The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
PORTLAND, USA, Mar 17 2026 (IPS) - Throughout its 250-year history, following the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, the United States has elected 47 presidents. From George Washington in 1789 to Donald Trump in 2024, each U.S. president has left their mark on the nation and the world in various ways.
Some presidents are celebrated for their foresight, character, and achievements, while others are criticized for their negligence, immorality, and failures during their time in the White House. Ranking these 47 presidents is a worthwhile endeavor as it contributes to an understanding of the past and also provides insight into the current and likely near-term policies and actions of the United States.
Three presidents have been impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives: Andrew Johnson (1868), Bill Clinton (1998), and Donald Trump (2019 and 2021). All three were acquitted by the U.S. Senate and remained in office. However, Trump is the only president in U.S. history to be impeached twice, first for his dealings with Ukraine and second for the incitement of insurrection.
According to rankings by presidential historians, political scientists, scholars, and other experts based on a president’s achievements, leadership qualities, and failures during their presidential tenure, the top five presidents on the list are: Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Theodore Roosevelt (Table 1).
Source: According to various surveys, including the Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey, Siena’s 7th Presidential Expert Poll, “American Presidents: Greatest and Worst”, C-Span 2021 Survey, U.S. News & World Report 2024 surveys, and Yahoo/YouGov Poll.
The five U.S. presidents consistently ranked at the bottom of the list are: James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Warren G. Harding, Franklin Pierce, and Donald J. Trump.
Routinely ranking at the bottom of the list of the worst presidents is Donald Trump. His lowest ranking is largely due to his presidency challenging democratic institutions and breaking longstanding constitutional norms, particularly the peaceful transfer of power, a U.S. precedent that had not been broken since George Washington first set it.
Routinely ranking at the bottom of the list of the worst presidents is Donald Trump. His lowest ranking is largely due to his presidency challenging democratic institutions and breaking longstanding constitutional norms, particularly the peaceful transfer of power, a U.S. precedent that had not been broken since George Washington first set it
A major factor contributing to Trump’s ranking as the worst president is his efforts to overturn the 2020 election outcome, including pressuring election officials and spreading false claims of widespread fraud. This culminated in the January 6, 2021 mob attack or insurrection on the U.S. Capitol, which aimed to prevent the certification of the 2020 election results.
Other major factors contributing to Trump’s continued low ranking include three notable abuses: 1. violation of his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution; 2. using the power of the federal government to threaten and punish his critics; and 3. shocking corruption and lack of moral authority.
Furthermore, other important factors include his failure to unite the country, his politicization of government, use of inflammatory rhetoric, especially against political opponents, his incompetent handling of the Covid-19 pandemic, his weakening of international alliances, alienation of close allies, and conflicts of interest with the use of the presidency to enrich himself. Additionally, his xenophobic, racist, and misogynistic remarks and tweets have been widely criticized.
The troubling statements made by the presidency include: suggesting people should inject bleach to cure Covid-19; claiming windmills cause cancer; stating that climate change is a hoax invented by China; and asserting that Tylenol use in pregnancy causes autism.
Also among the explanatory factors for his ranking include Trump’s vilification of immigrants as violent criminals, his self-promotion, and his normalization of dishonesty with 30,573 reported false and misleading statements during his first presidential term. These statements are believed to have significantly damaged public trust in democratic institutions.
His most recent claim during his 2026 State of the Union address that his second term as president should be his third term has also drawn criticism. Moreover, Trump’s quantitative claims not only push the limits of factual truth but also of mathematical possibility.
Additionally, Trump will be remembered for leaving the country worse off than he found it and rewriting the rules of the liberal international order that the U.S. itself created. In particular, as a result of his policies and actions, the populations of the closest allies of the U.S. have lost faith in the country. Pluralities in Germany and France, as well as a majority of Canadians, view the U.S. as creating more problems than solving them (Figure 1).
Source: Politico Poll with Public First.
Trump continues to insist incorrectly that tariffs are not primarily paid by importers and consumers, but by foreign governments. He has also claimed that his tariffs and related efforts have generated $18 trillion in new investments in the U.S. This highly exaggerated figure amounts to approximately 59% of the country’s gross domestic product in 2025 of $30.6 trillion U.S. dollars. This represents a rate of economic growth that surpasses the greatest periods of post-World War II expansion in the U.S. (Figure 2).
Source: New York Times.
In a national survey conducted by Quinnipiac University in 2018, U.S. adults were asked to identify who they believed were the worst presidents since World War II. Out of the 13 presidents who have served since the end of World War II, Donald Trump was found to be the worst. Similarly, in 2024, an expert survey conducted by the American Political Science Association (APSA) also ranked Donald Trump in last place among U.S. presidents.
According to an NPR/Marist poll in 2026, Trump’s approval rating is low, with only 39% of U.S. adults in the national survey saying they approve of the job he is doing overall, while 51% strongly disapprove. Additionally, the incomes of Trump’s working-class MAGA supporters have stagnated, while the wealthy have seen exponential returns on their investments.
A majority of U.S. voters oppose the actions of the Trump administration, particularly in areas such as the economy, foreign policy, and immigration enforcement. According to the NPR/Marist poll, two-thirds of those surveyed believe that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has exceeded its authority.
While it is possible for Donald Trump to achieve success in his remaining three years in office, this outcome seems unlikely based on his past and current policies, actions, and behavior. A more probable outcome is that at the end of Trump’s second presidential term, he will continue to be viewed as the worst president in U.S. history.
In summary, out of the 47 U.S. presidents, the top five according to scholarly rankings, presidential historians, and expert opinions are: Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Theodore Roosevelt. The bottom five presidents are: James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Warren G. Harding, Franklin Pierce, and Donald J. Trump, with the lowest ranking among the five being Donald J. Trump.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of many publications on population issues.
BRATISLAVA, Mar 17 2026 (IPS) - Gito* had just arrived at his father’s house in Caloocan City in the Philippines on December 7, 2016, when three armed policemen burst into the home, grabbed his father, took him outside and shot him multiple times. Gito told IPS his father had put his hands up when the officers told him they had come to arrest him, but they opened fire anyway.
Then they turned on Gito, who was 15 at the time and had come to see his father to get his lunch money for school. He says they told him his father was a drug dealer and that he would be facing charges because he was with him. He was taken away and tortured – beaten and forced to drink urine – and later jailed for three years. He and his four siblings were all forcibly separated; his mother’s mental health deteriorated, and even after release, Gito needed years of mental health help.
Andrea*, from the same city, told IPS a similar story. One day in October 2017, she and her husband and father-in-law were watching television at their home when two men wearing masks and black jackets and carrying guns burst in, shouting the name of a person none of them knew. Despite their protestations, the two men executed her husband and father-in-law, shooting them many times while they knelt in front of them. Andrea, who was five months pregnant at the time, was also injured in the shooting – a bullet hit her leg.
A priest prays at a gathering organised for the families of victims of Duterte’s war on drugs in Quezon City, ahead of the opening of the ICC confirmation hearing. Credit: IDEFEND
Left without any means of income with both the family’s breadwinners dead, she had to drop out of the vocational course she was on and spiralled into a deep depression. She eventually recovered. “When I looked at my baby, I saw my husband in her, so I picked myself up and faced life bravely,” she explained. She said, though, it is still hard financially, as she also supports her mother-in-law.
Gito’s father, and Andrea’s husband and father-in-law, were just a few of the estimated tens of thousands of victims of the brutally repressive anti-drugs policy implemented by former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte.
For years, people like Gito and Andrea have fought an often seemingly futile battle for justice for their loved ones even as local and international rights groups have detailed the horrific crimes committed under Duterte’s “war on drugs”.
But a recent hearing at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands, has given them, and others, hope that they could see justice.
Both Gito and Andrea, along with other relatives of people who were killed under Duterte’s violent crackdown on drug use, were at the Hague during confirmation hearings between February 23 and 27 to decide whether Duterte should stand trial on charges of crimes against humanity linked to his deadly anti-drug crackdown.
Launched in 2016, it remains one of the deadliest anti-narcotics campaigns in modern history, activists say. While official police figures show 6,252 people killed by May 2022, human rights groups estimate there could have been as many as 30,000 deaths, including vigilante-style executions.
The case against Duterte covers 49 incidents of alleged murder and attempted murder, involving 78 victims, including children. But prosecutors at the hearing said these incidents are only a fraction of the thousands of killings attributed to police and hired hitmen during Duterte’s anti-drug campaign.
At the trial the prosecution said that Duterte played a “pivotal” role in a campaign of extrajudicial killings that saw thousands murdered, alleging he personally drew up death lists, incited murders and then boasted about them afterwards.
The court was shown videos of Duterte threatening to murder alleged drug users and boasting of his own skills in extrajudicial killing.
Statements from victims’ relatives submitted at the trial also highlighted the devastating toll the repressive policy had taken on not just individual families but also wider communities which were already impoverished and marginalised.
Illegal drug use in impoverished communities was often a mechanism, the prosecution said when submitting witness testimony, to cope with terrible living conditions. They said victims’ marginalised and vulnerable conditions were exacerbated exponentially when targeted by police and that the campaign against them targeted their humanity.
The prosecution pointed out that victims were often killed in front of their families, usually in their homes and local neighbourhoods, which subsequently became crime scenes. Following the killings, the families were left with not just lasting personal trauma but stigma within their close-knit communities.
Meanwhile, by targeting marginalised groups, law enforcement authorities were specifically going after those who would be least likely to be able to file complaints in the domestic justice system, human rights lawyers at the hearing argued. They said this was calculated to ensure no one was held accountable ultimately for what happened.
Duterte’s defence claimed the 80-year-old did not issue specific orders to kill drug suspects as part of his policy to take down the illegal drug trade in the country. They said that what actions he took were within the law. Duterte himself waived his right to attend the hearing and said he does not recognise the court’s authority.
The ICC has 60 days in which to issue a decision on whether to proceed with the case against Duterte, ask for more evidence, or stop the process against him.
Activists who were at the trial have expressed hope that the case against him will go ahead.
“It was very clear that the prosecution had enough [evidence] to convince the judges that the case should proceed to trial.
“The truth of the matter is that the evidence presented by the prosecution was backed up by true narratives by witnesses and by families themselves who saw how their loved ones were killed,” Rowena Legaspi, spokesperson for the Philippine group In Defense of Rights and Dignity Movement (IDEFEND), told IPS.
Both Gito and Andrea said they were convinced of the strength of the evidence presented, although Gito admitted he feared Duterte might still somehow not be tried.
“This is a grave concern for me. There are fears around political interference or procedural issues that Duterte’s defence may raise in an attempt to stop the proceedings. But I also trust the ICC process and the sufficient documents they have,” he said.
Activists also see the fact that the confirmation hearings have taken place at all as a step towards justice for the victims of Duterte’s drug crackdown.
“For the families of the victims in the court and those watching back in the Philippines, this was like seeing light at the end of the dark day when Duterte was the president. Reaching this stage of confirmation charges continues to at least gradually break the pain that is embedded in them,” Legaspi added.
“This case moving to trial is a step towards healing for all of us,” said Andrea.
Campaigners also see it as essential to ongoing campaigning for justice in the Philippines.
For years, domestic institutions failed to deliver justice, local rights groups say, with findings by rights institutions stonewalled, courts offering no meaningful accountability, and families of victims silenced by fear.
And while Duterte’s arrest and transfer to The Hague was a breakthrough in itself, activists say. They also point out that at the same time, his allies at home continue to push immunity bills and resolutions questioning ICC jurisdiction.
IDEFEND said the hearings are a political and moral test of whether international law can pierce impunity and whether Filipino society will stand with victims against state-sanctioned violence and a litmus test of the Filipino people’s pursuit of accountability.
“Duterte’s arrest and the ICC process prove persistence matters. Leaders cannot forever hide behind power, sovereignty, or dynasties. The law may be slow, but history bends toward accountability when people insist on truth.
“This case is not just about putting Duterte on trial. It affirms that the lives lost — mostly the poor and voiceless — mattered. It restores dignity to families. It exposes the machinery of state violence. And it warns future leaders that mass killings will not be tolerated,” Legaspi said.
“It also challenges the culture of impunity shielding not just Duterte but also his enablers and successors. Senate resolutions, immunity bills, and denial campaigns show the fight is far from over. But every manoeuvre is proof of accountability’s power: they are afraid because truth is catching up,” she added.
Meanwhile, other drug policy reform campaigners say it serves as an example of the massive damage that can be caused by repressive drug policies and sends a strong signal to other leaders implementing similarly brutal, hardline anti-drug campaigns.
“The large-scale human rights violations committed under Duterte’s war on drugs – which have resulted in tens of thousands of extrajudicial killings – are one of the starkest examples of the devastating impacts of punitive drug policies. And the Philippines is not an isolated case. Around the world, lethal force continues to be justified in the name of drug control – mostly in contexts of entrenched impunity,” Marie Nougier, Head of Research and Communications at the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), told IPS.
“The decision by the International Criminal Court to pursue the case of Duterte sends an important signal: drug control cannot be used as a pretext for unlawful killings and the erosion of fundamental rights, and that political leaders are not beyond the reach of international law,” she added.
Back in the Philippines, the drug policies Duterte implemented remain in place and there continue to be drug-related killings, although not at the levels seen under Duterte.
And nearly a decade on from when Duterte’s hardline policies were introduced, only nine police officers have been convicted. Rights groups such as Human Rights Watch (HRW) say the vast majority of those responsible, including senior officials, have not faced any repercussions.
Legaspi said there have been some bills introduced by lawmakers on possible investigations of extrajudicial killings and discussion of treating drug use as a health issue rather than criminal and looking at harm-reduction measures to combat it.
She added, though, that Duterte’s drug policies had “an impact so huge that it continues to be felt to this day”.
Both Gito and Andrea said they were hopeful the hearings may bring about some change in the country’s drug policy.
In the meantime, though, both are waiting to see what the ICC decides and hoping for justice.
“For me, justice will be fully served when Duterte has been convicted and his co-perpetrators of the drug war have also been arrested, detained, and convicted. That is justice for me,” said Gito.
*Identity protected for their safety.
IPS UN Bureau Report
BRIGHTON, UK, Mar 17 2026 (IPS) - A massive expansion of AI-enabled surveillance of public spaces across Africa is violating citizens’ freedoms and the fundamental human right to privacy, warns a new report by the Institute of Development Studies.
African governments are paying billions of dollars to Chinese companies for so-called ‘smart city’ products for public space surveillance – including AI-enabled CCTV and control centres – with at least US$2 billion spent to date by the 11 African countries studied in the report.
The researchers stress that these sophisticated mass surveillance products are being rolled out across Africa without the robust legal frameworks needed to protect human rights. They warn that this lack of protection, coupled with the increased capacity and scale of the smart city mass surveillance leaves government critics, such as the political opposition and independent journalists, at high risk of being tracked and targeted by the state.
The report cites concerns across each of the countries studied. For example, in Zimbabwe, specific groups and government critics fear that facial recognition technologies are used to target them. In Mozambique, research finds that the smart CCTV cameras have been deployed in locations where political opposition is concentrated.
Nigeria is Africa’s largest consumer of Chinese mass surveillance technology, with over US$470 million to date spent on facial recognition and automatic car number plate recognition (ANPR). Mauritius was the second largest buyer out of the 11 African countries studied, spending US$456m, and Kenya the third largest with a spend of US$219m on smart city surveillance technology.
The research reveals that while several countries, including Korea, Israel and the USA, supply public space surveillance technologies, the vast majority of the mass smart city surveillance products used across Africa are supplied and funded by Chinese companies.
Dr Tony Roberts, independent digital rights researcher and co-author of the report, says: “Our new research shows that the rapid growth of smart city surveillance in Africa is occurring without adequate legal regulation or oversight. Unregulated surveillance creates a chilling effect that inhibits the right to peaceful protest and reduces the freedom to speak truth to power and hold governments to account.”
“Digital surveillance of terrorists and the most serious criminals can be justified in the public interest, but installing thousands of smart CCTV cameras for the mass surveillance of all citizens – suspected of no crime – violates important human rights.”
The report details that mass surveillance of public space via smart city technology is being introduced across Africa under the pretence of preventing terrorism or crime, but the researchers found no compelling evidence that the imposing of smart surveillance has led to any reduction in terrorism or serious crime. They also found mass surveillance of public space using smart city technology being used even in countries like Zambia and Senegal that have no terrorist threat or serious crime challenges.
Wairagala Wakabi, Executive Director, CIPESA and co-author of the report, said: “These so-called ‘smart city’ surveillance products are anything but smart for those at risk of being tracked and targeted by them.
“This large scale and invasive AI-enabled surveillance of public spaces is not ‘legal, necessary or proportionate’ to the legitimate aim of providing security. Instead, history shows us that this is the latest tool used by governments to invade the privacy of citizens and stifle freedom of movement and expression.”
“The recording, analysing, and retaining of facial images of individuals in public spaces without their consent interferes with their right to privacy. We need governments to be fully transparent about their procurement and use of smart city technology and ensure that the impacts on human rights have been fully assessed and shared with the public.”
The report was authored by researchers from the African Digital Rights Network and provides the most comprehensive analysis of the use of ‘smart’ city technology in 11 African countries: Algeria, Egypt, Kenya, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
Footnote:
At least US$2 billion expenditure on facial recognition and car tracking technologies in 11 countries. The real total is certainly higher because (1) surveillance spending is often secret; (2) no figures were available for two of the 11 countries studied; (3) the public accounts for the other nine countries were incomplete; and (4) this study included only 11 of Africa’s 55 countries.
The African Digital Rights Network is a network of 50 activists, analysts and academics from 20 African countries who are focused on the study of digital citizenship, surveillance and disinformation. It is convened by the Institute of Development Studies (IDS). For further information visit www.africandigitalrightsnetwork.org
The Institute of Development Studies (IDS) delivers world-class research, learning and teaching that transforms the knowledge, action and leadership needed for more equitable and sustainable development globally. IDS, in partnership with the University of Sussex, has been named best in the world for Development Studies in the QS World University Rankings by Subject 2025 for the ninth year in a row.
IPS UN Bureau
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 17 2026 (IPS) - The 70th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW70) has brought together global leaders, gender equity advocates, and youth representatives at the United Nations (UN) Headquarters to advance efforts to strengthen mechanisms for justice, equality, and representation for women and girls worldwide. With challenges particularly pronounced in conflict zones, this year’s priority theme —“ensuring and strengthening access to justice for all women and girls — focuses on repealing discriminatory laws and addressing persistent structural barriers that prevent women and girls from being fully heard, represented, and treated equally.
At the opening of the session in March 9, the CSW adopted its Agreed Conclusions, which emphasized the need to improve access to justice for women and girls, following a week of spirited discussions among member states. During these discussions, several countries, including the United States, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, and Russia, proposed objections in which they sought to modify language that strongly supported these reforms and to revisit provisions from previous agreements.
These efforts elicited significant pushback from other member states, who argued that such objections would undermine years of progress in gender equity reforms. The Chair of the CSW ultimately decided to preserve some core elements of previous agreements while incorporating progressive changes.
As the Commission convened to adopt the outcome, efforts to halt these changes were brought forward by the U.S., which argued that the provisions included “controversial” and “ideological” issues. These efforts ultimately failed, gaining votes from only the U.S. Other states, including Egypt and Nigeria, called for a delay in the voting process to allow time for continued negotiations.
“At a time of severe backlash on human rights and multilateralism, the adoption of Agreed Conclusions that safeguard long-standing gender equality standards is a powerful signal that global commitments still matter and that attempts to turn back the clock will not go unchallenged,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.
“While the loss of consensus is disappointing, a weakened text – or no outcome at all – would have sent an especially troubling signal to women and girls who continue to face barriers to access to justice, and multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. In a climate marked by widespread impunity, Amnesty reiterates its calls on states to step up resistance to attacks on gender justice,” added Callamard.
Women currently hold only about 64 percent of the legal rights afforded to men, with “discriminatory laws and patriarchal norms” continuing to impede progress towards justice. These disparities are particularly pronounced in conflict settings, where women and girls face heightened risks of violence, displacement, and exclusion from justice, opportunities, and decision-making.
“We meet at a time of multiple global crises, peace eludes us, and the world is extremely and increasingly fragmented. And gender inequality is compounded by the evils of war and conflict, from Afghanistan to Haiti, to Iran, Myanmar, Palestine, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Yemen, and beyond,” said UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous at the opening of the 70th session of the CSW. “When women and girls are denied justice, the damage goes far beyond any single case: it impacts the very fabric of our societies and good governance. Public trust erodes, institutions lose legitimacy, and the rule of law itself is weakened. A justice system that fails half the population cannot claim to uphold justice at all.”
Legal protections from discrimination and exploitation, and access to essential services are rapidly eroding, while female human rights defenders are increasingly under attack. Sexual and reproductive health rights are also being rolled back, and the UN has recorded an 87 percent increase in cases of conflict-related sexual violence over the past two years. Women and children in conflict zones continue to bear the heaviest burdens of violence and displacement. Currently, the number of women and girls living within 50 kilometers of deadly conflict is at its highest level in decades.
In commemoration of CSW70, IPS spoke with Anna, a 20 year-old Ukrainian activist and member of the UNICEF Global Girl Leaders Advisory Group. This initiative brings together 14 adolescent girl leaders from around the world who work to ensure that the perspectives of women and girls are represented in global decision-making, and present recommendations directly to the UNICEF Executive Board.
Anna was a teenager studying abroad when the conflict in Ukraine erupted, and was unable to return home to her family near the border. Since then, she has experienced significant challenges as a result of the war, compounded by limited access to essential services, such as education and psychosocial support, many of which have been disrupted or placed under strain by the war.
“When war begins, the changes in society are immediate and visible,” said Anna. “Frontlines move, cities are destroyed, and millions of people are forced to leave their homes. When many men go to the front, women often become the pillars holding communities together – running local initiatives, leading volunteer networks, managing businesses, and supporting families.”
Such shifts also bring structural struggles, as many women are forced to leave their homes and move with their children or elderly relatives. Such displacement can cause loneliness and uncertainty, Anna explained. While women take on more responsibility, inequality does not disappear. “Women still face salary gaps, stereotypes about leadership, and the expectation that they should both rebuild society and quietly carry the emotional labor of caring for everyone else. Stopping to fully process everything can feel impossible, because another responsibility, another task, or another crisis immediately takes its place.”
Anna speaking at a UNICEF-supported event dedicated to discussing the challenges and solutions for girls and young women in Ukraine who are not in education, employment or training. Credit: ISAR Ednannia /Serhii Piriev
In Ukraine today, roughly 32 percent of women aged 20-24 and nearly 49 percent of women aged 25-29 are left without access to education, employment, or training, compared to about 16.4 percent and 12.2 percent of men in the same age groups, respectively. In times of conflict, women are often the first to lose these opportunities and the last to regain them. Education for girls is often hardest-hit, as families are displaced and conflicts leave girls to take on added responsibilities to their families and support household incomes. Many are forced to drop out of school to keep their families afloat.
“My own educational journey has been deeply shaped by war. I was first displaced to Poland, and when I returned to Kharkiv for my senior year, continuing my studies was far from easy,” said Anna. “I consider myself incredibly privileged. I had a supportive family that believed in me and helped me keep going. But not every girl has that kind of support system – someone to catch her when she begins to fall behind.”
Additionally, the psychosocial strain of conflict and violence often leaves girls ill-equipped to engage in studies or training programs. With mechanisms for justice, healing, and empowerment for women and girls under attack, these challenges often go unheard, and impunity for sexual violence and abuse persists, leaving girls carrying significant amounts of trauma, anxiety, depression, and fear.
“Girls in crisis often carry a kind of psychological burden that is both invisible and personal – it is not only the direct exposure to violence, but the way war quietly settles into everyday life and into the body,” said Anna. “For many women and girls living near conflict zones, mental health is shaped by the constant proximity to violence. “You wake up, check the news, hear another siren, and feel what we call in Ukrainian a ‘ком в горлі’,’ or a lump in the throat.”
Sexual violence is particularly rampant near conflict zones, with Anna noting a persistent “climate of fear that reaches every woman who hears the story”. She added that many girls in Ukraine grow up with the knowledge that their bodies can become targets of violence. While girls are in school, studying for exams, or volunteering, many carry the awareness that women nearby have endured “unimaginable violence”.
According to a UN report, nearly 54 percent of surveyed countries reported having laws that do not correlate rape with the basis of consent, and roughly 75 percent of surveyed countries have laws that permit the forced marriage of a girl child. Additionally, 44 percent of countries lack laws that guarantee equal pay for women and girls. It is estimated that it could take 286 years to eliminate these gaps.
“The justice women and girls deserve, that is theirs by right, cannot wait. We must collectively pursue it, here at the United Nations, in our national laws and policies, in your court rooms and traditional justice mechanisms. In doing so, we must engage all of society, including men and boys and young people, to contribute to our collective effort for equality,” said Bahous.
IPS UN Bureau Report
LONDON, Mar 16 2026 (IPS) - Once again, global oil prices are spiking, driven by the Israeli-US war against Iran. With Iran retaliating by attacking infrastructure and transport hubs and blocking the Strait of Hormuz, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil passes, oil supplies from the region are being choked, pushing up prices. The cost of a barrel of Brent crude – the international benchmark for oil prices – stood at US$73 before the conflict but has surged beyond US$100 since. It could go higher still as war continues.
The impacts are already being felt when drivers fill up their petrol- and diesel-powered vehicles. But they go much wider. Bigger household energy bills will likely result, while businesses will pass on their increased costs in the form of higher prices. Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine sent oil prices soaring and sparked a global cost-of-living crisis, and now, as many economies seemed to be recovering, the war in the Gulf has brought another shock. Impacts could be political as well as financial: in numerous countries, the cost-of-living crisis helped drive voters towards right-wing populist and nationalist politicians. Recent years have seen Gen Z-led protests erupt in countries around the world, fuelled in part by young people’s anger at failing economies.
In a world increasingly characterised by conflict and with powerful states tearing up the international rulebook in pursuit of material interests, more oil shocks and big economic and political impacts seem inevitable. Governments typically react with economic policies that fail to protect those with the least, and by meeting political unrest with repression. They should consider another way.
The world will remain vulnerable to oil price shocks only for as long as it stays dependent on oil. The climate crisis compels a rapid move away from fossil fuel dependency to abate the worst impacts of global heating. Increasingly, this should also be seen as a matter of economic and political security.
Some steps have been taken in the right direction. Renewables now provide over 30 per cent of global electricity. Investments in renewables more than double those in fossil fuels. But fossil fuel companies have immense power and are determined not to give it up. That was reflected in the fact that 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists attended the latest global climate summit, COP30 in Brazil, and succeeded in preventing any new commitment to end fossil fuel extraction. Their power is shown in the lawsuit an oil company brought against Greenpeace, leading to a widely criticised trial in North Dakota, USA, with the campaigning organisation facing a punitive US$345 million damages bill. Their influence was reaffirmed by Donald Trump’s election win, after a campaign in which fossil fuel companies gave US$450 million in donations to Trump and his allies – and they were rewarded by US intervention in Venezuela.
Fossil fuel companies are determined to hold back the tide of renewables for as long as possible, because every day of delay is another day of profit, even though every fraction of a degree of temperature rise means avoidable suffering for millions of people. Delay is the new climate denial.
As the latest State of Civil Society Report points out, civil society’s working to make the difference, urging governments to hasten the transition and calling on global north states to make funding available for global south states to decarbonise and adapt to climate impacts. Civil society is exposing the environmental devastation caused by extraction and the complicity of fossil fuel companies in human rights abuses. Its strategies include advocacy, public campaigning, protests, direct action and, increasingly, litigation.
In 2025, climate litigation scored some big successes. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an unprecedented advisory opinion, ruling that states have a legal duty to prevent environmental harm, which requires them to mitigate emissions and adapt to climate change. This victory originated in civil society: in 2019, student groups from eight countries formed the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change network to persuade their governments to seek an ICJ ruling.
Following extensive civil society engagement, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a similar ruling. The African Court for Human and Peoples’ Rights is set to issue its advisory opinion following a petition brought by the African Climate Platform, a civil society coalition.
These rulings can seem symbolic, but they strengthen national-level efforts to hold states and corporations accountable. These have paid off recently too. In 2025, two South African groups stopped an offshore oil project after a court found its environmental assessments were deeply flawed. More litigation is coming, including in New Zealand, where civil society has filed a lawsuit after the government weakened its emissions reduction plan.
But civil society faces a backlash. Around the world, climate and environmental activists and their allies, Indigenous and land rights defenders, experience severe state and corporate repression.
Last year in Uganda, authorities arrested 11 activists for protesting against the construction of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline. In Peru, police used teargas and non-lethal weapons against people blocking a road to protest against a mine. In Cambodia, five young activists from the Mother Nature environmental group have been in jail since July 2024.
The French government has repeatedly vilified environmental campaigners and deployed police violence against protests, while last year the German government launched an inquiry into public funding of environmental groups and the Dutch parliament adopted a motion condemning Extinction Rebellion and urging the removal of its tax-exempt status.
As the latest oil price shocks reverberate around the global economy, governments should learn the lessons. As economies deteriorate, the temptation will be to say that transition is a luxury, something that can be put off even further. This is the wrong lesson: recent research in the UK suggests that the cost of achieving net zero will be about the same as the cost of another oil price crisis. Economic and political security lies in ending fossil fuel dependency as quickly as possible. To learn the right lessons, governments should stop repressing climate activism and instead listen to and work with civil society.
Andrew Firmin isCIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.
For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org
BANGKOK, Thailand, Mar 16 2026 (IPS) - Access to adequate housing is a foundation of resilient cities. Safe and affordable homes provide stability, allow residents to access essential services, and enhance the capacity for communities to withstand and recover from shocks. Yet housing is often treated as a downstream outcome of urban development or disaster recovery rather than as a strategic investment in resilience.
The Asia and the Pacific SDG Progress Report 2026 delivers a stark warning. The region is not on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, and 88 per cent of measurable targets are projected to be missed by 2030 at the current pace. Progress across SDG 11 indicators reflects mixed trends. While some indicators show improvement, disaster losses and infrastructure damage continue to rise.
This widening gap between policy commitments and real-world outcomes exposes a growing resilience deficit in urban systems. Accelerating progress on SDG Target 11.1, which calls for access to adequate, safe and affordable housing and the upgrading of informal settlements, will be critical to reducing urban vulnerability across Asia and the Pacific.
Regional dialogue increasingly reflects this shift toward translating policy commitments into concrete action that reduces urban vulnerability. Discussions at the 13th Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development in 2026 and statements at the eighty-first session of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, held under the theme resilient and sustainable urban development for regional cooperation, highlighted housing affordability, informal settlements and climate-resilient housing as growing policy priorities requiring stronger action at the city level.
Across Asia and the Pacific, around 700 million people, nearly one-third of the region’s urban population, live in informal settlements – many located in hazard-prone areas exposed to flooding, extreme heat, landslides and sea-level rise.
Urban informality reflects deeper structural weaknesses in urban systems, such as gaps in land governance, planning frameworks and service delivery, concentrating climate risks in the same neighbourhoods where housing conditions are most fragile.
Urban vulnerability is shaped by the way cities are built and governed. Unplanned development, weak land-use systems and inadequate housing expose millions of urban residents to climate hazards and disaster risks. In informal settlements, these risks intensify through substandard construction, overcrowding, and limited access to water and sanitation.
Climate change further amplifies these vulnerabilities as flooding, extreme heat, water insecurity, land subsidence and air pollution interact through fragile urban systems.
Evidence also shows that improving housing conditions generates broad development gains. Habitat for Humanity’s research indicates that large-scale upgrading of informal settlements could raise GDP per capita by up to 10 per cent and increase life expectancy by four percent.
Within just one year, housing improvements could prevent more than 20 million illnesses, avert nearly 43 million incidents of gender-based violence, and avoid around 80,000 deaths. These findings highlight that expanding affordable housing and upgrading informal settlements are critical investments in climate adaptation, public health and inclusive development.
A shared but differentiated responsibility
To realign SDG trajectories and move the region closer to a resilient urban future, housing must be understood as a core component of the urban system. Achieving this requires coordinated action across governments, the private sector and civil society.
Governments: From pilot projects to systemic guarantees
Governments must anchor climate-resilient and adequate housing as a national priority, embedding secure tenure, resilient housing and informal settlement upgrading within urban development, climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction strategies. Regulatory frameworks should enable participatory and in-situ upgrading and community-led tenure solutions that allow residents to invest in climate-resilient housing improvements.
Private sector: From speculative value to resilient value
The private sector can help scale resilient housing solutions by mobilizing blended finance that combines guarantees, concessional capital and private investment. These mechanisms can support incremental home improvements, affordable rental supply and climate-resilient retrofits. Companies can also prioritize locally sourced, low-carbon materials and passive design solutions such as cool roofs, insulation and cross-ventilation suited to tropical cities.
Civil society and academia: From isolated initiatives to knowledge-powered coalitions
Civil society and academic institutions play an essential role in co-producing evidence and solutions with communities. This includes exploring nature-based approaches in informal settlements and ensuring policies reflect lived realities on the ground. They also help hold institutions accountable to SDG 11 and climate justice by tracking progress on Target 11.1 and ensuring policies and investments prioritize the most vulnerable.
Housing will shape the region’s urban resilience
The future of urban resilience in Asia and the Pacific will largely be determined in its informal neighbourhoods. If current trends continue, millions more families will be pushed into precarious and hazard-exposed housing. Aligning housing policy with climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction and inclusive urban governance therefore offers one of the most powerful pathways to accelerate SDG 11 and strengthen resilience across the region.
Sanjeevani Singh is Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP; Enid Madarcos is Associate Director for Urban, Land and Policy, Habitat for Humanity International (Asia-Pacific)
IPS UN Bureau
ABUJA, Nigeria, Mar 16 2026 (IPS) - The Aba Women’s Riots of 1929 remain one of the most powerful demonstrations of Nigerian women’s collective resistance. Thousands of market women, farmers, traders, and mothers mobilized across districts in the then Eastern Nigeria to challenge colonial taxation and the extension of warrant chiefs’ authority over their lives. They organized without formal structures and without institutional support.
And yet, they achieved national disruption and forced policy change. When we contrast that era with the landscape of women’s movements today, the differences reveal both how far we have come and what we may have forgotten.
The Aba Women’s Riots were not only a gendered uprising but also a class struggle rooted in the economic exploitation and social restructuring imposed by colonial capitalism. A socialist point of view helps to reveal how colonial rule reshaped relations of production and imposed new class hierarchies that women directly resisted.
Deborah Eli Yusuf Tinam
The mikiri (also known as women’s meetings or associations) were regular assemblies of married women within a community. These networks coordinated economic activity—such as market regulation, collective labour, and mutual aid—and served as forums for political discussion and mobilisation.
British indirect rule dismantled these structures and replaced them with male warrant chiefs, male tax officials, male-controlled courts, and the exclusion of women from any form of decision-making. This represented a patriarchal restructuring of society, in which the colonial state elevated men—especially those who collaborated as local agents of imperial power.
Colonialism did not simply exploit labour; it re-organized gender relations in ways that made women’s labour easier to extract and less politically defended. Thus, the British colonial rule, contrary to the false claim that it helped “democratise” countries or “liberate” women, imposed a system that elevated patriarchy to new heights, so as to serve its interests.
The Abia Women’s Riot of 1929, also known as the Aba Women’s War, was a major protest by women against British colonial rule in southeastern Nigeria. It took place mainly in Aba and the surrounding areas in present-day Abia State.
The protest began in Oloko near Aba after a woman named Nwanyeruwa was questioned by a colonial agent. She informed other women, and soon thousands of women came together to protest. They marched, sang protest songs, and surrounded native courts and the homes of warrant chiefs. They aimed to stop taxation and remove corrupt leaders.
During the two-month “war” at least 25,000 Igbo women were involved in protests against British officials. Thousands of Igbo women congregated at the Native Administration centers in Calabar and Owerri as well as smaller towns to protest both the warrant chiefs and the taxes on the market women.
Using the traditional practice of censoring men through all-night song and dance ridicule (often called “sitting on a man”), the women chanted and danced, and in some locations forced warrant chiefs to resign their positions.
The women also attacked European-owned stores and Barclays Bank and broke into prisons and released prisoners. They also attacked Native Courts run by colonial officials, burning many of them to the ground. Colonial Police and troops were called in. They fired into the crowds that had gathered at Calabar and Owerri, killing more than 50 women and wounding over 50 others. During the two-month “war” at least 25,000 Igbo women were involved in protests against British officials.
Amid the chaos stood Adiaha Adam Udo Udoma, who seized the British officer’s rifle, and in a moment, etched into legend, broke it across a fearless act became a lasting symbol of defiance by the end of the uprising at least 50 women, including Udo Odoma were killed and many more were wounded still the movement endured but the British colonial authority responded with force, and many women were killed and injured.
Despite this, the protest was successful. The colonial government stopped plans to tax women and removed some warrant chiefs. The Abia Women’s Riot remains an important event in Nigerian history. It shows the courage, unity, and strength of women in the fight against injustice and colonial oppression.
One of the first challenges the Aba women faced—one that is no longer as present today—was the complete absence of political recognition. Women at the time were excluded from formal governance; they were not seen as political actors and did not vote (men acquired voting rights earlier than women, although also under restrictions). Their mobilisation first had to assert their political personhood before demanding anything else.
Today, Nigerian women still face underrepresentation, but they are at least acknowledged participants in political discourse. Policies, ministries, gender desks, and advocacy platforms exist, even if imperfectly, and women can push for reforms through both formal and grassroots channels.
Another challenge that women in 1929 had to navigate was communication across vast distances without literacy or technology. They relied on networks, songs, messengers, and market alliances to coordinate action. Today’s organisers benefit from social media, digital advocacy, and rapid mobilisation tools that reduce logistical barriers and amplify voices far beyond local communities.
There are enduring lessons in the way the Aba women mobilised. Their movement was deeply community-rooted; they were not elites speaking on behalf of the masses—they were the masses. Their power came from collective legitimacy, a shared grievance, and a clear strategy that everyone understood.
They also practiced what was essentially feminist organising: solidarity across clans, a refusal to centre individual leaders, and a commitment to nonviolence—until they faced violent repression by colonial forces. Modern movements sometimes struggle with fragmentation, internal rivalry, and the pressure to elevate individual faces rather than collective goals.
In many ways, today’s women’s movements also struggle under the weight of constant “activist trainings”, frameworks, and Western-influenced bourgeois toolkits that can dilute the very agency they are meant to strengthen.
Activism has gradually become “professionalized,” and while capacity-building has its place, it can unintentionally create dependence on external validation before women feel confident enough to act. The Aba women did not wait for workshops on movement-building, advocacy strategy, or leadership; they mobilised because the urgency of their lived experience demanded it. Their power was organic, instinctive, and rooted in shared realities.
When modern movements become overly shaped by imported bourgeois methodologies, they risk losing that raw, community-driven energy that once made women’s uprisings so transformative.
Unlike in 1929, contemporary advocacy now leans heavily on digital spaces, which can distance organisers from rural women whose realities mirror those of the 1929 protesters more than those of urban inhabitants. For example, NGO debates on gender equality frequently centre urban issues—career mobility, political appointments, digital violence—while rural women still grapple with land rights, market taxation, displacement, and insecure livelihoods.
Earlier movements would likely have pushed for deeper integration of rural women’s priorities, since their strength came from women who understood each other’s economic struggles firsthand. Another gap is sustainability. Many modern protests surge in moments of crisis but lose momentum afterwards.
The Aba women maintained long-term pressure because their grievances were tied to everyday survival; they did not have the luxury of moving on. Their consistency and clarity offer a model for building movements that do not fade once headlines end.
Ultimately, if modern women’s movements in Nigeria are to reclaim their power, they must return to the grassroots, where realities are raw, urgent, and unfiltered. Rural women, who often carry the heaviest burdens, should not be an afterthought; they should be the starting point.
And while international support has played a role in pushing gender issues forward, movements should not be dependent on it. The Women’s War of 1929 illustrates how colonial capitalism relied on patriarchy to function, and how women’s oppression was foundational to the colonial economy.
Too many actions today feel cosmetic—grand displays without the heat of real rage or the conviction to disrupt the system in a meaningful way. To move beyond this, organising must be bold, provocative, and grounded in lived experience. Only then can women’s movements break free from inherited templates and reclaim the fearless, self-determined spirit that once defined women’s resistance in this country.
This is the way to place themselves at the forefront of the struggle to dismantle capitalism and patriarchy and establish an egalitarian socialist society.
Deborah Eli Yusuf Tinam, is a development worker, political commentator, and political economy and history enthusiast working at the intersection of peacebuilding, gender equality, youth development and governance. She holds a Master’s degree in International Affairs and Strategic Studies from the Nigerian Defence Academy and has a background in Journalism from Ahmadu Bello University. She is the Vice President of the Young Urban Women Movement Nigeria, a member of RevolutionNow and previously served as the North Central Coordinator of the Take it Back Movement Nigeria.
IPS UN Bureau