Climate, Urbanization

Highlights from “Climate and Environmental Justice in Harlem”

Jeremy Hinsdale

August 13, 2024

 News from the Columbia Climate School

On August 7, a diverse group of practitioners, activists and business and community leaders gathered for “Climate and Environmental Justice in Harlem: A Discussion of New York City’s Plans.” Sponsored by the Columbia Climate School and the Greater Harlem Chamber of Commerce, the event featured a wide-ranging discussion about how climate change and polluting industries impact the health and well-being of disadvantaged communities, and what is being done to address the disproportionate environmental burden borne by marginalized neighborhoods in New York City.

Video and selected excerpts from the event appear below, and comments have been edited for clarity. Information about the panelists appear at the bottom of this page.

“Climate and Environmental Justice in Harlem” took place as part of Harlem Week 2024: Celebrate the Journey, the 50^th year of the annual community celebration. The first Harlem Day took place in the summer of 1974 with the objective of bringing a “positive vibe” to the greater Harlem community’s residents, businesses and cultural institutions during a difficult economic and social period in New York City. Learn more about Harlem Week.

---

Harlem and New York City

“The Office of Climate and Environmental Justice is the first mayor’s office in New York City to actually have environmental justice within its title… It’s been incredible to come into this office and really see how to operationalize something like environmental justice within a mayor’s office. One of the things we were able to do with city council is pass a series of local laws that required the city to produce an environmental justice report. This report [EJNYC Report], which we did with [environmental justice nonprofit] We Act, is really a landmark, first-of-its-kind documentation of the historic burdens and benefits that we New Yorkers experience across New York City. Something like this really hasn’t been done before at this scale.” – Elijah Hutchinson, executive director, Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice

“One of the biggest, nation-leading rules that NYC now has is Local Law 97, which is going to require every property in New York City that’s over 50,000 square feet to do energy efficiency upgrades… And that is part of a broader strategy for the city as a whole. This city is going completely carbon neutral by 2050. We’re going 100% renewable by 2040. And we’re halving our transportation emissions by 2030 in the transportation sector. Those are really, really ambitious targets, and we have to do a whole lot more work to get there.” – Elijah Hutchinson

Climate and Health

“Earlier we were saying this is the hottest year. I also like to think of this as this is the coolest year that we will be experiencing because every year in the future, we expect to be hotter, which is concerning because heat is the biggest killer of New Yorkers and especially black and brown New Yorkers. On average, we experience about 350 heat-related deaths a year in New York City—that’s more than all of our other climate hazards combined.” – Elijah Hutchinson

“East Harlem, whose census tracts are largely in environmental justice areas, has the highest rate of adult emergency room visits attributed to pm 2.5 [tiny particulates produced by combustion] per 1,000 residents for all New York City neighborhoods. This is about triple the citywide average. Long-term exposure to pm 2.5 across New York City as a whole contributes to around 2,000 excess deaths per year.” – Elijah Hutchinson

The Built Environment

“Peaker power plants are located in environmental justice communities. This is very clear. If you look at a map of New York City, the areas where we have our energy infrastructure, our polluting infrastructure are usually located in areas that are environmental justice communities. We have to do everything we can to decommission and shut down those plants and convert to renewable energy so that those benefits can be realized in EJ communities.” – Elijah Hutchinson

“Trees do so much. Not only do they provide shade, they capture water. They add biodiversity. Right now, we’ve hit a record with tree planting in New York City. We planted more trees this year than in the last eight years—18,000 trees across the city. We’re committed [with the NYC Parks Department] to planting a tree in every spot we possibly can in all of the neighborhoods across New York City that are experiencing high heat vulnerability. And we’re launching an urban forest master plan for all of New York so that at least 30% of the city is covered in trees. That work is going to be done with a coalition of partners that are in the open space, green space and community-based organization world.” – Elijah Hutchinson

Community and Activism

“The impacts that Harlem and the Bronx and parts of Brooklyn experience are not just heat and flooding and climate impacts—they actually intersect with a number of other challenges that these communities face. The quality of their housing, lack of jobs… We know from academic studies that formerly redlined communities in every city across the country are many degrees warmer during heat waves than communities that were not redlined. We also know from studies that those communities have much of the same demographics that they did in the 1940s, when the federal government drew a line around these communities, denied them mortgages and paved the way for decades of disinvestment.” – Sheila Foster, professor of climate, Columbia Climate School.

“Medgar Evers College was birthed out of the Central Brooklyn community, with social justice in its DNA. It was named for Medgar Wiley Evers, who gave his life, slain in his driveway by an assassin’s bullet from the Ku Klux Klan, with his family right there in the house waiting for him to come in. And he was slain because he was a social justice advocate trying to assist in getting the right to do what? To vote. And here we are in 2024. And we are fighting for the same right. And so I would say it is no surprise that, in America, environmental insults happen mostly in black and brown communities.” – Patricia Ramsey, president, Medgar Evers College

Economics

“NYC government is coordinating with private businesses on the workforce development and green jobs side—especially investments in offshore wind and new sectors that will support the green energy transition. We’ve invested over $100 million in new innovation hubs in Sunset Park, the Brooklyn Navy Yard and establishing a new climate exchange on Governors Island, just to name a few. We’re looking to spur innovation in small businesses as well, to support that entire ecosystem. We’ll have 400,000 green jobs in New York soon—that’s a significant percentage of our GDP. The important part is connecting those jobs to people and the communities that have been impacted most by these harms.” – Elijah Hutchinson

“For people living on the fence line with gas, oil and power plants, progress is not going to be fast enough, if ever… There are policies like Justice 40 that say, hey, 40% of the benefits [should go to EJ communities], but how do we make that real? We really need an academic institution to track, document and compare with what the administration says… accountability is still an issue.” – Peggy Shepard

Big Ideas

“A number of years ago, when I was a young professor, I remember teaching this biology lab. And I had read this biology book—I don’t recall the name—that talked about going into space. All of you know that when astronauts go into space and they have to stay up there for a while, they have to take some things with them. What are some of the things they have to bring? Water and food. Can they stay up there as long as they want to? No. Why? Limited oxygen. The supplies are going to run out. And so, the book said, let’s think about Earth like it’s a spaceship. And when I did that, it helped our students who were non-science majors visualize that there is no guarantee [such resources] are going to be here if we continue to abuse them.” – Patricia Ramsey

“I’d like you all to listen to this quote: If you want to learn about the health of a population, look at the air they breathe, the water they drink, and the places where they live. Now can you believe that was observed by Hippocrates in the 5th century BC? Yet these issues remain front and center to our health and our well-being.” – Peggy Shepard

---

Panelists

Curtis Archer, president, Harlem Community Development Corporation

Sheila Foster, J.D., is a professor of climate at the Columbia Climate School. Foster is a leading scholar of environmental and climate justice. Her research spans a broad range of topics, including innovative resource governance regimes, land use policy, and the role of subnational governments and local leaders in addressing cross-border
challenges such as climate change.

Elijah Hutchinson, executive director, Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice

Patricia Ramsey was appointed the sixth president of Medgar Evers College by the City University of New York Board of Trustees. Ramsey, who officially took office on May 1, 2021, is the first woman and the first scientist to serve as president of the College.

Peggy Shepard is co-founder and executive director of WE ACT for Environmental Justice and has a long history of organizing and engaging northern Manhattan residents in community-based planning and campaigns to address environmental protection and environmental health policy locally and nationally.

Daniel Zarrilli is the first-ever chief climate and sustainability officer at Columbia University where he is leading and coordinating the university’s wide-ranging efforts to achieve its climate commitments and related sustainability goals.

From growth fetish to post-growth

By Gus Speth, originally published by Democracy Collaborative

August 13, 2024

My family and I spent 25 years in Washington DC. They were good years, and every morning I began with coffee and The Washington Post. The newspaper was a wonderful companion—and reliably progressive. But there is something going on there now on the editorial board that I find, well, weird.

The Post has now published several editorials that reflect antipathy towards what environmentalists and climate advocates are trying to accomplish. The most recent, and one that got me concerned again, is “Ending Growth Won’t Save the Planet.”

I have read it several times, trying to understand. The editorial board is eager to make the case that Growth Is Good and that America should keep striving for it. It’s amazing that the Post feels the need to defend economic growth. News Flash! The Washington Post thinks growth is in trouble!

The editorial is clear: Its worry is that climate concern will drive an attack on growth. And what better whipping boy, on whose back to make their case, than the tiny “degrowth” movement? Called decroissance in France, degrowth has some thoughtful advocates in Europe. But here, its proponents are so far from political relevance that their voice cannot be heard. Still, the Post can’t resist: “’Degrowth’—the brand name for neo-Malthusianism—ignores how ingenuity and innovation have repeatedly empowered humanity to overcome ecological constraints.” Mostly, of course, we have bulldozed ecological constraints away, but that is a story for a little later.

The editorial casts a disdainful eye on growth critics like Naomi Klein, Greta Thunberg, and even Pope Francis. It makes light of esteemed figures like Herman Daly and Paul Ehrlich. I believe this confirms that the Post’s concern is not really the miniscule degrowth movement but those who are scoring points on the prevailing pro-growth orthodoxy.

Were I prominent enough, the Post could certainly have included me on its list. That would have made me very happy. In several books and numerous articles, I have joined the critics of economic growth as it is currently defined and practiced. So, naturally, I feel called to respond now.

Five reasons to reject the growth fetish

Hardly anyone would favor the version of degrowth in the Post’s caricature. I do advocate what I and many others have called a post-growth society. To me that is the view that economic growth—by which I mean GDP growth—should no longer be an important national policy objective.

That is plain heresy, of course. Not much in our society is more faithfully followed than the gospel of economic growth. To know what growth critics are up against, consider this remarkable passage from J. R. McNeill’s environmental history of the 20th century, Something New Under the Sun. He writes that the “growth fetish” solidified its hold on imaginations and institutions in the twentieth century:

“Social, moral, and ecological ills were sustained in the interest of economic growth; indeed, adherents to the faith proposed that only more growth could resolve such ills. Economic growth became the indispensable ideology of the state nearly everywhere. … The overarching priority of economic growth was easily the most important idea of the twentieth century.”

Despite the heresy, I want to offer five reasons why I think the Post should reconsider and join us in questioning GDP growth as a national priority. Five is a lot, but the points are short—and important.

First, our measure of growth, gross domestic product, is terribly flawed and should be pushed off its exalted pedestal. GDP should stand for Grossly Distorted Picture. Never mind that GDP is simply a cumulative measure of all activity in the formal economy—good things and bad things, costs and benefits, mere market activity, money changing hands, busyness in the economy—for the bigger it gets, the greater the private profit and public revenue. Never mind also that even the creator of its formalisms, Simon Kuznets, warned in the 1930s that

“distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth. … Goals for ‘more’ growth should specify more growth of what and for what.”

Though it is still very much on its pedestal, GDP’s continued reign must be challenged, and many economists agree. Favoring growth when that growth is measured by GDP is a tragic blunder.

What we need is a dashboard of alternative indicators. It should include (1) measures of true economic progress that correct and adjust GDP so that we can gauge sustainable economic and environmental welfare, (2) indicators of objective social wellbeing such as the status of health, education, and economic security, (3) indexes of environmental conditions and trends, (4) indicators of democratic performance, and (5) measures of subjective wellbeing such as life satisfaction, happiness, and trust.

Here is good news: Indicators of all these types have already been developed!

The first of the above indicators responds to society’s need for a monetized measure that corrects the shortcomings of GDP. Such a measure could then be compared to uncorrected GDP on a regular, quarterly basis.  The results of country studies using such a measure show changes in public welfare eventually flatlining while GDP continues to grow, not producing additional wellbeing.

That leads to the second point: GDP growth doesn’t deliver the claimed social and economic benefits. Since 1980, real GDP in the United States has tripled, and per capita GDP has doubled. Phenomenal growth! You would think America would be a paradise. But during this period real hourly wages of US workers hardly budged, stagnating while the pay at the top skyrocketed as did a vast inequality. Simultaneously, life satisfaction flatlined, social capital eroded, families lived paycheck to paycheck, and the environment declined. Over this period, the US dropped from the No. 1 country on the UN’s Human Development Index to No. 21. As I describe in what follows, desperately seeking more GDP growth is unlikely to yield better results.

My third concern is a major one: the overriding imperative to grow gives overriding power to those, mainly the corporations, that have the capital and technology to deliver that growth. And, much the same thing, the growth imperative wars against a long list of public policies that would improve national wellbeing but are said to “slow growth” and to “hurt the economy.”

Such policies include shorter workweeks and longer vacations; greater labor protections, including a living minimum wage, protection of labor’s right to organize, and generous parental leaves; guarantees to part-time workers; new incentives for a twenty-first-century corporation, one that embraces rechartering, new ownership patterns, and stakeholder primacy rather than shareholder primacy; restrictions on advertising; incentives for local and locally owned production and consumption; strong social and environmental provisions in trade agreements; rigorous environmental, health, and consumer protection; greater economic equality with genuinely progressive taxation of the rich and greater income support for the poor; increased spending on neglected public services; and powerful initiatives to sharply curb greenhouse gas emissions nationally and globally.

Taken together, these policies would undoubtedly slow GDP growth, but quality of life would improve, and that’s what matters.

Fourth, the growth imperative reinforces our dreadful consumerism. Recall that GDP is 70 percent consumer spending. American consumerism is definitely pathological but essential to keep the current system going. The New York Times ran a story a while back that summed up the matter nicely: “Why Americans Must Keep Spending—Households perceive an endless stream of needs, and besides, the economy depends on it.”

In my book America the Possible I discuss a series of policy changes that could curb our consumerist addiction, but here I want to stress something else. Our search for meaning and belonging through having more material things deflects us from pursuing the real sources of happiness and satisfaction: close ties in families and with friends, development of skills and talents, informal education, helping others and volunteering, exposure to the natural world, sports and play, and even politics. Many people do sense that today there is a great misdirection of life’s energy and that, as Martin Seligman said,

“Materialism is toxic to happiness.”

My fifth and final point, of course, is that economic activity and its growth are the principal drivers of massive, continuing environmental decline. The economy consumes natural resources (both renewable and nonrenewable resources), occupies the land, and releases pollutants. As the economy has grown, so has biological impoverishment and pollutants of great variety, including a handful of greenhouse gases. Economist Paul Ekins observed that

“The sacrifice of the environment to economic growth. . . has unquestionably been a feature of economic development at least since the birth of industrialism.”

Time for something better

Of late, there has been serious work done to see if societies can have it both ways: can growth go up while environmental destruction goes down? This challenging possibility has been called “green growth.” That may be what the Post is advocating, but the editorial board seems unaware of this work. It is a fair question, and there are qualified analysts on both sides. One of the best is Canadian economist Peter Victor. I admire Victor’s books and articles and have been influenced by them. So perhaps it is predictable that I agree with him on green growth’s prospects.

Victor’s latest book is last year’s Escape from Overshoot. In analyzing the pros and cons of the green growth proposal, Victor concludes that “the prospects for long-term green growth are discouraging and they become more so the faster the economy grows.”  Victor sees potential benefit from green growth policies in the short term, but concludes:

“More and more goods and services cannot be produced out of less and less forever. Green growth, which depends on the endless dematerialization of GDP, does not offer a plausible, even possible, long-term solution.”

Who does GDP growth benefit? A growing economy can be good for the bottom line of businesses, large and small. Government revenues go up when the economy grows: the taxman does not care if the activity is healthy or harmful. There are countries in the developing world where strong GDP growth could make a big positive difference. And we cannot forget the national security complex. For security hawks the global projection of a strong America is aided by robust GDP growth. We shouldn’t just try to wish all these complex matters away, but we can find ways to address them, including by looking around the world for ideas.

Our society tends to see growth as an unalloyed good, but an expanding body of evidence is now telling us to think again. The never-ending drive to grow the overall US economy has produced a ruthless international search for energy and other resources, brought us to the cusp of environmental ruin, led us away from badly needed policies and social growth, and rests on a manufactured consumerism that does not meet the deepest human needs. It’s time for something better. To me, that something better is post-growth, where society focuses major policy interventions on growing the activities that benefit people, place, and planet and on shrinking those things that do the opposite and, all the while, not pausing to worry about GDP.

Photo by Sam Balye on Unsplash

Gus Speth

James Gustave Speth is author of America the Possible: Manifesto for a New Economy (Yale Press) and, most recently, They Knew: The U.S. Federal Government’s Role in Causing the Climate Crisis (MIT Press). He has served as Dean of the Yale School of the Environment, as President of the World Resources Institute, and as Administrator of the UN Development Programme. He was Chair of the US Council on Environmental Quality during the Carter Administration.

This 16th-century law was England’s first ‘refugee policy’

Emigration of the Huguenots (1566) by Jan Antoon Neuhuys. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

THE CONVERSATION
Published: August 13, 2024 

Between around 1540 and 1590, several thousand people fleeing religious persecution in what is today the Netherlands arrived in England. Political philosopher Hannah Arendt argued in her 1951 book, The Origins of Totalitarianism, that such migrants were the “happier predecessors” of modern refugees, who are faced with the “severest restrictions”.

The idea that those fleeing religious persecution in early modernity were in some way happier than modern refugees is often linked to the idea that there were no border controls.

This is, to some extent, true – there was no meaningful system of international border control in 16th-century England. And there were no laws or guards to prevent someone from entering and settling in a new country.

But migrants were subject to border control within England itself, which took several forms. The English parliament passed laws restricting migrants from setting up in trade in 1523, 1529 and 1530. These laws culminated in the 1540 Act Concerning Strangers, which meant most migrants could not legally work.


Legal handbooks from the time, which I am studying in my PhD research, described limitations on migrants’ ability to hold or bequeath property, as well as their limited standing in court. They also noted that migrants were subject to the laws of the land if they committed a crime. This principle was affirmed by Courteen’s Case, a 1618 case concerning Dutch merchants, in which a judge ruled that migrants living in England could be tried for crimes committed there.

Despite these restrictions, the crown did sometimes recognise the persecution of these 16th-century Dutch migrants, and gave some of them a level of protection. However, these were “privileges” – not the same as the rights that English subjects enjoyed.

In 1550, Edward VI granted migrants the use of the “Stranger Church”, a space in which to worship in their own languages and out of conformity with the Church of England. The crown also took surveys of the “returns of aliens” from 1560 onwards – to find out whether migrants had arrived “uppon pretence of fleeing for persequcon for ye cause of relligon”.

Despite this recognition, internal barriers to settlement remained in place. The majority of migrants settled in London, and it is clear from archival documents that they were frequently prosecuted under the 1540 Act for working. As a group of Dutch immigrants complained in 1560:


[We] cannot believe that you wish those who, for the sake of the true religion … have come hither … as to a free and safe place, to be precluded from the very first from your dominion … The grant of this temple [the Stranger Church] would benefit the strangers little if they had no liberty to reside and to exercise their trade.
A new life in England

Some who fled religious persecution were invited by towns such as Norwich and Canterbury to settle. Migrants were constituted as a separate community: permission to settle was tied to living in specific places, in specific numbers, and their rights of trade and manufacture were limited to specific goods.

Perhaps more importantly, these settlements were established under letters patent – legal instruments which did not have the same power as statutes. This meant the migrants in these communities could still be prosecuted under the 1540 Act Concerning Strangers.

Letters patent were also temporary, renewable on the death of each monarch. Flurries of letters between migrant communities on the death of Elizabeth I show just how anxious these communities were that their limited privileges might be revoked.

In 1616, Dutch migrants in Norwich complained that, despite having been settled as a community for over 50 years, they suffered “greevous molestations” on the grounds of “certaine ancient Actes and Statuts, whereby Strangers are forbidden to keepe house and use their severall crafts”.

Like some migrants today, many lived precariously, sometimes getting away with illegal working or, if they had the right connections, receiving protection from powerful people. They wanted the laws revoked and to receive proper protection in recognition of their persecution.

Refugees near the Croatia-Serbia border in 2015. BalkansCat/Shutterstock

But the law persisted. In 1685, around 50,000 Huguenots arrived in England fleeing persecution in France, to find that despite an outpouring of charitable donations, they were still unable to meaningfully settle due to statutes like the 1540 Act.

For 40 years, debate raged about whether a law should be passed for a “general naturalisation”. This would be a cheap and easy way for the Huguenots to become English subjects and overcome the restrictions faced by other persecuted migrants.

This debate culminated in the passage of the Foreign Protestants Naturalisation Act in 1708. But it was revoked in 1712 when the government became worried it had encouraged thousands of German “poor Palatines” to emigrate to England.
Protecting refugees today

Of course, we cannot judge laws from 1540 by today’s standards. But it is striking how many similar debates are ongoing about whether those fleeing persecution should be offered protection, and what rights they should have in a host country. As I’m finding in my research, the idea that early modern refugees were necessarily “happier” than today’s refugees is wrong.

Modern refugee policies hinge on the idea that those fleeing persecution have a right to protection. This was not part of considerations when the Act Concerning Strangers was passed. It was perhaps not until the provisions of the 1951 UN Convention that those seeking sanctuary in England could be guaranteed protection and meaningful settlement.

Today, this right is under threat and imperfectly recognised in many countries around the world. But in theory, it is a guarantee that people will not be returned to harmful situations they have left, and have rights in the country in which they settle.

Author  

Kathleen Commons
PhD candidate, history, University of Sheffield
Disclosure statement
Kathleen Commons receives funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (White Rose College of Arts and Humanities) for her PhD research.

Afghan Women's Group 'Purple Saturdays Movement' Calls For Urgent International Action Against Taliban's 'Rampant Misogyny,' Says UN Risks Its Reputation

August 13, 2024
Special Dispatch No. 11500

Days before the Afghan Taliban regime completes three years in power on August 15, 2024, the Afghan women's rights group "Purple Saturdays Movement" issued an urgent call for action against the Taliban's "rampant misogyny' in Afghanistan, saying also that the United Nations risks losing its reputation in the eyes of the world for failing to protect Afghan women.

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA, i.e., the Afghan Taliban), which took over Afghanistan on August 15, 2021, has banned all girls over age six and women from schools, colleges, and universities, and has banned women from work, businesses, offices, sports arenas, parks, and all public activities.

Women's groups have been urging the world to recognize the Taliban's "gender apartheid."[1] "The Taliban's rule has been marked by rampant misogyny, violence against women, and systemic efforts to strip women of their rights and freedoms. However, the response of the international community and the United Nations to the Taliban's atrocities has been concerningly inadequate," the Purple Saturdays Movement said in a statement on August 5.

In a June 25 statement, the Purple Saturdays Movement stressed that the UN risks losing its reputation for failing to pressure the Taliban: "The choice is clear: protecting human rights and women's participation [at the international meetings on the future of Afghanistan] is not just a duty but a moral imperative that the UN must fulfill to retain its relevance and respect on the global stage."

Afghan woman in chains (courtesy: awcswo.org)

Following is the text of the August 5 statement:[2]

"The Taliban's Return To Power Has Led To A Severe Rollback Of Women's Rights In Afghanistan; Reports Of Sexual Violence, Including Rape By Taliban Members, Have Increased Alarmingly"

"The Purple Saturdays Movement: A Call For Urgent Action Against Taliban Misogyny In Afghanistan

"In the three years since the Taliban regained control in Afghanistan, the group has become notorious internationally for its egregious treatment of women. The Taliban's rule has been marked by rampant misogyny, violence against women, and systemic efforts to strip women of their rights and freedoms. However, the response of the international community and the United Nations to the Taliban's atrocities has been concerningly inadequate.

"The Purple Saturdays Movement has emerged as a powerful voice against these injustices, advocating for stronger actions from global entities to address and rectify the dire human rights situation in Afghanistan. The movement highlights the urgent need for the United Nations and the international community to take decisive measures against the Taliban to prevent further suffering and degradation of women's rights in the country.

"Misogyny and Violence Under Taliban Rule

"The Taliban's return to power has led to a severe rollback of women's rights in Afghanistan. Reports of sexual violence, including rape by Taliban members, have increased alarmingly. Forced marriages, particularly involving girls under the age of 18, have become more common, perpetuating cycles of abuse and inequality. This climate of fear and oppression has also led to a tragic rise in suicides among women, who see no escape from the brutality imposed upon them.

"Additionally, the Taliban's harsh and repressive policies have driven many women into drug addiction as a means of coping with the unbearable conditions of their daily lives. The combination of these factors is creating a humanitarian disaster in Afghanistan, with women bearing the brunt of the Taliban's oppressive regime."

"Severing Diplomatic Ties With The Taliban Until They Demonstrate A Genuine Commitment To Respecting Human Rights, Particularly Those Of Women And Girls"

"The International Community's Role

"The Purple Saturdays Movement argues that the international community and the United Nations have not done enough to confront the Taliban and protect Afghanistan women. Despite clear evidence of human rights violations, the global response has been tepid, with some nations even continuing to engage diplomatically with the Taliban. This approach not only legitimizes the Taliban's rule but also emboldens them to continue their abuses without fear of repercussions.

"The movement calls for immediate and concrete actions from the international community, including:

"1. Imposing Sanctions: Implementing targeted sanctions against Taliban leaders and entities that are directly involved in human rights abuses.

"2. Humanitarian Support: Providing robust support to Afghanistan civil society organizations that are working to protect women's rights and offer services to survivors of violence.

"3. Diplomatic Isolation: Severing diplomatic ties with the Taliban until they demonstrate a genuine commitment to respecting human rights, particularly those of women and girls.

"4. International Monitoring: Establishing an independent international body to monitor and report on the human rights situation in Afghanistan, ensuring accountability for violations...

"The situation in Afghanistan under Taliban rule is dire, and the consequences for women are catastrophic. The Purple Saturdays Movement serves as a crucial reminder of the urgent need for the international community to act decisively and with purpose. The United Nations and global powers must prioritize the protection of human rights in Afghanistan and stand in solidarity with the women who are fighting for their freedom and dignity. Without such intervention, the suffering of Afghanistan women will only continue to escalate, leading to a deeper humanitarian crisis."

Following is the text of the June 25 statement:[3]

"The United Nations Will Do Eternal Damage To Its Reputation By Abandoning Its Duty To Protect Human Rights"; "[It] Also Sends A Dangerous Message Globally: That Women's Rights Are Negotiable And Secondary To Political Expediency"

"Indeed, the United Nations will do eternal damage to its reputation by abandoning its duty to protect human rights and women's participation [in the Third Doha meeting, June 30-July 1, 2024] in a shameful attempt to appease the Taliban. The global community relies on the UN as a beacon of hope and justice, particularly in regions where fundamental freedoms are under constant threat. In Afghanistan, the plight of women and girls has been particularly severe since the Taliban's resurgence, with significant rollbacks on their rights to education, work, and public life.

"The UN mandate includes the protection and promotion of human rights, with a specific focus on ensuring gender equality and empowering women. However, recent actions and negotiations with the Taliban suggest a troubling departure from these principles. Any move to placate the Taliban without securing concrete commitments to uphold women's rights risks undermining decades of progress and the very credibility of the UN.

Under the Taliban, women are forced to protest from within four-walls of homes

"The Impact on Women and Girls

"Since the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan, there have been numerous reports of women being forced out of their jobs, girls being banned from secondary education, and increased enforcement of draconian dress codes and mobility restrictions. These actions are in direct violation of international human rights standards, which the UN is supposed to uphold.

"Abandoning these responsibilities not only betrays Afghanistan women and girls but also sends a dangerous message globally: that women's rights are negotiable and secondary to political expediency. This could embolden other regimes with poor human rights records to act with impunity, knowing that the international response may be compromised by political considerations."

"The UN Stands At A Critical Juncture; It Can Choose To Uphold Its Foundational Principles And Fight For The Rights Of Afghanistan Women And Girls, Or It Can Capitulate To Political Pressures And Tarnish Its Legacy"

"The Moral And Ethical Obligation

"The UN was established to foster peace, security, and cooperation among nations, with an unequivocal commitment to human rights. Its charter and various treaties and declarations, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), underscore its duty to protect the most vulnerable.

"Failing to stand firm against the Taliban's abuses not only undermines these instruments but also erodes the moral authority of the UN. Furthermore, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 5 which aims to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls, cannot be realized if the international community turns a blind eye to such egregious violations. The UN's credibility in promoting and achieving these goals hinges on its consistency and integrity in defending human rights everywhere.

"The Way Forward

"To restore and maintain its reputation, the UN must take a principled stand. This means unequivocally condemning the Taliban's actions that infringe on human rights, particularly those affecting women and girls. The UN should leverage its diplomatic and economic tools to press for real and verifiable commitments to human rights from the Taliban. This includes ensuring that women and girls can return to school, work, and participate freely in public life without fear of reprisal.

"Moreover, the UN should increase its support for local and international NGOs working on the ground to protect and promote women's rights in Afghanistan. By amplifying the voices of Afghanistan women and girls, the UN can help ensure that their rights are not sacrificed at the altar of political compromise. In conclusion, the UN stands at a critical juncture. It can choose to uphold its foundational principles and fight for the rights of Afghanistan women and girls, or it can capitulate to political pressures and tarnish its legacy. The choice is clear: protecting human rights and women's participation is not just a duty but a moral imperative that the UN must fulfill to retain its relevance and respect on the global stage."

 

---

[1] MEMRI Special Dispatches Series No. 11414, Afghan Women's Groups Urge Boycott Of Doha Meeting: Doha Has Been 'An Unholy Place And A Bitter Platform For The People Of Afghanistan'; 'The Taliban Have Violated And Trampled All Values, International Covenants, And The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights', June 24, 2024.

[2] Afghanwomennews.com, August 5, 2024.

[3] PurpleSaturdays.org, June 25, 2024.

WALES/CYMRU

New data reveals the highest number of school leavers progressing straight into the labour market in 15 years

August 13, 2024

South Wales Reporting Team 

13 percent of Year 13’s decided to go straight into employment in 2023

Working Wales can provide free support and guidance to young people ahead of results day

As exam results are being released, the Welsh Government is urging young people in Wales to explore the various options and support available to them in their post-school or college endeavours.

According to recent data1 from Wales’s national careers advice service, Careers Wales, there has been a significant increase in the number of students entering the workforce immediately after completing Year 11. This percentage is the highest it has been since 2008 at 9%.

However, despite seeing this rise in Year 11 students entering the workforce, the majority still choose to pursue full-time education (FTE) as their preferred path.Figures also showed that young women in Wales were more likely to stay in education, compared to their male counterparts. In Year 13, there was a notable difference of 9.2% points between the number of young women and men continuing in full-time education.

Thanks to the Welsh Government’s Young Person’s Guarantee, all young people in Wales have access to a variety of support to assist them in their journeys. The Young Person’s Guarantee was established to ensure all under-25s in Wales can access support to gain a place in education or training, find a job, or become self-employed.

Working Wales provides free and impartial careers advice and guidance to school and college leavers, offering support to help young people confidently navigate their next steps.

Upon completing her A-levels, 18-year-old Sophie Seymour from Newport successfully secured an apprenticeship, choosing a different path than most young women, who typically opt to continue in education.

Sophie faced uncertainty when she received her results, leading her to explore various paths before ultimately securing an apprenticeship with the guidance of her Working Wales adviser.

She explained: “An apprenticeship had never really been a part of my plan. I originally thought I wanted to be a flight attendant, and then I thought I wanted to be a teacher or a police officer. I even applied for some university courses, before I realised that this wasn’t the right pathway for me. I was really confused about what to do.”

Sophie successfully secured an apprenticeship in a local travel agent. However, when it came time for her interview, she sought guidance from Working Wales, following a recommendation from her friend.

“I was really excited about the apprenticeship, because I loved the idea of working in travel, but I get anxious, especially during interviews. I was worried that my nerves might affect my chances of securing the position. My careers adviser, Shawney, was incredibly helpful in preparing me.”

“Shawney helped with practice questions to make sure that I felt confident, and when I had doubts, she really encouraged me that I was doing well. She also gave me exercises to help me stop tapping and fidgeting when I became nervous, which was a big help.”

Thanks to the support Sophie received, she passed her interview and secured her apprenticeship at the travel agent.

Sophie said, “Having someone to talk to, who had a deep understanding of the process and knew about all the different options available to me was invaluable. Because she understood how stressful the interview was for me, I felt like she was just so much more understanding of my needs and how to work with me.”

With a new wave of young people beginning to lay the foundations of their careers, it’s important to understand the future needs of the Welsh economy. The need for a tech literate workforce is growing, with new data showing that the number of online job adverts asking for Microsoft Excel has doubled in the last 3 years in Wales2.

This was something Sophie was conscious of when she was at school. She said: “I did an IT A-level as I know so many different jobs involve technology, and I wanted to make sure that I had the necessary skills employers are looking for.”

Nikki Lawrence, Chief Executive of Careers Wales, said:

“Stories like Sophie’s showcase the importance of young people reaching out for support at whatever stage they feel they need it most. Providing both practical and compassionate advice is fundamental to our offering, and it is inspiring to hear what an impact this has.

“Sophie’s story also reminds us that there are different options available for young people receiving their results, and it’s important that they are aware they can explore any of these routes.

“As always, we’re here to help anyone who might need support after getting their results this summer. We can offer expert advice and guidance to help young people access routes they might not have previously considered to achieve their goals.

“Young people have a lot on their minds, especially at this time of year, and we know that some people can become overwhelmed with making choices about their future careers or might not know the options available to them. There is the right path out there for everyone, and our Working Wales careers advisers are here to help them take the first steps towards finding that.”

A significant portion of young individuals in Wales (31%) have expressed pessimism regarding their future education or employment prospects3. Although the world of work may seem like a daunting place, the reality is a much more positive one. Research in 2024 by Labour Market Analytics company Lightcast™, found that the demand for digital skills is already growing, with further growth forecast for key sectors such as energy and health.

Indeed, numerous sectors within the Welsh economy are expected to see real growth over next 5 years and as they do so, so too do the career prospects of thousands of people taking their first career steps.

Ken Skates, Cabinet Secretary for the Economy, Transport and North Wales said:

“It’s encouraging to see our young people following different pathways after getting their results, helping us to create a healthy foundation for our future workforce in Wales and demonstrating that there is a path to a prosperous career in Wales for everyone, regardless of background or circumstance.

“As always, ahead of the results period this year, I’d like to wish everyone waiting for results good luck, and encourage young learners and those around them to familiarise themselves with the Young Person’s Guarantee and the raft of support and options that are now available to students in Wales.”

—

For more information about the Young Person’s Guarantee, and how to access support around results, visit the Working Wales website, call free on 0800 028 4844, speak to an adviser via webchat, or email workingwales@careerswales.gov.wales

Hong Kong: Conviction for participation in peaceful protest makes a mockery of the rule of law

Posted on August 13, 2024 

ARTICLE 19 strongly condemns yesterday’s decision in which the Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal unanimously dismissed an appeal by Jimmy Lai and six other pro-democracy campaigners to overturn the conviction for their role in an August 2019 peaceful protest, attended by an estimated 1.7 million people. Lord David Neuberger, a former British Supreme Court Justice who sits as a Non-Permanent Judge at the Hong Kong court and was among the five justices to hear the appeal, said after that the issues had been ‘fully considered’. ARTICLE 19 is alarmed at Lord Neuberger’s ongoing presence on the Hong Kong court, which lends credibility to a system actively dismantling the rule of law. We reiterate our call for him to resign. Jimmy Lai, and other pro-democracy campaigners must be immediately and unconditionally released. Hong Kong must protect the freedoms of expression and peaceful protest.

 

Michael Caster, ARTICLE 19’s Asia Digital Program Manager, said:

“Hong Kong is systematically abandoning all pretence of the rule of law with each unjust decision such as this, made worse by the imprimatur of foreign justices like Lord Neuberger, who lamentably also chairs the High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom under the global Media Freedom Coalition. No amount of judicial pageantry can change the purely political nature of the ongoing assault on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong.”

 

Jimmy Lai, 76, a British citizen, along with six others, Martin Lee, Margaret Ng, Albert Ho, Lee Cheuk-yan, ‘Long Hair’ Leung Kwok-hung and Cyd Ho were earlier convicted for their part in an unauthorised assembly on 18 August 2019. A high point of the pro-democracy protest movement, on that day some 1.7 million people joined a demonstration at Victoria Park, once the site of the annual Tiananmen Square candlelight memorial demonstration which has also become a victim of Hong Kong’s embrace of authoritarianism. The campaigners were cleared of the previous conviction for organising the assembly and were appealing the charges for participation.

Arguing on behalf of Jimmy Lai, the defence highlighted that any restrictions on the freedom of expression, assembly, and other fundamental freedoms must be ‘proportionate’. Two UK Supreme Court decisions were cited in arguing that a conviction over unauthorised assemblies where no serious public disorder or violence takes place would be a disproportionate restriction on the freedom of peaceful assembly. In their opinion, Chief Justice Andrew Cheung and Judge Roberto Ribeiro held that the UK decision had no bearing. Following the decision, Neuberger claimed that constitutional differences between Hong Kong and the UK require different approaches in acting on proportionality.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which is binding on Hong Kong, clearly requires that restrictions on the freedom of expression and assembly must be necessary and proportionate.

In June, two other British justices, Lawrence Collins and Jonathan Sumption, withdrew from the Hong Kong court. Jonathan Sumption explained his decision citing the fact that Hong Kong is ‘slowly becoming a totalitarian state’ where ‘the rule of law is profoundly compromised’.

At the time, Lord Neuberger told Reuters that he would remain on the court in Hong Kong to ‘to support the rule of law in Hong Kong, as best I can.’

“The ongoing legal harassment of anyone who dares to plan or participate in pro-democracy protests is clearly designed to signal that in Hong Kong there is no freedom of expression or peaceful protest,” said Caster. “The participation of sympathetic foreign justices in this crackdown on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong, coupled with the ongoing transnational repression of protest leaders and campaigners abroad, are both part of China’s efforts to reframe authoritarianism and repression at home and around the world, behind the veil of the rule of law. Staying on in Hong Kong now to ‘support the rule of law’merely supports repression.”

In light of ongoing and persistent attacks on the freedom to protest, independent media, and broader freedom of expression, ARTICLE 19 calls on the foreign judges still sitting on Hong Kong’s highest court to withdraw themselves. They must stand for the principles of judicial independence and the rule of law, which are fundamental to the legal profession.

We also call on the Media Freedom Coalition and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, as the secretariat for the High Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom, to review Lord Neuberger’s role as Chair should he continue to willfully lend credibility to a system that clearly neither respects media freedoms nor broader human rights and rule of law protections.

ARTICLE 19 has consistently highlighted the deterioration of rights in Hong Kong since the 2019 protests, the arrests that followed, and authorities’ introduction and use of national security laws to censor dissent.

 

Multi-national food factory fined £360,000 after worker's fingers cut off

The employee lost the fingers on his right hand after attempting to unblock an ingredient blender at a Glasgow factory.

© Google Maps 2024

Kerry Ingredients produces dry seasonings, blends and dry gravy and curry mixes for the food industry.

Calum Loudon
AUGUST 12,2024


A multi-national food company based in Scotland has been fined £360,000 after a worker’s fingers were cut off by a machine.

The 39-year-old man was attempting to unblock a mixer that blended dry seasoning blends at a Kerry Ingredients factory in Hillington, Renfrewshire, in August 2021.

The firm produces dry seasonings, blends and dry gravy and curry mixes for the food industry – during the mixing process the machine began to develop a blockage.

The worker tried to clear the blockage by removing a part of the blender and inserting his right hand – where it came into contact with the rotating blades.

Four of his figners were cut off.

Following the incident, the man has had to re-learn how to do everything with his left hand.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that there were no fixed guards preventing access to the blades from the underside.

It was also established there were not any interlocked guards which would have stopped the rotating parts if any component on the underside of the mixer were to be removed.

Kerry Ingredients plead guilty to a contravention of The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations and the Health and Safety at Work Act.

At a hearing on August 8, the company was fined £360,000.

HSE principal inspector Hazel Dobb said: “This incident could so easily have been avoided by simply carrying out correct control measures and safe working practices.

“Companies should be aware that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required standard

Cost-of-living crisis blamed as probable suicides rise in Scotland



The rate for men was more than three times higher than that for women 

by Kirsteen Paterson
13 August 2024
@kapaterson

The cost-of-living crisis may be behind a "distressing" rise in probable suicides in Scotland, it is claimed.

Almost 800 deaths in Scotland were recorded as probable suicides in 2023.

The total – 792 – marks a rise of 30 on the previous year.

Professor Rory O'Connor, chair of the Scottish Government’s Suicide Prevention Academic Advisory Group, said the pressures of the cost-of-living crisis and economic downturn may be to blame.

While the number of female cases decreased by four to a total of 202, the suicide rate in men was more than three times as high.

Male suicides increased by 34 to 590, National Records of Scotland (NRS) figures show.

The average age of death for suicides has also increased from 41.9 in 2000 to 46.6 in 2023.

The suicide rate was "significantly" higher than the national average in Dundee City, Highland and East Ayrshire council areas, NRS said.

While comparable statistics for the rest of the UK are yet to be released, Scotland had the highest incidence in 2022.

O'Connor said: "Similar to other countries, sadly an increase is not unexpected given the challenges of recent years, including the cost-of-living crisis and the economic downturn, which have led to financial and social hardship for so many.

"Every single death is heartbreaking, leaving behind devastated families, friends and communities. We need to continue to do everything we can to ensure that those at risk of suicide receive the care and support that they need when they need it."

Responding to the figures, mental wellbeing minister Maree Todd said: "This report makes for distressing reading and my sincere condolences go out to all those who have been affected by the loss of a loved one by suicide.

"I am determined that together with [councils organisation] Cosla and other partners we reduce the number of deaths by suicide and improve the nation's mental health as a whole."

Todd said groups deemed at higher risk of suicide will be prioritised, including "those living in poverty, middle-aged men and LGBT communities".

An online resource including information about help for those feeling suicidal is to be launched and Todd said the introduction of suicide reviews this year will help authorities "spot missed opportunities to support people and, importantly, use that learning to redesign services".

Anyone affected by these issues can access support from organisations including the NHS 24 Mental Health Hub, Breathing Space and Samaritans.

China's new ambassador to Germany faces ties tested by spying accusations

South China Morning Post
Sun, Aug 4, 20244

China has picked a seasoned diplomat with decades of US affairs experience to be its next top envoy to Germany, according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

Deng Hongbo is deputy director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Communist Party's Central Committee, a primary body for shaping and coordinating China's foreign policy. He will succeed Wu Ken as Beijing's ambassador to Berlin.

The nomination, which has not been made public, comes as ties between the two countries are tested by Berlin's espionage accusations against Beijing.

Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.

Germany on Wednesday accused China of being behind a 2021 cyber spying attack against its federal cartography agency and summoned Beijing's ambassador to lodge a complaint.

China rejected the German claim, calling it a "baseless" accusation.

"It's smearing for political purposes," the Chinese foreign ministry's top Europe official, Wang Lutong, wrote on Friday on social media platform X, formerly Twitter.

That was about four months after the Chinese ministry summoned German ambassador Patricia Flor over Berlin's arrest of four Germans accused of spying for Beijing, urging Germany to stop "malicious speculation and anti-China political farce".

China's ambassador to Germany is considered a vice-ministerial post - the same level as its envoys to permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and a rank Deng already holds.


Deng, 59, has years of experience working on Beijing's relations with Washington.

After being posted in Vietnam for about five years, Deng began a long career at the Chinese embassy in the US in 1993, serving in various positions until 2005, when he left for the Chinese foreign ministry's department of North American and Oceanian affairs.

After two years as a deputy head of the department and a stint of less than one year as China's ambassador to Kenya, he was reassigned in 2010 to the embassy in Washington as China's No 2 diplomat there until his departure three years later.

In November 2018, it was confirmed that Deng had taken up his current position at the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Communist Party's Central Committee.

His public appearances include a visit to the southwestern megacity of Chongqing last September to inspect a local agricultural project supported by the commission and a November 2022 briefing to his colleagues about the 20th party congress.

Chinese ambassador to Germany Wu Ken delivers a farewell speech at Beijing's embassy in Berlin on July 24. Photo: Chinese embassy in Germany alt=Chinese ambassador to Germany Wu Ken delivers a farewell speech at Beijing's embassy in Berlin on July 24. Photo: Chinese embassy in Germany>

Wu, who has served as China's ambassador to Germany since 2019, was officially confirmed to be leaving the post last week.

During a farewell speech at the Chinese embassy in Berlin on July 24, Wu said bilateral ties had navigated the tests of the Covid-19 pandemic and geopolitical conflicts over the past five years.

"China-Germany relations have always been an important stabilising factor in China-EU relations. Exchanges and cooperation in various fields have remained close and fruitful," he said, adding that frequent high-level exchanges had "provided strong strategic guidance for the development of bilateral relations".

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited China for three days in April. In his public remarks during the trip, Scholz did not throw his support behind Brussels' de-risking agenda.

His previous trip to China in November 2022 was the first by any leader from the Group of Seven nations since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Germany has long been China's biggest trading partner in Europe.

China was Germany's top trading partner in the world for eight years in a row until it was dethroned by the US in the first quarter of this year, according to data from the German Federal Statistical Office.

Germany's direct investment in China in the first half of the year grew 18.1 per cent year on year in Chinese yuan terms, while overall inflows into the world's second-biggest economy fell 29.1 per cent during the same time frame, according to the Chinese commerce ministry.

Beijing also shares some concerns with Berlin when it comes to EU tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

During his trip to China in June, Germany's vice chancellor and minister for economic affairs Robert Habeck said that "tariffs only ultimately hurt the market, I don't want them. I hope nobody in Europe wants the tariffs. Therefore, we should work to avoid it."

While in Beijing, Habeck said that Germany's China strategy, which was released a year ago and labelled the country a "partner, competitor and systemic rival", needed to be updated to include a long-term plan and take Europe's approach into account.

However, Habeck also said China's support for Russia in the war against Ukraine was the main reason for the deterioration in economic relations between Berlin and Beijing.

This article originally appeared in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), the most authoritative voice reporting on China and Asia for more than a century. For more SCMP stories, please explore the SCMP app or visit the SCMP's Facebook and Twitter pages. Copyright © 2024 South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.

Copyright (c) 2024. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.