the African Union’s strategic framework for socio-economic transformation of the continent over the next five decades, highlights the need for dialoguecentred conflict prevention, as well as the management and resolution of existing conflicts, with a view to silencing the guns in our Continent by the Year 2020. Agenda 2063 provides that in order to achieve sustainable conflict prevention and resolution, a culture of peace and tolerance must be cultivated and nurtured in our children and youth, among others, through peace education.

Furthermore, in its first 10 years implementation plan, Agenda 2063 stresses the imperative of ending all wars, civil conflicts, gender-based violence and violent conflicts and prevent genocide, as part of Africa’s collective efforts to silence the guns in the continent by the year 2020. In organising the retreat, the PSC was inspired and guided by the clarion call in the OAU/AU 50th Anniversary Solemn Declaration adopted by the AU Heads of State and Government in Addis Ababa on 26 May 2013, in which they, among other aspects, expressed their “determination to achieve the goal of a conflict-free Africa, to make peace a reality for all our people and to rid the continent of wars, civil conflicts, human rights violations, humanitarian disasters and violent conflicts, and to prevent genocide.”

The PSC’s resolutions further read: “We pledge not to bequeath the burden of conflicts to the next generation of Africans and undertake to end all wars in Africa by 2020. In this regard, we undertake to address the root causes of conflicts, including economic and social disparities; put an end to impunity by strengthening national and continental judicial institutions, and ensure accountability in line with our collective responsibility to the principle of non-indifference.

“We undertake to eradicate recurrent and address emerging sources of conflict including piracy, trafficking in narcotics and humans, all forms of extremism, armed rebellions, terrorism, transnational organized crime and new crimes such as cybercrime; push forward the agenda of conflict prevention, peace-making, peace support, national reconciliation and post-conflict reconstruction and development through the African Peace and Security Architecture; as well as, ensure enforcement of and compliance with peace agreements and build Africa’s peacekeeping and enforcement capacities through the African Standby Force.

“We will maintain a nuclear-free Africa and call for global nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear energy; ensure the effective implementation of agreements on landmines and the non-proliferation of small arms and light weapons; address the plight of internally displaced persons and refugees and eliminate the root causes of this phenomenon by fully implementing continental and universal frameworks.”

In conceiving practical steps to silence the guns in Africa by the year 2020, the PSC took into consideration the political history of the African continent, which has been marred particularly by three major tragedies, namely, slavery, colonization and the unpaid extraction/ exploitation of natural resources, which have created a huge burden for Africa and its people. The end of slavery at the end of the 19th century and the fall of colonialism under the weight of protracted nationalist and liberation struggles across the continent ushered in a new era in Africa.

However, the new era is faced with a myriad of challenges that the continent has not yet been able to successfully overcome. The cycle of violent conflicts and disruptive crises persist on the continent, so do situations of relapses back into the cycle of violence and destruction for some countries that were perceived to have already emerged from conflicts. It is therefore critically important for Africa and its people to put in place strategic guidelines for addressing these challenges.

In some instances, the African continent has also not been able to foster and manage effective political transitions, partly due to the fact that the erstwhile liberation movements have taken too long to transform themselves into dynamic governing political parties, which could more successfully adapt to operating in pluralistic democratic societies as agents of political discourse and crucial facilitators rather than act as a stumbling block to any democratic dispensation.

Similarly, failures to transform some of the military wings of some of the liberation movements into professional and disciplined national armies, which pledge loyalty to civilian government regardless of the political party in power, have brought problems to some parts of Africa. All of these facts have stifled serious attempts to silence the guns in Africa.

Yet, peace, security and socio-economic development should be pursued simultaneously. Equally challenging is the task of sustaining transitions from war to peace and to prevent relapses. This is why the AU PSC developed a Master Roadmap of realistic, practical, time-bound implementable steps to silence the guns in Africa by 2020.

The master Roadmap is premised on the principle that Africa should take, assume total responsibility for its destiny. Assuming such responsibility should also take into account the fact that, while appropriate decisions and programmes have been adopted with a view to resolving some of the challenges Africa is faced with, there has been encroachment on some of those decisions by the implementation deficit.

Evo Morales: “an economic model that belongs to the people, not to the empire”

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

Excerpts from an article by Matt Kennard*, 14 July, in Declassified UK

The President of Bolivia from 2006-19 invites Declassified to his house deep in the Amazon rainforest for an exclusive interview – on the UK role in the coup that overthrew him, how he reversed 500 years of history and industrialised Bolivia, and the efforts of the US and its British ally to bring him down.



Video of interview

When Evo Morales, Bolivia’s first indigenous president, was overthrown in a British-backed  coup in November 2019, many believed his life was in danger. Latin America’s history is littered with liberation leaders cut down by vengeful imperial powers. 

Legendary resistance leader Túpac Katari, like Morales from the Aymara indigenous group, had his limbs tied  to four horses by the Spanish before they bolted and he was ripped apart in 1781.

Some 238 years later, Bolivia’s self-declared ‘interim president’ Jeanine Áñez appeared in Congress days after the coup against Morales brandishing a huge leatherbound Bible. “The Bible has returned to the government palace,” she announced.

Her new regime immediately forced through Decree 4078  which gave immunity to the military for any actions taken in “the defence of society and maintenance of public order”. It was a green-light. The following day, 10 unarmed protestors were massacred by security forces.

When the coup was looking inevitable, Morales had gone underground. 

His destination, with his vice-president Álvaro García Linera, was El Trópico de Cochabamba, a tropical area deep in the Amazon rainforest in central Bolivia, and the heartland of his Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) party and its indigenous base. . . .

Days after Morales and Linera arrived in El Trópico, Mexico’s left-wing president Andrés Manuel López Obrador sent a plane to rescue them, flying them out of Chimoré airport again. 

Obrador later said that the Bolivian armed forces targeted the aircraft with an RPG rocket moments after it took off. It appears the UK-backed coup regime wanted the deposed president – who had served for 13 years – dead. Morales credits Obrador with saving his life

Villa Tunari

Morales is back in El Trópico now, but in very different circumstances. 

After a year of ‘interim government’ democracy was eventually restored in October 2020 and Morales’s MAS won the elections again. The new president Luis Arce, formerly Morales’ economy minister, took power and Morales made a triumphant return from exile in Argentina.

After a tour of much of the country on foot, Morales settled back in El Trópico. 

He has recently moved into a house in Villa Tunari, a small town that sits just 20 miles down the road from Chimoré airport. It has a population of just over 3,000. . . .

I got the interview because of an investigation I wrote in March 2021 revealing the UK’s support for the coup which deposed Morales. . . .

Local journalists told me that Morales often mentions the article in his speeches, so I start with that.

“Just last year, through the media, we were informed that England had also participated in the coup,” he tells me. This, he continues, was a “blow against our economic model, because our economic model has produced results.”

He adds: “It is an economic model that belongs to the people, not to the empire. An economic model that does not come from the International Monetary Fund. An economic model that comes from the social movements.”

Morales continues: “When we came to government in 2006, Bolivia was the last country in South America in terms of economic and development indicators, the penultimate country in all of America.”

Over the next 13 years of his government Bolivia experienced its most stable period since it declared independence in 1825, and achieved unprecedented economic success, even praised by the IMF and World Bank. Crucially, this success was translated into unprecedented improvements  for Bolivia’s poor.  

“For the first six years we had the highest levels of economic growth in all of South America and that was because of those policies that came from social movements based on nationalisation,” Morales tells me.  

He was part of the “pink tide ” of left-wing governments in Latin America in the 2000s, but his model was more economically radical than most. 

On his hundredth day in office, Morales moved to nationalise  Bolivia’s oil and gas reserves, ordering the military to occupy the country’s gas fields and giving foreign investors a six-month deadline to comply with demands or leave. 

Morales believes it was this programme of nationalisation that led to the Western-backed coup against him.

“I continue to be convinced that the empire, capitalism, imperialism, do not accept that there is an economic model that is better than neoliberalism,” he tells me. “The coup was against our economic model…we showed that another Bolivia is possible.”

Added value

Morales says the second phase of the revolution – after nationalisation – was industrialisation. “The most important part was lithium,” he adds. 

Bolivia has the world’s second-largest  reserves of lithium, a metal that is used to make batteries and which has become increasingly coveted due to the burgeoning electric car industry.

Morales remembers a formative trip to South Korea he made in 2010. 

“We were discussing bilateral agreements, investments, co-operation and they took me to visit a factory that produced lithium batteries,” Morales says. “Interestingly, South Korea was asking us for lithium, as a raw material.”

Morales said he asked at the factory how much it cost to build the facility. They told him $300m. 

“Our international reserves were growing,” he adds. “I said at that moment, ‘I can guarantee $300m dollars’. I said to the Koreans, ‘let’s replicate this factory in Bolivia. I can guarantee your investment’”. The Koreans said no. 

“That’s when I realised that industrialised countries only want us Latin Americans so that we can guarantee them their raw materials. They don’t want us to give us the added value.”

At that point, Morales resolved to start industrialising Bolivia, reversing half a millennium of colonial history. 

The traditional imperial dynamic which had kept Bolivia poor was that rich countries would extract raw materials, send them to Europe to be made into products, industrialising Europe at the same time, and then sell them back to Bolivia as finished products, at a mark-up. 

(article continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:
 
Can Latin America free itself from US domination?

(article continued from left column)

With the country’s lithium deposits, Morales was adamant this system was finished. Bolivia would not just extract the lithium. It would build the batteries, too. Morales calls it “value added”.  

“We started with a laboratory, obviously with international experts that we hired,” he says. “Then we moved on to a pilot plant. We invested around $20 million, and now it’s working. Every year it produces about 200 tonnes of lithium carbonate, and lithium batteries, in Potosí.” 

Potosí is a city in southern Bolivia that became the centre of the Spanish empire in Latin America after gargantuan silver deposits were discovered there in the 16th century. Called  “the first city of capitalism”, it is estimated up to eight million  indigenous people died mining Potosi’s Cerro Rico (Rich Hill) for silver, all of it destined for Europe.

Morales continues: “We had a plan to install 42 new [lithium] plants by 2029. It was estimated that profits would be five billion dollars. Profits!”

“That’s when the coup came,” he says. “The US says China’s presence is not permitted but…having a market in China is very important. Also in Germany. The next step was with Russia, and then came the coup.” 

He continues: “Just last year, we found out that England had also participated in the coup – all for lithium.” 

But Morales says his people’s long struggle for control over their own riches is not unique.

“This is a struggle not only in Bolivia, or Latin America, but throughout the world,” Morales says. “Who do natural resources belong to? The people under the control of their state? Or are they privatised under the control of transnationals so they can plunder our natural resources?”

Partners or bosses?

Morales’ nationalisation programme put him on a collision course with powerful transnational companies who were used to the traditional imperial dynamic.

“During the 2005 campaign, we said, if corporations want to be here they do so as partners, or to provide their services, but not as bosses or owners of our natural resources,” Morales says.  “We established a political position with regards to transnational companies: we talk, we negotiate, but we do not submit to transnational corporations.”

Morales gives the example of hydrocarbon contracts signed by previous governments.

“In previous contracts – contracts made by neoliberals – it literally said ‘the title-holder acquires the rights to the product at the mouth of the well.’ Who is the title-holder? The transnational oil company. They want it from the mouth of the well.” 

He adds: “The companies tell us that when it is underground it belongs to the Bolivians, but when it comes out of the ground it is no longer the Bolivians. From the moment it comes out, the transnational corporations have an acquired right to it. So we said, inside or outside, it all belongs to Bolivians.”

Morales continues: “The most important thing now is that of 100% revenue, 82% is for Bolivians and 18% for corporations. Before it was 82% for the companies, 18% for the Bolivians, and the state had no control over production – how much they produced, how they produced – nothing”. . .

Placing conditions

Since the formation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823 – which claimed the Western Hemisphere as the US’s sphere of influence – Bolivia has been largely under its control. This changed for the first time with the advent of the Morales government. 

“As a state, we want to have diplomatic relationships with all the world, but based on mutual respect,” Morales tells me. “The problem we have with the US is that any relationship with them is always subject to conditions.”

Morales continues: “It’s important to have commerce and relations based on mutual benefit, not competition. And we found some European countries that do that. But above all we found China. Diplomatic relationships with them aren’t based on conditions.”

He adds: “With the US, for example, their economic plan, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, if you wanted to access it you had to, in exchange, privatise your natural resources.”

The MCC was a project  of the George W. Bush administration which sought to run aid more like a business. Headed by a CEO, it is funded by public money but acts autonomously, and has a corporation-style board which includes  business people expert in making money. The aid “compacts” it signs with countries come with attached policy “conditionalities”.

“China doesn’t place any conditions on us, same as Russia, and like some countries in Europe,” Morales adds. “So that is the difference” . . . .

Morales believes that information and communication for the “people who do not have a voice” is the most important issue today. He is currently working on building independent media in Bolivia. 

“The people without many means of communication are faced with a hard struggle to communicate,” Morales says. “We have some experience, for example in El Trópico. We have a radio station, we don’t have a national audience, but it is listened to and followed a lot by the right-wing media.” They follow mainly to find attack lines on Morales.

“How nice it would be if the people had their own media channels,” Morales continues. “This is the challenge the people have. This media we have, which belongs to the empire or the right-wing in Bolivia, that’s how it is in all Latin America. It defends its interests…and they are never with the people.”

He adds: “When, for example, the right-wing makes a mistake it is never revealed, it’s covered-up and they protect themselves. The [corporate] media is there to defend their big industries, their lands, their banks, and they want to humiliate the Bolivian peoples, the humble people of the world.”

‘I have a lot of hope’

Latin America has long been the world’s home of democratic socialism. I ask Morales if he has hope for the future. “In South America, we are not in times of Hugo Chávez, Lula, [Néstor] Kirchner, [Rafael] Correa,” he says.

Together these progressive leaders pushed for the integration of Latin America and the Caribbean, through organisations such as the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) in 2008 and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in 2011. 

“We came down, but now we are recovering,” Morales adds.

Recent events point to another left-wing resurgence in the continent. Morales points to recent victories in Peru, Chile and Colombia and Lula’s expected return to the presidency in Brazil soon. 

“Those times are returning,” he says. “We need to again consolidate these democratic revolutions for the good of humanity. I have a lot of hope.”

He continues: “In politics we must ask ourselves: are we with the people or are we with the empire? If we are with the people, we make a country; if we are with the empire, we make money. 

“If we are with the people, we fight for life, for humanity; if we are with the empire, we are with the politics of death, the culture of death, interventions, and pillaging of the people. That is what we ask ourselves as humans, as leaders: ‘Are we at the service of our people?’” . . . .
_________

* Matt Kennard is chief investigator at Declassified UK. He was a fellow and then director at the Centre for Investigative Journalism in London. Follow him on Twitter @kennardmatt

____________

(Thank you to Joe Yannielli for sending this article to CPNN.)

UN General Assembly declares access to clean and healthy environment a universal human right

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from the United Nations

With 161 votes in favour, and eight abstentions*, the UN General Assembly adopted a historic resolution on Thursday (July 28), declaring access to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, a universal human right.

The resolution, based on a similar text adopted last year by the Human Rights Council, calls upon States, international organisations, and business enterprises to scale up efforts to ensure a healthy environment for all. 

The UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, welcomed the ‘historic’ decision and said the landmark development demonstrates that Member States can come together in the collective fight against the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution.

“The resolution will help reduce environmental injustices, close protection gaps and empower people, especially those that are in vulnerable situations, including environmental human rights defenders, children, youth, women and indigenous peoples”, he said in a statement released by his Spokesperson’s Office.

He added that the decision will also help States accelerate the implementation of their environmental and human rights obligations and commitments.

“The international community has given universal recognition to this right and brought us closer to making it a reality for all”, he said.

Guterres underscored that however, the adoption of the resolution ‘is only the beginning’ and urged nations to make this newly recognised right ‘a reality for everyone, everywhere’.

Urgent action needed

In a statement, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet also hailed the Assembly’s decision and echoed the Secretary-General’s call for urgent action to implement it.

“Today is a historic moment, but simply affirming our right to a healthy environment is not enough. The General Assembly resolution is very clear: States must implement their international commitments and scale up their efforts to realize it. We will all suffer much worse effects from environmental crises, if we do not work together to collectively avert them now,” she said.

Ms. Bachelet explained that environmental action based on human rights obligations provides vital guardrails for economic policies and business models.

“It emphasizes the underpinning of legal obligations to act, rather than simply of discretionary policy.  It is also more effective, legitimate and sustainable,” she added.

A resolution for the whole planet

The text, originally presented by Costa Rica, the Maldives, Morocco, Slovenia and Switzerland last June, and now co-sponsored by over 100 countries, notes that the right to a healthy environment is related to existing international law and affirms that its promotion requires the full implementation of multilateral environmental agreements.

It also recognises that the impact of climate change, the unsustainable management and use of natural resources, the pollution of air, land and water, the unsound management of chemicals and waste, and the resulting loss in biodiversity interfere with the enjoyment of this right – and that environmental damage has negative implications, both direct and indirect, for the effective enjoyment of all human rights.

According to the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment, Mr. David Boyd, the Assembly’s decision will change the very nature of international human rights law.

“Governments have made promises to clean up the environment and address the climate emergency for decades but having a right to a healthy environment changes people’s perspective from ‘begging’ to demanding governments to act”, he United Nations Conference on the Environment in Stockholm, which ended with its own historic declaration, was the first one to place environmental issues at the forefront of international concerns and marked the start of a dialogue between industrialized and developing countries on the link between economic growth, the pollution of the air, water and the ocean, and the well-being of people around the world.

UN Member States back then, declared that people have a fundamental right to “an environment of a quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being,” calling for concrete action and the recognition of this right.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?

(Article continued from the left column)

Last October, after decades of work by nations at the front lines of climate change, such as the Maldives archipelago, as well as more than 1,000 civil society organisations, the Human Rights Council finally recognised this right and called for the UN General Assembly to do the same.

“From a foothold in the 1972 Stockholm Declaration, the right has been integrated into constitutions, national laws and regional agreements. Today’s decision elevates the right to where it belongs: universal recognition”, UN Environment chief, Inger Andersen, explained in a statement published this Thursday.

The recognition of the right to a healthy environment by these UN bodies, although not legally binding— meaning countries don’t have a legal obligation to comply— is expected to be a catalyst for action and to empower ordinary people to hold their governments accountable.

“So, the recognition of this right is a victory we should celebrate. My thanks to Member States and to the thousands of civil society organizations and indigenous peoples’ groups, and tens of thousands of young people who advocated relentlessly for this right. But now we must build on this victory and implement the right”, Ms. Andersen added.

Triple crisis response

As mentioned by the UN Secretary-General, the newly recognised right will be crucial to tackling the triple planetary crisis.

This refers to the three main interlinked environmental threats that humanity currently faces: climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss – all mentioned in the text of the resolution.

Each of these issues has its own causes and effects and they need to be resolved if we are to have a viable future on Earth.

The consequences of climate change are becoming increasingly apparent, through increased intensity and severity of droughts, water scarcity, wildfires, rising sea levels, flooding, melting polar ice, catastrophic storms and declining biodiversity.

Meanwhile, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), air pollution is the largest cause of disease and premature death in the world, with more than seven million people dying prematurely each year due to pollution.

Finally, the decline or disappearance of biological diversity – which includes animals, plants and ecosystems – impacts food supplies, access to clean water and life as we know it.

* States who abstained: China, Russian Federation, Belarus, Cambodia, Iran, Syria, Kyrgyzstan and Ethiopia.

(Note from the editor: Here is a translation of the explanation of their vote by the Russian Federation.

Mr Chairman, We would like to start by thanking the delegations of Slovenia, Switzerland, Costa Rica, Maldives and Morocco as the main sponsors of the draft resolution “The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment” for their openness and constructive approach upon approval of the document.

The Russian Federation attaches great importance to the protection of environment and gives it increased attention both at the national, as well as at the international level. The theme of the draft resolution is at the intersection of two branches of law – international human rights law and international environmental law. However, neither universal environmental agreements nor international human rights treaties do not disclose the content of such concepts such as “clean environment”, “healthy environment”, “sustainable environment” or any similar concepts.

The wording of the existing international acts differ significantly. The main legal content of these concepts today occurs in national level. Each of the countries, based on the situation prevailing there and conditions, defines its own standards.

In this regard, the proclamation of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, without defining at least minimum standards universal character, prematurely.

Moreover, we are convinced that a new right can be recognized exclusively within the framework of international treaties, which are carefully prepared by authorized experts and approved by states. Only in this case can we speak of legal recognized law to be taken into account by States. Chosen one the authors of the method – the recognition of the right through the resolution of the General Assembly – is, at least controversial from a legal point of view, and in the future may lead to negative consequences.

In view of the foregoing, the Russian Federation cannot support the submitted draft resolution A/76/L.75 and puts it on vote. However, recognizing the importance of the topic under consideration as a whole, the Russian delegation will not oppose, but will refrain from voting.

Thank you for your attention.

(Thank you to Georgina Galanis for sending this article to CPNN.)