International – Page 2 – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

Morocco’s Gen Z Protests – A Fight for Human Rights

On a September night, hundreds of young Moroccans gathered outside Hassan II Hospital in Agadir. In hand? Candles for a woman who recently passed while giving birth due to delayed medical advice. Her death was not just a tragedy; instead, it was a spark that brought hundreds of Moroccan youth together, demanding better healthcare, education, and dignity.

Beginning on September 27th, 2025, hundreds of protesters stormed the streets in Rabat, Casablanca, Agadir, Meknes, and Tangier. Of these individuals, 400+ arrests have been made, and at least two have been killed. The extent of the protest makes it the most significant youth movement in Morocco since 2011.

Photo 1: Protestor getting detained in Meknes, Morocco.
Credit: Yousra Bounuar

What is Gen Z?

Gen Z is made up of young individuals born between 1997 and 2012. Equipped with technological savvy, Gen Z is known to be the most digitally immersed group to date. This unique knowledge strengthens their ability to connect and elicit change.

Global Protests

The protests in Morocco come at a time when Gen Z around the world are organizing with one another. Examples around the world include Nepal, where a recent ban on social media to silence an anti-corruption campaign sparked backlash; Madagascar, where youth are demanding that the government address high levels of poverty and corruption; and Peru, where protesters are also demanding that the state fight corruption. All of this represents a historic trend of Gen Z being known as a generation that seeks momentous change.

The Beginning

The protests in Morocco represent anger towards a system stretched thin. Over the past few years, Morocco has faced myriad burdens that have impacted the community significantly. There is significant youth unemployment, with around 22.1% of youth in the country being unemployed. This limits their ability to support their families and to find opportunities that would support upward socioeconomic mobility.

Beyond this, there are additional burdens that impact Morocco’s healthcare abilities. One is the low doctor-to-patient ratio; especially in the more southern regions, 7.8 doctors can serve around 10,000 patients, which is quite far from the WHO’s recommended ratio. This is seen in tandem with the high maternal mortality rate of women in the country, which stands at around 70 deaths per 100,000 births. Clearly, there are significant disparities that impact the health outcomes of those around the country.

Whilst all of this was happening, the state continued to invest in the FIFA 2030 World Cup stadium. This investment was significant, with billions of dirhams being allocated to build stadiums at the same time that hundreds of healthcare facilities were underfunded.

The Turning Point

The nuances of the burdens faced by Moroccans across the country elicited tensions that bubbled into a full-on protest, catalyzed by the death of a young expectant mother. As the vigil began, hashtags began to flood Moroccan social media. From #GenZ212 to #WeDeserveBetter, thousands were speaking out for the need for investment in the community rather than in stadiums. From education to healthcare, protestors across the country were advocating for additional resources to be funneled to communities, rather than foreign investors. These protests mobilized throughout the entire country, and, as expected, the increased presence of activists led to a corresponding rise in police presence.

Though many protesters were peaceful, armed police used armored vehicles and tear gas to impact the protestors. Videos circulated of rubber bullets and tear gas being administered to protestors. This, in combination with the detention of journalists, resulted in public disorder. The infringement of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression resulted in dangerous outcomes for many involved. With over 400 detained, 37 charged, and at least two deaths, the effects of government intervention are undeniable. It is true that, as a way to address the qualms of the young protestors, the government worked to mobilize social reforms to support development across the country, mainly in rural areas. However, this was in conjunction with the critical increase of police conducting mass arrests and abusing peaceful demonstrators.

The World Is Watching

The violation of various human rights has met with protests in Morocco. By limiting freedom of assembly and engaging in increased policing of expression with the censorship of journalists, there are many explicit violations of human rights that have occurred as a result of the protests. Additionally, the right to health and work are being violated by the underfunded healthcare facilities and unemployment crisis, which creates the need for action. As Morocco is a signatory to both the ICCPR and ICESCR, it is integral that the country upholds these rights not just on paper, but in practice as well. Right now, the current situation is rife with suppression, neglect, and censorship — in direct opposition to the mandates of the ICCPR and ICESCR.

Most recently, the United Nations Human Rights Office called for restraint. This was focused on being able to respect citizens’ right to assembly. With Morocco’s current rank as 129th out of 180 countries on the 2024 World Press Freedom Index, the crisis demonstrates the need for sustainable change in the country.

The Need for Reform

Morocco can work and explore ways to improve the outcomes for its country. The youth in Morocco are not calling for a revolution: they are calling for reform. With improved hospital systems and jobs that sustain families, they want a country that enforces institutions and protects and uplifts its citizenry.

It is essential that Morocco upholds its human rights obligations over international partnerships. When working with the international community, all partners should work to ensure that sports and trade do not come at the expense of the community, accountability, and justice.

Weaponizing Winter: War Crimes in Ukraine

In a world marked with war and destruction, nations and opposing forces will do almost anything to gain an upper hand. This often includes directly targeting homes of civilians, torturing prisoners of war and depriving them of food. In Russia’s case, one of their most prevalent tactics has been bombing Ukrainian thermal power plants.

Ukrainian Climate

Winters in Ukraine are brutally cold, with average temperatures staying below 32^oF (0^oC) throughout inland areas. In the capital (Kyiv), snow covers the ground for about 80 days out of the year. This amounts to almost three months where civilians are left to trudge through freezing conditions. During these times, it is imperative for people to be able to receive heat in their homes.

Due to global warming, temperatures have been increasing in recent years, but during colder times, temperatures have been recorded to drop to -4^oF (-20^oC) and lower. The slight increase in temperatures is not enough to make a difference in people’s lives, especially when they are left with no power in their homes.

Buildings that were damaged and abandoned in the wintertime, there is snow on the ground — Snowy landscape. Source: Adobe Stock Asset ID#: 131601262

By targeting thermal power plants, Russia is actively trying to freeze out Ukrainian citizens. This violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 25), which states that every person has rights to an adequate standard of living. When power plants are destroyed, civilians lose access not only to heat, but also water, healthcare, and safety.

Power Grid Attacks

The most recent attack happened on October 8, just as temperatures began to drop. This came as no surprise- every year since the beginning of the invasion, Russia has targeted energy infrastructure, which has continuously left the people of Ukraine without power for prolonged periods. During these attacks, authorities have had to create warming tents where people can go to warm up and charge their electronics.

For Ukraine, this is the fourth year where the people are forced to face a winter of blackouts. While Russia claims that the attacks are strictly aimed at the Ukrainian military, millions of civilians are affected by the power outages. On October 8, nine regions experienced power outages ranging from Kharkiv and Sumy to Odesa. While Ukraine has been retaliating and attempting strikes on Russia, Ukraine lacks long-range weapons, and its Western allies are hesitant in aiding Ukraine with such weapons, due to fears of escalating the conflict with NATO involvement.

Life Without Power

To prevent total blackouts, Ukraine has implemented planned power cuts – a strategic measure to protect the grid from overloading and to allow for safer repair. Additionally, with the continued damage to the grid and uncertainty about future attacks, temporary outages help prevent overloads, protect workers, and reduce the risk of a larger catastrophe.

While these measures are necessary to ensure prolonged safety, during these power cuts many civilians are negatively affected. A lot of civilian homes in Ukraine are in high story buildings that can go above 24 floors. Elevators are imperative for the elderly, those who are disabled, and mothers. During outages, the elevators have no way of working. Those who rely on elevators to get in and out of their homes are forced to plan their days around power cuts.

A girl who has the Ukrainian flag draped over her shoulders walking through a destroyed bomb shelter — Child wrapped in a Ukrainian flag. Source: Adobe Stock Asset ID#: 504260131

This becomes deeply impactful when, during these power outages, people cannot get out of their homes to get to a bomb shelter. Russian attacks are unpredictable, and most bomb shelters are located underground. During the power cuts, some people become victims of drone strikes because they live on top floors and have no way of getting down. Those who are able have resorted to going outside during times without power. In favorable weather conditions, it is better to be outside and know that you can get to a shelter.

People’s Rights

Ukraine and its people are protected under the Geneva Convention; under Common Article 3, it states that those who are not actively participating in hostilities, including those who have laid down their weapons, will always be treated humanely. It goes on to further state that any violence to life and person is prohibited. Although Russia has continuously stated that their intent is to harm military forces, these claims have been deemed false, and civilian infrastructure constantly faces destruction.

The Fourth Geneva Convention in turn, prohibits attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure. This includes things like civilian homes, power plants, and hospitals. As mentioned previously, Russia has been staging attacks on Ukrainian power plants since the start of the invasion in 2022. This is a clear violation of the Geneva Convention, because they are taking power away from millions of civilian homes. By doing this right before winter, they are weaponizing the snowy and cold climate in Ukraine.

Even without formal signing, International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is considered a customary law. This means that the articles under IHL are universally recognized as binding. As mentioned above, one of those articles specifically prohibits targeting civilian infrastructure. Human Rights Monitoring Mission (HRMMU) has been monitoring the consequences of Russian attacks on the lives of the general population. They have stated that the current and previous attack on the electricity infrastructure directly violates International Humanitarian Law.

Conclusion

These attacks have had long-term consequences and are not easily fixed. They affect the general population by taking away their ability to feel safe in their homes. Repairs are lengthy and dangerous, and plants are forced to use backup generators to continue providing homes and hospitals with electricity. Unfortunately, outages are still persistent because of overloads, and a backup generator can run for only so long.

Two kids hiding in a bomb shelter wearing jackets and hats with their backpacks — Children holding hands in a bomb shelter. Source: Adobe Stock Asset ID#: 490954008

Power plant attacks have been premeditated and calculated by Russia to instill fear into civilians and destroy morale. The seasons in Ukraine change very rapidly, especially as wintertime approaches, and this attack is a direct weaponization of Ukrainian winters. As the war continues, more of these attacks occur, and there is simply not enough time to restore everything before the cold months take hold.

Despite this, the people of Ukraine have continued to fight back. Communities come together to help those who are most in need. Those who are able to are stepping up in their fields to provide the necessary support – health professionals, educators, and first responders are all taking a part in creating an environment in which services are available to those in need and human rights are being defended against attack.

Aid Interrupted: Gaza’s Famine and the Global Sumud Flotilla

Image 1: Delivery of humanitarian aid by military helicopter. Source: Adobe Stock. By: photos_adil. Asset ID#: 322148549.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)’s Article 25 and Article 22 state that every human has the right to live with dignity, have healthcare, and enjoy adequate living standards. Specifically, Article 25 affirms that all humans have the right to ample health, food, medical care, clothing, housing, etc. Similarly, Article 22 discusses how there are economic, social, and cultural rights for all people.

In addition to the UDHR, International Humanitarian Law covers the protection of civilians, religious military personnel, medical personnel, injured soldiers, and prisoners of war. These people under the protection are to be treated humanely, even in combat. Along with that, hospitals, ambulances, and medical supplies are supposed to be protected. It is in violation of international humanitarian law to target civilian infrastructure. These laws apply to both sides, regardless of who started the conflict.

All humans have the right to medical care, food, and water. These rights are explicitly discussed in the UDHR and protected under International Humanitarian Law. This blog will be examining the famine in Gaza and the restriction of humanitarian aid. The contents of this blog were researched and written prior to the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas in the early part of October 2025. As such, this blog will only discuss the famine in Gaza, the Global Sumud Flotilla, and Israel’s block on humanitarian aid.

The Famine in Gaza:

Image 2: Palestinians gather to receive food from charity organization. Source: Adobe Stock. By: Tayiba Photography. Asset ID#: 1489429287.

The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) completed a famine review on the Gaza strip in August 2025. The levels of famine are measured on a scale of 1-5, with each level increasing in severity. In the case of Gaza, three phases are relevant: phase 3, phase 4, and phase 5. Phase 3 is considered a crisis, meaning households experience gaps in food consumption and high levels of malnutrition. Phase 4 is classified as an emergency; this means that households have significant gaps in food consumption, which causes high acute malnutrition and death. Phase 5 is considered a famine. This means that families lack basic needs and food, which have caused starvation, destitution, death, and devastating levels of acute malnutrition.

In late August of 2025, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared a Famine in Gaza, and the IPC predicted that this famine would increase exponentially within two months. Furthermore, they anticipated that around 640,000 people would experience IPC Phase 5 starvation, 1.14 million people would experience IPC Phase 4, and close to 396,000 people would experience IPC Phase 3 of starvation. These figures not only reflect a humanitarian emergency, but a systemic denial of basic rights.

In order to be classified as a famine, three requirements have to be met: acute malnutrition, extreme food deprivation, and starvation related deaths. All three of these conditions have been met in Gaza. Severe acute malnutrition, as stated by the National Library of Medicine, includes the presence of both severe wasting and oedema on both feet.

Severe wasting means that the weight to height ratio shows extreme weight loss and/or failure to gain weight. Oedema is a condition with hyperpigmentation and swelling within the feet, indicating an extreme lack of dietary protein. When applying pressure to feet that have oedema, a dent will remain after the pressure is lifted.

In July 2025, 39% of households in Gaza reported that they go multiple days without food, and 12,000 children were reported to be acutely malnourished. Additionally, drinking water in Gaza is extremely limited and sanitation services have decreased significantly. In response to the famine, the United Nation (UN) continues to call for a ceasefire with the release of hostages in order for much needed aid to enter Gaza.

The Global Sumud Flotilla:

Palestinian flags on the flotillas from Barcelona. Source: Adobe Stock. By Roman. Asset ID#: 1739738944. — Image 3: Palestinian flags on the flotillas from Barcelona. Source: Adobe Stock. By: Roman. Asset ID#: 1739738944.

According to the Maritime Injury Center, nearly two-thirds of the ocean waters are international, with the areas surrounding nations split into different jurisdictions and territories. Each Nation with a coast has approximately 12 nautical miles of territory from its coast. Anything beyond the 12 nautical miles is considered international waters or the high seas. The respective nations’ laws are enforceable within and only within its 12 nautical miles.

The Global Sumud Flotilla set sail from Barcelona on August 31, 2025. The flotilla consisted of around 50 ships, traveling with the intent to deliver critical humanitarian aid to the people of the Gaza strip. The ships carried food, medicine, baby formula, and other essential humanitarian supplies. Along with the aid, various activists from different countries were on board the ships.

After weeks of journeying, the Global Sumud Flotilla was ultimately intercepted by Israel in the beginning of October 2025. It is estimated that the first ships were stopped around 70 nautical miles from the coastline of Gaza, further than the previously established 12-mile standard. The flotilla was halted in international waters, and the activists on board were taken into Israeli custody. Under International Humanitarian Law, humanitarian aid workers are protected, in which case the detainment and mistreatment of such people is a legal violation.

Amnesty International released statements on October 7, 2025, regarding the safety of the doctors, activists, human rights defenders, and journalists that were detained during the interception. They also reported that the detainment of members of the flotilla and the blocking of humanitarian aid was an international humanitarian law violation. Israel’s interception raises questions under both maritime and humanitarian law.

Humanitarian Aid Blockade on Gaza:

Image 4: Palestinian flag in front of buildings with black smoke and fire. Source: Adobe Stock. By: diy13. Asset ID#: 662345673.

According to Human Rights Watch, Israel’s block on humanitarian aid from entering Gaza is in violation of International Humanitarian Law. Despite the fact that Israel is a warring party in opposition to Gaza, the nation is still required to allow humanitarian aid.

Years earlier, in 2007, Israel implemented a naval blockade on the Gaza strip after they determined the area to be under Hamas’s control. Since then, they have placed sanctions and restrictions on what is and is not allowed in Gaza, which have varied throughout the years. After Hamas’s attack on October 7, 2023, which resulted in around 1,200 Israelis dead and 240 taken hostage, restrictions were strengthened.

With the ongoing famine in the Gaza strip, humanitarian aid is essential to the survival of Gazan people, though the UN has reported an increase in restrictions and blocks on aid entering and moving within Gaza. While humanitarians have been able to distribute food to some people, it is not enough to sufficiently combat the famine. Aid movements within Gaza are being blocked, and the lack of consistency for inspection rules have created delays.

Inconsistent inspections and outright blocks have only worsened the famine’s impact on the people of Gaza. As stated in International Humanitarian Law, a state has a legal obligation to allow the influx of humanitarian aid and blocking such aid is in violation of the law.

Conclusion:

As of Monday, October 13, 2025, the ceasefire deal has resulted in the release of 20 Israeli hostages that were taken by Hamas in October 2023. Along with that, Palestinian detainees were released. Though the current ceasefire is fragile, there is hope that with the deal, critical humanitarian aid can enter Gaza.

Without sufficient aid, medical care, food, water, and sanitation, the famine will continue to grow and more civilians will suffer. However, there is a small hope that with the ceasefire, Gazans will have more aid. Allowing humanitarian aid is a legal obligation. To deny and deprive people of such aid would be against the UDHR and in violation of International Humanitarian Law.

Addressing the Global Water Crisis

My water bottle travels with me everywhere. It seems like something I cannot live without. When I was filling it up from the tap before heading to class, I couldn’t help but wonder what it is like to lack access to clean drinking water. That is the reality for many people around the world, especially as weather patterns change and industry use of water increases. Globally, water systems are failing, and people pay the price.

The UN’s Perspective on Water:

The UN General Assembly recognizes the right of individuals to “enough water for personal and domestic uses,” or 50 to 100 liters per day. The UN stresses water’s importance for health and well-being, stating that “water should be treated as a social and cultural good, and not primarily as an economic good.”

Water’s Impact on People

Despite the importance of water to daily life, a quarter of the world’s population lives in countries with inadequate water supply, and water shortages threaten to displace hundreds of millions by 2030. When water isn’t easily accessible, people have to walk miles to transport it. When this task falls to children, their physical health and education are threatened.

It is paramount that access to water is expanded globally. What threatens our water supply? How can it be improved? The following are a few examples of water issues and how they have been handled worldwide.

Sustainable Practices in Agriculture

As climate change and industrial practices threaten the delicate balance of the hydrological cycle, which represents the flow of water across the planet, careful management of water is more important than ever. Conservationist groups have made proposals to both governments and private industry for implementing more sustainable water practices.

One major area of potential improvement is agriculture, which accounts for around 70% of the world’s water usage. Efficient and sustainable practices, such as drip irrigation and storing water, are recommended by environmental groups to reduce water usage. Some farmers are hesitant to update their methods due to the high up-front costs of installing these systems. In Mexico, drought is forcing farmers to reassess their traditional flood irrigation. Managing water use is difficult due to the economic demand for this precious resource.

A vegetable field is flooded, illustrating a wasteful use of water. — Image 2: Flood irrigation of a vegetable plantation wasting water. Source: Adobe Stock.

Difficulty in Addressing Crises

Iran is currently battling a water crisis due to the combined effects of decreased rainfall and chronic mismanagement. In Tehran, the nation’s capital, water pressure is so low that it cannot reach many of its residents. When confronted with a changing climate, Iran has funneled resources into water-intensive industries and drained groundwater for agriculture, rather than prioritizing access for individuals.

Despite the way that water-intensive industries contribute to scarcity, addressing water shortages in Iran is not as simple as shutting down these water-intensive industries. Water conservation plans must account for sectors like steelmaking and agriculture, because they are major contributors to Iran’s economy. Some solutions, like groundwater recharge, which allows more rainwater to soak into the ground and replenish aquifers, don’t require sacrifices to industry. Climate-focused innovation can provide relief for water-strained areas, while other development projects put communities at risk.

Costs of Development for Communities

The development and expansion of infrastructure are important to sustaining the modern world. However, development comes at a cost to environmental stability. These issues affect ordinary people’s access to clean drinking water.

In Lesotho, a small landlocked country, residents have submitted complaints to the African Development Bank, claiming that a water project, which will transport water from Lesotho to Johannesburg, South Africa, has damaged their homes and polluted their water. In trying to provide water for one population, incautious development has put another community at risk.

Other development projects seemingly unrelated to water still place a strain on resources and pollute surrounding areas. Artificial intelligence data centers have become a flash point for environmental and water issues. Meta’s data center in Newton County, GA. has limited nearby residents’ access to water. The construction of the data center, which uses 500,000 gallons of water daily, caused sediment build-up in pipes. It has cost homeowners thousands of dollars in repairs.

AI data centers require water to cool their processor chips, and they also use electricity generated by steam-powered plants. Large data centers can use up to 5 million gallons of water per day. Some concerned citizens are seeking to block the construction of these plants because of the rising environmental costs associated with them. Environmental advocacy is one path toward equitable water access, as data center projects worth billions of dollars have been blocked or delayed by local communities in the US. Even so, other efforts are stalled by corporate lobbying.

Corporate Influence on Environmental Legislation

To implement water policy, governments must make choices about the practices for water extraction and the uses of water that they will allow. In the United States, private equity-owned companies like BlueTriton, whose products include Poland Springs, are rewriting environmental legislation. An amendment proposed by BlueTriton lobbyists in the Maine legislature struck an entire bill that would have placed limits on its contracts with the state.

The bottled water industry uses significantly less water than agriculture and other sectors, but BlueTriton’s involvement in Maine’s legislation is just one of many cases involving corporations influencing environmental policy. In 2025, over $60 million has been spent on lobbying the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to roll back regulations on PFAS industries. This is money well spent for lobbyists, since the EPA has moved to vacate portions of its PFAS limits rules in drinking water. Governments are key players in water management, so their attention to vulnerabilities is paramount to managing water crises.

What Happens When Governments Neglect Vulnerable Communities?

In the Maldives, which faces unique challenges including rising sea levels and unpredictable weather patterns, a Human Rights Watch (HRW) investigation found that the government has struggled to communicate effectively with rural communities, thereby putting them at risk. The investigation also found that the government left crucial water infrastructure, including desalination plants, in disrepair. An earlier HRW report concluded that the Maldives Environmental Protection Agency failed to enforce environmental regulations, which threatened access to freshwater.

The Maldives government has partnered with NGOs like the Green Climate Fund in recent years to improve its water systems, but some residents pointed out that the projects were “carried out hastily and remained only partially completed, years behind schedule.” This demonstrates the difficulty of restoring water infrastructure that has fallen behind. Along with recent efforts by the Maldives Government, the international community has stepped up to help alleviate the water shortage through grant funding of projects like building desalination plants.

alt= — Image 3: Desalination plant. Source: Adobe Stock

International Cooperation

These challenges transcend borders. Therefore, the international community, institutions like the United Nations Development Programme, NGOs like the Green Climate Fund, and individuals worldwide are working transnationally to ensure access to safe and secure water for all. The UNDP has invested over $8 billion in sustainable water development, and it recently partnered with the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF) to bring clean water to 150,000 Ethiopians.

What Can We All Do?

Sustainable development and equitable access to water are possible. To reach the UN’s sixth Sustainable Development Goal of safe and affordable drinking water for all, individuals, governments, and corporations must take action. Potential solutions include environmentally conscious infrastructure development, limiting waste, and investing in innovative green technologies. Individuals can join their local Waterkeeper Alliance chapter, support water conservation legislation locally and nationally, limit their personal water use, and donate to water organizations.

Cuba’s Electricity Crisis: What’s Happening and What Comes Next

Recent Blackouts

The recurring blackouts in Cuba are not random accidents; they are the clearest evidence of a grid that is stretched to its limits. In September 2025, the island’s national grid collapsed once again, leaving the country in darkness for hours. Reuters reported this as the fourth such failure within a year, the product of sudden shutdowns at generating units and the collapse of transmission lines. Power was restored gradually, but the event demonstrated the fragility of the system. These blackouts are not isolated incidents but the predictable outcome of deeper structural weaknesses.

Image 1: Street in Cuba. Source: Yahoo! Images

The Scale of the Shortfall

The scale of the electricity deficit illustrates the severity of the crisis. Reports from Cuba’s state utility, echoed in international coverage, noted that generation shortfalls in 2025 often exceeded 1,300 to 1,700 megawatts during peak demand. Given the modest size of the grid, this deficit meant that at times nearly half of national demand went unmet. Authorities responded by cutting power to entire regions in order to prevent complete collapse. The fact that such extreme measures are necessary underscores the unsustainable mismatch between demand and available supply.

Causes of the Crisis

The causes fall into three categories: infrastructure, fuel, and financial capacity.

First, infrastructure remains the most visible problem. Cuba relies on oil-fired thermal plants built decades ago, many of which are in deteriorated condition. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has emphasized that the country’s generation mix remains heavily dependent on oil, with little diversification compared to its regional peers. When such aging facilities break down, the grid lacks redundancy, and obtaining spare parts is difficult. Maintenance is often delayed because of financial limits, leaving plants more vulnerable to failure.

Second, fuel shortages amplify the fragility of the system. Cuba imports much of the fuel needed to run its plants. Deliveries from Venezuela and Russia have been inconsistent, and limited foreign currency reserves prevent Cuba from buying from other markets. Domestic crude is heavy and sulfur-rich, which accelerates wear on equipment. The Associated Press has shown how these supply issues translate directly into blackouts, as plants are unable to run at needed capacity.

Finally, the broader financial crisis prevents modernization. With restricted access to international credit and trade, Cuba cannot easily fund new power stations or grid upgrades. Stopgap measures such as leasing floating power plants or importing small generators provide relief but are costly and unsustainable. These responses demonstrate urgency but also reveal the state’s limited room to maneuver.

Social and Economic Impacts

The electricity crisis affects more than power consumption; it reaches into daily life and the economy. Households experience water shortages because pumps require electricity. Refrigeration becomes unreliable, threatening food and medicine storage. Many Cubans fall back on bottled gas or wood fires when power is cut, while internet and communication services weaken further during outages. Businesses, particularly small ones, lose productive hours without backup generators. Even the tourism industry, one of Cuba’s key revenue sources, struggles as hotels and restaurants attempt to maintain services amid rolling outages. Hospitals use emergency generators, but these depend on scarce diesel, leaving healthcare facilities at risk during long blackouts.

These disruptions carry broader consequences. Public frustration grows as outages stretch beyond twelve hours in some regions, eroding confidence in the government’s ability to provide basic services. The crisis also raises business costs, discourages investment, and accelerates emigration, particularly among younger professionals. The electricity problem is therefore not only technical but also social and economic, shaping the choices individuals and communities make about their futures. Access to reliable electricity is a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and Cuba’s constrained ability to ensure it reflects broader limitations on the state’s capacity to fulfill economic and social rights.

Government Responses

The government has adopted a mix of emergency and long-term responses, though both reveal limitations. Rolling blackouts remain the central short-term strategy, designed to prevent total collapse. Emergency repairs and floating power stations provide additional capacity, but at high cost.

At the same time, officials have announced renewable energy projects, with a focus on solar power. Targets call for hundreds of megawatts of photovoltaic capacity, supported by international partnerships. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) and other observers, renewables currently account for less than five percent of Cuba’s electricity mix, meaning the path to diversification is long. Progress is further constrained by the need for financing, storage capacity, and stronger grid infrastructure. These efforts are aspirational and signal intent, but they remain far from transforming the immediate reality.

Limitations of Current Responses

The limitations of these measures are clear. Rolling blackouts maintain control but do not solve underlying shortages. Floating plants and small generators provide relief but do not modernize the system. Renewable projects point to a better future but require resources the government struggles to secure. Without broader structural reform, both technological and financial, Cuba will remain locked in a cycle of temporary fixes and recurring blackouts. Blackouts deepen inequalities, disproportionately affecting lower-income and rural communities, which often lack resources for backup generators.

Future Scenarios

Several scenarios emerge from the evidence. The most realistic short-term path is stabilization, which would entail combining emergency repairs, modest new generation, and incremental renewable growth. This could reduce, though not eliminate, the severity of outages. A more ambitious scenario involves accelerated renewable deployment, supported by international financing and partnerships. This path could reduce reliance on imported fuel and create long-term resilience, but only if Cuba can overcome significant investment and logistical barriers. The least optimistic scenario is continuity: erratic fuel deliveries, aging plants, and insufficient investment sustaining a cycle of crisis for years to come.

Which path materializes will depend on both internal capacity and external conditions, from global fuel markets to the willingness of partners to invest in Cuba’s infrastructure. The government’s ability to manage projects and prioritize reform will also be decisive.

Conclusion

Cuba’s electricity troubles have weighed heavily on daily life, the economy, and the country’s outlook. Still, the crisis isn’t only a story of hardship. It’s also a story of people adjusting, of small acts of resilience, and of steps toward a different energy future. The government’s renewable projects may be slow, but they point to possibilities beyond the current struggles. In the meantime, families, neighborhoods, and businesses continue to adapt as best they can, holding onto the hope that the lights will stay on more often in the years ahead.

High-Income Countries Retreat from Global Health

President Donald Trump holds a cabinet meeting, Wednesday, February 26, 2025, in the Cabinet Room. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

Introduction

In favor of focusing on domestic economic recovery, migration control, and new geopolitical strategy, high-income countries are overlooking global health in their reprioritized foreign aid plans (Nain, 2025). This retreat from investing in global health displays a departure from historically fundamental moral and legal obligations to global health and human rights. From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the right to health has been codified as a shared responsibility. However, recent policy changes suggest a breakdown in multilateral obligations. The blog seeks to explore the ideological and structural consequences of this retreat, asking what does it mean when global health is no longer treated as a collective imperative, but as a negotiable interest?

Historical Context

More than mere technical interventions, global health has a history of moral and legal obligations rooted in human rights. The right to health, as enshrined in Article 25 of the UDHR, affirms that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family” (United Nations, 1948). This was further codified in Article 12 of the ICESCR through the obligation of state actors to act toward “the prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases,” as well as the “creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness” (United Nations, 1966; Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights & World Health Organization, 2008). Scholars and practitioners over the past two decades have asserted global health to be rights-based and participatory (Meier & Gostin, 2018; Gostin & Meier, 2020). Additionally, Mulumba et al. (2025) argue that enforceable commitments from high-income countries are essential to the global realization of the right to health. Despite these observations, recent trends suggest a troubling retreat from these shared responsibilities.

Delegates from Netherlands looking at documents at AMR conference — Rene Verleg Fotografie
10 February 2016, 09:02 AMR conference – Ministers Schippers & van Dam EU2016 NL from The Netherlands

Policy Shifts

A series of global health funding cuts, including a 67% reduction from the United States in 2025, has disrupted various health programs including those surrounding HIV, tuberculosis, and maternal health across dozens of countries (Krugman, 2025). Similarly, the United Kingdom instituted an aid reduction of 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income by 2027, most severely impacting sexual and reproductive health rights (SRHR) (Parker & Garcia, 2021). Through the Mattei Plan, Italy restructured its aid to prioritize migration control and energy diplomacy, which reduced bilateral health programming by 26% (Donor Tracker, 2025). Canada, despite earlier commitments to scale SRHR investments, paused new global health funding in 2024, claiming to instead be prioritizing domestic equity (Global Affairs Canada, 2024). Australia deprioritized health programs through a $500 million cut from its Indo-Pacific aid portfolio in favor of strategic infrastructure and defense partnerships (Stanhope, 2024).

Citing “shifting national priorities,” the Netherlands withdrew support from SRHR, LGBTQIA+, and harm reduction programs (Meier & Gostin, 2018). Norway reduced its aid by 5% in 2024, drastically impacting emergency relief and support for low- to middle-income countries (Norad, 2025). Revising its Development Cooperation Charter to align foreign aid with national security, Japan launched Official Security Assistance (OSA) and shifted focus from multilateral health to defense and tech diplomacy (International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2024).

Germany and France have reallocated development funds toward trade competitiveness, migration control, and domestic security (Parker & Garcia, 2021). Germany, despite remaining a top donor to the World Health Organization (WHO), has adopted a transactional posture that has subordinated health to economic and geopolitical interests (Bayerlein, 2025; Bundesministerium für Gesundheit, 2025). Similarly, France launched a new Global Health Strategy and co-hosted the WHO’s Investment Round but cut global health aid by 33% amid domestic budget strain (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2024; World Health Organization, 2025a; Krugman, 2025).

Spain and South Korea complicate this trend through selective engagement rather than full high-income country retreat. South Korea reaffirmed its leadership through strategic dialogue with the WHO, and Spain launched a new Global Health Strategy in 2025 (World Health Organization, 2024a; World Health Organization, 2024b; Donor Tracker, 2024). Despite these efforts, both countries have simultaneously recalibrated foreign policy toward economic security and technology diplomacy (Lee, 2024; Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Spain, 2025).

These are more than fiscal shifts in a world of economies. They reflect a deeper ideological repositioning. Many governments increasingly justify aid reductions through a “domestic-first” standpoint that frames global health as competing priority with national economic recovery, rather than as a complementary one (Center for Development, 2025). Others prioritize defense, trade, and migration over health equity as a geopolitical strategy. This logic is echoed across the philanthropic sector, where the Gates Foundation’s 25-year sunset plan embodies a transition from broad global health engagement to a finite, legacy-oriented agenda (Gates Foundation, 2025; Shefcik, 2025). This recalibration, framed as a pivot toward “achievable” goals, reflects the broader trend of donor fatigue and feasibility framing. This trend suggest that global health priorities are now shaped by power asymmetries, short-term metrics, and political expediency rather than solidarity across shared interests (Abimbola, 2021).

Human Rights Implications

We have already begun to feel the consequences of these shifts. UNAIDS (2025) warns of the impact felt in countries like Tanzania and Uganda, which have seen closures and disruption in HIV clinics and other essential services. These disruptions, as documented by Physicians for Human Rights (2025), threaten to reverse decades of progress in HIV prevention and treatment. UN agencies are also warning that gains in preventable death reduction from maternal health programs could be lost (World Health Organization, 2025b). These disruptions disproportionately affect marginalized populations and violate core human rights obligations (Meier & Gostin, 2018; Gostin & Meier, 2020; UNRIC, 2025). The WHO has reported that over 70% of surveyed countries are experiencing similar health system breakdowns due to aid withdrawals (World Health Organization, 2025c). These outcomes show the severe impacts of eroded accountability measures within global health governance (Parker & Garcia, 2021).

One of the signs at the main entrance to the US Agency for International Development (USAID) offices being taped over on February 7, 2025. This is on the west side of the Ronald Reagan Building. 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004.
7 February 2025, 12:54:26 http://edwardjohnson.com/ G. Edward Johnson

Domestic Consequences

High-income countries are not exempt from the consequences of the retreat from global health. Parker and Garcia (2021) argue that isolationist health policies create blind spots that leave even wealthy nations vulnerable to transnational threats. Weakened pandemic preparedness, undermined surveillance systems, and limited coordinated response capacity are all side effects of reduced engagement (Bond, 2025). Perhaps more significantly, the public is experiencing a breakdown of trust in health institutions. Amid a growing crisis of confidence in public health leadership, calls for renewed efforts to restore institutional legitimacy are on the rise (Leslie, 2023; Cooper, 2025). Withdrawing from global health commitments not only abandons vulnerable populations globally but also compromises the moral leadership and resilience of high-income countries.

Closing Reflection

Beyond restored funding, a reorientation of values is necessary for a rights-based recommitment to global health. This requires the abandonment of performative pragmatism for enforceable obligations to solidarity and justice. It demands the centering of marginalized voices, the rebuilding of institutional trust, and the recognition of global health as a shared infrastructure of resilience, rather than a zero-sum game of political maneuvering. The consequences of this retreat – from disrupted HIV clinics to weakened pandemic preparedness – must be confronted as we forge a new path rooted in justice. Furthermore, for a more equitable and secure world, it is a strategic imperative that we reclaim global health as a human right.

One In, One Out Mandate: How the UK and France Systematically Deny Claims to Asylum

In August this year, the UK and France began their trial of a One In, One Out Policy regarding migrants. While the current UK government champions this mandate as a way to tackle illegal immigration and assist more vulnerable populations, currently there is no plan in place to ensure those protections.

In this article, we will be examining the terms of the deal and the implications this has for immigration to the UK, the societal treatment of migrants, and the effect this policy can have on the lives and integration of migrants into the UK.

Policy Overview

Man holding a board with the French flag design and the words "Immigration Policy." — Source: Adobe Express. By STOATPHOTO, Asset ID# 1193060357

The current mandate, in effect as of August this year, deals with illegal immigration from France to the UK. As per this mandate, any immigrants who are caught going from France to the UK will be deported within 14 days of their claim being denied, and the UK will accept the same number of immigrants from France who have applied legally and fulfill other criteria.

Yvette Cooper, in her then position as Home Secretary for the UK, said in a letter that this initiative aims to dismantle smuggling operations. Smugglers can often extort large amounts of money from desperate migrants, and their methods of smuggling can be dangerous, unreliable and even contribute to human trafficking. The policy specifically targets immigration across the English channel, aiming to shut down smuggling via small boats.

A catch of this policy is that the UK considers France a safe third country and can automatically deem asylum claims from migrants from France as inadmissible. With only a 14-day period from asylum claim denial to deportation, and limited access or knowledge of legal resources, this will make it virtually impossible for anyone coming from France to have their claim properly considered.

Human Impact

Hands holding scraps of paper reading "Refugee" and "Asylum" — Source: Adobe Express. By nito, Asset ID# 106026480

While the Home Office said this initiative is primarily aimed to increase border security and fight smuggling operations, there is no plan currently in place to protect the most desperate and vulnerable immigrant populations.

Legal difficulties exist not just for the migrants who are deported out via this deal, but also for those who are accepted in. In order for a migrant to be eligible to be accepted to the UK under this policy, they are required to pass background checks that include proof of identification, such as a passport, and submitting a recent photograph. These may be insurmountable obstacles for refugees from war-torn regions or those fleeing the effects of devastating famines or other natural disasters. To hinge someone’s eligibility for asylum on meeting these requirements may violate Article 14 of the UDHR, which grants the right to seek asylum, because it does not consider their actual claims to asylum and immediately dismisses what could be an absolutely critical and legitimate case for entry. What is being presented as a fair and just deal targeting smuggling operations will end up preventing people from accessing refugee status in the UK.

Legal Limbo

Yvette Cooper, current UK Secretary of State — Yvette Cooper, current Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs for the UK. Source: Steve Eason

This deal is currently only in its trial phase until next year, and under its current limitations the cap is 50 people returned to France each week. At the beginning of August this year, more than 25,000 people had already arrived in the UK by crossing the English Channel in a small boat. As the UK hits its limit of deportees every week, another issue arises: what to do with those who are not returned to France.

For these individuals, their claim to asylum will likely still be denied. However, they will have to wait in detention centers for months while they are being processed. There are not many return agreements with other countries, so the UK has very few options for where to send these immigrants. Slow processes to attempt to return immigrants will result in long wait periods in detention centers, followed by even longer waiting periods in legal limbo if they’re released into communities.

Ultimately, this new mandate will impede people’s freedom of movement, deny what could be strong and legitimate claims for asylum, and create further obstacles for people seeking refuge from war-torn or dangerous regions. It is not a solution to the immigration problem, but it is the introduction of more hurdles that would-be immigrants must overcome as they seek inclusion in society, secure living and cultural acceptance.

Memory Against Forgetting: Families of Colombia’s Falsos Positivos Lead the Fight for Dignity

When we talk about justice, it’s tempting to think first of courtrooms, judges, and laws. But for many Colombians, especially the families of victims of falsos positivos, justice has been built not only in tribunals but in memory itself: in the photos carried to marches, the murals painted in neighborhoods, the names shouted at demonstrations, the rituals performed year after year so that forgetting is impossible.

Between 2002 and 2010, thousands of young men — mostly poor, often from rural or marginalized communities — were killed by members of Colombia’s military and falsely presented as guerrillas killed in combat. These extrajudicial executions, known as falsos positivos, were incentivized by a warped system that rewarded body counts with promotions, money, and leave time.

For the families of the deceased, the pain was double: they suffered not only the violent death of their children, brothers, or fathers, but also the stigma of being told these dead loved ones were “terrorists.” For decades, official narratives denied their innocence. In response, parents, siblings, and loved ones took on the role of guardians of memory.

Today, as Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) finally begins to hand down historic rulings against perpetrators, the country is reminded that these families’ insistence on remembrance is what made justice possible at all.

Sign that states mothers of Soacha and Bogota do not forget — Image 1: Sign “The mothers of Soacha and Bogota do not forget”. Source: Yahoo Images.

Memory as Resistance

In Colombia, the act of remembering has often been a political gesture. For mothers who lost their sons to falsos positivos, memory is more than grief: it is resistance against erasure.

One of the most emblematic groups is the Mothers of Soacha (Madres de Soacha). In 2008, dozens of women discovered their sons had been lured from Bogotá’s outskirts with promises of work, only to be killed hundreds of miles away and buried as guerrillas. For them, memory became a form of activism:

Photographs at protests: They carried enlarged portraits of their sons to public squares, confronting officials and society with faces that proved they were not anonymous guerrillas but young men with families, lives, and dreams.

Annual commemorations: Every year, they gather to honor the date of disappearance or death, keeping the stories alive in the community.

Murals and art: Walls in Soacha and beyond carry painted faces of the murdered youth, transforming public space into testimony.

This memorialization disrupts the state’s attempt to rewrite their deaths as a part of “combat.” It asserts: they lived, they were innocent, and they will not be forgotten.

Image 2: Sign in favor of the Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz. Source: Yahoo Images.

The Weight of Stigma

For families, memory is not only about honoring loved ones but also about countering stigma. Many recall being told by neighbors, even relatives, that their sons must have been guerrillas — why else would the army say so? The official record branded them criminals, compounding the loss with shame.

By publicly naming them, retelling their stories, and refusing silence, families reclaimed dignity. Memory became a way of restoring the humanity stripped away by both the bullets and the lies.

In that sense, memorialization is not passive. It is an active form of justice: refusing the false narrative, demanding truth, and forcing institutions to confront uncomfortable realities.

From Memory to Justice: Recent Developments

The persistence of families has borne fruit. This September (2025), the JEP issued its first substantive ruling on falsos positivos. Twelve ex-military officers from the Batallón La Popa were held responsible for 135 killings between 2002 and 2005. Instead of prison, their sentences include restorative projects: building memorials, contributing to truth-telling initiatives, and reparations.

For many families, the ruling is bittersweet. On one hand, it is the first time the state has officially recognized that their loved ones were not guerrillas but civilians murdered under a policy of deception. On the other, some feel restorative sanctions are insufficient for crimes of this magnitude.

Yet, what is undeniable is this: without the relentless work of victims’ families, there would be no case, no ruling, no justice at all. Their memory work forced the truth into public view, long before courts were willing to listen.

Memory Across Generations

Memorialization also has a temporal dimension. Parents age; siblings pass the torch. Children who never met their uncles now grow up seeing their faces in photos at family homes. Some youth groups have joined mothers in painting murals or organizing cultural events to keep the memory alive.

This intergenerational transmission matters. It means falsos positivos are not confined to dusty files or occasional headlines; they remain part of Colombia’s living social fabric. Memory ensures continuity, so history cannot be rewritten by official silence.

The Global Echo

Colombia is not alone in this. Around the world, victims’ families have taken up memorialization as a path to justice:

These movements share a belief: memory is part of justice when justice is delayed.

Image of women holding up signs with pictures — Image 3: Mothers of Plaza de Mayo. Source: Yahoo Images.

The Fragility of Memory

Yet memory is fragile. Murals are painted over. Political shifts can reduce funding for memorial projects. Denialist narratives re-emerge. Even now, some Colombian politicians downplay the scale of falsos positivos or frame them as “errors” of war rather than systematic crimes.

This is why the work of families remains so urgent. Their voices remind us that memory cannot be outsourced to institutions alone. It lives in communities, in stories told around dinner tables, in names recited at vigils.

A Country Still Healing

Colombia’s 2016 Peace Accord promised both truth and justice. The JEP was born to address atrocities like falsos positivos. Its rulings — like the one in September — are milestones. But healing requires more than verdicts.

It requires listening to families, supporting memorialization efforts, and integrating their memory work into the nation’s broader historical narrative. Museums, school curricula, public memorials, and state apologies can all help ensure that the falsos positivos are never repeated and never forgotten—and to that end, some rulings have ordered soldiers and officers to participate in community memorial projects, recognizing memory as a necessary path toward reconciliation.

Memory as Our Responsibility

The parents and relatives of falsos positivos victims have shown extraordinary courage. They remind us that memory is not just about the past, it is about shaping the present and protecting the future.

By carrying photos, painting murals, and speaking truth, they have forced Colombia, and the world, to confront a reality that many preferred to ignore. Their work demonstrates that justice is not only legal but also cultural and emotional.

A Call to Remember

As readers, we too have a role. We can support memorialization efforts, share victims’ stories, and resist denialist narratives. If you are in Colombia, visit a memorial site, attend a commemoration, or learn the names of the victims in your region. If you are outside of Colombia, read about the Mothers of Soacha, amplify their voices, and connect their struggle with global movements for truth and justice.

Because in the end, forgetting is complicity. And memory — stubborn, painful, luminous memory — is the first step toward dignity, accountability, and peace.

Hungary Leaves the International Criminal Court

Earlier this month, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban declared that the country would withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), becoming the first European Union member state to pull out of the decades-old global institution. This decision came during Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Hungary, where Orban refused to comply with his ICC-mandated responsibility to arrest the Israeli Prime Minister, thus rejecting the legitimacy of the court’s arrest warrants. Though an individual incident, this event is indicative of a global shift away from international institutions, raising concerns regarding the future and authority of the ICC and global organizations as a whole. As numerous countries, the United States included, fight against democratic backsliding, international law is crucial in ensuring democratic standards are upheld, making this withdrawal worth monitoring.

What is the ICC?

The ICC is a permanent international court designed to prosecute political officials and military members following their initiation or continuation of international law violations, specifically targeting perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. Unlike the International Court of Justice, the United Nations’ branch that pursues cases between nations, the ICC functions independently from any pre-existing international organization and focuses solely on individual responsibility and perpetration of crimes.

The idea of establishing a court of global accountability originated after World War I; however, the largest push came after World War II and the global outrage surrounding the Holocaust. While an international court had yet to be established, ad hoc tribunals were created, prosecuting Nazi military and political officials. In between then and the court’s creation, other ad hoc tribunals have been organized, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. These events popularized the establishment of a permanent, global court. In 1998, the UN General Assembly met in Rome, finalizing a treaty that would then become the Rome Statute, the foundational document of the ICC. 120 countries voted to establish the court, and by 2002, the statute was adopted, gaining the necessary 60 ratifications needed for it to enter into law, thus granting the ICC international legitimacy and authority.

Under the Rome Statute, the ICC is given universal jurisdiction, meaning that perpetrators of international law violations can be tried even if the events occurred in another country. This also grants the court the ability to investigate allegations, with claims being brought to the ICC or based on the suspicions of the institution. If the court finds that an individual has likely played a direct role in the initiation or continuation of a crime outlined by the ICC, an arrest warrant will be issued. As part of ratifying the Rome Statute, member states assume the responsibility to comply with these rulings and are expected to detain those who receive arrest warrants if they enter the nation’s territory. After detention, trials are conducted, and a final ruling is eventually made. Since the court lacks an overarching enforcement mechanism, this organization relies heavily on state compliance to maintain legitimacy. Without this, the ICC loses its prosecutorial power and therefore its purpose.

Large meeting at International Criminal Court. Seats in a semicircle around a large screen and panelists — Image 2: ICC Assembly of States. Source: Yahoo Images

Why is Hungary’s Withdrawal Important?

Though Hungary’s absence won’t single-handedly undermine the ICC’s functional capacity, it does signify the country’s shift away from global institutions and further descent into authoritarianism. Since Orban took office in 2010, the country has become an “illiberal state,” a term Orban uses with pride. This reality is demonstrated in his views on international institutions. When discussing his reasons for withdrawing, Orban expressed that “Hungary has always been half-hearted” on its commitment to what he stated was the “political court” of the ICC. Furthermore, under his regime, Hungary has isolated itself from the democratic values of the European Union, with Orban having captured public institutions and the formerly independent media. He has undermined judicial independence, creating a government oversight committee that tracks the domestic courts and placing partisan judges in politically important positions. Orban has also been consistent in his support of Vladimir Putin, criticizing EU-imposed sanctions on Russia and openly condemning support for Ukraine. These actions have ultimately isolated the country from the Union and its foundational values, thus undermining the EU’s efforts to foster a unified Europe.

Hungary’s rejection of the ICC is also representative of the current global climate, as there has been an international decrease in support for global institutions. Since the issuance of Netanyahu’s arrest warrant, several countries, such as Belgium, Germany, and France, have remained unclear as to whether they would comply with ICC orders, disregarding their responsibility as set out under the Rome Statute. Similarly, Europe has seen a rise in Euroscepticism, or a distrust in the authority of the European Union. This perspective has pervaded several powerful political parties throughout Europe, such as the Alternative for Germany Party in Germany, the Freedom Party in Austria, the Law and Justice Party in Poland, and the Georgian Dream Party in Georgia. These parties have openly criticized the authority granted to the EU and the need for sovereign countries to align their policies with an overarching institution. Meanwhile, numerous countries are reverting to conservative, traditional cultural and political norms, further increasing hesitancy toward a liberal international order that advocates for equality and progressive policies.

This shift is not unique to Europe, as the United States has also been open in its rejection of the ICC and other international institutions. Recently, the Trump administration has placed sanctions on ICC officials, signifying distrust in the court. Furthermore, the US has withdrawn from the Paris Climate Agreement, the World Health Organization, and certain branches of the United Nations. With one of the world’s hegemonic powers withdrawing and delegitimizing international institutions, it is understandable why this perspective has been normalized on a global scale.

Hungarian PM Orban talks at a European Union podium, with EU flags behind him — Image 2: Orban talks at the EU. Source: Yahoo Images

The Case for International Law and the ICC

While many argue that international law and institutions violate a country’s sovereignty, the reality is that this relinquishment can be viewed as necessary to ensure long-term stability. Historically, nations have been seen as fully autonomous, lacking international institutions to follow; however, this autonomy allows countries to encroach on the rights of others, whether domestically or internationally, thus creating instability that jeopardizes the rights and safety of individuals. By surrendering some control over an independent nation to an international body, sovereignty can be enhanced. For example, by allowing international policy to dictate environmental policy, sovereignty could be strengthened by enabling countries to live without fear of climate-related destruction. In the case of the ICC, by granting a global court the authority to enforce international law, egregious behavior can face punishment, hopefully deterring these actions and thus providing greater long-term stability. In other words, relinquishing some domestic power to an international agency can enhance aspects of sovereignty as countries can live without fear of external encroachment on their rights. So, while international law might not yet be perfect, there is an argument to be made that it is worth attempting to fix rather than rejecting it altogether.

Conclusion

Hungary’s withdrawal from the ICC is representative of a broader shift away from the modern-age liberal order. Though its absence won’t directly interfere with the court’s ability to try violators of international law, it does bring into question the future of the ICC and other international institutions, as numerous countries, both within the EU and beyond, see a decline in their support of democratic values and global organizations. However, not all hope is lost; if current member states can uphold their commitments to the Rome Statute, the ICC can remain a powerful authority and deterrent against committing egregious crimes. In doing so, trust in the ICC can be consolidated, ensuring it and other global organizations play a role in the future of international politics. Because of this potential, international law remains a cause worth advocating for, as it can help ensure long-term stability during a time of global uncertainty.

Peace Constitutions: Costa Rica and Japan

What do you know about peace and peace-building processes? If you have previously studied the concept of peace, you may have encountered peace constitutions and their role in promoting both positive and negative peace.

In peace studies, peace is not limited to the absence of violence (negative peace); it also includes the social and economic institutions and structures that sustain societies (positive peace). In other words, as Martin Luther King put it in his response to an accusation that he was disturbing the peace during the Montgomery Bus Boycott, “True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice.” Learn more about peace from the fifth edition of David P. Barash and Charles P. Webel’s Peace and Conflict Studies, which elaborates on the aspects of positive peace, historical and current conflicts, nationalism, and terrorism.

Constitution on paper — Image 1: A written constitution. Source: Yahoo Images.

Constitution-building is the process of creating or amending that involves negotiating, drafting, and implementing fundamental principles and frameworks for a nation to work, according to PeaceRep. Peace agreements can be a constitution or have the constitution included within them. Charlotte Fiedler from the German Institute of Development and Sustainability analyzes the effects of writing a new constitution after conflict. This political scientist argues that constitution-making is part of the peace-building process, and empirical evidence indicates that it allows countries to start anew with a new governance framework, rethink previous regimes, and, therefore, improve their societal peace outlook. According to Fiedler, post-conflict constitutions are linked to trust-building, meaning that longer constitution-making processes are more successful in sustaining peace than shorter, forced processes. Both Japan’s and Costa Rica’s peace constitutions were drafted after conflicts, and both countries have seen respective benefits.

Japan’s Postwar Constitution

The 1947 constitution introduced more power to Japanese society by placing the military under civilian control, granting new rights to women, and reformulating the responsibilities of the imperial family. After WWII, Japanese cities were devastated, and post-conflict planning started. The U.S. diplomat Hugh Borton, who was part of these plans, claimed that Japan needed a new one: “to truly steer away from the imperial institution.” The Japanese wanted to amend their 1889 Meiji Constitution, but the Allies didn’t think this was enough. Therefore, General MacArthur created three principles to serve as an outline for a new constitution: no longer being able to wage war, a parliamentary system, and more power to the people.

After a lot of back and forth between the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers staff (SCAP), the Japanese cabinet, and the first post-war general election, a new constitution was drafted. The SCAP included in Article 9 that Japan would renounce the use of force as a tool for addressing international issues. Some agreed with this article, showing Japan’s commitment to peace, but others weren’t keen on the idea. Ultimately, it was amended to read that Japan would not keep armed forces strong enough for any acts of aggression

Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution includes a no-war clause, in which the government renounces war as a means of sovereignty and refuses to settle disputes using military force. It also includes wording such as “We, the Japanese people, desire peace for all time… we have determined to preserve our security and existence, trusting in the justice and faith of the peace-loving peoples of the world.” Because of the language in it, the constitution played a major role in shaping Japan’s national identity of pacifism.

Lessons from Japan

Image 2: Japan Self-Defense Forces in the forest. Source: Yahoo Images.

As established in “Peace in Theory and Practice” under Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution, a review by Lawrence W. Beer, an expert on the politics of Japan and other Asian countries, reveals a few lessons that these peace constitutions teach the world. First, a renunciation of war is acceptable, desirable, and realistic. Second, the military does not have to be the center of international and national planning; instead, the economy, democracy, human rights, and the environment should be the center of national security concerns. Third, major peaceful changes in culture and system are possible even in the most nationalist, military-driven nations. Despite these efforts and lessons, some government officials have worked to reinstate a stronger military force and larger access to arms. Hence, time will tell how Japan will uphold its pacifist identity.

Costa Rican Constitution

Costa Rica committed to peace and democracy after years of internal conflict and unrest. Early on, after gaining independence from Spain, Costa Rica focused on its internal development, avoiding prolonged conflicts and opting for defense rather than aggression. After a period of peace when the military focused on maintaining internal order, Federico Tinoco seized power through a coup and established an authoritarian rule heavily dependent on military power. Tinoco was not well received, and this dictatorship affected public opinion on the military and its role in society. The event that pushed Costa Rica to make its final decision to abolish its military was the 1948 Civil War, which left thousands dead and had people urging for a peaceful country. The aftermath of the civil war led to the decision that same year.

Painting celebrating the peace constitution of Costa Rica — Image 3: Painting celebrating Costa Rica’s peace constitution. Source: Yahoo Images

The codification of the 1949 constitution declared Costa Rica a neutral nation, prohibiting the use of force by its army. Article 12 states, “The Army as a permanent institution is abolished,” and instructs the funds to be allocated to public welfare programs instead. What was before the job of the military became the job of the civilian police force, whose main objective is community policing and human rights?

Finally, the Costa Rican Constitution, in Article 50, guarantees the right to live in a healthy and environmentally balanced environment, making both the state and the public responsible for conserving their natural resources. Following this article, the country has passed legislation to address fishing and mining, as well as utilizing renewable sources for a large portion of its energy.

Lessons from Costa Rica

Without the burden of military expenditure, Costa Rica was able to focus more on its social services, providing better resources for its nation. This investment in education and healthcare resulted in one of the highest literacy rates in Latin America and a healthcare system with universal coverage for its citizens. What’s more, fund reallocation allowed for the development of tourism, technology, and environmental conservation. Although a lot of money and arms are still poured into the police, the shift to a more peaceful and sustainable society is evident. Ultimately, Costa Rica’s stance on peace has had an impact on the nation’s structure and its reputation in the international arena.

These two countries are not the only ones with limitations on their military forces. Iceland, Mauritius, Panama, and Vanuatu have also decided to abandon the use of the military and instead rely on alliances, diplomatic relations, and geographical isolation for national defense. For other countries and territories, such as Micronesia, defense is the responsibility of others. For example, Monaco’s defense is the responsibility of France, while the Faroe Islands are under the responsibility of Denmark.

Leaning away from raising armies for aggression may improve international harmony. How it would affect internal conflict is an aspect to consider. Moreover, the logistics of maintaining a defense army, such as limitations on size and allies, are also important factors in this conversation. A peace constitution that abolishes the military may not be a popular reform in bigger countries such as the U.S., Russia, and China. Less threat of attacks may allow for further distancing from military expenditure. Ultimately, a peace constitution not only addresses negative peace but also leads to positive peace as resources are reallocated to fit the new goals and structure of each nation.