AUSTRALIA

Science ‘has critical role to play in drought preparedness’

By Emma Koehn in Melbourne


Australian academy says draft government drought plan should boost coordination of scientific knowledge and expertise

A national plan to support communities through future drought conditions must acknowledge the role science and research play in helping Australia prepare for extreme conditions, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has been told.

A consultation closed on 20 September on “a new Australian government drought plan” that outlines the investments that will be made in data tools and policies to support families financially and emotionally through future drought conditions.

The Australian Academy of Science weighed in on the blueprint, arguing that it must not ignore the role of science. “Science has a critical role in drought preparedness and a recognition of this should be included in the plan. The global science network is continually developing new tools and knowledge that offer important opportunities for us to build drought and climate resilience into our production systems,” the group said.

Better coordination

In a statement to Research Professional News, the academy said the plan was an opportunity for the government to “articulate an approach to strategic coordination on science relevant to drought and the government’s policy response to build, maintain and grow the pipeline of science and research capabilities required to enable drought preparedness”.

“This should include the science and scientific capability that underpins our fundamental understanding of drought processes and drought resilience,” the group said. “Such coordination is essential for maintaining and enhancing Australia’s drought science expertise, ensuring that critical scientific advances are effectively integrated into drought preparedness and resilience.”

Australia has long invested in projects to help understand climate patterns and forecast the impacts of low rainfall, but this work is completed across a range of separate organisations, including government departments, universities and research institutes.

“A new drought plan provides an opportunity to improve coordination between the wide variety of mechanisms in Australia for supporting research related to drought,” the academy wrote in its submission to the consultation.

Promoting innovation

The draft plan includes a focus on “promoting innovation and adoption of new technologies”, including programmes to test climate-resilient farming practices.

“This work will complement a range of initiatives across all levels of government, as well as the private sector and community organisations, that strengthen adaptation. This includes delivering science, research and evidence-based tools,” the draft report says.

The department will review all feedback on the proposal and release a final national plan by the end of 2024.

Denmark faces EU court questions on housing policy, racism


30 September 2024 - 

By Reuters

A dozen residents of Copenhagen first filed a case against Denmark's ministry of social affairs in 2020 after facing eviction. Stock photo.
Image: 123RF/NATTEE CHALERMTIRAGOOL

Denmark must answer accusations at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on Monday that its policy of demolishing minority-heavy neighbourhoods to promote integration amounts to racial discrimination.

The Nordic country in 2018 introduced what it called a ghetto package, a controversial plan to radically alter certain residential zones, including by tearing down social housing units to disperse residents.

Known for strict immigration policies, Denmark has had relative success in integrating migrants from non-Western countries, with high language proficiency and employment rates, but faced a backlash from those affected by the 2018 plan.

At the core of the case is whether Denmark's use of the term "ethnic origin", often used to describe people of colour when classifying ghetto neighbourhoods, is racially discriminatory.

Denmark defines areas with over 1,000 residents as ghettos if more than 50% are "immigrants and their descendants from non-Western countries", and where at least two other criteria on education, income, crime and work force participation are met.

A dozen residents from Mjolnerparken, a residential area in Copenhagen, first filed a case against Denmark's ministry of social affairs in 2020 after facing eviction.

A Danish court in 2023 requested a preliminary ECJ hearing to determine whether the term "ethnic origin" should be interpreted as including "non-Western" background and, if so, whether this was discriminatory.

Eddie Khawaja, a lawyer for the residents, said the plaintiffs felt stigmatised.

"They feel offended by the fact that in everyday speech, in legislation, in all the political proposals that surround this, they have been referred to as residents of ghetto areas," Khawaja said.

Denmark's ministry of social affairs declined to comment, saying it did not discuss ongoing cases.

Once the ECJ has reached a conclusion, the case will return to the Danish court which will decide how to apply the ruling.

The ICC between Delegation Theory and Community Functions: Perils and Opportunities


30.09.24 | 

[Dr Letizia Lo Giacco is Assistant Professor of Public International Law at the Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies of Leiden University]

A default mode to understand and reflect on the activity of the International Criminal Court (ICC, ‘the Court’) is from the standpoint of international criminal law. This comes of course quite natural, being the Court a permanent pivot in the international criminal justice system. However, the ICC has always been concerned with questions that reach beyond international criminal law and can well be grasped from the vantage point of international institutional law. The aim of this blogpost is to recast the current debate on the authority of the ICC to exercise jurisdiction in the Situation of Palestine with regard to Israeli nationals (for more background, see here) in terms of international institutional law, rather than to draw from the most immediate canons of international criminal law. As I will explain, the question before the Court raises important questions on the nature and function of the ICC within the international community, which bear on the foundational idea of what international organizations are and what motivates their creation in the first place.

The Question Before the ICC

On 20 May 2024, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) requested the Pre-Trial Chamber to issue arrest warrants against top leaders of Hamas as well as of the State of Israel for alleged international crimes committed on the territory of Palestine. Pursuant to the Rome Statute, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction based on the territoriality principle – namely, in case the alleged crimes were committed on the territory of a State Party to the Statute – or on the active personality principle – that is, if the alleged perpetrator of the crime is a national of a State Party (Article 12 ICC St). It is not required that these pre-conditions be met cumulatively for the Court to exercise jurisdiction. Only one pre-condition suffices to that end. Therefore, based on the provisions of the Statute, the ICC may exercise jurisdiction over Israeli nationals, provided that the crimes for which they are allegedly responsible took place on the territory of Palestine – which is a State Party to the Rome Statute as of 1 April 2015.

Nevertheless, arguments have been recently advanced in the context of the Situation of Palestine to the effect of denying the Court’s jurisdiction with respect to Israeli nationals allegedly responsible for crimes committed on the territory of Palestine (see Request by the United Kingdom for Leave to Submit Written Observations pursuant to Rule 103, 10 June 2024, para 18 – then withdrawn under Starmer’s newly elected government; Zipperstein). These arguments assume as axiomatic that an international institution such as the ICC would operate on the basis of a perfect symmetry between powers possessed by state parties domestically and powers conferred to the ICC to exert its functions at the international level. This is misleading and unsound.

For the purposes of this intervention, the crux of the issue before the ICC revolves around whether or not the ICC may exercise its powers to investigate and prosecute international crimes committed on the territory of Palestine by Israeli nationals, notably Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant, in the event one grants that Palestine renounced its criminal jurisdiction over Israeli nationals by bilateral agreement with Israel (the so-called ‘Oslo Accords issue’). To be sure, this is all but uncontroversial and several sound and compelling legal arguments can be made to render the invocation of the Oslo Accords issue moot (see eg Quigley; Haque).

On the one hand, some proponents advocate that the 1995 Oslo Accords (‘Oslo II’) affect the Court’s jurisdiction in relation to Israeli nationals, for they interpret the Accords as preventing Palestine from exerting jurisdiction upon them. Thus, by implication, Palestine would not confer such criminal jurisdiction to the Court, because it does not possess it in principle. This position falls squarely with the model commonly referred to as ‘delegation theory’ or ‘theory of conferral’. It also finds expression in the nemo dat quod non habet doctrine invoked by several participants in the Court’s proceedings under scrutiny (see eg Bachman, Mayersen, Rose and Rubenstein, para.7; Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, para. 12).

Conversely, on the opposite side of the spectrum, other proponents argue that the activity and functioning of the Court do not rest on a delegation of powers by national states but on the fulfilment of a jus puniendi function at the international level. Importantly, within the ICC system informed by the principle of complementarity, such function shall not be read as securing a ‘primary right’ to punish to states, but as making clear that it is their ‘primary responsibility’ to make ‘sovereignty answerable’ (Stahn, p.447). This is fully in line with public law conceptions of the modern state where sovereignty understood as a ‘system of rights is supplanted by one of duties’ (Loughlin, p.371). What is more, the idea of the Court exerting jurisdiction based on conferral of powers that states would normally exercise at the domestic level is simply misplaced, given that states recognise or accept the jurisdiction of the Court, created to perform certain functions and fulfil certain purposes within the international community. This position echoes the so-called ‘functionalist theory’ or ‘functionalism’, which is a shared mode of thinking in both public law (see Loughlin) and public international law (Klabbers; Schermers and Blokker, pp.10-11). Still, while functionalism in public law normatively aspires to public institutions serving the common good, in public international law, functionalism arguably postulates that international organizations are a necessity to the realization of the common good in the international community, thus assuming as axiomatic that community interests are better fulfilled by international organizations than by individual states alone (Klabbers, p. 647).

As anticipated, instead of indulging into the merits of the jurisdictional challenge in the specific situation – distinguished amici curiae already eminently tackled this issue (see, among others, Schabas, Haque, Pinzauti and Heinsch, Lynk and Falk) – I intend to recast the question before the Court in the register of international institutional law, by looking at the Court as a public institution performing public functions within the international community. In fact, whether or not the Court may exercise jurisdiction over Israeli nationals for acts committed on the territory of Palestine foregrounds prominent and long-standing issues of international institutional law, going to the heart of what an international organization is and how its relationship with member states in to be governed. In other words, the issue in front of the Court is not just one of jurisdictional powers but it is, most fundamentally, one involving a choice of paradigm which runs across the law of international organizations and reflects on how international legal thought conceives of them.

Two Outlooks at the ICC qua an International Organization

The ICC is not only an international organization, but it is also a public one. First, the ICC uncontroversially qualifies as an international organization (ILC, Article 2(a) DARIO), insofar it was established by a treaty governed by international law (ie the Rome Statute) and possesses its own legal personality (Article 4 Rome Statute). Secondly, its public character can be arguably derived from formal as well as substantive features. From a formal point of view, States created the Court by an act of public international law. The constitutive document is a public international law instrument and the creation of such institution is determined by States, that is, the public institutions par excellence. From a substantive point of view, the Court makes a public institution for the character of the purposes and functions entrusted with it. Not only are they regarded as promoting community interests, ‘but actually as embodying the community interest’ (Klabbers). In a nutshell, the Court is there to perform functions that are in the general interest of the international community, and to exercise powers that have a public lineage, being these typically exercised by states vis-à-vis their constituencies.

1.A Private Lens for Public Functions: the Pitfall of “Perfect Symmetry”

In public international law, there are at least two rationales that explain the creation of international organizations, or at least two ways in which one can conceive of them. One way is to look at international organizations as subjects operating on the basis of delegated functions or conferred powers which are perfectly symmetrical with those possessed at the domestic level. To be sure, the issue here does not rest so much with the doctrine of conferral of powers, but rather with the perfect symmetry that seems to be presupposed and required by the advocates of the nemo dat quod non habet doctrine in order for an international organization to perform its functions. According to this view, sovereign states ‘contract out’ to international organizations functions that they would be able to juridically exercise at the domestic level. This paradigm would sit well with the nemo dat quod non habet doctrine, recently invoked before the ICC, in that a State would only be able to confer powers that it would posses in the first place, in an optic of perfect symmetry.

Nevertheless, it is worth stressing that this doctrine draws from property law (see Sheehan, The Principles of Personal Property Law, p.55 and ff), that is, a field of private law concerned with sales, transfer of property and ownership titles. While in the context of commercial transactions, the nemo dat quod non habet doctrine appears fit for purpose, in the context of international justice it seems grossly unfit. In fact, the Court does not operate in a private law dimension, nor is it concerned with ownership titles or commercial transactions. It is rather a public institution created with functions that are in the general interest of the international community. Despite the multiple critiques that can certainly be raised as to the actual fulfilment of its purposes, international criminal law is a tool to tackle common concerns in the international community, designed as part and parcel of public international law. It is geared towards community interests, not with private ones. What is more, in no instance to the knowledge of this writer was the doctrine ever applied by international criminal courts and tribunals to date. Why would now be time to import or transplant this private law doctrine into public international law?

2. A Public Lens for Public Functions: Opportunities to Reaffirm Community Interests Functions

Conversely, another way to look at international organizations is to conceive of them as created precisely to perform functions or tackle challenges that single states alone could not or would not effectively carry out (on the point, see eg Schermers and Blokker, pp.20-24). This paradigm is at home with the idea of international organizations serving community interests that states per se or states alone would not be able (sometimes not even willing) to perform. It is precisely at this juncture that the tension between state sovereignty and the common good, or between atomistic interests and community ones, materializes most prominently. In this optic, the nemo dat quod non habet doctrine appears not only misleading, but also hard to reconcile with the idea that international organizations serve community interests and fulfill purposes that are in the general interest, not necessarily in the individual one. In fact, it is not unusual for international organizations to become ‘competitors of their own creators’ rather than bending to instrumentalist or principal-agent dynamics (Klabbers, p.666).

The nemo dat quod non habet doctrine is even less compelling in the case of international organizations created on the basis of multilateral agreements with virtually universal reach and foundational vocation as the Rome Statute. In fact, particularly in the ambit of international justice, it is hard to see how functions such as the peaceful settlement of disputes could be ‘contracted out’ by single sovereign states to the Court as a reflection of their own jurisdiction (literally, the authority to pronounce the law, from the Latin juris dicere). Instead, states have create international institutions precisely because of the nature of purposes and functions entrusted in international judicial institutions. It would hence be more adequate to say that the international community has entrusted an international court with functions designed to tackle global challenges and international concerns, for which cooperation between international and national authorities is deemed desirable. No doubt, by ratifying or acceding the Rome Statute or accepting the jurisdiction of the Court by declaration lodged under Article 12(3), individual states can bring the Rome Statute into operation or ‘activate’ the power of the Court (see Stahn, 448) to investigate and prosecute crimes committed on their territory or by their nationals. Still, such functions do not come into being by single acts of ratification or accession, but are entrusted in the Court from its very creation, as part of an international justice system crafted by multilateral negotiations. Unlike the delegation theory, this doctrine can explain, among other things, why sovereign immunities of high-ranking officials do not bar prosecution before international courts and tribunals while they do before foreign domestic courts, as confirmed by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case (DRC v. Belgium), ICJ Reports 2002, p. 3, at para 61.

The Court and its Public Function

The Court is up to pronounce on a jurisdictional challenge that has wider implications, reaching beyond the situation at hand, and bearing on the idea and functions of international organizations within the international legal order.

While the vocabulary of conferral of powers is present in several international law instruments as a reflection of states’ power to create international organizations (see e.g. Art 24 UN Charter), the paradigm of perfect symmetry between powers possessed by a State at a national level and powers conferred to an international institutions is unfounded. As such the application of concepts of delegation/conferral of powers based on the property law-derived nemo dat quod non habet principle are smoke and mirrors for the Court and sit uncomfortably with the system of international criminal justice born out of the Rome Statute. For one, the Court is not a blueprint of domestic jurisdictions transposed to the international level. Furthermore, the Statute makes crystal clear that the Court is established as a legal subject in its own rights, distinguished from its member states, and which ‘may exercise its functions powers, as provided in [the] Statute, on the territory of any State Party…’ (Article 4 Rome Statute). If there is any legally founded question that may arise in relation to the requested arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant, this is one that concerns their enforcement with the possible infringement of sovereign immunities of states not party to the ICC, as per Article 98 Rome Statute (Part IX on Cooperation).

The compass of the Court shall be the Rome Statute (Article 21(1) ICC Statute) interpreted from the standpoint of public international law. This means that the Court shall not lose sight of the overarching public function it performs to secure accountability for international crimes. To follow the Statute-based methodology employed by the Permanent Cout of International Justice in Competence of the ILO in Regard to International Regulation of the Conditions of the Labour of Persons Employed in Agriculture (Advisory Opinion) [1922] PCIJ (ser B) No 2, it would legally unjustifiable, let alone absurd, to uphold a Statute-based interpretation that would grant impunity to Israeli nationals allegedly responsible for international crimes committed on the territory of a State Party to the ICC.

REVIEW

Out of Gaza: New Palestinian Poetry

September 30, 2024 

Book Author(s):Alan Morrison, Atef Alshaer
Book Editor(s):Alan Morrison, Atef Alshaer
Published Date:March 2024
Publisher:Palestine Book Awards 2019
Paperback:72 pages
ISBN-13:978-1739473457

by Muhammad Hussein

When an Israeli air strike killed the prominent Palestinian writer and scholar Refaat Alareer in Gaza back in December, it signalled not only the random and wanton destruction of an area in Gaza City, but also the deliberate targeting of the man known as a leader of a new generation of writers and poets in the besieged enclave.

His killing was further evidence of the Israeli occupation regime’s campaign to assassinate Gaza’s Palestinian intelligentsia and academic class. This stemmed from the belief that with the killing of such figures would come the gradual decline of literary development and the articulation of revolutionary thought, leaving the oppressed people with the natural desire for liberation but without intellectual guidance and support.

Thus, does the role of poetry reveal itself in the significance of human consciousness, manifesting not only in concepts such as romance or longing, but in the very spiritual need for self-determination and dignity.

Atef Alshaer, the editor of Out of Gaza: New Palestinian Poetry, writes in his introduction to the book that, while “Guns, bombs, rockets, and other tools of killing and destruction are deafening methods of silencing and robbing people of their humanity,” poetry is the “poor companion of the oppressed and anybody with a living soul” which serves as “a humanising force, a repository of meaning and remembrance to lives lost and landscapes destroyed.”

Read the full review at the PBA website here

UN cannot allow violations of international law to become normalised, says Vivian Balakrishnan

Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 30 Sep 2024
Author: Arvind Jayaram

Dr Balakrishnan also stressed the need for small states like Singapore to support multilateralism, instead of taking sides, getting embroiled in great power rivalry, or becoming an arena for proxy wars.

Singapore has called on UN member states to prevent the recent violations of international law from becoming normalised, underscoring the need to transform global governance institutions to make them more representative and responsive.

Citing the war in Ukraine as an example, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan said at the 79th UN General Assembly in New York on Sept 28: “The invasion of one country by another, under the pretext of historical errors and grievances, cannot be justified by any means.”

Presenting Singapore’s national statement, Dr Balakrishnan highlighted Article 2 of the UN Charter, which states that all members shall refrain from the threat or the use of force against territorial integrity. 

Noting that the preamble of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 242 in 1967 affirms the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, he said if the notion that “might is right” is allowed to prevail, the world will become a very dangerous place, especially for small states.

The resolution, adopted after the six-day Arab-Israeli war of 1967, called on Israel to withdraw from territories it had occupied in that conflict – including the West Bank and Gaza – and for all countries in the region to respect one another’s territorial integrity and their right to live in peace with their neighbours.

“A descent into chaos and conflict is a clear and present threat. In this moment of uncertainty, all countries, big and small, have a responsibility to work together to preserve the peace and to save lives,” said Dr Balakrishnan.

“We cannot achieve this without the UN playing its rightful role as an arena for dialogue and for partnership. This is the moment to double down on multilateralism and strengthen the role of the UN as a collective vehicle for peace and sustainable development.”

He said that this is why Singapore and other small states have to consistently stand for compliance with international law and the UN Charter by all member states.

“We must return to the basics – by reinforcing the foundational role of the UN in maintaining international peace and security. That is the raison d’etre for the UN,” said Dr Balakrishnan.

“We must restore respect for the rule of law and the UN Charter. This has underpinned global peace and security for the last 80 years.”

Dr Balakrishnan said global governance institutions must take into account the needs of small states and developing countries.

This includes reforming the UNSC to reflect contemporary realities and making it more transparent and accountable.

Dr Balakrishnan said the effective functioning of the Security Council is at the heart of a robust and responsive UN, asserting that its five permanent members – the US, UK, France, Russia and China – bear a special responsibility alongside their privileges.

“They must demonstrate leadership by cooperating to maintain international peace and security,” he said, adding that the lack of trust among the major powers and the resulting deficit of global leadership make it very difficult to find effective, peaceful solutions to ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, Ukraine and Sudan.

He noted that the veto initiative – a UN resolution that makes the UNSC permanent members answerable to all UN member states in the General Assembly whenever they cast a veto – is a step towards greater accountability.

“This is a good first step, but it is not the end of that journey that is necessary. Much more work is needed to make the Security Council more transparent and accountable. Singapore will continue to work with other UN member states in this regard,” said Dr Balakrishnan.

He also stressed the need for small states like Singapore to support multilateralism, instead of taking sides, getting embroiled in great power rivalry, or becoming an arena for proxy wars.

“We simply aim to defend our sovereignty, to exercise our autonomy, and to chart our own futures – our people deserve that,” he said. “For small states, multilateralism and international law is not an option; it is, in fact, an existential necessity.”

In the national statement, Dr Balakrishnan also affirmed Singapore’s support for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ New Agenda for Peace. He said the Republic is ready to work with all member states to strengthen the role of the UN in promoting peace and security, particularly in preventive diplomacy, mediation and conflict prevention.

The new agenda encourages member states to move beyond competition and find avenues for cooperation and collective action to pursue shared interests. “Such efforts are urgently needed to save civilian lives and to prevent catastrophes,” said the minister.

Dr Balakrishnan also reiterated Singapore’s support for the work of the International Court of Justice and for the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), which governs all activities in oceans and seas.

He emphasised the need for new instruments to strengthen international legal frameworks. He also said the consensus adoption of the Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement in June 2023 was a crucial step in strengthening the Unclos framework for the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and their resources.

The BBNJ Agreement gives states the means to establish “area-based management tools” in the high seas and deep seabed. Singapore ratified it last week.

Dr Balakrishnan also welcomed the outcomes of the just-concluded Summit of the Future, including the adoption of the Pact for the Future, the Declaration on Future Generations, and the Global Digital Compact.

He said these agreements have the potential to reinvigorate international cooperation. “This is a significant milestone in reinvigorating the UN system, and Singapore will support efforts on the implementation of the Pact.”

The minister also urged member states to accelerate efforts to achieve the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, and reiterated Singapore’s commitment to provide support through capacity building.

He announced the renewal of Singapore’s capacity-building programme for the Forum of Small States (FOSS). The FOSS for Good package will offer digital-themed programmes to support the Global Digital Compact, a comprehensive framework for global governance of digital technology and artificial intelligence.

“Singapore will continue to support our fellow small states; we will share our development experience,” said Dr Balakrishnan.

Source: Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.

 GREENWASHING

Shifting Into Sustainability: APEC’s Role In Steering A Greener EV Battery Supply Chain

Monday, 30 September 2024
Press Release: APEC

By Glacer Niño A. Vasquez and Emmanuel A. San Andres

The global shift toward electric vehicle adoption is gaining speed and the APEC region is at the forefront.

Envision a world where electric vehicles (EVs) glide silently along streets, their batteries a marvel of high performance and zero emissions. Picture bustling urban centers bathed in the glow of clean energy, with the air crisp and clear, free from the smog of a myriad tailpipes. This vision of a sustainable future is not just a dream—it is within our grasp.

The global momentum toward EV adoption is accelerating, with the APEC region leading the convoy. APEC economies are setting ambitious electrification targets, fueling a surge in EV sales and demand for EV batteries.

An EV battery goes through a long-haul supply chain journey, traversing through mineral extraction, production, distribution, and recycling. Each node on this supply chain journey must be optimized to meet the rising demand for EVs while committing to sustainability. If the EV battery supply chain is a vast network of highways, APEC economies are at the crossroads of this network, supplying and processing the raw materials, its workers assembling battery components, installing them into vehicles, and handling post-use recycling and disposal.

Yet, these highways also come with bottlenecks and potholes—resource concentration, environmental impacts from mining and processing, and extreme weather events, not to mention trade tensions, regulatory complexities, and policy uncertainty.

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Decongesting the EV battery supply chain requires investing in research and development to reduce reliance on primary minerals and enhance battery recyclability. Technological advancements could minimize dependence on specific resources, cutting down the environmental impact of mineral extraction and processing.

Right now, the industry heavily relies on minerals like lithium and cobalt, which are not only expensive but come with significant environmental risks and are sensitive to geopolitical tensions. What if we could reduce that reliance? Advancements in battery chemistry—such as sodium-ion batteries—could be a possible solution. These batteries use materials that are more abundant and easier to source. Companies are already starting to build sodium-ion manufacturing facilities, though widespread commercial use for EVs is still a few years away. The time to invest in research and development is now. Getting ahead of the curve could lessen future supply chain disruptions and lower costs in the long run.

As EV sales accelerate, efficient battery recycling becomes increasingly critical. Consider the current scenario: only five percent of EV batteries are recycled, resulting in a growing pile of waste and missed opportunities. Developing a circular economy, where old batteries are repurposed into new production lines, is essential. By focusing on recycling and recovering minerals, we can reduce our dependency on newly mined resources and mitigate the risks that come with a concentrated supply chain.

APEC economies could also benefit greatly from creating joint ventures to establish recycling hubs. Participating in these hubs would allow economies that lack raw materials to still play a key role in the EV battery supply chain. This isn’t just about managing waste; it’s about recovering valuable materials and keeping the wheels of sustainability turning.

By leveraging regional cooperation, economies can diversify supply chains, making it less likely that a single disruption will cause widespread issues. The more economies are invested in each other’s supply chains, the less likely they are to impose trade barriers. Offering incentives like tax breaks and making it easier to do business can attract foreign investment in recycling facilities and EV production, while partnerships can help with tech transfers, spreading best practices, and strengthening the industry as a whole.

Furthermore, establishing clear standards and regulations is akin to setting the traffic lights for our journey, ensuring that everyone on the highway is receiving the same set of rules and information and driving accordingly. These standards will enable a cross-border circular economy, where recyclable materials flow seamlessly, and supply chain transparency is maintained. With clear guidance, manufacturers, consumers, and policymakers can navigate this landscape confidently, making informed choices that support our collective vision for a greener future.

EV battery supply chain transparency is just as important, too. For instance, digital tools could provide visibility the entire lifecycle of a battery, from mineral extraction to end-of-life recycling. This kind of transparency builds trust and allows supply chains to become more stable and resilient while ensuring adherence to international labor and environmental standards.

Moreover, with transparent data on emissions and sustainability, economies can work together to set global pricing mechanisms that account for the environmental costs of production, helping us all transition to sustainability.

The road ahead may be long and winding, with traffic jams along the way, but APEC can steer us in the right direction. With a greener EV battery supply chain, we won’t just be imagining sustainable transportation; we won’t just be picturing a sustainable world—we can make it a reality. As we shift into sustainability, we can create a world where technology and the environment advance hand in hand, and our cities, streets, and skies reflect the promise of a greener tomorrow.

***

Glacer Niño A. Vasquez is researcher and Emmanuel A. San Andres is senior analyst at the APEC Policy Support Unit. They, along with Madeline Craig-Scheckman, are co-authors of the PSU policy brief Driving the Future: Leveraging Regional Cooperation for Inclusive, Sustainable, and Resilient Electric Vehicle Battery Supply Chains.

© Scoop Media

UKRAINE

RSF investigation: tracking the missing journalists of Melitopol



One year ago, multiple journalists and media workers were arrested by occupying Russian forces during a roundup of the inhabitants of the city of Melitopol in Southern Ukraine. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) launched an investigation into their fate and found many of them illegally imprisoned in Russia and occupied Ukraine.

20 August 2023 marked a turning point in the occupation of Melitopol. At the crack of dawn, at least four journalists and news content creators were escorted away by men in military uniform, as documented by RSF. In October 2023, their arrest was confirmed by Russian propaganda videos in which the journalists were forced to make false confessions – yet no information on their fate or whereabouts has been released since. Russia is holding these media workers illegally, moving them from prison to prison in conditions that are much closer to enforced disappearance than legitimate detention. RSF’s investigation retraced the paths of their imprisonment, shedding light on the situation as Russia’s silence persists.

Before the roundup, Melitopol residents showed fierce resistance to Russian occupation. Quickly conquered after Russia’s large-scale invasion on 24 February 2022, the streets of the “cherry capital” – as the city is known in Ukraine – filled with protestors marching against the occupation, while the internet buzzed with content from inhabitants reporting on life under Russian rule. Repression intensified: the mayor was arrested in March 2022, followed by several journalists in the summer of 2023. At the same time, the occupying forces launched the Mediatopol centre, an institution revealed to be a school for propaganda by an RSF investigation.

Since then, information on the situation in Melitopol has become rare. The city has lost the last of its reporters and news arrives in dribs and drabs. Attempting to contact non-occupied Ukraine comes with great risk. “One phone call can ruin your life,” sums up a retired reporter living in the city of Zaporijjia, where the Melitopol administration relocated.

"By persecuting journalists and spreading propaganda, Russia is exporting the predatory policies on information that it uses at home to the occupied territories of Ukraine. Many citizens of Melitopol have fallen victim to the Russian hunt for journalists. RSF will continue documenting their captivity – which constitutes a war crime – and campaigning for their release.

Arnaud Froger

Head of RSF's Investigations Desk

Four journalists detained and one enslaved

The first journalist arrested during the August 2023 roundup was Georgy Levchenko, administrator of the Telegram channel Ria-Melitopol, a local media outlet with over 80,000 subscribers. He was taken prisoner before sunrise, around 4 a.m., according to footage of the arrest filmed by Russian forces. The video was released two months later and broadcast on Channel One Russia, the Kremlin's premier TV channel for propaganda. Under incredible stress, the journalist appears apologetic and frightened in his cell; he was likely still in Melitopol when the video was filmed. In a press release dated 27 October 2023, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (FSB) accused Levchenko of giving information about the Russian military to the Ukrainian intelligence services.

Several sources have told RSF that Levchenko was transferred to the pre-trial detention centre in Mariupol, a port city in southeastern Ukraine that held one of the biggest battles since the outbreak of the war. RSF has not yet been able to confirm Levchenko’s exact whereabouts.

However, RSF found two content creators for the Telegram channel Melitopol tse Ukraina (“Melitopol is Ukraine”), which broadcast local news during the occupation, in the Mariupol detention centre: Yana Suvorova, the channel's administrator, and her colleague Vladyslav Gershon. Both were also arrested in the early hours of 20 August 2023 and filmed for a Russian television report. Like Levchenko, Suvorova and Gershon were arrested, interrogated, and forced to give a confession that was broadcast on Channel One Russia.

In an FSB document seen by RSF, the two journalists are accused of having “intended to take part in sabotage and terrorist operations” alongside Ukrainian military intelligence agents in the Zaporizhia region of Ukraine. The document does not provide any concrete evidence for these accusations.

According to RSF’s information, the journalists were transferred to multiple detention sites – some of which were improvised, as civilian infrastructure in conquered areas is used to hold Russian prisoners – before arriving in Mariupol. They were held alongside Russian prisoners who were repeat offenders and found themselves in cells so overcrowded that some prisoners had to sleep standing up.

Anastasia Hloukhovska met the same fate. A journalist for Ria-Melitopol, she had chosen to put her activities on hold since the invasion. Arrested during the roundup on 20 August 2023, she was first held in Melitopol, in a DIY boutique turned into a makeshift prison, before being transferred to the pre-trial detention centre in Priazovske, a village 30 km away. Like the three other arrested journalists, Hloukhovska has been accused of “terrorism.” According to RSF’s information, she is currently held in Rostov, an administrative region in southwestern Russia.

While investigating the disappearance of these Melitopol journalists, RSF discovered the case of Yevhenii Ilchenko, a Melitopol inhabitant who launched his own Telegram channel to report on the Russian occupation of his city. Ilchenko was arrested by Russian forces on 10 July 2022 and subjected to forced labour a few weeks later. Essentially, Ilchenko was enslaved. RSF’s investigation discovered that his jailors forced him to dig trenches and contribute to the war efforts against his own country.

UN: 84% of Gaza’s health facility buildings destroyed

September 30, 2024
in Gaza, News

DayofPal- UN Women has released a report on the health situation in Gaza, titled “Gaza: A War on Women’s Health.”

The new report provides a comprehensive analysis of the health sector crisis in Gaza and its impact on the physical and mental health of women and girls.

After more than 11 months of war, the healthcare system in Gaza has almost collapsed, the report said.

Nearly 84 percent of health facility buildings have been destroyed or damaged, and those remaining in service lack medicines, ambulances, basic life-saving treatment, electricity, and water, according to the UN Women report.

The report estimated that more than 177,000 women face life-threatening health risks, including 162,000, who have or are at risk of developing non-communicable diseases (NCDs) like diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular or hypertensive diseases; and 15,000 pregnant women who are at the brink of famine.

“Pregnant and lactating women are facing severe complications and experiencing infections, anemia, and hypertension. Some 68 percent of pregnant women surveyed have suffered from urinary tract infections, anemia, hypertensive disorders, vaginal bleeding, or hemorrhage. The lack of sexual and reproductive health services is another area of concern.”

“Despite this serious decline in their overall health, women are also the main caregivers for their families, eating last and least under severe hunger and starvation conditions. The new risk of polio is adding new challenges to a health system already operating with the bare minimum.”

“Too many women in Gaza are at risk of dying from medical complications after months without any medication, limited access to doctors and no treatment for serious illnesses like diabetes or cancer. It is imperative that we act swiftly to save their lives. An immediate and sustainable ceasefire, the release of all hostages, the provision of safe, unimpeded humanitarian aid, and access to medicines and health services throughout Gaza are essential to prevent further deterioration,” said UN Women’s Regional Director for Arab States, 

Moez Doraid.

Indonesia walks out of UN general assembly in protest of Israeli speech

JAKARTA (ANN/JAKARTA POST) – Indonesian delegates, along with representatives from other countries, staged a walkout during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech at the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), amidst widespread international condemnation of Israel’s military actions in Gaza and Lebanon.

At the UN headquarters in New York, Indonesian diplomats, along with those from other Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states, exited the debate hall shortly before Netanyahu addressed the assembly on Friday night, leaving the room notably half-empty when he began speaking.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Rolliansyah Soemirat informed The Jakarta Post on Sunday that Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi had instructed the Indonesian diplomats to leave on her behalf, as she was engaged in another meeting at the UN.

As Netanyahu spoke about Israel’s right to retaliate and its plans to “continue degrading Hezbollah,” referring to the escalating conflict with the Iran-backed military group in Lebanon, some remaining delegates in the hall applauded his remarks.

This marked the second occasion this year that Indonesia walked out of a UN meeting regarding Palestine. In January, Retno led an Indonesian delegation out of a UN Security Council (UNSC) meeting just as the then-Israeli permanent representative began their speech.

On Saturday, Retno addressed the UN, calling for an end to Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza and the West Bank. She urged countries that have yet to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state to do so promptly.

Has Israel-Hamas war displaced Palestinian refugees forever?

The plight of Palestinian refugees has worsened dramatically since the Israel-Hamas war began. DW explains their status.

Fleeing from bombs: Displaced Palestinians take shelter in a tent in the southern Gaza Strip

Image: MOHAMMED ABED/AFP


Astrid Prange de Oliveira | Jennifer Holleis

09/28/2024

Since the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, the hope for peace and the return of Palestinian refugees to their old homes has all but disappeared. DW explains why there are more Palestinian refugees today than in 1948, and how their legal status differs from that of other refugees.

How many Palestinian refugees are there?

The Palestinian population in the Middle East is estimated at seven million people whose legal status varies. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) reports that it currently supports 5.9 million people in the region.

They live in 58 refugee camps across Jordan, Syria, Gaza, and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Lebanon (see map).

Palestinian refugees also live in Egypt, where an estimated 100,000 have fled since the the Israel-Hamas war broke out. There are also 1.5 million Palestinian Israelis who live in Israel.

Who is considered a refugee?

According to UNRWA, these refugees are defined as "persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period June 1, 1946 to May 15, 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict."

This also applies to "descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children." As a result, the number of registered persons has risen from 750,000 in 1950 to almost six million today.

West Bank faces uncertain future as violence increases  02:25

 

What are the living conditions for Palestinian refugees?

The everyday experience of many Palestinian refugees and their families is characterized by poverty and discrimination. In many Arab host countries, Palestinians cannot acquire citizenship and are therefore stateless.

Around 80% of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon live below the national poverty line, according to UNRWA figures. They cannot buy property, are not allowed to work in all professions and have no access to the state education and healthcare systems.

In Jordan, around 2.3 million people are registered as Palestinian refugees. It is the only Arab country that has granted citizenship to this group—more than half of the Jordanian population is already of Palestinian origin.

The situation in Syria has steadily deteriorated due to the ongoing civil war. In 2021, a UNRWA survey revealed that 82% of registered Palestinian refugees were living in absolute poverty. Nevertheless, many are now returning to Syria due to the conflict between Israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah militia.

Why is there a refugee agency specifically for Palestinians?

UNRWA was established by UN Resolution 302 (IV) of December 8, 1949 and began its work on May 1, 1950. The UN General Assembly extended UNRWA's mandate in December 2022 to last until June 30, 2026.

The agency's task is to care for Palestinians who were displaced or forced to flee their homes as a result of the Arab-Israeli War and the founding of the State of Israel on May 14, 1948, along with their descendants. Palestinians refer to this period as the "Nakba”—a catastrophe.

A refugee camp in the Jordan Valley for Palestinians who were driven from their homes by Israeli forces in 1948. The Palestinians refer to this period as the “Nakba” — the catastropheImage: CPA Media/picture alliance

The UN Refugee Agency UNHCR is responsible for the protection of all other refugees and stateless persons worldwide. Like UNRWA, it was also founded in 1950.

The separation of responsibilities between the two agencies means that in countries such as Egypt, where Palestinian refugees are present but UNRWA is not, those affected live in a legal vacuum. This is because the UNHCR has no mandate to care for Palestinian refugees.

Fleeing War in Gaza — for a new life in Egypt?  28:29

Why has Israel demanded the dissolution of UNRWA?

The Israeli government accuses UNRWA of being involved in the October 7 massacre, claiming that the aid organization is infiltrated by Hamas.

Following these allegations, several donor countries — including the United States, the European Union and Germany — suspended their payments to UNRWA.

The UN launched an internal investigation into the allegations. In a statement published on August 5, 2024, it said that nine UNRWA employees had been dismissed due to possible involvement in the Hamas-led attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023. Allegations against ten other employees could not be substantiated.

Symbolic meaning: A Palestinian refugee shows the keys to the house from which his ancestors were expelledImage: Issam Rimawi/ZUMAPRESS/picture alliance

Is there a right of return for Palestinians?

According to Article 11 of UN Resolution 194, all refugees have the right to return to their homes if they are willing to live in peace with their neighbors. In the eyes of the governments of many Arab states, this also applies to today's descendants of those displaced in 1948.

"The Nakba catastrophe is a defining source of identity for the Palestinian population. It underscores injustice," says Peter Lintl, a member of the Africa and Middle East department at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. In his view, the right of return "can only be resolved within the framework of peace negotiations and is only conceivable in a Palestinian state."

This article was originally published in German.

Astrid Prange de Oliveira DW editor with expertise in Brazil, globalization and religion

Jennifer Holleis Editor and political analyst specializing in the Middle East and North Africa.