Site Meter UN Dispatch | United Nations News & Commentary Global News – Forum | Page 8
Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size

All Posts

from UNeP

Dropping the Ball on the Climate-Conflict Nexus

Last week the United States Institute of Peace hosted an event featuring the Administrator of the UN Development Program, Helen Clark, and a panel of experts to discuss building resilience and preventative capabilities in the face of growing social, economic and political pressures brought about by climate change. Underlying the event was the release of a report late last year by the National Research Council on climate change and social stress. Recent research shows that climate change serves as a conflict multiplier, encouraging new conflicts while reinforcing existing ones. As a result, recognizing the threat climate change poses and building resilience in fragile societies to these pressures is a critical issue, not just to limit the devastating effects of natural disasters but also for conflict prevention.

Unfortunately, the primary takeaway from the event was that we generally lack the sense of urgency these issues call for. While national security policymakers no longer question the connection between human security and the environment, the human consequences of climate change largely remains in the distant background in national and international policy. Yet these consequences are already apparent. Rising sea levels threaten numerous small island states while changing weather patterns increase the devastation of natural disasters, from heat waves in Russia and drought in East Africa to floods in Pakistan and stronger hurricanes in the Atlantic. These events constrain current resources, both for the people affected and the ability of the international community to respond. These economic pressures, along with a growing youth demographic in the developing world, set up a perfect recipe for conflict.

One example raised by an audience member is that of Boko Haram, a militant Islamic group from Northern Nigeria. Although the group was founded in Borno State near Lake Chad – a vital resource in the arid Chad Basin of the Sahel which has shrunk by 90% in the last 50 years resulting in severe economic decline for the region – international attention on the region did not exist until Boko Haram began attacking government buildings and civilians in Nigeria. Now, there is plenty of attention on Boko Haram but it is largely seen through the lens of global terrorism and not as the price of resource scarcity due to climate change and government corruption. This disconnect is due both to our narrow view of terrorism but also our human tendency towards reaction rather than prevention. Until we can properly conceptualize the danger that climate change presents and acknowledge its consequences, we are setting ourselves up for disaster.

Scientists agree that a rise of two degrees Celsius in global temperatures from pre-Industrial averages would bring about disastrous changes to the environment. Keeping the world below this two degree benchmark has been the primary goal of international agreements on climate change. While so far the average global temperature has only risen an estimated 0.7 degrees, the rate of increase is drastically speeding up; new predictions estimate the world is on track for a potentially catastrophic six-degree rise by 2100. As fragile societies are already facing increased conflict due to mounting resource scarcity and climate pressures with a mere 0.7 degree rise, now is the time to ask whether we are prepared for the consequences of an unchecked six degree rise which will impact everyone in ways that are difficult to fully fathom today. As the answer to that question is almost undoubtedly “no”, we need to start putting real resources towards the problem and help the most fragile and threatened states among us move towards stronger resiliency.

 

Climate | | Leave a comment

Tiempos Difíciles se Avecinan para la Nueva Misión de Mantenimiento de Paz en Mali

Para la versión en inglés, hacer clic aquí.

El Consejo de Seguridad aprobó ayer una sólida fuerza de 12,600 para mantener la paz en Mali, la cual comenzará a desplegarse a partir del 1 de julio.

La misión tiene un gran apoyo: El respaldo militar francés. Las misiones de paz que tienen el respaldo de fuerzas militares occidentales, tienden a ser más exitosas que las que se componen exclusivamente de tropas de países en desarrollo. Tener una poderosa fuerza occidental como respaldo, que sea capaz de aportar cosas tan simples como helicópteros que puedan volar de noche, puede aumentar la efectividad militar de la misión. La mayoría de las misiones de paz no tienen esta clase de posibilidades. Esta misión las tendrá.

Sin embargo, tengo serias dudas acerca de las perspectivas de éxito de la misión. Esta será la primera vez que fuerzas de paz de la ONU entren en confrontación directa con una insurgencia, en la cual los propios mantenedores de la paz serán los objetivos principales. El mantenimiento de la paz es siempre peligroso, pero raramente son las propias fuerzas de paz el blanco principal de la violencia.

Este no será el caso en Mali, donde hay una inspirada insurgencia islamista activa, que ve en la ONU a un enemigo. Yo consideraría la misión en Mali entre las más mortales de la historia de la ONU porque – a diferencia de otras misiones en el mundo hoy – estas fuerzas de paz serán consideradas como legítimos objetivos por los insurgentes. Una pregunta clave, por tanto, es ¿hasta qué punto aceptarían tener víctimas mortales los países que contribuyen con sus tropas? Si la tolerancia es baja, la misión fracasará.

Otra cosa que aminora el éxito es la falta de un proceso político de paz en curso. Las fuerzas de paz se despliegan esencialmente para reforzar la capacidad del gobierno de Mali para controlar su territorio. Hasta ahora, los reclamos políticos subyacentes que provocaron esta rebelión no han sido escuchados; y la política en Bamako continúa siendo inestable. Este proceso político necesita ser priorizado y enfatizado por la comunidad internacional, para que la misión tenga éxito.

Deseo fervientemente que la misión tenga éxito. Sólo que no veo a las piezas alinearse en esa dirección. Al menos por ahora.

| Leave a comment
Screen shot 2013-04-26 at 10.25.19 AM

Tough Times Ahead for New Mali Peacekeeping Mission

The Security Council yesterday approved a 12,600 strong peacekeeping force in Mali, to deploy starting July 1.

The mission has one big thing going for it: French military backing. Peacekeeping missions that have the backing of western military powers tend to be more successful than those made up exclusively of troops from the developing world. Having a powerful western backing force, which could provide things as simple-sounding as helicopters that can fly at night, can boost the military effectiveness of this mission. Most peacekeeping missions don’t have that kind of capacity. This mission will.

Still, I have grave doubts about the prospects for success of the mission. This will be the first time that UN Peacekeepers will come in direct confrontation with an insurgency in which the peacekeepers themselves are the main targets. Peacekeeping is always dangerous, but rarely are peacekeepers themselves the main targets of violence.

This will not be the case in Mali, where there is an active, Islamist inspired insurgency that views the UN as an enemy.  I would expect the Mali mission to be among the deadliest in UN history because unlike any other mission in the world today, these peacekeepers will be considered legitimate targets by insurgents. A key question, therefore, is how much are troop contributing countries willing to accept casualties? If the tolerance is low, the mission will collapse.

Another thing mitigating against success is the ongoing lack of a political peace process. Peacekeepers are essentially deploying to strengthen the Malian government’s ability to control its territory. So far, the underlying political grievances that sparked this rebellion have yet to be addressed; and politics in Bamako remains unstable.  This political process needs to be prioritized and emphasized by the international community in order for the mission to succeed.

I desperately want the mission to succeed. I just don’t see the pieces lining up in that direction. At least not yet.

Security | | Leave a comment
Screen shot 2013-04-26 at 9.46.14 AM

Top of the Morning: Chemical Weapons in Syria; New Mali Peacekeeping Mission

Top stories from DAWNS Digest

US Believes Chemical Weapons Used in Syria

The evidence that Assad has used chemical weapons against his own people has been mounting, along with pressure on the US to do something concrete about it. What remains to be seen is what the Obama administration will choose to do about it. “In an unclassified letter sent to senators, the White House says U.S. intelligence believes ‘with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin.’ …The White House said the assessment is preliminary and is not enough to change the U.S. ‘decision-making’ on the issue because ‘credible and corroborated’ facts are needed to guide U.S. policy.” (Voice of America http://bit.ly/10fu1Z0)

Security Council Approves Mali Peacekeeping Mission

After months of negotiations, the UN Security Council approved the creation of a 12,600 Mali peacekeeping force beginning July 1. “France, aided by some 2,000 troops from Chad, began a military offensive in January to drive out Islamist fighters, who had hijacked a revolt by Mali’s Tuareg rebels and seized two-thirds of Mali. The U.N. peacekeeping force – to be known as MINUSMA – will assume authority from a U.N.-backed African force deployed there to take over from the French. Most of the African force, known as AFISMA, is likely to become part of the peacekeeping operation, diplomats say.” (Reuters http://yhoo.it/ZRkd7K)

Security | | Leave a comment
Screen shot 2013-04-25 at 12.30.30 PM

Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons. Now What?

Chuck Hagel confirmed what was suspected by Israeli, British and French intelligence: Chemical weapons were used in Syria. Some policy questions this raises

This, of course, will set off a great deal of punditry. After all, President Obama himself said that the use of Chemical weapons would be a “red line”for the the USA.

So if this red line has been crossed, what does it mean for the next phase of US policy?

Some, (e.g. John McCain et al) are already calling for either direct military involvement in Syria, like a No-Fly Zone or supplying the rebels with US arms. But those advocating these policies really need to grapple with some key questions about the implications of scaled up American involvement in Syria’s civil war.

For example, how can we be sure that the USA is arming the right rebels; and not the jihadis or groups that sometimes kidnap UN peacekeepers? Also, if the USA starts arming the rebels, doesn’t that suggest that Washington is entering into a proxy war with Russia, which is arming Assad? And if so, what does that augur for the chances of success of the rebels? And what does an indirect war with Russia mean for America’s other international priorities, like Iranian and North Korean proliferation?

Also, if the USA implements a no-fly zone it would almost certainly do so without the support of the Security Council as Russia would almost certainly veto such a measure. We saw what happened the last time the USA fought a war in the middle east without solid international backing. Is the Obama administration willing to undermine the United Nations in pursuit of launching a military intervention in Syria?

It seems to me that anyone who uses this opportunity to advocate for deeper American military involvement in Syria has to first start by addressing some of these questions.

PS: Here’s a good discussion this morning on HuffPo Live in which I participated.

Security | | Leave a comment
Screen shot 2013-04-25 at 10.02.56 AM

20 Million Reasons to Support Vaccines

Ed Note. As I noted yesterday, there’s  a major international summit on increasing access to childhood vaccines around the world underway in Abu Dhabi. Peter Yeo, executive director of the Better World Campaign, posted this item to Huffington Post about the occasion.

In the past two decades, immunization efforts have averted an estimated 20 million deaths globally. Yet, for all the progress that has been made–thanks largely to a sustained investment from the United States, the United Nations, other governments, and private partnerships–a great need remains. Last year, well over 20 million infants did not receive vaccinations that would protect them from devastating yet entirely preventable diseases like polio and measles.

We know the consequences: They are costly and needless — in lost productivity, increased health care costs, and loss of life. We also know the opportunities: They include 20 million more kids getting a boost on their physical, emotional, and cognitive development.

Now, with the Global Vaccine Summit kicking off in Abu Dhabi today, leaders from the U.S. and around the world have 20 million reasons to devote their political will toward mobilizing resources and seeing through one of the most successful and cost-effective public health investments on the planet.

This summit–a gathering intended to give all children a healthy start to life by providing them with life-saving vaccines–comes at a critical moment, as the world works toward the target 2015 deadline to fulfill the UN’s Millennium Development Goals, which include reducing childhood mortality.

We know that vaccines are a vital part of getting us there, and we’ve already made significant progress: Thanks to USAID and partner support, more than 100 million children now receive a basic set of immunizations every year, and tens of millions more receive supplemental vaccines against polio, measles, and other diseases. In addition, UNICEF currently supplies vaccines to 36 percent of the world’s children. With a steadfast commitment to continuing global immunization campaigns like these, the elimination of diseases like polio may become a reality in this current generation.

Indeed, the return on efforts from the U.S., UN, Rotary International, and other partners to expand polio vaccine access and coverage has already been measurable. While polio paralyzed more than 1,000 children each day in the 1980s, today the number of new polio cases has dropped more than 99 percent, leaving the world nearly polio-free. As the lead scientific agency for US government efforts toward global polio eradication, the CDC contributed significantly to that remarkable achievement of reducing the number of cases reported: from 350,000 in 1988, to just 223 in 2012.

In fact, worldwide, polio cases stand at their lowest levels, in the fewest districts, in the least number of countries at any point in history. We are so close to eradicating this disease, and we must maintain a global focus to achieve that goal. Eradicating polio means no child in generations to come will ever be paralyzed by this disease. It means that societies will not have to face the $40-50 billion price tag that could come with treating paralytic polio and lost productivity. Conversely, left untreated, global re-infection could result in as many as 200,000 children per year being paralyzed over time.

Given the exceptional risks of inaction, and the extraordinary rewards for maintaining the momentum on vaccination efforts, additional government, multilateral, private sector, and civil society support remains essential. Less than 1,000 days remain in the historic framework of the Millennium Development Goals, including the reduction of childhood mortality, but this fight must live on so that diseases like polio and measles do not undermine its progress.

By building this awareness, we can put pressure on governments, civil society, the private sector, and other key actors to make meaningful and concrete steps to help fulfill these goals through immunization. Twenty million children are counting on it.

Health | | Leave a comment

Diplo Tweets