The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
BRATISLAVA, May 3 2024 (IPS) - A new report has warned media freedom in the EU is close to “breaking point” in many states amid rising authoritarianism across the continent.
In its latest annual report covering 2023, the Berlin-based Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties) highlighted widespread threats, intimidation and violence against journalists and attacks on the independence of public broadcasters in the EU, with roll backs in media freedom down to “deliberate harm or neglect by national governments”.
The group says its research confirms a continuation of alarming trends seen in the previous year, including heavy media ownership concentration, insufficient ownership transparency rules, and threats to the independence and finances of public service media,
And it warns the decline in media freedom seen in a number of EU member states has the potential to pose a direct threat to democracy.
“Media freedom is falling across Europe, and what we see, not just in Europe but in many places around the world, is that where media freedom declines, the rule of law declines too,” Eva Simon, Senior Advocacy Officer at Liberties, told IPS.
The Slovak Radio building in Bratislava, part of the RTVS public broadcaster. Credit: Ed Holt/IPS
The Liberties report, compiled with 37 rights groups in 19 countries, comes as other media freedom watchdogs and rights groups warn of growing concentration of media ownership, lack of ownership transparency, surveillance and violence against journalists in EU countries, government capture of public broadcasters, and rising restrictions on freedom of expression.
Press freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) released its annual World Press Freedom Index today (April 3, 2024), warning that politicians in some EU countries are trying to crack down on independent journalism. They single out a number of leaders as being “at the forefront of this dangerous trend,” including Hungary’s pro-Kremlin prime minister, Viktor Orban, and his counterpart in Slovakia, Robert Fico.
It also highlights concerns for press freedom in other places, such as Malta, Greece, and Italy, pointing out that in the latter—which fell in the Index’s rankings this year—a member of the ruling parliamentary coalition is trying to acquire the second biggest news agency (AGI), raising fears for future independence of media.
“One of the main themes of this year is that the institutions that should be protecting media freedom, for example, governments, have been undermining it,” Pavol Szalai, head of the EU/Balkans desk at RSF, told IPS.
Like Liberties, RSF has cited particular concern about media freedom in Hungary and Slovakia among EU states.
Media freedom has been on the decline in Hungary for more than a decade, as autocratic leader Orban has, critics say, steadily cracked down on independent journalism. His party, Fidesz, has de facto control of 80 percent of the country’s media, and while independent media outlets still exist, their sustainable funding is under threat as state advertising is funneled to pro-government outlets.
The government’s effective control of Hungary’s public broadcaster is another major concern.
“Capturing public broadcasters limits access to information and that can have a huge impact on formulating political opinions and then how people vote,” said Simon.
Hungary is also suspected of having arbitrarily monitored journalists using the controversial Pegasus software.
RSF and Liberties both say their worry is not just what is happening to media freedom in Hungary, but that what Orban has done has provided a blueprint for other autocratic leaders to follow.
“Leaders in Europe are being inspired by Orban in his war against independent media. Just look at Fico in Slovakia, who has declared war on independent media,” said Szalai.
For years, Fico has repeatedly attacked and denigrated independent media and journalists.
In 2018, investigative journalist Jan Kuciak—who had been looking into alleged corruption by people close to Fico’s government— and his fiancée Martina Kusnirova were murdered. Critics said Fico’s rhetoric against journalists had contributed to creating an atmosphere in society that allowed those behind the killings to believe they could act with impunity.
Independent journalists continue to face harassment and abuse from Smer MPs today.
Since being elected Prime Minister for the fourth time last autumn, Fico and the governing coalition led by his Smer party have continued their attacks. They also refuse to communicate with critical media, claiming they are biased.
It has also approved legislation—which is expected to be passed in parliament within weeks—that will see the country’s public broadcaster, RTVS, completely overhauled and, critics say, effectively under the control of the government.
“If the bill is passed and signed into law in its current form, RTVS will become a mouthpiece for government propaganda,” said Szalai.
The government has rejected criticism over the bill and argued changes to RTVS are necessary because it is no longer objective, is persistently critical of the government, and is not fulfilling its remit as a public broadcaster to provide balanced and objective information and a plurality of opinions. A senior official at the Slovak Culture Ministry who is among the favorites to take over as head of the public broadcaster in its new form has since suggested that people who support the flat-earth theory should be invited onto shows to air their opinions on the broadcaster.
The bill has led to public protests and threats of a mass strike from current RTVS employees.
However, against this grim backdrop, media watchdogs say new EU legislation provides hope for an improvement in media freedom.
The recently-passed European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which takes full effect across the EU in August next year, will, among others, ban governments from pursuing journalists to reveal their sources by deploying spyware, force media to disclose full ownership information, introduce transparency measures for state advertising, and checks on media concentration. It also provides a mechanism to prevent very big online platforms from arbitrarily restricting press freedom.
Another key measure in the legislation is that it enshrines the editorial independence of public service media, setting out that leaders and board members of public media organizations be selected through “transparent and non-discriminatory procedures for sufficiently long terms of office.”
“It is a good law that creates a very important base [for ensuring media freedom], which can be built on in the future. More safeguards [to media freedom] could be added to it in the future,” said Simon.
Szalai agreed, highlighting that the legislation was legally binding for member states. He admitted it had some shortcomings—for example, under some exceptions, journalists could be forced to reveal sources—but emphasized that it would take precedence over any national legislation, “and so governments cannot ignore it or try to get around it.”
But its implementation will be down to individual governments and authorities—something, that media freedom organizations have said must be closely watched.
A new EU body, the European Board for Media Services, is to be set up to oversee the implementation of the laws.
“It is important to make sure that the forces attacking media freedom are held back by this law. It will be up to the European Commission to hold governments to account on its implementation, and the Commission needs to consider press freedom as a priority after the European Parliament elections [in June] and to check on the EMFA’s implementation and take measures against any countries that violate it,” said Szalai.
IPS UN Bureau Report
IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report,
For the rural farmers in Chile, a combination of climate change-induced mega droughts, water policies that make access unaffordable and a State that either doesn’t want to or dares not intervene in the water market means family enterprises are dying out.
BERLIN, Germany, May 3 2024 (IPS) - The year 2024 seems to be a year of big decisions. The European Parliament elections in June and the US presidential election in November… politics and the media are talking of a showdown between democracy and disinformation. Add the elections in Russia and India to that and almost half of the world’s population will be casting their vote this year.
According to EU High Representative Josep Borrell, ‘malicious foreign actors’ are trying to win the ‘battle of narrative’. Disinformation is being pumped out, aimed at dividing society and undermining trust in state institutions, as stated by the German Federal Government.
Social media is purportedly being used to spread lies, disinformation and deep fakes, which is rapidly generating false information and creating filter bubbles and echo chambers. It is also being claimed that artificial intelligence, deep fakes and personalised algorithms are building on the already existing uncertainty, reducing confidence in democratic institutions.
Does this threaten the very core of democracy?
There are a number of major counterpoints to the theory that a social media-driven flood of disinformation is posing a threat to democracy. Firstly, there is the term itself. We can distinguish ‘disinformation’ from simply ‘false information’ on the basis of whether there was any malicious intent.
False information is a mistake; disinformation is an outright lie. However, the line between the two is often difficult to draw. How do we know whether someone is acting maliciously unless we are mind readers?
The term ‘disinformation’ is often a misnomer, all too often applied in political spheres to anyone who simply takes a different view. This has been (and still can be) frequently observed on both sides of the debate surrounding the dangers of the coronavirus in recent years.
There are still no empirically meaningful studies that demonstrate that disinformation, filter bubbles and echo chambers have had any clear impact. Far from it, most studies show a low prevalence of disinformation, with little to no demonstrable effects. There even seems to be a link between intensive media use and a differentiated opinion.
There has never been a greater amount of high-quality knowledge available at such a low cost than we have today.
It is also unclear whether disinformation campaigns are capable of having a lasting effect at all. Even Lutz Güllner, the head of strategic communications at the European External Action Service, who is responsible for the EU’s efforts to prevent Russian interference in the elections to the European Parliament, admits that nothing is actually known about this.
Existing empirical studies suggest that disinformation makes up just a small fraction of the information available online and even then only reaches a small minority. Most users are well aware that self-proclaimed influencers and dubious websites should not necessarily be regarded as trustworthy sources of information.
The most important counterargument is perhaps the fact that there has never been a greater amount of high-quality knowledge available at such a low cost than we have today. Media libraries, blogs, political talk shows on TV, simple and inexpensive digital access to a variety of daily newspapers and other magazines… it has never been easier for anyone to access information.
Forty years ago, most people lived in an information desert, reading one newspaper and possibly watching the news on one television channel. Not a shred of information diversity. But the internet and social media have since brought about a huge increase in plurality when it comes to forming opinions, albeit often hand in hand with increased uncertainty.
However, this has shaped the modern era from as early as the 16th century, when the printing press was invented. Plurality is the epistemic foundation of an open society. From this point of view, it is a condition for democracy, not a threat to it.
The problem lies elsewhere
It is important not to misunderstand these counterarguments though. There are indeed dangers on a more abstract and yet more fundamental level. The core problem with ensuring a stable democracy is not with people lying and using information strategically to manipulate others’ opinions — that is nothing new.
Rather, it is because in Europe today, we move in different arenas of truth that are increasingly difficult to reconcile.
In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Russian President Vladimir Putin explained in detail why he thought Ukraine belonged to Russia. He didn’t necessarily lie but expressed a subjective truth built on historical constructions, which he probably truly believes in, as bizarre as that might sound to many Western ears.
Likewise, the rhetoric iterated by Trump supporters that the Democratic Party is leading America into the abyss may not really qualify as a lie spread against their better knowledge; it is the presumed sincerity, not the lie, that should concern us.
In modern society, incontrovertible truths become a rare commodity, and the struggle for the sovereignty of interpretation of reality takes centre stage. Unfortunately, the myth that we like to believe, that there is only a single truth in this day and age, which can be fact-checked, holds little water.
Liberals and conservatives, right and left, feminists and old white men must keep talking to each other. Then we have no reason to fear malicious foreign actors or even a battle of narrative.
In the philosophical debate, the underlying difficulty of determining truth can be found in an argument dating back to Aristotle about what actually constitutes truth. The general consensus today is that the truthful content of propositions cannot be directly derived from reality (facts) but can only be verified by way of other propositions.
This dismantles the idea that some kind of congruence between proposition and reality can be determined. This ‘coherence theory of truth’ responds to the problem by understanding as true only those propositions that can be applied without contradiction to a larger context of propositions that we have already accepted as true. So, truth is what complements our construction of the world (and our prejudices) without contradiction.
But if agreement with conviction becomes the key criterion instead of facts, then the truth threatens to become intersectional, subjective and specific to context; the truth for some almost inevitably becomes a falsehood for others. How is this relevant to the current debate on disinformation?
For the US, it first means that 100 million potential Trump supporters are neither (exclusively) liars, nor idiots. Rather, they live in a world that combines a firm belief in traditional values, a rejection of East Coast intellectualism and a reluctance towards post-modern contingency. It is a philosophy consisting of mutually reinforcing aspects that provide a fixed framework for classifying new information. One where there is no need for fact-checkers or experts.
How can we and should we deal with such a fundamental dispute? Democracy is not a philosophical room for debate; there are always times when incompatible and harshly spoken positions clash. We must learn to weather these storms while preventing the truth from drifting away.
This is not simply a matter of fact-checking, but rather continually renewing society’s understanding of the foundation of truth. Liberals and conservatives, right and left, feminists and old white men must keep talking to each other. Then we have no reason to fear malicious foreign actors or even a battle of narrative
Jürgen Neyer is Professor of European and International Politics at the European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder) and Founding Director of the European New School of Digital Studies (ENS). He is currently researching the links between technological innovation and international conflicts.
Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), published by the Global and European Policy Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin.
IPS UN Bureau
SANTIAGO, May 2 2024 (IPS) - The drinking water supply in the southern island of Chiloé, one of Chile’s rainiest areas, is threatened by damage to its peatlands, affected by sales of peat and by a series of electricity projects, especially wind farms.
The peat bog (Moss sphagnum magellanicum) known as “pompon” in Chile absorbs and retains a great deal of water, releasing it drop by drop when there is no rain. In southern Chile there are about 3.1 million hectares of peatlands."We condemn the fact that the extraction of peat is permitted in Chiloé when there is no scientifically proven way for peat to be reproduced or planted.... there is no evidence of how it can regenerate." ¨-- Daniela Gumucio
Peat is a mixture of plant debris or dead organic matter, in varying degrees of decomposition, neither mineral nor fossilized, that has accumulated under waterlogged conditions.
The pompon is the main source of water for the short rivers in Chiloé, an archipelago of 9181 square kilometers and 168,000 inhabitants, located 1200 kilometers south of Santiago. The local population makes a living from agriculture, livestock, forestry, fishing and tourism, in that order.
“We don’t have glaciers, or thaws. Our water system is totally different from that of the entire continent and the rest of Chile. Since we don’t have glaciers or snow, our rivers function on the basis of rain and peat bogs that retain water and in times of scarcity release it,” Daniela Gumucio told IPS by telephone.
The 36-year-old history and geography teacher said that the Chiloé community is concerned about the supply of drinking water for consumption and for small family subsistence farming.
Gumucio is a leader of the National Association of Rural and Indigenous Women (Anamuri) and chairs the Environmental Committee of Chonchi, the municipality where she lives in the center of the island.
This long narrow South American country, which stretches between the Andes Mountains and the Pacific Ocean, has 19.5 million inhabitants and is facing one of the worst droughts in its history.
It’s strange to talk about water scarcity in Chiloé because it has a rainy climate. In 2011 more than 3000 millimeters of water fell there, but since 2015 rainfall began to decline.
In 2015 rainfall totaled 2483 millimeters, but by 2023 the amount had dropped to 1598 and so far this year only 316, according to data from the Quellón station reported to IPS by the Chilean Meteorological Directorate.
The forecast for April, May, and June 2024 is that below-normal rainfall will continue.
A water emergency was declared in the region in January and the residents of nine municipalities are supplied by water trucks.
To supply water to the inhabitants of the 10 municipalities of Chiloé, the State spent 1.12 million dollars to hire water trucks between 2019 and 2024. In Ancud alone, one of the municipalities, the expenditure was 345,000 dollars in that period.
A close-up shot of a peat bog in a watershed on the island of Chiloé, which has the ability to absorb water 10 times its weight. Because of this property, those who extract it today, without any oversight, dry it, crush it and pack it in sacks to sell it to traders who export it or sell it in local gardening shops. CREDIT: Courtesy of Gaspar Espinoza
Alert among social activists
The concern among the people of Chiloé over their water supply comes from the major boost for wind energy projects installed on the peat bogs and new legislation that prohibits the extraction of peat, but opens the doors to its use by those who present sustainable management plans.
Several energy projects are located in the Piuchén mountain range, in the west of Chiloé, where peat bogs are abundant.
“They want to extend a high voltage line from Castro to Chonchi. And there are two very large wind farm projects. But to install the turbines they have to dynamite the peat bog. This is a direct attack on our water resource and on our ways of obtaining water,” Gumucio said.
In 2020, the French company Engie bought three wind farms in Chiloé for 77 million dollars: San Pedro 1 and San Pedro 2, with a total of 31 wind turbines that will produce 101 megawatts (MW), and a third wind farm that will produce an additional 151 MW.
In addition, 18 kilometers of lines will be installed to carry energy to a substation in Gamboa Alto, in the municipality of Castro, and from there to the national power grid.
Another 92 turbines are included in the Tabla Ruca project, between the municipalities of Chonchi and Quellón.
Peat bogs accumulate and retain rainwater in the wetlands of Chiloé and release it drop by drop to river beds in times of drought. CREDIT: Courtesy of Gaspar Espinoza
Engie describes its initiatives as part of the transition to a world with zero net greenhouse gas emissions, thanks to the production of clean or green energy.
Leaders of 14 social and community organizations expressed their concerns in meetings with regional authorities, but to no avail. Now they have informed their communities and called on the region’s authorities to protect their main water source.
Local residents marched in protest on Mar. 22 in Ancud and demonstrated on Apr. 22 in Puente Gamboa, in Castro, the main municipality of the archipelago.
Thanks to peatlands, the rivers of Chiloé do not dry up. The peat bogs accumulate rainwater on the surface, horizontally, and begin to release it slowly when rainfall is scarce.
For the same reason, peat is dup up and sold for gardening. In 2019 Chile exported 4600 tons of peat.
The wind energy projects are set up in areas of raised peat bogs, known as ombrotophic, located at the origin of the hydrographic basins.
“We have had a good response in the municipal council of Chonchi, where the mayor and councilors publicly expressed their opposition to approving these projects,” said Gumucio.
Dozens of trees have been felled in Chiloé to install wind turbines and make way for high-voltage towers that will transmit green energy to Chile’s national power grid, without benefiting the inhabitants of the Chiloé archipelago. CREDIT: Courtesy of Gaspar Espinoza
The other threat to peatlands
The second threat to the Chiloé peat bogs comes from Law 21.660 on environmental protection of peatlands, published in Chile’s Official Gazette on Apr. 10.
This law prohibits the extraction of peat in the entire territory, but also establishes rules to authorize its use if sustainable management plans are presented and approved by the Agricultural and Livestock Service, depending on a favorable report from the new Biodiversity and Protected Areas Service.
The peatland management plan aims to avoid the permanent alteration of its structure and functions.
Those requesting permits must prove that they have the necessary skills to monitor the regeneration process of the vegetation layer and comply with the harvesting methodology outlined for sustainable use.
But local residents doubt the government’s oversight and enforcement capacity
Dozens of trees have been felled in Chiloé to install wind turbines and make way for high-voltage towers that will transmit green energy to Chile’s national power grid, without benefiting the inhabitants of the Chiloé archipelago. CREDIT: Courtesy of Gaspar Espinoza
“We condemn the fact that the extraction of peat is permitted in Chiloé when there is no scientifically proven way for peat to be reproduced or planted…. there is no evidence of how it can regenerate,” said Gumucio.
The activist does not believe that sustainable management is viable and complained that the government did not accept a petition for the law to not be applied in Chiloé.
“We have a different water system and if this law is to be implemented, it should be on the mainland where there are other sources of water,” she said.
But according to Gumucio, everything seems to be aligned to deepen the water crisis in Chiloé.
“The logging of the forest, the extraction of peat, and the installation of energy projects all contribute to the drying up of our aquifers and basins. And in that sense, there is tremendous neglect by the State, which is not looking after our welfare and our right to have water,” she argued.
Peatland is part of the vegetation of the island of Chiloé, but is threatened by unsupervised exploitation, which the authorities hope to curb with a recently approved law, whose regulations are to be ready within the next two years. CREDIT: Courtesy of Gaspar Espinoza
Scientists express their view
Six scientists from various Chilean universities issued a public statement asserting that the new law is a step in the right direction to protect Chile’s peatlands.
In their statement, scientists Carolina León, Jorge Pérez Quezada, Roy Mackenzie, María Paz Martínez, Pablo Marquet and Verónica Delgado emphasize that the new law “will require the presentation of a sustainable management plan” to exploit peat that is currently extracted without any controls.
They add that management plans must now be approved by the competent authorities and that those who extract peat will be asked to “ensure that the structure and functions of the peatlands are not permanently modified.”
They also say that the regulations of the law, which are to be issued within two years, “must establish the form of peat harvesting and post-harvest monitoring of the peat bog to protect the regeneration of the plant, something that has not been taken into consideration until now.”
They point out that the new law will improve oversight because it allows monitoring of intermediaries and exporters who could be fined if they do not comply with the legislation.
“While it is true that there is concern among certain communities and environmental groups, we believe that these concerns can be taken into account during the discussion of the regulations,” they say.
The scientists reiterate, however, that “peatlands are key ecosystems for mitigating the national and planetary climate and biodiversity crisis” and admit that “significant challenges remain to protect them, although this is a big step in the right direction.”
HYDERABAD & MONTREAL, May 2 2024 (IPS) - In a world faced with habitat loss and species extinction, climate change, and pollution, it’s crucial that countries develop their national action plans and create a society that lives in harmony with nature, says David Cooper, Acting Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in an exclusive interview with IPS.
And in a year where more than 4 billion people across the globe are expected to participate in elections, Cooper believes that politicians should put biodiversity on their manifestos.
Since taking the reins from the previous Executive Director, Elizabeth Mrema, Cooper has been at the forefront of steering the CBD towards the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework.
Later this year, world leaders will gather in Cali, Colombia for the 16th Biodiversity Convention of the Parties (COP16) slated for October 21 to November 1, 2024 for which preparations are currently underway.
Cooper gives insight into the core issues that will be on the top of the COP16 agenda, the current status of biodiversity finance, including the newly operationalized biodiversity fund, the upcoming meetings of the scientific and technical bodies of the CBD, the current status of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAP) and what is likely to unfold in the coming months in Digital Sequence Information (DSI).
David Cooper, Acting Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
Biodiversity Finance: On Track but at Slow Pace
The UN Biodiversity Convention aims to mobilize at least USD 20 billion per year by 2025 and at least USD 30 billion per year by 2030 for biodiversity-related funding from all sources, including the public and private sectors.
However, the current situation with biodiversity funding shows that while progress is happening, it’s not fast enough. Some countries and groups are trying hard to give more money to projects that help nature, but overall, it’s still below expectations, and there are unfilled promises, Cooper acknowledges.
“We need to see a serious road map,” Cooper says, “All countries, in particular the donor country community, have to see how we are going to achieve at least that USD 20 billion by 2025 because that’s imminent.”
He called on big donors to honor their commitments.
“It’s really important that the big donors who promise money actually follow through and give the money they said they would. We need everyone to work together to make sure there’s enough money to protect our plants, animals, and the places they live,” Cooper says. “Certainly, we need to see all countries put efforts behind all of the goals and targets of the framework and that, of course, includes those on financial resources.”
Cooper welcomed the decision by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to establish a new fund, the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund. He said the CBD secretariat was working closely with Carlos Manuel Rodriguez, the GEF CEO, and his team.
“We then saw a number of contributions to that fund coming. The contribution from Canada is a significant one of 200 million Canadian dollars. Other significant donations came from Germany, Spain, Japan, and most recently, Luxembourg. Actually, the contribution from Luxembourg, if we look at its pro rata, given the size of the Luxembourg economy, is also quite generous, even though it’s only USD 7 million in total.”
National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)
It’s not only about funding, Cooper says, but countries showing their commitment to their agreements, including developing NBSAPs. He acknowledged that very few countries had submitted so far.
“It’s only a few countries so far, and Spain, Japan, China, France, Hungary, and Ireland have submitted their NBSAPS, as well as the European Union,” says Cooper.
While he is optimistic that all the countries will develop their targets, he recognizes that it’s a complex process.
“I think most countries are in the process of developing their national targets, which is the first thing they’re supposed to do. But this is a process that is also supposed to engage all the different sectors of the economy and all the different parts of society, with the engagement of local communities, indigenous peoples, businesses, and so on.”
The CBD supports the countries through the complexities.
“The developing countries in particular have been supported through the Global Environment Facility. We’ve also been organizing a number of regional dialogues so that countries can share their experience as they move forward,” Cooper says.
At COP15, it was decided that all countries should submit their NBSAPs, if possible, before COP16.
“If they’re not able to submit their full NBSAPS by then, then at least they should provide their updated national targets. So, we do expect many, many countries to have progressed on their NBSAPs by COP16. Immediately prior to COP16, there will be another meeting of the subsidiary body on implementation to also take stock of where we are on that.”
COP16: What’s In, What’s Out
The core focus of CBD COP16 is likely to revolve around the adoption and implementation of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. This framework sets out the global targets and goals for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use for the next decade and beyond. Key aspects of the framework may include targets related to halting biodiversity loss, promoting sustainable resource management, enhancing ecosystem resilience, and ensuring equitable sharing of the benefits derived from biodiversity.
“I think I can highlight four key areas for COP 16,” says Cooper. “The first is that we have to see, and we have to have demonstrated progress in terms of implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework. That means national targets are set. That means NBSAPs developed in at least a majority of countries. That means funds are flowing, which means, as I said before, a credible path towards this USD 20 billion by 2025 target. It also means the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund should be receiving more funds and supporting more projects.”
The second core issue will be the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) on genetic resources. There was an agreement made at COP15 to establish this mechanism, but no details were fleshed out at that time, so those details are now being negotiated in an intergovernmental working group.
“Of course, the establishment of such a mechanism with a fund would give another major boost to the Convention because it would bring in another source of funding.”
The third area would be finance, he says.
“The fourth area that I would highlight is the need to further strengthen the role of indigenous peoples and local communities as key actors.”
He also points out that there’s a number of other issues, such as the issue of biodiversity and health and synthetic biology, that need to be managed, including looking at a risk assessment and risk management for, for instance, gene-edited mosquitoes.
“They’ve determined that the theme of the COP will be peace with nature, which is a broad theme that will include many, many issues,” he reveals.
Plastic Pollution Treaty and CBD’s Role
The fourth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4) on plastic pollution in April 2024 at the Shaw Center in Ottawa, Canada, aims to develop an internationally legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment, to end plastic pollution by 2040.
Ending plastic pollution is also one of the biodiversity targets, Cooper says, adding that the CBD is actively involved in the logistical organization of INC-4.
“Also, the reduction of waste from plastics and pollution from plastics is one of the elements of target 7 of the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. So, we are seeing the success of INC-4 negotiations as hugely important for the implementation of the Framework,” he says.
What to Watch out for Between Now and COP16
Although all eyes will be on the COP16 negotiations, there are a number of global events taking place in the next few months that will contribute to the agenda and determine the level of the world’s preparedness for the conference.
“The most important ones are obviously the SBSTTA (Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical, and Technological Advice) and the SBI (Subsidiary Body on Implementation), then this working group on Digital Sequence Information that will take place in August,” Cooper says.
Like the SBI, SBSTTA is a subsidiary body established under the CBD. While the SBI specifically assists in reviewing progress in the implementation of the Convention and identifies obstacles to its implementation, among other functions, SBSTTA plays a crucial role in ensuring that decisions made under the CBD are informed by the best available scientific evidence and technical expertise.
“Then we have the G7 and G20 processes coming up, which are important processes to show leadership. The CBD COP itself will be followed by the COPs of climate change and desertification, making the linkage between these. Also, we expect Colombia and the indigenous peoples will host just before COP, a pre-cop focusing on indigenous peoples and local communities and their roles,” Cooper says.
Finally, as a record 64 countries across the world hold their elections this year to elect a new national government, does this provide a unique opportunity to speak about biodiversity and should biodiversity, like climate change, be made an election issue?
“Definitely,” says Cooper.
“If we look at many of the extreme events that people suffered from, particularly last year, whether these be fires, wildfires, droughts, storms, or floods, you know, these are largely attributed by the media to climate change. Climate change is increasing the probability and severity of these events, but these events are also happening because of ecosystem degradation because we haven’t been managing biodiversity and ecosystems well. So, I think we all have an opportunity to make this message and these links clearer. Politicians have a particular responsibility to do so, and I hope more of them will do so as these various elections in various parts of the world pan out.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
NEW YORK, May 2 2024 (IPS) - The report from Amnesty International USA comes ahead of a May 8 deadline for the Biden administration to certify that Israel is complying with international and domestic laws.
With just over a week until the deadline for the Biden administration to certify that Israel’s use of U.S.-supplied weapons is adhering to domestic and international law, Amnesty International USA submitted a report to the federal government detailing how American bombs and other weapons have been used in Israeli attacks that could constitute war crimes.
The White House, said the human rights group, must inform Congress that Israel is violating humanitarian laws by May 8 as part of the National Security Memorandum on Safeguards and Accountability with Respect to Transferred Defense Articles and Defense Services (NSM-20) process, and “must immediately suspend the transfer of arms to the Israeli government.”
Amnesty’s report focuses on several attacks on civilian infrastructure in which Israel used bombs and other weapons made by U.S. companies including Boeing, as well as practices used by the Israeli government and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) since they began bombarding Gaza in October in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack.
Four of the IDF attacks took place in Rafah, where Israel is reportedly preparing a ground offensive after forcibly displacing more than 1 million Palestinians to the southern city and carrying out airstrikes for months.
The four strikes in December and January killed at least 95 civilians, including 42 children, despite the U.S. and Israel’s repeated claims that the IDF is targeting Hamas fighters.
“The evidence is clear and overwhelming: the government of Israel is using U.S.-made weapons in violation of international humanitarian and human rights law, and in a manner that is inconsistent with U.S. law and policy.”
“In all four attacks,” reported Amnesty, “there was no indication that the residential buildings hit could be considered legitimate military objectives or that people in the buildings were military targets, raising concerns that these strikes were direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects and must therefore be investigated as war crimes.”
The strikes, which included one on a five-story building inhabited by the Nofal family, were carried out with GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs—made in the U.S. by Boeing.
“The evidence is clear and overwhelming: the government of Israel is using U.S.-made weapons in violation of international humanitarian and human rights law, and in a manner that is inconsistent with U.S. law and policy,” said Amanda Klasing, national director for government relations with Amnesty International USA. “In order to follow U.S. laws and policies, the United States must immediately suspend any transfer of arms to the government of Israel.”
Boeing was also the manufacturer of Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) that were used in October 2023 in “two deadly, unlawful airstrikes on homes full of Palestinian civilians,” according to satellite imagery examined by Amnesty’s weapons experts and remote sensing analysts.
Those attacks killed 43 civilians, nearly half of whom were children.
Other patterns in Israel’s assault on Gaza, including its use of a 24-hour mass evacuation notice early on in its current escalation, ordering more than 1.1 million people in Gaza City and northern Gaza to go to the southern part of the enclave; its use of indiscriminate attacks with both U.S.- and Israel-made weapons; its use of arbitrary “administrative detention”; and its denial of humanitarian assistance, all show that the Biden administration’s continued material support for the IDF violates U.S. and international law, Amnesty said.
As progressives in the U.S. Congress have warned, Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2378-1) bars the federal government from providing military aid to any country that is blocking U.S. humanitarian aid.
Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s announcement on October 9, 2023 of a “complete siege on Gaza” with “no electricity, no food, no water, no gas” allowed in has deprived the enclave of equipment needed to provide healthcare to tens of thousands of people wounded in Israel’s attacks, as well as pregnant women and newborns, the elderly, and people facing chronic illnesses.
It has also placed Gaza’s 2.3 million Palestinians at risk of a “government-engineered famine,” said Amnesty, with dozens of people, including children, already having starved to death.
“It’s shocking that the Biden administration continues to hold that the government of Israel is not violating international humanitarian law with U.S.-provided weapons when our research shows otherwise and international law experts disagree,” said Klasing.
“The International Court of Justice found the risk of genocide in Gaza is plausible and ordered provisional measures. President [Joe] Biden must end U.S. complicity with the government of Israel’s grave violations of international law and immediately suspend the transfer of weapons to the government of Israel.”
The report comes days after Biden signed a military aid package including $17 billion more for the IDF, after approving multiple weapons transfers to Israel since October.
Ahead of the May 8 NSM-20 deadline, a coalition of more than 90 lawyers—including at least 20 who work in the Biden administration—is preparing to send a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland warning that Israel’s practices in Gaza likely violate the Arms Export Control Act, the Leahy Laws, and the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit disproportionate attacks on civilians.
While spokespeople for the Biden administration have repeatedly said publicly that the White House does not accept allegations that Israel has violated international humanitarian law—and made the U.S. complicit—the letter is just the latest sign of widening dissent within the government regarding Gaza.
Senior U.S. officials recently told Secretary of State Antony Blinken in an internal memo that Israel lacks credibility as it continues to claim it is adhering international law.
“This is a moment where the U.S. government is violating its own laws and policy,” a Department of Justice staffer who signed the new letter, told Politico. “The administration may be seeing silence or only a handful of resignations, but they are really not aware of the magnitude of discontent and dissent among the rank and file.”
Julia Conley is a staff writer for Common Dreams.
Source: Common Dreams
IPS UN Bureau
ROME, May 1 2024 (IPS) - Journalism is in crisis, again. The challenges to press freedom are enormous and multi-faceted and they are deepening — in “free” and open societies as well as autocracies. And there are no simple solutions.
For individuals and entire media outlets the crisis is existential.
Farhana Haque Rahman
Beyond the threat to life and limb, tens of thousands of media jobs were lost in 2023 and the trend this year is no better. Entire outlets have shut down, or been taken over and/or dumbed down.
In our world of enhanced digital chaos, and the font of bigotry and disinformation which is social media, audiences are as increasingly fractured as the news outlets they choose to turn to.
Bots and AI-generated deep fakes will compound all this politicised confusion and mistrust. Torrents of trivia, subtle scare-mongering and old-fashioned intimidation are a potent combination in the erosion of freedoms and democracy.
Russia has seen a mass exodus of journalists. Hong Kong is a shadow of its former self. Myanmar’s regime is a killer and jailer of reporters. But in an increasingly polarised US, by some counts, over two-thirds of Americans say they don’t trust their mass media. There is excellent reporting happening but much will pass unseen, or dismissed outright.
South Africa’s membership-based Daily Maverick shut down for an entire day in April to draw attention to how market failure was endangering independent journalism.
“Without journalism, our democracy and economy will break down,” the outlet declared.
How all these very different factors are coming together is clearly seen in the media coverage of our global climate breakdown and broader threats to our environment.
The environment is not just a highly dangerous topic to cover – sometimes akin to conflict reporting – but it has become a cesspit of corporate propaganda emitted by polluting industries, some of them giant state-owned entities, as well as their partners in disinformation ensconced in politics, academia, “non-profit” foundations AND the mass media themselves.
UNESCO is dedicating World Press Freedom Day this year to the importance of journalism and freedom of expression in the context of the current global environmental crisis. As UNESCO says: “Independent journalists as well as scientists are crucial actors in helping our societies to separate facts from lies and manipulation in order to take informed decisions, including about environmental policies.”
“Investigative journalists are also shedding light on environmental crimes, exposing corruption and powerful interests, and sometimes paying the ultimate price for doing their job.”
As India, the world’s largest democracy, holds elections 10 years after Narendra Modi first took over as prime minister, Reporters Without Borders noted that at least 13 of the 28 journalists killed in India since then were working on stories linked to the environment, mainly land seizures and illegal mining. Several were killed while investigating the so-called sand mafia, an organized crime network supplying the construction industry.
Reporters Without Borders ranked India 161st out of 180 countries in its 2023 World Press Freedom Index.
In the Global South, indigenous, local, and independent journalists and communicators are particularly vulnerable to violence and intimidation while working in remote areas without adequate backup and resources.
But in the world’s industrialized democracies – those that blazed the trail of bio-diversity mass extinction, pollution and emissions of greenhouse gases overheating our planet – major media outlets are actively aiding and abetting fossil fuel companies by partnering them.
As laid clear in a report by the outlets Drilled and DeSmog, many major media outlets have “an internal brand studio that crafts editorials, videos, even events and entire podcasts for advertisers, many of which are fossil fuel companies.”
“The likes of Politico, Reuters, Bloomberg, the NYT, the Washington Post, and the Financial Times are all creating content for oil companies that directly contradicts what their climate reporters are publishing. And we know from peer-reviewed research that at most one-third of people can actually tell the difference between advertorial content and reporting.”
Journalists, particularly those covering the climate crisis and collapse of eco-systems, also have to confront those almost intangible contradictions that thwart efforts to engage and inform the public.
How does one communicate the magnitude of the dangers facing us and our planet to a global audience already bowed down under a barrage of awfulness? How does one resist what one US political scientist referred to as the “banality of crazy”?
He was referring to Donald Trump’s violent, sexist and racist rhetoric which has been heard so often that it sometimes barely stirs a media reaction, but the phrase could be used to describe other kinds of dangerously acceptable new-normal.
There is no one easy answer to all this. Freedom of the press rests on just that. It also depends on our own integrity and credibility.
Farhana Haque Rahman is Senior Vice President of IPS Inter Press Service and Executive Director IPS Noram; she served as the elected Director General of IPS from 2015-2019. A journalist and communications expert, she is a former senior official of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and the International Fund for Agricultural Development.
IPS UN Bureau
Excerpt:
World Press Freedom Day 2024
NEW YORK, May 1 2024 (IPS) - Diaa Al-Kahlout, the veteran Gaza bureau chief for the Qatari-funded London-based newspaper Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, had been covering the Israel-Gaza war for two months when he became part of the news.
On December 7, Al-Kahlout was detained along with members of his family by Israeli forces in a mass arrest in Beit Lahya in northern Gaza. Over 33 days in Israeli custody, he said he was interrogated about his journalism and subjected to physical and psychological mistreatment.
Al-Kahlout is one of more than two dozen Palestinian journalists arrested by Israel since it launched a widespread bombardment of Gaza following the Hamas October 7 raid on Israel. After his release, Al-Kahlout made the “unbearable” decision to leave Gaza for Egypt, from where he spoke to CPJ about his experience covering the war, his detention, and the journalism environment in Gaza. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
How did you manage to report at the beginning of the war, before your arrest?
For the first time, I faced problems covering a war. I had prepared my home for emergencies and wars, like installing solar power, allowing me to work normally in such situations. I lived in a relatively safe area in Beit Lahya. By the third or fourth day of the war, I started losing my journalistic tools like electricity, my phone, and laptop and primarily relied on my mobile phone.
We had to buy an Israeli SIM card at a very high price because everyone needed it. This was the first time this happened in any war, but despite this, I continued to work day and night for 61 days, despite the difficult conditions — and this was before being arrested.
At the start, there were many journalists in the north, but in the second month of the war, I became one of the important sources. I was shooting videos and sending them for publication without compensation; I was helping everyone, including major channels. People in Gaza were very cooperative because they knew I was a journalist, so they gave me priority to charge my phone so my coverage could continue.
You manage a team of journalists. How did the hardships you describe affect that?
My colleagues are also my friends, as we have a personal relationship from years of working and collaborating on coverage from Gaza. Within days, communication with them was almost completely cut off. Unfortunately, I couldn’t play my usual role in assigning tasks, editing stories, and verifying the materials [and had to leave this to colleagues in regional offices].
With great difficulty, we managed to continue our work, although there was no problem finding stories. As a journalist in Gaza now, you find stories everywhere you go, and a thousand stories can be told in a thousand ways.
After about two months of covering the war, Israel detained you for 33 days. What happened?
At about 7 or 8 a.m. on December 7, 2023, the Israeli army ordered all the men in our area to come down from their houses and gather in a nearby area. They stripped us of our clothes, leaving us only in our underwear in the cold, handcuffed us from behind, and blindfolded us. Even so, we were not afraid at all. We are civilians and were taken out of our homes.
A video image shown by the BBC on December 8 depicts the mass arrest of Palestinians from Beit Lahya in Gaza. The Israel Defense Forces told the BBC that “IDF fighters and Shin Bet officers detained and interrogated hundreds of terror suspects” on December 7. (Screenshot: Video obtained by BBC)
We stayed at Zikim base [in Israel], where we were interrogated and I was asked about my journalistic work. I was interrogated twice, once by the Israeli army and once by the Shin Bet [Israeli security service]. In the latter, the interrogator asked me about a report published in Al-Araby Al-Jadeed in 2018 about a failed Israeli unit operation in Gaza. [Al-Araby Al-Jadeed published several reports about the botched Israeli operation.]
I was blindfolded and forced to sit in a squatting position on a sand hill, with the soldier behind me continuing to hit me. During the interrogation, they also asked why I was in contact with leaders in Hamas.
I answered that I speak with various personalities due to my work and request statements for publication. Their response was, “You’re a terrorist, you son of a dog,” and they started mocking and bullying me, then put tape around my mouth because I was arguing with them.
After about 12 hours, we were moved by a bus to the Sde Teiman military base belonging to the Israeli army. I stayed in this detention center, moving between several barracks, for 33 days. They assigned me the number 059889. Of course, no one called us by our names, we all had numbers called out in Hebrew, which we do not speak.
Every day in detention, they would separate us and move us between barracks. The food consisted of moldy bread. I spent almost the entire time in a squatting position on my knees, which caused me inflammation and severe pain. When I was arrested, my weight was 130 kilograms [286 pounds], and I lost 45 kilograms [99 pounds] in detention.
During the detention period, I was interrogated three times in the same manner, focusing on [my work with] Al-Araby Al-Jadeed and on Al-Jazeera [where I did not work] with questions about why I was in contact with Palestinian leaders in Gaza, and about my sources that I relied on to publish my journalistic reports in the newspaper.
I told them I was a known journalist, that leaders would send us reports for publication, and that we did not publish everything we received but only what we could verify.
I was subjected to torture called “ghosting” daily, which involves being handcuffed with the hands upward or behind the back while blindfolded, in addition to significant psychological torture alongside physical torture. Even going to the bathroom was on their schedule.
Twenty days after my detention, a new person was detained and told me about the statements issued about me [by my outlet and rights groups] — and I learned that these statements were issued the same days I was tortured.
On the 32nd day, the chief prison officer, prison officials, and Shin Bet came with prisoners from a prison in the Negev [in southern Israel]. They started calling out numbers, and the last name — or rather, number — on the list was mine. They gave us medicine to relax our bodies from the exhaustion of detention, and if they found anyone called out was injured or sick, they would not release them.
On the 33rd day, we were transferred to a bus that roamed around before they removed the blindfolds and unshackled us, and I found myself in front of the Kerem Shalom crossing [into Gaza].
Detention left its mark on me, both psychologically and health-wise. The most significant issue I face is with my vision, as I cannot see well due to being blindfolded for 33 consecutive days and nights. My vision was excellent before my arrest. In detention, we were beaten and “ghosted” if any part of our eyes showed.
I have severe chest inflammation and acute vertebral inflammation, resulting in leg pain, in addition to malnutrition, and lack of sleep. Before my travel, the cracks in my skin caused by detention conditions resulted in pus and severe pain. In addition to the bruises still on my body, I can’t sleep or rest normally since my release.
I behave as if I were still in prison; even my sleep was affected by the prison experience and what I suffered. I would sleep in the same position we were forced into during detention.
After my release, I stayed in the journalists’ tent [a designated area for the press] in [the southern Gaza city of] Rafah for two months, where I tried to get back to work and to make sure my family is okay, but that was hindered by the blackouts and the lack of journalistic devices.
I was hoping to get back to the north to my family, but day after day I lost hope that the war would end and I decided to leave for Egypt, which happened on March 10, and my family joined me on March 13. They arrived tired and sick, and we began the journey of treatment.
[Editor’s note: CPJ could not independently verify Al-Kahlout’s description of torture, but it is in line with human rights groups’ descriptions of the treatment of some Palestinians in Israeli custody. Reached by CPJ’s New York headquarters about Al-Kahlout’s allegations of mistreatment, the Israeli military’s North America spokesperson said: “The individuals detained are treated in accordance with international law. The IDF has never, and will never, deliberately target journalists. The IDF protocols are to treat detainees with dignity. Incidents in which the guidelines were not followed will be looked into.” CPJ in New York also emailed the Shin Bet about Al-Kahlout’s interrogation over a 2018 article, but did not immediately receive a reply.]
Have you returned to work? What are your plans?
Mentally, I am not capable of resuming work. I am still pursuing treatments and medications, and monitoring my health condition and that of my family. I don’t even have the basic work tools like a laptop.
We are currently waiting for visa procedures and to travel to [the Qatari capital of] Doha. But Doha will also be unknown to us. I hope my family and I can adapt to the new situation. My media institution supported me, but the situation in Gaza and the constant worry for the rest of my family in Beit Lahya kept me in perpetual terror. I feel anxious and tired.
I lost all my possessions; my house and my family’s house were destroyed, I lost my new car, and my small piece of land. Suddenly, we lost everything.
How do you compare covering this war to previous ones?
From the first day, it has been impossible to comprehensively cover the war. We lost our main sources of information [as blackouts hindered reporting and official sources became harder to reach] and no one can document all this destruction.
Unfortunately, there is a significant lack of information and an inability to grasp the extent of the bombing and strikes happening in Gaza. This has prevented journalists from fully performing their jobs.
Dozens of very important stories of victims have been missed amid the killings and madness. The truth is, that the outside world sees only 10% of the actual reality in Gaza, and what we see is unimaginable. As journalists, we should simply apologize because we can’t cover everything. I used to be able to get all the news, and today, many significant stories haven’t been covered.
Given the scale of the genocide, the lack of empathy has been striking. I’ve been working in journalism since 2004 and have never seen this level of destruction in any war I covered, and I have covered all the wars on Gaza since then.
In the past, we treated the killing of five people as a massacre, but today in Gaza, a massacre means 100 and more. People have become numbers and we don’t know the details of their stories, that is if we even know of their deaths.
Unfortunately, the absence of the internet and the lack of quick alternatives pose a real dilemma, and a journalist who loses his equipment cannot replace it. Almost all press offices were lost, and hospitals have become the main headquarters for journalists.
Journalists in Gaza have found no respect. Amid all these difficulties in covering and reporting events, there was another challenge: trying to survive, securing food and drink, and protecting the family. Moving even an inch in Gaza now is madness.
The Palestinian journalists couldn’t fully deliver the picture due to the massive bombings and communication blackouts that stopped stories from getting out. What was shared were just bits of breaking news, and the deeper stories were lost or silenced because journalists were targeted, there was no security, and essential supplies like electricity and the internet, and work tools like laptops were missing.
The people of Gaza and the journalists there suffered injustice in this coverage, which was made worse by the absence of foreign journalists who could have helped complete the story.
Doja Daoud is CPJ’s Middle East and North Africa representative. Before joining CPJ in March 2022, Daoud worked for the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Araby al-Jadeed as a writer and news editor focusing on press freedom and media monitoring. She also contributed to Lebanese news outlets and co-founded Alternative Press Syndicate, a local union group for journalists.
IPS UN Bureau
Excerpt:
World Press Freedom Day 2024