Category Archives: global

Around the World, Global Solidarity and Cooperation Are Remarkably Popular

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An essay by Lawrence Wittner in Foreign Policy in Focus

One of the curious ironies of our time is that, although many politicians spout heated nationalist rhetoric, rail against foreign nations, and belittle international cooperation, this approach to international affairs is not at all what most people want.

The climate of aggressive nationalism is clear enough. In nations around the globe, demagogues (usually of a rightwing variety) whip up xenophobia, preach superpatriotism, demand vast military buildups, and―if holding public office―often launch invasions of other nations under the banner of restoring an allegedly glorious national past.

But what is often overlooked is that, across the planet, most people favor a very different way of engaging with the world.

In late 2025, Focaldata, a major research company commissioned by the Rockefeller Foundation, conducted a landmark survey of 36,405 people across 34 countries. The resulting report, Demanding Results: Global Views on International Cooperation, revealed that 55 percent of people worldwide “believe their country should cooperate on global challenges even if it means compromising on national interests.” If international cooperation was proven to solve global problems, public support jumped to 75 percent. Respondents viewed such cooperation as essential for food and water security, jobs, health, trade, and climate.

Other opinion surveys confirm the widespread nature of internationalist sentiment. An Ipsos poll conducted between February and April 2026 found a substantial increase over the previous year in support for global solidarity and cooperation, with net disagreement shifting to net agreement. Among the more than 22,000 adults in the 31 countries surveyed, nearly two-thirds now supported the claim that, “for certain problems, like environmental pollution, international bodies should have the right to enforce solutions.” Some 42 percent (a plurality) agreed with the idea that “my taxes should go towards solving global problems.” And nearly four out of 10 respondents (a plurality) endorsed the statement: “I consider myself more a world citizen than a citizen of the country I live in.”

Another measure of the worldwide support for international cooperation is provided by polling on public attitudes toward international organizations. The Rockefeller Foundation-Focaldata study reported that public trust was strong for the United Nations (58 percent) and the World Health Organization (60 percent), although weaker for international financial institutions. The global popularity of the United Nations was also attested to by a Pew Research Center survey that appeared in September 2025. Covering 31,938 adults in 25 countries, it found that a median of 61 percent of adults had a favorable view of the world organization, while only 32 percent had an unfavorable one.

Even proposals for new, avant-garde global institutions have attracted more public support than opposition. Commissioned by Democracy Without Borders, Nira Data conducted a global survey in September 2025 of public attitudes toward the election of a citizen-elected world parliament to handle global issues. The survey, released in January 2026, drew upon 117,000 people in 101 countries that held 90 percent of the world’s population. The finding was that 40 percent of respondents approved of the world parliament idea, while only 27 percent opposed it.

(Article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:


How can we develop the institutional framework for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

But what about the United States? Surely in this flag-waving nation, engulfed in the rabid “America First” rhetoric of the Trump administration and its MAGA acolytes, no more than a small minority would support the ideals of global solidarity and cooperation.

But that’s not the case at all.

One of the most striking findings of the Rockefeller Foundation-Focaldata survey is that 61 percent of U.S. respondents believed that the United States should cooperate on global challenges even it meant compromising on some national interests.

When it came to the United Nations, the Pew Research Center report revealed that 57 percent of Americans held a positive view of the world organization, as compared to 41 percent with a negative one. Moreover, it found that positive views of the United Nations had increased by 5 percent over the preceding year.

A study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, issued in September 2025, reported an even more favorable public attitude toward the United Nations. Two-thirds of the Americans surveyed, it noted, said that the United States should be more willing to make decisions within the framework of the United Nations, even if this meant that the country would sometimes have to go along with a policy that was not its first choice.

Admittedly, opinion surveys found that the level of support for international cooperation varied significantly from country to country. Thus, for example, the backing for international cooperation when that meant compromising on some national interests was greater in India (81 percent) and South Korea (73 percent), the countries highest on the scale, than in Argentina (41 percent) and Japan (34 percent), the countries at the bottom of the scale.

Furthermore, there was often a political dimension to worldwide public attitudes toward foreign affairs. According to the Pew Research Center, “people who place themselves on the left of the ideological spectrum are more likely than those on the right to have a positive view of the UN.”

This political division was particularly wide in the United States, where, as the Pew report maintained, “81 percent of liberals―versus 34 percent of conservatives―have a favorable opinion” of the United Nations. When it came to the issue of support for cooperation with other nations, the surveys by Rockefeller-Focaldata and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs both found substantial differences between the attitudes of Democrats (quite positive) and Republicans (far more negative).

Even so, in most countries, including the United States, support for international solidarity and cooperation is very substantial, and growing. Consequently, political activists and politicians shouldn’t be reluctant to speak out for them. Indeed, given the popularity of this internationalist approach to global affairs, it might even prove a winning political issue.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, global, United Nations,

Labor Unions Celebrate World Court Ruling Enshrining Right to Strike

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article by Marjorie Cohn from Truthout (licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).

The right to strike is under attack throughout the world, including in the United States. Labor strikes are currently forbidden or restricted in the majority of countries.

Now, in a landmark 43-page advisory opinion  issued May 21, the International Court of Justice (ICJ, or World Court) has determined that the right to strike is protected under the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise.


Bank employees and members of various trade unions gather at Azad Maidan as part of a nationwide Bharat Bandh, or general strike, on February 12, 2026, in Mumbai, India.

“At a moment when workers’ organizations face sustained attacks around the world, this opinion reaffirms that the freedom to withhold one’s labor is not a privilege granted by the powerful, but a fundamental human right grounded in international law,” AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler said in a statement.

The ILO  is the United Nations agency that sets global labor standards. It has 187 member states and has adopted 191 conventions since its founding in 1919. The ILO considers Convention No. 87 to be one of its 11 fundamental conventions.

In 2023, the ILO asked the ICJ to settle an internal dispute  about whether Convention No. 87 gives workers the right to strike, which is not specifically addressed in the convention. Although advisory opinions of the ICJ are not legally binding, many courts accept them as authoritative legal decisions.

The ICJ ruled in its 10-4 opinion that a strike “is one of the main activities engaged in and tools used by workers and their organizations to promote their interests and improve conditions of labour, thereby ensuring the effective exercise of the freedom of association protected under Convention No. 87.”

The Court found “that protection of the right to strike is encompassed in the protection of the freedom of association provided for in Convention No. 87.”

In reaching that conclusion, the Court considered provisions in two 1996 Covenants that contain relevant rules of international law regarding the right to strike. Both refer to Convention No. 87.

Article 8, paragraph 1 (d) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights  (ICESCR) expressly protects the right to strike, if it is exercised in conformity with domestic laws.

Article 22, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights  (ICCPR) provides for the right to freedom of association. The ICJ noted that for more than 25 years, the Human Rights Committee — which monitors the implementation of the ICCPR — has considered the right to strike to be encompassed in the protection of freedom of association.

Due to the high degree of overlap between the states parties to the ICESCR and ICCPR, and Convention No. 87, the ICJ determined there was a common understanding among them on the right to strike. The Court thus concluded “that an interpretation taking into account the relevant rules of international law contained in the ICESCR and the ICCPR indicates that the protection of the right to strike is encompassed in the protection of the freedom of association provided by Convention No. 87.”

No Right to Organize Without the Right to Strike

“For generations, working people have understood a simple truth: The freedom to join a union means nothing if you cannot withhold your labor when bosses refuse to listen. Now, the world’s highest court has affirmed that truth,” said Jeffrey Vogt, director of the International Lawyers Assisting Workers (ILAW) Network, which issued the call for the ILO referral of this case to the ICJ.

The ICJ decision “affirms decades of judicial precedent and what workers around the world know: there is no right to organize and bargain collectively without the right to strike,” Shuler said in her statement. “When workers are barred from taking collective action on the job, they cannot defend their rights and demand the workplace conditions and contracts they are owed. The freedom to join a union becomes an empty formality.”

“This is an important day for the International Labor Organization [ILO], and for its continued relevance in the world of work. However, the significance of this opinion extends well beyond the institutional context in Geneva,” the ILAW Network wrote in a statement.

The ICJ advisory opinion came “at a moment of acute pressure on the international labour rights system,” ILAW stated. “Across the world, the right to strike is under sustained attack — through restrictive legislation, expansive judicial interpretation of essential services, the criminalisation of trade union activity, and the use of dismissals, injunctions, and damages claims to deter collective action.”

Legal restrictions on the right to strike are increasing. In 2022, strikes were outlawed or stringently restricted in 129 of the 148 countries tallied by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), one of the six organizations with consultative status at the ILO Governing Body.

The ITUC, which represents 191 million workers in 169 countries and territories, is dedicated to trade union democracy and independence. It has regional organizations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The ICJ decision “is important not only for workers and trade unions, but also for governments and responsible businesses,” ITUC stressed.

This decision “will serve as a powerful interpretive tool before national constitutional and labour courts, before regional human rights bodies, and before the ILO’s own supervisory bodies,” ILAW noted. “It strengthens the hand of every worker and union challenging strike bans, broad essential-services designations, criminal sanctions against strikers, prohibitions on solidarity and political strikes, and the dismissal and blacklisting of workers who exercise this right.”

(article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
What is the contribution of trade unions to the culture of peace?

(article continued from left column)

Ruling Will Affect Tens of Millions of Workers

In October, 18 countries and five international organizations, including the ILO, presented oral testimony before the ICJ, and other nations filed written contributions. The majority of participants supported the right to strike, which is guaranteed in most European countries.

Bolivian miners march through La Paz on May 31, 2026 in opposition to the austerity policies of President Rodrigo Paz. (Photo by COB Central Obrera Boliviana/Facebook) From Common Dreams re-publication of this article.

Harold Koh, who represented the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) before the ICJ, told the judges that the case would “affect the real rights of tens of millions of working people around the world.” If the Court ruled that the Convention didn’t protect the right to strike, Koh warned, “National employer groups would contest the right to strike country by country, focusing first on nations with compliant courts, weak civil societies and ineffective media.”

Jeffrey Vogt worked with the legal team of the ITUC on the briefs and oral arguments presented to the ICJ. Vogt’s co-authored book, The Right to Strike in International Law, provided a legal roadmap for the case.

Vogt told Truthout that “the written view of the U.S. (under the Biden administration) was to support the right to strike, albeit on narrower grounds than what we had argued. When the Trump administration came in, they withdrew the Biden era brief but fortunately did not appear for oral arguments and take a contrary view.”

“The decision deals with the right to strike in the abstract — does the convention protect it — but does not go into the modalities,” Vogt added. The Court wrote that its “conclusion that the right to strike is protected by Convention No. 87 does not entail any determination on the precise content, scope, or conditions for the exercise of that right.”

“That was a conscious decision,” Vogt noted. “We did not want the court to attempt to define the scope, especially since we believe that is the proper role of the ILO supervisory system.” Vogt said that “the ICJ gave ‘great weight’ to the views of the supervisory system, which is helpful.” And although “the ILO has supported secondary strikes,” in which workers strike in solidarity with other workers at a different employer, the ICJ decision didn’t opine on that specific issue.

The Right to Strike in the U.S.

“The right to withhold one’s labor, inherent in the right to strike, belongs to all workers, but it has been restricted,” Jeanne Mirer, a labor lawyer in private practice working with the International Commission for Labor Rights, told Truthout. “Many unions have agreed never to strike while a collective bargaining agreement is in effect.”

Most private sector workers in the U.S. have the right to strike under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Employees, including international and undocumented workers, cannot be fired or disciplined for participating in a lawful strike.

“Those exempted from the NLRA, such as agricultural and domestic workers, are not restricted in the right to strike but have no protections against discharge if they strike and do not have the power to prevent such retaliation,” Mirer added.

Some states have their own laws granting protection to domestic workers and 14 states guarantee farmworkers collective bargaining rights.

Railroad and airline workers are not covered by the NLRA, but they come under the Railway Labor Act, which has several limitations on the right to strike.

In recent years, Congress and the courts have narrowed the definition of “protected concerted activity” under the NLRA. Union membership is dropping. Nevertheless, strike actions in the U.S. increased by almost 50 percent in 2022, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court weakened the legal protections for striking in Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, making it easier for employers to sue unions in state courts. Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, writing, “The right to strike is fundamental to American labor law.” She noted:

“Workers are not indentured servants, bound to continue laboring until any planned work stoppage would be as painless as possible for their masters. They are employees whose collective and peaceful decision to withhold their labor is protected by the [National Labor Relations Act] even if economic injury results.”

The NLRA’s protections for private sector workers don’t extend to public sector employees. “Public employees in the United States have been restricted in many ways from striking,” Mirer said.

Federal workers are legally prohibited from striking. Thirty-six states prohibit public sector workers from striking. Three other states that haven’t addressed the issue would likely outlaw public sector strikes as well. In the 12 states where strikes are not per se unlawful, various preconditions must be met before workers can engage in strikes.

The World Federation of Trade Unions, which played a decisive role in the creation of Convention No. 87 in 1948, applauded the ICJ’s decision:

“It is clear that the existence of a class-oriented and militant trade union movement is the essential, decisive, and irreplaceable factor to ensure that the right to strike, as well as conventions, collective bargaining, labor laws, and workers’ achievements, are not merely empty words on paper but are implemented in practice. The WFTU reiterates its call for struggle in every country, sector, and workplace to safeguard the sacred right to strike in practice.”

“It is up to workers and their organizations to build on the ICJ decision to ensure the right to strike can be an effective tool to build worker power,” Mirer said.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, global

Indigenous Leaders Call for Global Recognition of Peacebuilding Role as UN Forum Echoes Summit Outcomes

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from the Women Survivors Network

 Indigenous leaders, diplomats and United Nations officials convened in New York for the Second Global Summit on Indigenous Peacebuilding, issuing a call to reframe global peace and security efforts by placing Indigenous Peoples at the center of conflict prevention and resolution.

Held in New York City on April 25–26, 2026, the two-day summit gathered 300 representatives from 80 countries and seven socio-cultural regions of the world amid growing concern that a majority of the world’s conflicts occur in biodiversity-rich areas inhabited by Indigenous Peoples.

Organizers said the summit has already influenced international policy discussions. The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues referenced the event and its recommendations in its 2026 outcome document, including a proposal to declare 2027–2037 an International Decade of Indigenous Peacebuilding.

Opening the Summit, Binalakshmi Nepram, Founder-Director of Manipur Women Gun Survivors Network and President of the Global Alliance of Indigenous Peoples, Gender Justice and Peace, called for a fundamental shift: “It is time to move from seeing Indigenous Peoples as victims of conflict to recognizing them as experts, mediators, and negotiators of peace.”

The Summit built on the outcomes of the first global gathering, which led to the first-ever declaration on Indigenous Peacebuilding and the creation of a Global Network of Indigenous Peacebuilders, Mediators and Negotiators to help resolve some of the world’s most entrenched conflicts.

A series of global initiatives were launched at the gathering, including the Global Indigenous Mothers March for Peace, Healing and Unity, the recognition of an innovative and much-needed Indigenous Humanitarian Peacebuilding (IHP) Model to respond directly to survivors in war and conflict zones,  a forthcoming book on Indigenous Peacebuilding, and the rollout of online and in-person curriculum programs to train Indigenous peacebuilders worldwide.

A central feature of the summit was the Weaving for Peace exhibition, which brought together traditional textiles from Indigenous communities across Manipur, Guatemala, Papua New Guinea, Bolivia, the Haudenosaunee, the Sámi region, Maasai Regions, Amazon and the Sahel, highlighting cultural resilience as a foundation for peace.

(article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Indigenous peoples, Are they the true guardians of nature?

(article continued from left column)

Speakers pointed to rising global displacement—estimated at around 200 million people—with many conflicts linked to resource extraction, environmental degradation and transnational organized crime affecting Indigenous territories with huge humanitarian consequence.  Aluki Kotierk, Chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, underscored the role of Indigenous knowledge systems rooted in balance and reciprocity. “Indigenous Peoples must be recognized not as security threats, but as part of the security infrastructure,” said Dr Albert Barume, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Indigenous Issues, framing Indigenous peacebuilding as a matter of international peace and security.

Justin Mohammad, Ambassador for First Nations People, Australia, said Indigenous diplomacy has long shaped relations across regions and should be integrated into modern peace processes.

“When multilateral institutions are being questioned, we need governance—but we must humanize it,” said Laura Gil, Assistant Secretary General of the Organization of American States. Omar Hilale, Permanent Representative of Morocco to the United Nations and Chair of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission, emphasized the need for inclusive peacebuilding approaches that incorporate Indigenous knowledge and local leadership.

Laura Flores Director of Americas Division of the United Nations Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs also joined and stated, “member states are increasingly recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ role in peacebuilding, including through a landmark resolution on Indigenous Peoples’ rights and their role in peacebuilding, negotiations, and transitional justice.”

Ana Pérez Conguache, representing the Guatemala Presidential Commission, highlighted the importance of addressing land rights, inequality and historical injustices as part of sustainable peace.Ambassador David Lametti, Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations also spoke at the Summit pledging support for Indigenous Peacebuilding.

Many scholars and leaders from conflict affected regions such as Dr Noni Arambam, Maisnam Arnapal, Adam Kuleit Ole Mwarabu, Daniel Mastaki from DRC, Nuba Mountain and many others also spoke. Participants concluded with a shared message: that the world’s Indigenous Peoples are the world’s peacemakers; that wars and conflicts currently engineered in Indigenous territories must end immediately; and that Indigenous Peoples who are displaced must be protected.

That justice, inclusion, and the leadership of Indigenous Peoples—their peacemaking and their wisdom—hold the key for healing people, for peace and the planet, and it’s time UN member states and the world realize and ensure this in policy, planning, action, and resourcing.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, United Nations,

Women, Peace and Security Index 2025-2026

. WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

Sections on individual indicators from the Women, Peace and Security Index 2025-2026

Indicator performance has improved little since the 2023/24 WPS Index

Inclusion indicators

With the exception of some high performers, women’s average years of schooling
remain alarmingly low. The global average for the education indicator (average
number of years of schooling for women ages 25 and older) stands at 8.4
years, four years short of completing secondary education in most countries. The top performers, where women receive over 12 years of schooling on average, are countries classified as high income and with very high Human Development Index rankings. Low-income and low Human Development Index countries rank at the bottom on this indicator, with just over three years of schooling. The Sub-Saharan Africa region and the Fragile
States group score at the bottom, with an average of 5.3 years of schooling.
On average, girls in 33 countries receive less than five years of schooling.


The United States and Germany are tied for the highest average years
of schooling, at 14, while Somalia, classified as a Fragile State, has the
lowest average, at 0.9 year. The Middle East and North Africa region has
the widest range of performance on this indicator, from 13.4 years in the
United Arab Emirates to 0.9 year in Somalia. Lebanon is the best performing among the Fragile States group, with roughly 13.1 years of schooling, the only country in that group to place in the top quintile for this indicator.

Sub-Saharan Africa performs exceedingly well on women’s employment, while
the Middle East and North Africa and South Asia perform poorly. The global
average for the employment indicator (the percentage of women ages 25–64
who are employed) is 56 percent, ranging from 24 percent of women
employed in the Middle East and North Africa region to 73 percent in
the Developed Countries group. A close second is Sub-Saharan Africa,
at 71 percent. Iceland is the only country in the Developed Countries
group that ranks in the top 10 on women’s employment. However, the
range across countries in the group is narrow, with most countries ranking
high on employment even if they are not in the top 10. Burundi, classified
as a Fragile State, is tied as the highest-ranking country in the world on this
indicator, with roughly 90 percent of women employed. Half of the 10 top-ranked countries on this indicator are in Sub-Saharan Africa (Burundi, Tanzania, Nigeria, Benin, and Togo), including two classified as Fragile States (Burundi and Nigeria). São Tomé and Principe is the only country in that region with fewer than a third of women employed.

While high rates of employment are an important indicator of women’s status, the global datasets we use do not capture working conditions and unpaid care burdens that women manage (see appendix 1 for details on the data sources we use). For example, highest-ranking Burundi has the largest share of women (roughly 95 percent) employed in the informal economy, especially in agriculture. Employment may also not translate
into higher standards of living; almost two-thirds of Burundi’s population
lives below the 2017 poverty line of $2.15 a day, nearly the same share as
eight years ago when the inaugural WPS Index was produced. While most
Burundian women work in small-scale farming jobs, men are more likely
to work in higher revenue-generating industrial agricultural enterprises.
Thus, the concentration of women’s employment in the informal sector is
evidence of the continuing need to improve women’s inclusion, even as
women’s high employment rates represent gains in their status and social
acceptance of women’s employment.

The Middle East and North Africa is the worst-performing region, with more than three in four women unemployed. Low labor force participation by women reflects a combination of structural and legal barriers— such as slow industrialization, male-dominated oil economies, discriminatory family laws, and lack of childcare or maternity support—that restrict both the supply of and demand for women’s labor. These barriers are reinforced by high unemployment among educated women, weak private sector job creation, and persistent patriarchal norms that discourage women’s employment. South Asia is the second-worst performing region and, along with the Middle East and North Africa, the only region where fewer than half of women are employed (39 percent). Despite some favorable laws, women’s low employment in South Asia reflects a lack of supportive infrastructure, such as childcare, eldercare, safe transport, inclusive workplaces, and re-entry opportunities, combined with education gaps, limited access to finance, and restrictive social norms.

Minor changes in other indicators of inclusion. The global average for cellphone
use (percentage of women and girls ages 15 or older who report having a
cellphone) increased from 80 percent in the 2023/24 WPS Index to 84 percent. The Developed Countries group is the best performing, at 96 percent, and South Asia is the worst performing, at roughly 65 percent, up from 55 percent in the 2023/24 WPS Index. In seven countries, less than half of women report having their own cellphone (Chad, Ethiopia, Niger, Afghanistan, Madagascar, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and
Pakistan). As mentioned, Pakistan is the only country in which fewer
than a third of women have their own cellphone.

Globally, average parliamentary representation (percentage of parliamentary seats held by women) declined slightly, from 26 percent in 2023/24 to 24 percent. The Latin America and the Caribbean region performs best, with women filling roughly 33 percent of parliamentary seats on average. South Asia is the worst-performing region, at roughly 16 percent, displacing the Middle East and North Africa, whose score improved from 15 percent in the 2023/24 WPS Index to 18 percent.

There are limited updates to the financial inclusion indicator (percentage of women and girls ages 15 years or older with an account at a financial institution). The Middle East and North Africa region performs worst on this
indicator, at 28 percent. The average rate for the Fragile States group, which
was the worst-performing region in the 2023 Index, has remained the same
(34 percent). In six countries worldwide, less than 10 percent of women have
access to their own bank account: South Sudan, Afghanistan, Yemen,
Burundi, Djibouti, and Central African Republic. South Sudan is the
lowest-ranking country globally on this indicator, with only 4 percent of
women having access to their own bank account. Eight of the ten bottomranking countries on this indicator are classified as Fragile States. The exceptions are Pakistan, at 14 percent, and Djibouti, at 9 percent.

Justice indicators

Mixed performances on barriers to justice. The global score on absence of legal
discrimination (a measure of the differences between men’s and women’s legal access to economic opportunities, from 0, worst, to 100, best)
improved slightly, from 75.7 on the 2023/24 WPS Index to 76.1. Fourteen
countries have a perfect score of 100, all except one (Latvia) in the Developed Countries group. Seven of the bottom dozen countries on this indicator are classified as Fragile States, and all except one of these Fragile States (Afghanistan) are in the Middle East and North Africa region, which is the worst-performing region on this indicator on the current WPS Index (as it was on the 2023/24 WPS Index).

Performance ranges widely on the related access to justice indicator (an ordinal measure of women’s ability to enjoy equal, secure, and effective access
to justice, from 0, worst, to 4, best). Denmark once again ranks highest on
the indicator, with a score of 3.958, more than 40 times higher than bottomranking Nicaragua, with a score of .097. Nicaragua displaced Afghanistan,
which was the lowest performer on this indicator in the 2023/24 WPS Index.
Nicaragua’s score plunged 85 percent from its score of .659 on the 2023/24
WPS Index, a large drop that may reflect the deterioration of judicial independence following the February 2025 constitutional reforms driven by President Daniel Ortega. These included eliminating the separation of powers and positioning the judiciary branch under direct executive influence of the new co-presidency of President Ortega and his wife. Key legal protections have been removed, including references to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the prohibition against gender-based wage discrimination. Women face heightened risks, and dissenters are threatened with loss
of citizenship. Afghanistan also deteriorated on the access to justice indicator, with its score falling from .372 on the 2023/24 WPS Index to .160.

Eight of the ten highest-ranking countries on the access to justice indicator are in the Developed Countries group, whose average score on this
indicator is 3.5. No other region has an average above 2.2. The second-best
performing regions are Latin America and the Caribbean and SubSaharan Africa, tied with an average score of 2.2. Latin America and the Caribbean’s improved standing may be explained by the almost 5 percent rise in its average score for this indicator from the 2023/24 WPS Index, together with declines in scores for Central and Eastern Europe and
Central Asia, East Asia and the Pacific, and South Asia. Countries in
the Latin America and the Caribbean region also have the widest range of
scores on this indicator, with best performing Costa Rica (3.540) scoring 36
times higher than worst-performing Nicaragua (.097).

The Fragile States group performs worst overall on the access to justice
indicator, with a score of 1.8, followed closely by the Middle East and
North Africa. The average score for the Middle East and North Africa,
the lowest ranked region on this indicator in the 2023/24 WPS Index,
rose from 1.7 to 1.9. The increase reflects improvements in several countries’ scores, including Egypt (up 37 percent), Algeria (17 percent), Qatar
(12 percent), Palestine (11 percent), Yemen (4 percent, and no longer in
the bottom 10 countries for this indicator), and Iraq (2 percent, and no
longer in the bottom 20).

It makes intuitive sense that the absence of legal discrimination and
access to justice indicators are strongly connected, since few formal legal
protections for women would typically mean that women also have a limited ability to safely pursue justice (and vice versa). Figure 6.3 visualizes
the normalized scores of these two justice indicators, with the overlapping
patterns reaffirming the positive relation between them. Nonetheless, there
are some outlier countries that score high on one indicator and low on
the other. As on the 2023/24 WPS Index, Nicaragua and El Salvador
have high scores on the absence of legal discrimination (86.3 and 88.8,
respectively) indicator but low scores on access to justice (.097 and .792,
respectively).

Worsening conflict and aid cuts threaten to undo gains in the maternal mortality ratio. The global average maternal mortality ratio (an indicator of mothers’ risk of death from a single pregnancy) improved from 212 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2023/24 to approximately 188. Nigeria has the highest maternal mortality ratio in the world, with 993 deaths per 100,000 live births.

Belarus and Norway continue to have the lowest maternal mortality ratio, improving to 1 death per 100,000 live births. The Developed Countries group performs the best on this indicator, with an average of 10 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. The United States has the worst maternal mortality ratio among countries in the Developed Countries group (box 6.1).

The Fragile States group has the highest maternal mortality ratio among regions, with an average of 457 deaths per 100,000 live births. Seven of the ten lowest-ranking countries on this indicator are classified as Fragile States, and five of these are in Sub-Saharan Africa. Recent research also reaffirms that armed conflict is associated with increases in maternal and child deaths globally. For instance, research focusing on the Tigray region of Ethiopia found that maternal outcomes deteriorate severely in rural areas during wartime, likely due to disruptions in healthcare infrastructure.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Prospects for progress in women’s equality, what are the short and long term prospects?

(continued from left column)

However, since the 2023/24 WPS Index, maternal mortality ratios have
improved for both the Sub-Saharan Africa region (down from 507 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births to 437) and the Fragile States group
(down from 540 to 457). South Sudan, which was the worst-performing
country on this indicator in the 2023/24 WPS Index, with 1,223 maternal
deaths per 100,000 live births, has nearly halved that number to 692. South
Sudan’s improvement may be attributed to the gradual increase in midwife
training throughout the country, supported by organizational efforts such
as the establishment of the Catholic Health Training Institute in 2010
and UNFPA support of mobile health clinics and community outreach programs that provide perinatal care. Additional efforts are ongoing, with
the World Health Organization (WHO) and South Sudan’s Ministry of
Health collaborating in 2024 to develop guidelines and training resources
on maternal health for healthcare workers.

Despite substantial progress over the past two decades, the WHO reported
that Sub-Saharan Africa, grappling with high rates of poverty and multiple
armed conflicts, still accounted for about 70 percent of maternal deaths
worldwide in 2023. Recent maternal mortality data also reveal the detrimental impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, with an estimated 40,000 more
deaths in 2021 than in 2020, driven by health complications from Covid-19
and widespread disruptions to maternity services, underscoring the need
to maintain essential care during crises such as pandemics. Global maternal mortality ratios began to improve in the two years after the pandemic,
returning to the falling trend of earlier years.

Globally, maternal deaths dropped 40 percent between 2000 and 2023,
but progress has slowed notably since 2016, with almost one woman dying
every two minutes in 2023 from pregnancy- or childbirth-related complications. And now there is a risk of reversals, as deep cuts in humanitarian funding in 2025 are severely undermining maternal and child health
services. In many areas, maternal and child health facilities have closed,
the number of health workers has declined, and supply chains for lifesaving medicines have been disrupted.

Especially at risk are women in countries that are heavily dependent on
humanitarian assistance, such as those classified as Fragile States, where
maternal mortality ratios are already high. For instance, a 2025 UN report
estimated that the likelihood of maternal death is 400 times greater in
Sub-Saharan Africa than in Australia and New Zealand. The highest risks are in countries ranked the worst on the maternal mortality ratio
indicator: Nigeria (181st), Chad (180th), Central African Republic
(178th tie), South Sudan (178th tie), Liberia (177th), Somalia (176th),
and Afghanistan (175th). Researchers at Stanford University have estimated that reductions in development assistance to low-resource countries that last five years or longer can reverse 64 percent of the progress in
maternal mortality. Health and dignity are not only basic human rights,
but they are also central to women’s participation and protection under the
WPS Agenda. Urgent and sustained action is needed from all countries to
preserve and increase the gains in maternal mortality.

Security indicators

Despite some improvements, less than two-thirds of women worldwide report
feeling safe walking at night in their communities. Community safety (the percentage of women who report feeling safe walking alone at night in their
community) has improved slightly, rising from 64 percent globally on the
2023/24 WPS Index to 66 percent. But that means more than one-third of
women feel unsafe walking alone at night in their communities. Singapore is the highest-ranking country on this indicator, with 97 percent of
women feeling safe walking alone at night, while Syrian Arab Republic
is the lowest-ranking country at 17 percent—and the only country where
fewer than one in four women feels safe walking alone at night.

Among regions, East Asia and the Pacific again performs best, with
84 percent of women reporting feeling safe walking in their community at
night (compared with 83 percent in the 2023/24 WPS Index), while Latin
America and the Caribbean again performs worst, at 42 percent (40 percent in 2023/24). El Salvador is the only country in the Latin America and
the Caribbean region to score above the global average, with 85 percent
of women reporting that they feel safe walking alone at night. In 16 of 27
countries in the region, more than half the women report feeling unsafe
walking alone at night.

In 31 of the 37 countries classified as Fragile States, fewer than two-thirds of women feel safe walking alone at night. In a majority of countries
(23) in the Sub-Saharan Africa region, that share shrinks to fewer than
half. Syrian Arab Republic has the worst performance globally on this
indicator, with less than a quarter of women feeling safe walking alone at
night. The second-worst performers on the community safety indicator are
South Africa and Afghanistan, at 25 percent each. In Afghanistan, the
Taliban continues to restrict women’s mobility, including prohibitions on
visiting parks and even health centers.

Community safety is one of the few indicators on which the Developed Countries group does not perform best. Its score of 65 percent puts it behind the East Asia and the Pacific region, at 84. Nine countries in the Developed Countries group are below the global average of 66 percent: Israel (63 percent), Canada (63 percent), Belgium (63 percent), the United States (58 percent), Malta (56 percent), Australia (52 percent), Greece (51 percent), New Zealand (47 percent), and Italy (44 percent). Just behind the Developed Countries group are the Middle East and North Africa and South Asia regions, both at just under 65 percent. Eleven countries in the Middle East and North Africa score above the global average on community safety, with more than two-thirds of women
feeling safe walking alone at night.

Perceptions of community safety also vary within countries, with vulnerable groups often feeling more unsafe. For instance, a 2024 study for
Brazil found that perceptions of safety among women have deteriorated
more in rural areas than in urban areas, especially for non-White populations, a finding the study links to an erosion of trust in police services.
In the United States, there is a notable racial difference in perceptions of
safety, with fewer than half of Black women (46 percent) feeling safe walking alone at night, compared with 58 percent of women overall. Only
two-thirds of Black women in the United States believe they would be
treated fairly or with respect by local police, and one-fourth report having
experienced discriminatory treatment in the past year, higher than that of
Black men (one-fifth).

Political violence targeting women shows little improvement. Globally, political violence targeting women (violent and politically motivated events targeting women) improved from 0.080 event per 100,000 women in the 2023/24 WPS Index to 0.070 event in the current one. While this indicator captures “the use of force by a group with a political purpose or motivation” in targeting women (physical violence or attempt at physical violence), it does not capture the full scope of political violence targeting women. For instance, it does not include intimidation, threats, or online or technologyfacilitated gender-based violence, all of which can have serious implications for women’s safety and their ability to participate in politics and in peace and security efforts.

The Latin America and the Caribbean region continues to have
the highest rate of political violence targeting women, despite a reduction from 0.381 event per 100,000 women on the 2023/24 WPS Index to
0.338 on the current one. The region also has the second-highest share of
women living in proximity to conflict (up from 44 percent to 47 percent).
When considered along with the region’s performance at the bottom of
the regional rankings on community safety, these results reinforce the
relationship between feelings of safety at the local level and instability
at the societal level. The second-worst performing region on this indicator is the Fragile States group, at 0.212 event per 100,000 women. The
Middle East and North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa regions performed slightly better, at roughly 0.130 event per 100,000 women. The
other country groups have an average rate ranging from 0.006 event
per 100,000 women (Developed Countries) to roughly 0.020 for three
regions (Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, East Asia
and the Pacific, and South Asia).

Seven of the ten bottom-ranking countries on the political violence targeting women indicator are in the Latin America and the Caribbean region,
and only one of those (Haiti) is classified as a Fragile State. Trinidad and
Tobago is the worst-performing country globally on this indicator, with
3.017 events per 100,000 women. The next lowest ranked country is Belize,
with 1.452 events, which makes Trinidad and Tobago an outlier on this
indicator. Trinidad and Tobago has a history of high rates of political violence targeting women, with 8 events per 100,000 women in the 2019/20
WPS Index, rising nearly fourfold to 23 events in the 2023/24 WPS Index.
That large increase may be related to the island country’s very small population, intensifying gang violence that led the government to declare a state
of emergency in December 2024, and the second-highest score worldwide
on a measure of the geographic diffusion of conflict.

Eleven countries in the Fragile States group have 0.000 reported events
of political violence targeting women, a hopeful sign that such violence
can be controlled even in contexts of fragility and conflict. Kosovo’s rate
of 0.000 events may reflect targeted interventions and women’s leadership. For instance, discussions on political violence targeting women and
its consequences for women’s representation were spurred in Kosovo by
initiatives such as the EmPOWER Local Women Politicians Program, a
capacity-building program sponsored by the Organization for Security and
Co-operation in Europe that offers leadership workshops, civic engagement
opportunities, and cross-party collaboration for women in politics. As a
result of such efforts, women parliamentarians led their fellow lawmakers
in developing and endorsing an official declaration in 2024 that calls for
accountability and the safeguarding of women’s full participation in electoral spheres.35
Despite these positive signs, women in 94 countries are still subjected
to political violence. They range from the United Kingdom, with 0.003
event per 100,000 women, to five countries (Palestine, Cameroon,
Jamaica, Belize, and Trinidad and Tobago) where events exceed 1 per
100,000 women.

Finally, political violence targeting women does not affect all women in
the same way or to the same degree, and a lack of reporting does not necessarily mean a lack of occurrence. The United States is an example of how
these limitations can affect our understanding of this indicator. The country’s score on this indicator fell from 0.025 event per 100,000 women in the
2023/24 WPS Index to 0.006 in the current one. However, a recent study
found high levels of political violence targeting women during the 2024
US election cycle, with Black women 7 times more likely to be targeted by
hate speech than Black men, 3 times more likely than White women, and
18 times more likely than White men.

(Editor’s note: Cuba was one of 18 countries that were not included in their report because data was lacking on several indicators. Elsewhere in the report, it is noted that Cuba, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Rwanda are the only countries with more than 50% women in parliament. Other countries not listed come from the Caribbean (6), Pacific Islands (2), tiny European states (4), tiny Asian states (2). Also North Korea, Eritrea and Equatorial Guinea.)

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

global, WOMEN'S EQUALITY

UN General Assembly resolution: Interreligious Dialogue as Soft Power Peace Tool

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Excerpt from an article of United Nations News Service

The Assembly adopted by consensus [on May 20] the draft resolution titled “Promotion of interreligious and intercultural dialogue, understanding and cooperation for peace” (document A/80/L.43) aimed at advancing interreligious and intercultural dialogue as a practical tool for peace, inclusion and sustainable development, supported by education, policy, partnerships and global cooperation.

Introducing the biennial text, the representative of Pakistan, also speaking on behalf of the Philippines and all co-sponsors, stressed that it is essential to promote a culture of peace — one that embraces diversity and inclusivity, safeguards fundamental rights and freedoms and rejects social structures and stereotypes that create divisions among individuals, societies, communities and nation States.

Question(s) related to this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

Despite progress achieved over the years, he noted, much more remains to be done to fully realize these shared ideals.  In this regard, he recalled the Constitution of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which affirms that “since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed”.  He explained that “a technical rollover” would retain the key messages reaffirmed through the consensus adoption of the resolution during the seventy‑eighth session.

Despite the unanimous adoption, several delegations raised some concerns. Among them was the representative of the United States, who said that the Assembly “spends countless hours negotiating symbolic, repetitive text with little to show in tangible results for the common citizen”.  Washington, D.C., she added, “is finished with performative exercises and bloated ideological multilateralism that fails to advance the core mission of the United Nations”.

(Editor’s note: The resolution was proposed by Indonesia, Pakistan, Philippines and Turkmenistan. Its operative paragraphs include the following:)

Calls upon Member States, which have the primary responsibility to counter discrimination and hate speech, and all relevant actors, including political and religious leaders, to promote inclusion and unity to combat racism, xenophobia, hate speech, violence and discrimination.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, United Nations,

May Day Demonstrations Worldwide Condemn US-Israeli War on Iran, Champion Workers

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article by Brad Reed from Common Dreams (licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

May Day demonstrations across the world on Friday denounced the US-Israeli war against Iran, which has caused a global energy crisis that is disproportionately harming working-class people.

Among the earliest May Day demonstrations took place in the Philippines, and a video published  by The Associated Press shows protesters clashing with police near the US Embassy in the capital city of Manila.


Workers in the Philippines clash with police

While many demonstrators held signs that referenced local issues, American foreign policy was also a major focus of the protesters, as marchers in Manila carried a large banner that read, “Down With US Imperialism.”

Josua Mata, leader of the SENTRO umbrella group of labor federations, told  The Associated Press that the war with Iran was a central focus of protests because of the impact it’s had on energy costs.

“Every Filipino worker now is aware that the situation here is deeply connected to the global crisis,” Mata explained.

Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto attended a May Day rally held in the capital of Jakarta, where Jakarta Globe reported  that he announced a host of worker-friendly policies including plans “to build daycare facilities for workers’ children and accelerate the construction of at least 1 million homes.”


Workers’ demonstration in Jakarta, Indonesia

Question related to this article:
 
What is the contribution of trade unions to the culture of peace?

(article continued from left column)

France 24 reported  that hundreds of demonstrators in Istanbul, Turkey were arrested after attempting to march to the city’s iconic Taksim Square, which police had sealed off.

The Turkish Contemporary Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD) said  on Friday afternoon that at least 350 demonstrators in Istanbul have been detained as a result of the protests, with hundreds more potentially in custody.


May Day protests in Istanbul

May Day demonstrations are also taking place across Europe, with many demonstrators blaming US President Donald Trump’s war for the deterioration of workers’ living standards.

The European Trade Union Confederation, which represents 93 trade union organizations in 41 European countries, released a statement declaring that “working people refuse to pay the price for Donald Trump’s war in the Middle East,” adding that “today’s rallies show working people will not stand by and see their jobs and living standards destroyed.”


May Day demonstration in Madrid (Photo by Fernando Sanchez/Europa Press via Getty Images)

Trump is also facing protests at home, with more than 4,000 “May Day Strong” events planned across the United States.

Daniel Bertossa, general secretary for Public Services International, said  this year’s May Day demonstrations are providing a desperately needed backlash to power grabs being made by the global billionaire class.

Bertossa pointed to the US-Israel attack on Iran, as well as Trump’s repeated threats to invade Greenland, as key turning points that have pushed workers to organize and fight back.

“Rising living costs caused by the war are now driving anger among working-class people and producing a rare and powerful moment to connect and educate,” said Bertossa. “Fascists don’t have the answers to the economic pain they exploited to get elected—international affairs impact us all—and international working-class solidarity matters
.”
Bertossa added that “May Day is a vivid reminder that working-class politics is not a spectator sport,” and “we have never won by watching, waiting, or relying on great power leaders to gift us our future.”

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, global

Colombia: Conference on the Transition Beyond Fossil Fuels concludes with five key outcomes

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from Minambiente, Colombia (translation by CPNN)

– April 29: In Santa Marta, Colombia, 57 countries met with 13 stakeholder groups, totaling more than 1,500 participants. The discussions focused on three key themes: reducing economic dependence on fossil fuels, transforming supply and demand, and advancing international cooperation.

The main conclusion of the conference is clear: this momentum must be sustained and efforts must be organized on a larger scale. This conference delivers five key outcomes that create a practical platform for working together and supporting one another to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels:

1. The second conference on transitioning beyond fossil fuels was announced, to be held in early 2027. It will be co-chaired by Ireland and Vanuatu.

2. A coordination group will be established to ensure continuity to the second and future conferences, strengthen links between initiatives, and avoid duplication. This group will bring together countries leading key transition efforts—such as the United Kingdom, Denmark, Brazil, France, and the Marshall Islands—along with the co-host countries Colombia, the Netherlands, Tuvalu, and Ireland, and will be advised by the COP30 Activation Group.

3. The results will be shared with the COP30 Presidency to inform its roadmap. They will also be aligned with the COP31 roadmap and Action Agenda, and will contribute to the second Global Stocktake.

4. Three lines of work have been established to identify concrete ways to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and strengthen cooperation. Their structure will be defined between the first and second conferences. They will remain open and flexible, allowing countries to join or lead, with the support of existing initiatives and experts from the Santa Marta process.

5. The Scientific Panel on the Global Energy Transition (SPGET) was launched to support countries in moving beyond fossil fuels. This panel will contribute to the development of roadmaps aligned with the 1.5°C target and will address legal, financial, and policy barriers.

(Click here for the original article in Spanish)

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

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

Sustainable Development Summits of States, What are the results?

(Article continued from the left column)

“We succeeded in bringing the world together. We decided not to resign ourselves to an economy built on the destruction of life; we decided that the transition beyond fossil fuels can no longer remain a slogan, but must become a concrete, political, and collective effort. When people look back in the future, they will not only remember this conference. They will remember whether or not we rose to the challenge of our time,” stated the acting Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia, Irene Vélez Torres.

For her part, the Netherlands’ Minister for Climate and Green Growth, Stientje van Veldhoven, stated: “I can confidently say that, in recent days, we have laid the groundwork for concrete action to move away from fossil fuels. With such a broad coalition of countries and representatives from the private sector, civil society, and beyond, this is a group capable of making a significant impact. The countries convened in Colombia represent approximately 30% of global energy demand and nearly 20% of global energy supply. Together, we have begun to organize on a large scale to meet this challenge, committing ourselves to sustained, long-term participation. This transition will require navigating a complex set of economic, social, and technical challenges. The message for addressing these was clear: let’s get to work and support each other throughout the process.”

Final list of participating countries: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Luxembourg, Malawi, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Portugal, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vatican City – Holy See.

– – – – –

(Editor’s note: According to Greenpeace, “The landmark Santa Marta conference for the transition away from fossil fuels represents an important milestone on the road to long-term climate and energy stability.” According to the World Wildlife Fund, “Santa Marta tackled the toughest climate hurdle – turning ambition into action, while bringing all stakeholders into the conversation”. And according to Bill Mckibben, founder of 350.org, “Santa Marta Leads the World Into the Energy Future, while the US Clings to the Past.”

(Editor’s note 2: At last year’s COP30 in Belém, a group of 80 countries called for the design of a global roadmap to phase out coal, oil and gas, but it was blocked by large oil producers and consumers like Saudi Arabia, Russia, India and China.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

global, Latin America, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT,

Pope Leo calls for new ‘cul­ture of peace’

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article by Nova Kruijning from Jurist

Pope Leo XIV on Thursday urged  the US and Iran to return to peace negotiations amid rising tensions in the ongoing war, calling for a new “culture of peace” to replace the default recourse to violence whenever conflicts arise. The remarks come on the heels of a very public back-and-forth  between the Pope and US President Donald Trump over the war, marked by Trump’s repeated threats of escalation, which the Pope criticized as undermining diplomatic efforts and risking further instability in the region.

En route home from his trip to Africa, Pope Leo emphasized  the need to collectively reject the use of force in international relations and instead rely on consistent, diplomatic mechanisms to resolve international disputes of this scale. Characterizing the current geopolitical situation as “chaotic,” Pope Leo noted the lack of consistency in diplomatic signals and attributed the escalating severity of the situation in the Middle East thereto. “One day Iran says yes, the United States says no, and vice versa,” the pontiff stated. “We don’t know where it will go.”

Question related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(article continued from left column)

The tension between Pope Leo XIV and Donald Trump has become an unusually prominent element of the crisis. While disagreements between the Vatican and world leaders are not uncommon, the directness of this exchange particularly stands out. Trump’s emphasis on strength and escalation has contrasted sharply with the Pope’s calls for restraint and dialogue, turning what might have been a quiet disagreement into a public divide. 

Observers note that Pope Leo’s tone marks a deviation from his typically mild, more tempered approach. Rather than offering broad moral guidance, he has taken a firmer stance, openly criticizing rhetoric he views as destabilizing. This suggests a belief that the gravity of the situation – particularly involving Iran and the United States – requires clearer, more urgent intervention to prevent further destabilization. This shift was also pointed out during his recent trip to Africa, where his remarks took on a more urgent and pointed character, taking aim at a “handful of tyrants” and “masters of war” who have “ravaged” the world. 

“The perceived change in tone is due to the escalation of events … which have forced his words to become more explicit,” said the Rev. Antonio Spadaro, undersecretary of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Culture and Education. “But the vision was already right there, right beneath the surface.”

The exchange reflects a broader pattern of volatility in the conflict itself, where inconsistent signals and increasingly irrational rhetoric have made (sustained) diplomacy increasingly difficult, if not seemingly impossible. As tensions between the United States and Iran fluctuate, each escalation appears to narrow the leeway for negotiation and increases the chance that even a minor incident or misunderstanding could trigger a wider confrontation to topple an already exceedingly fragile region.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

‘This Is a Fight for Humanity’: Meet the 2026 Winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Olivia Rosane from Common Dreams (reprinted according to  Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

The Goldman Environmental Foundation announced  the six winners of the 2026 Goldman Environmental Prize on Monday, honoring an all-female slate of advocates who protected wildlife, took on extractive industries, and won important legal victories in the movement to halt the climate crisis.

Videos available on Goldman Prize website

The announcement comes as world leaders have failed  to make progress in addressing environmental challenges, and President Donald Trump, leader of the world’s largest historical climate polluter, has withdrawn  the US from the Paris Agreement, rolled back  climate and environmental regulations domestically, and made efforts to supercharge  the extraction and use of fossil fuels.

“While we continue to fight uphill to protect the environment and implement lifesaving climate policies—in the US and globally—it is clear that true leaders can be found all around us,” John Goldman, vice president of the Goldman Environmental Foundation, said in a statement. “The 2026 prize winners are proof positive that courage, hard work, and hope go a long way toward creating meaningful progress.”

The 2026 prize is notable because it marks the first time that all of the winners—Iroro Tanshi of Nigeria, Borim Kim of South Korea, Sarah Finch of the United Kingdom, Theonila Roka Matbob of Papau New Guinea, Alannah Acaq Hurley of the US, and Yuvelis Morales Blanco of Colombia—are women.

‘There’s lots of people doing really good things and, together, we are going to make the world a better place than it would otherwise have been.’

“I am especially thrilled to honor our first-ever cohort of six women, as this is a powerful reflection of the absolutely central role that women play in the environmental community globally,” Goldman said.

The winners also exemplify the prize’s 2026 theme “Change Starts Where You Stand,” as each of them began with a fight to protect a local community or ecosystem that has global implications for the climate, biodiversity, and environmental justice.

As US-based winner Alannah Acaq Hurley said, “At the end of the day, this is a fight for humanity, and, honestly, our ability to continue as humans on this planet.”

Here is how six remarkable women waged this fight and won.

Iroro Tanshi

Iroro Tanshi is a Nigerian conservation ecologist who has worked successfully with local communities to protect endangered bats and their rainforest habitat from wildfires.

Tanshi was elated in 2016 when she discovered the short-tailed roundleaf bat, previously believed to be extinct in the area, living in Nigeria’s Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary. However, two weeks later, a devastating wildfire ignited, forcing Tanshi to evacuate and ultimately impacting around half of the park.

Tanshi then turned her attention to preventing wildfires, which are sparked by traditional farming practices rubbing against the climate crisis.

“The way people manage these farms is they use fire to clean the farms every year, but climate change has completely toppled the pattern of rainfall and people can no longer predict when to burn safely,” she explained in a video.

Tanshi and her team worked with local communities on a Zero Wildfire Campaign, which includes educating farmers on when it is safe to burn and forming a team of “forest guardians” to patrol and fight fires on high-risk days. Due to her efforts, these guardians put out 74 fires between 2022 and 2025, preventing any of them from becoming major blazes.

“My hope for the future is that people would take these small-scale projects as signals for what the future should look like,” she said. “Let’s stay nimble. Let’s try to work in our small communities and solve those problems there on the ground.”

Borim Kim

Borim Kim helped win Asia’s first successful youth climate lawsuit, inspiring people across the region to demand government action on climate.

Kim was first motivated to take collective action when a heatwave baked Seoul in 2018, killing 48 people including a woman near her mother’s age, who died in her home.

“I realized that even home wasn’t safe from the climate crisis,” she said in a video. “I started looking for what I could do.”

Inspired by the international youth climate movement, she founded Youth 4 Climate Action (Y4CA) and helped organize school strikes and walkouts. After her activism led to meetings with policymakers, she realized that national leaders had no real plans to address the climate crisis. In 2020, she and Y4CA mobilized 19 young people to sue  the South Korean government for violating  the constitutional rights of future generations. Once the case was launched, she also continued to build a social movement for climate action.

In August 2024, the country’s Constitutional Court ruled in favor of the young people, mandating that South Korea reduce its emissions in line with the scientific consensus, a decision the environmental minister accepted. The ruling is projected to prevent between 1.6-2.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide from reaching the atmosphere.

“Youth may be seen as having a lower position in society, but now this decision has affirmed our right to live safely and the state’s duty to protect us,” Kim said.

Sara Finch

On the other side of the world, Sarah Finch also secured a precedent-setting legal climate victory.

Finch lives in a part of southeastern England called the Weald. While it is currently a rural area, it hosts oil and gas reserves that were eyed for exploitation during the fracking boom of the 2010s. Finch helped form the Weald Action Group to push back against many potential wells, but they were not able to stop the Surrey County Council from approving the operation and expansion of a drilling site called Horse Hill in 2018.

In gearing up to challenge the decision, Finch discovered that the council’s environmental impact statement had only considered emissions from direct drilling at the site, but not the emissions generated from the burning of the fuel once it was extracted, also known as Scope 3 emissions, which make up around 90% of oil and gas’ contribution to the climate emergency.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Local resistance actions: can they save sustainable development?

(Article continued from the left column)

“It became apparent that it was actually the norm that Scope 3 emissions were being emitted from these kinds of decisions, and we realized that actually it was happening everywhere and in much bigger developments than Horse Hill,” Finch said in a video.

She and her team challenged the environmental impact statement over its failure to consider Scope 3 emissions, losing multiple times before finally securing  a groundbreaking victory from the UK Supreme Court in 2024, which has come to be known as “the Finch ruling.”

The UK government cited the “Finch ruling” when it revoked  ts backing of two North Sea oil developments. Overall, the projects canceled or delayed in 2024 due to the ruling would have generated enough Scope 3 emissions to equal the UK’s domestic greenhouse gas emissions that year.

“It wasn’t just a win on Horse Hill,” Finch said. “It wasn’t even just a win on a handful of sites. It was a win on the whole future of the UK oil and gas industry. And I feel like, there’s lots of people doing really good things and, together, we are going to make the world a better place than it would otherwise have been.”

Theonila Roka Matbob

Theonila Roka Matbob was born into an environmental disaster. Rio Tinto’s Panguna Mine had devastated the ecosystem of Bougainville in Papua New Guinea’s (PNG) Autonomous Region of Bougainville (ARB), destabilized its society, and led to a civil war that killed 15,000-20,000 Bougainvilleans, including her father.

“Our environment was tortured, and then the land was tortured, and the third party that was tortured were my people,” Roka Matbob said in a video.

Rio Tinto closed its copper, silver, and gold mine in 1989 due to the war, but had done nothing to clean up the 150,000 tons of tailings it had dumped into local rivers or take responsibility for the havoc the mine had caused. As an adult, Roka Matbob began to wonder why justice had not been done and to gather testimony from people impacted by the mine.

This led to a successful campaign that persuaded Rio Tinto first to fund an assessment of the mine’s impacts and then to sign a memorandum of understanding in 2024 to act on the assessment’s findings and develop a plan with local communities to remediate the area.

“It doesn’t mean we will restore everything as it was, but at least the story that my grandchildren and my great-grandchildren can remember [is] that our grandparents fought,” she said.

Alannah Acaq Hurley

As Theonila Roka Matbob secured justice for the impacts of one major mine, Alannah Acaq Hurley helped prevent another one from being dug in the first place.

Hurley grew up as a member of the Yup’ik Indigenous group in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, a haven of biodiversity that also hosts the world’s largest wild sockeye salmon run. But in 2001 a new danger emerged: Canadian company Northern Dynasty Minerals announced plans to construct the Pebble Mine, the largest open-pit mine in North America.

“The pit would be so big, you could literally see it from the moon,” Hurley said in a video. “It didn’t take long for us to understand the level of threat that this mine posed—acid mine drainage, toxic tailings left in perpetuity. It was not a matter of if something goes wrong, it was a matter of when.”

Chosen to lead the United Tribes of Bristol Bay in 2013, Hurley built a coalition to oppose the mine, uniting tribes, commercial fishers, and environmentalists to make their cause to the US Environmental Protection Agency and push back against the company’s multiple attempts to move forward with the copper-and-gold mining project. Finally, in 2023, the EPA canceled  the project via its rarely used veto power.

“It’s just really a testament to the power of the people,” she said. “We just never stopped until we were heard.”

Yuvelis Morales Blanco

Yuvelis Morales Blanco also defended her community from an extractive industry.

Blanco was born to subsistence fishers on Colombia’s Magdalena River in the Afro-Colombian community of Puerto Wilches.

“We had nothing but the river—she was like a mother who took care of me,” she said in a statement.

However, even as a child she saw the river was threatened by oil spills from Ecopetrol, Colombia’s leading oil company headquartered nearby. The potential threat level was raised even further when she learned while attending college in 2019 that Ecopetrol planned to build two pilot fracking projects near Puerto Wilches.

“Man, I’m like, ‘They’re going to do that in Wilches?’ No sir!’” she recalled in a video.

Blanco joined the Colombia Free from Fracking Alliance and began to raise awareness in her community about the plans. As the campaign’s momentum grew, so did her reputation as a spokesperson. This ultimately led to threats of violence against her that forced her to seek asylum in France in 2022, yet she continued to mobilize against the fracking plans from abroad.

She and the alliance saw success in 2022, as a local court halted the permitting process, newly elected President Gustavo Petro pledged there would be no fracking during his administration, and Ecopetrol suspended its contracts. In 2024, the Colombian Constitutional Court further ruled that the fracking projects had violated the Afro-Colombian community of Puerto Wilches’ right to free, prior, and informed consent.

Blanco continues to fight for a ban on fracking and for legal protections for environmental defenders—over 140 of whom were reported missing or killed in 2024, the most recent year for which Global Witness has a full tally. Colombia was also the most dangerous countries for defenders that year, with 48 deaths.

“I am very hopeful because I have a river that always accompanies me, and I know we’re going to win,” she said.

The Goldman Environmental Prize was founded in 1989 by Rhoda and Richard Goldman, and has since honored 239 winners in 37 years. The 2026 awards will be presented live in San Francisco on Monday evening at 8:30 pm ET. Watch it on YouTube here.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Sánchez, Lula Lead ‘Work for Peace’ and Equality at Gathering of Global Progressive Leaders in Spain

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article by Julia Conley from Common Dreams (reprinted according to Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Arriving in Spain on Friday for a two-day visit that will center on a gathering of progressive leaders from more than 100 political parties across five continents, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva emphasized that the summit was not “an anti-Trump meeting.”

But the contrast between US President Donald Trump’s violent foreign and domestic policies and the international meeting, which will focus on wage inequality and electoral strategy for progressives, was unmistakable as Spanish President Pedro Sánchez opened  the gathering at a press conference in Barcelona on Friday.

“We want to double our efforts to work for peace and for a reinforced multilateral order. While others open wounds, we want to mend them and cure them,” said Sánchez.

Da Silva—who is commonly called Lula—and Sánchez, as well as other leaders who will be attending the weekend event, have spoken out forcefully against Trump’s policies and the rise of the far right in the US, Germany, Italy, and other European countries.

Sánchez has refused  to allow US fighter planes to use Spanish military bases for missions in the US-Israeli war on Iran and  closed  the country’s airspace to American military aircraft—plus doubled down on his condemnation of Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war even after the US president threatened  Spain with a trade embargo.

Lula expressed solidarity with Pope Leo this week after the pontiff denounced  the Iran war, and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who will also attend the meeting, took aim  last month at Trump’s claim that her country is the “epicenter of cartel violence”—blaming the US for the flow of illegal weapons into Mexico.

Lula emphasized that the 3,000 attendees of the summit, which will include the IV Meeting in Defense of Democracy as well as a gathering called the Global Progressive Mobilization on Saturday, will “discuss the state of democracy, to see what went wrong and what we have to do to repair it.”

The Brazilian president added that “Brazil and Spain are side by side in the trenches together.”

“We are an example that it is possible to find solutions to problems without giving into the empty promises of extremism,” said Lula. “Democracy must go beyond just voting and bring real benefits to people’s lives.”

Sánchez added that “in a world that doubts and fragments, Spain and Brazil open a new chapter convinced that our countries have something the world needs: the strength to build bridges where others raise walls.”

The Global Progressive Mobilization meeting will include roundtables dedicated to discussing economic inequality and other issues at a time when, as one report showed  earlier this month, the richest 0.1% of people on the planet are stashing more than $2.8 trillion in tax havens—more than the wealth owned by the entire bottom 50% of humanity.

The economic hardships of working people have only been exacerbated by the war on Iran, which has sent global energy prices soaring.

US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) is the only federal US official planning to attend the gathering, while New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani—who has swiftly taken steps toward enacting  a universal childcare program and announced  a plan to tax second homes valued at over $5 million since taking office in January, is scheduled to participate virtually.

Also on Saturday, Lula and Sánchez will host the IV Meeting in Defense of Democracy, a summit first held in 2024 with the aim of combating “extremism, polarization, and misinformation.”

Question related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(article continued from left column)

European Council President António Costa, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, Colombian President Gustavo Petro, and leaders from Albania, Ghana, and Lithuania are among those attending the meeting on democracy.

Lula said the large number of attendees is evidence that progressive governments are winning more influence around the world despite the rise of authoritarian political parties.

“Our flock is growing. We must give hope to the world,” said Lula. “Otherwise, what happened with [Nazi leader Adolf] Hitler is going to happen.”

Economist Gabriel Zucman, who joined  Mamdani this week in publishing an op-ed calling for an end to regressive tax systems and highlighting a proposal for a 2% tax on the wealth of those with more than €100 million, or $117 million, expressed hope that the global left is amassing power by building a cooperative international movement.

“The good news is that, from Zohran Mamdani and [Congresswoman] Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York to Pedro Sánchez in Spain, from Lula in Brazil to [Green Party Leader] Zack Polanski in the UK, we may be seeing the early signs of a new cross-border alliance taking shape against global oligarchy,” said Zucman. “And I have no doubt that in this fight—the defining battle of the 21st century—democracy will prevail. See you in Barcelona this weekend to press ahead!”

. . . .

(Editor’s note: It seems that there was no official press release with the results of the meetings in Barcelona on April 17 and 28, but here is some additional information about the meetings, drawn from other sources:

The summit is intended to become a regular event, aiming to “unite progressive forces from around the world.” 

The presence of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum at the meeting has a symbolic character, just a few weeks after King Felipe VI acknowledged, for the first time, “numerous abuses” during the Spanish conquest of America in the 16th century, a subject of tension between Madrid and Mexico for many months. Sheinbaum declared at the opening of the meeting, “”I come from a people who recognize their origin in the great indigenous cultures, those that were silenced, enslaved and plundered, but that were never defeated, because there are memories that cannot be conquered and roots that can never be uprooted,”

Colombian President Gustavo Petro told the press on Friday that “by firmly opposing the war waged by the United States and Israel against Iran , “it seems to me that Spain’s position is at the forefront in Europe.”

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who campaigned alongside Kamala Harris in her aborted presidential bid against Donald Trump, addressed a large crowd Saturday at the first Global Progressive Mobilization, describing Trump as a “warmonger” with no real plan. Walz denounced an apparent authoritarian drift under Trump, stating that “it has to be called by its name. It’s fascism. Or at least, it’s becoming fascist, as they would say.”

 Giacomo Filibeck , Secretary-General of the Party of European Socialists (PES)., said Left-wing parties needed to show voters there was an alternative to what organisers called the “right-wing international”. No sitting prime minister of a large western European country took the stage.

A Eouropean delegation included German Vice-Chancellor Lars Klingbeil, British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, Italian opposition leader Elly Schlein, and Belgian politician Paul Magnette. The President of the European Council, António Costa, cancelled his visit at the last minute.

Alexander Soros, son of financier George Soros and now chair of the Open Society Foundations (OSF) acted in practice as a third host alongside Sánchez and Lula. Writing on X at the close of the meeting, he said it had been “an honor to welcome so many incredible leaders” to Barcelona, and posted photographs of himself with the Spanish Prime Minister. Pedro Abramovay, a senior OSF programme official, appeared on the speaker list, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation also took part.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

Europe, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global,