Number of results to display per page
Search Results
42. Mid-Year Update: 10 Conflicts to Worry About in 2021
- Author:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- In ACLED’s special report on 10 conflicts to worry about at the start of 2021, we identified a range of flashpoints and emerging crises where violent political disorder was likely to evolve or worsen over the course of the year: Ethiopia, India & Pakistan, Myanmar, Haiti, Belarus, Colombia, Armenia & Azerbaijan, Yemen, Mozambique, and the Sahel.1 Our mid-year update revisits these 10 cases, tracking key developments in political violence and protest activity during the first half of 2021 and analyzing trends to watch in the coming months.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, Conflict, Protests, and Political Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, India, Yemen, Colombia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Haiti, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Myanmar, Belarus, Sahel, and Global Focus
43. Violence Targeting Women in Politics: Trends in Targets, Types, and Perpetrators of Political Violence
- Author:
- Roudabeh Kishi
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- The addition of identity types to ACLED data on political violence targeting women sheds new light on the physical threats to women’s participation in political processes, such as running for or holding office, supporting or voting for political candidates, leading human rights campaigns or civil society initiatives, and more. This report analyzes the expanded data to unpack key trends in violence targeting women in politics. Download the expanded data and read the updated Political Violence Targeting Women FAQs for more information about ACLED methodology.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, Politics, Women, and Violence
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
44. ACLED 2020: The Year in Review
- Author:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- One year since the official start of the pandemic in March 2020, COVID-19 has killed more than two million people and brought at least half the earth’s population under lockdown (New York Times, 11 March 2021; New York Times, 3 April 2020). The health crisis has had major impacts on worldwide conflict and disorder patterns, contributing to an overall decrease in political violence levels last year even as it fueled an increase in demonstration activity. And while the pandemic’s effects have been global in scale, they have not been felt equally across conflict contexts: although violence declined on the aggregate level, it rose in nearly half the world’s countries. As vaccine distribution accelerates and countries relax public health restrictions, conflict levels are expected to increase throughout 2021(for more, see ACLED’s special report: Ten Conflicts to Worry About in 2021). Last year, ACLED expanded data collection to Latin America and the Caribbean, East Asia, the United States, and all of Europe, achieving near global coverage. Our 2020 annual report reviews the past 12 months of data on political violence and demonstration activity around the world.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, COVID-19, Health Crisis, and Demonstrations
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
45. A Year of COVID-19
- Author:
- Roudabeh Kishi
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- March 2021 marks the first anniversary of the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). One year on, this report explores ACLED’s special coverage of the pandemic’s impact on political violence and protest trends around the world – analyzing changes in demonstration activity, state repression, mob attacks, overall rates of armed conflict, and more through the COVID-19 Disorder Tracker.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, Conflict, COVID-19, and Demonstrations
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
46. Are we facing a wave of conflict in high-income countries?
- Author:
- Sarah Cliffe, Daniel Mack, Céline Monnier, Nendirmwa Noel, Paul von Chamier, and Leah Zamore
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The recent wave of violent protests and unrest across the developed world – the storming of the US Capitol during the electoral college process and the riots in the Netherlands, among others – questions the assumption that high-income countries have become immune to large-scale internal political violence. Are we facing a new wave of high-income conflict? At a minimum, increased violent unrest, political assassinations, and domestic terrorism in the next ten years seem possible, unless governments focus on avoiding impunity and establishing shared understanding of facts, reducing inequality and prejudice, and building institutional resilience. This analysis examines whether these recent events augur a wider shift in conflict risk to high-income countries, akin to the shift seen from low to middle-income countries 20 years ago. Given these events, this analysis systematically reviews conflict risks in high-income countries, as well as offers a framework that has been widely applied in the developing world to examine the risk factors for violent conflict in wealthy countries, including second generation impacts of COVID-19.
- Topic:
- Conflict, Protests, COVID-19, and Civil Unrest
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
47. How can we work towards economic recovery for all? Financing for Development: the issues, challenges, and opportunities in 2021
- Author:
- Sarah Cliffe, Karina Gerlach, and Leah Zamore
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- 2021, we all hope, will be the year of recovery. If COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out at scale, including in the developing world, global economic recovery will be large. But that in itself ensures neither that all countries will be included in the recovery, nor that all people within each country will see the gains. A rising tide, as we have seen only too well since US president John F. Kennedy first used the phrase in 1963, does not lift all boats. Elsewhere, CIC has analyzed the high demand for transformative policies in high- and low-income countries alike since the COVID-19 crisis began, including policies for domestic action on inequality and socioeconomic exclusion. This piece takes a more global view and considers how to ensure that all countries benefit, and examines the issues, challenges, and opportunities in financing for development. It looks first at the key political messages that explain why 2021 should be a year of urgent, ambitious global action for shared economic recovery; secondly at the measures under discussion (which are expanded in an annex); thirdly at the political interests at play; and fourthly at foreseeable scenarios for agreement. Last, we outline the calendar of relevant policy meetings this year and the challenge of orchestrating progress between them.
- Topic:
- Governance, Reform, Finance, Multilateralism, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
48. It’s Time to Go Back to Basics of Governance
- Author:
- Nanjala Nyabola
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to re-evaluate the principles or ideas that are at the heart of theories of government, that is the fundamentals of governance and public theory. What is government for, but also what should government do and how. Engaging with the crucial philosophical questions of governance is integral to building back better: going back to basics is a major step in figuring out how to prevent mistakes from happening again. The social contract is one such principle: the idea of a social contract is central to answering the question of what governments are for: explaining why people obey laws, providing answers to why we live in societies, and why we abide by social rules and norms. Recognizing the ongoing debates, national and international, around the meaning and origins of the term social contract, this paper by Nanjala Nyabola tries to point to some of the important thinking from the south and from non-western sources and traditions that have helped shape modern understanding of social contract theory. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review, in such a short paper, but rather a selection that reflects the richness and variety of such sources and how they have impacted thinking throughout the ages. Overall, looking at ideas of social contracts outside Western philosophical tradition reminds us that it is not just about the form of the social contract or that all political organizations must be identical. These theories also remind us that compulsion and punishment are not a strong foundation for strong systems of governance. We have to create societies that people want to live in.
- Topic:
- Security, Governance, Reform, Fragile States, and Multilateralism
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
49. Treaty Allies Matter for US Foreign Policy Experts—but They Are Not Indispensable
- Author:
- Sibel Oktay, Paul Poast, Dina Smeltz, and Craig Kafura
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- The Council's polling experts examine how American foreign policy experts think of the term "allies," and whether variations in thinking matter for US foreign policy decisions. “America is back,” President Joseph Biden pronounced at the State Department in February 2021. His comment ostensibly meant the United States was returning to the international fold after leaving a global leadership void during the Trump years. The previous administration had downplayed—even discounted—American alliances as key US foreign policy tools. “We will repair our alliances and engage with the world once again, not to meet yesterday’s challenges, but today’s and tomorrow’s,” Biden stated. At the NATO summit four months later, Biden reiterated his administration’s key message and commitment to the alliance. Emblematic of this commitment, he and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson also signed a “New Atlantic Charter” recommitting both nations to their “alliances and partners.” The United States is unique in the world in terms of security alliances. The country enjoys “the largest and most enduring military footprint” in recent history. From military bases to providing training and material assistance, this footprint is largely enabled through allies. Hence, it is perhaps unsurprising that recent surveys show a perception among Americans that alliances largely benefit the United States. But what is meant by the term “allies”? Given the variety of military partnerships and relationships maintained by the United States, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the term “ally” is used to describe countries across this range of relationships. Some countries have a formal defensive treaty with the United States, while others are merely recipients of US military financial aid. How do American foreign policy experts think of the term “allies,” and does variation in such thinking matter?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Public Opinion, Partnerships, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
50. How the United States Can Support Nascent Political Parties
- Author:
- Patrick Quirk and Jan Surotchak
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Council on International Policy (CIP)
- Abstract:
- Supporting democracy and human rights overseas is front and center in the Biden administration’s foreign policy. The White House has committed to hold a “summit for democracy” this year, vocally condemned human rights abuses by China, and called for budget increases in foreign assistance and diplomacy critical to execute its democracy agenda abroad. As the Biden team designs this agenda, it will take stock of existing democracy assistance approaches and toolkits to make sure they address the current landscape of threats (i.e., a rise in Russian and Chinese malign influence) and changing needs of democracy partners on the ground (i.e., training on new technology). One area that is in desperate need of an update is how the U.S. helps strengthen political parties abroad, something it has done since the 1980s. The U.S. approach to supporting parties has not kept pace with the evolution of these organizations over the last ten years. Increasingly, political parties are taking novel forms that arise from so called “people power” movements and often focus more on mobilizing voters than formulating policy. One of the four most common types of parties today are those that emerge from mass protest movements and widespread latent dissatisfaction with traditional parties. Examples include the Five Star Movement in Italy, the Union to Save Romania, the New Conservative Party in Latvia, and Semilla in Guatemala. Getting support to this party type ‘right’ is important because many of the countries where these entities are emerging matter for U.S. interests. In both the Czech Republic and Slovakia – NATO allies on the front line of countering Russian and Chinese influence – new, anti-establishment parties are running the government, as traditional parties have struggled with accusations of corruption and failure to meet citizen needs. In Mexico and Brazil, both major strategic partners of the United States, emergent political organizations have taken power. In Iraq, citizens protesting government corruption and inefficiencies have formed several new parties to contest the October 2021 elections and challenge the political establishment. Yet in these and other contexts, the United States lacks an approach to structure its support of such nascent parties. Here, we outline recommendations for selecting which parties to support and then a framework to maximize effectiveness of U.S. assistance to them.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Cooperation, Democracy, Political Parties, Influence, and Partisanship
- Political Geography:
- North America, Global Focus, and United States of America
51. China, climate politics and COP26
- Author:
- Sam Geall
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Lowy Institute for International Policy
- Abstract:
- There is no credible emissions pathway towards limiting global warming to 1.5°C without significant movements from China over the next decade to accelerate its energy transition and decarbonisation. China aims to become carbon-neutral by 2060. Yet Beijing is hedging in the near term, in part due to an uncertain global macro and geopolitical environment, and in part due to domestic threats of social instability and economic stagnation. China’s negotiating position at COP26 in Glasgow stands to benefit from support from many developing countries — unless the United States and other rich countries make an effective alternative appeal to the Global South with respect to climate finance, mitigation and adaptation.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- China, Global Focus, and United States of America
52. Democracy and the Challenges of Climate Change
- Author:
- Kevin Casas-Zamora
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- Climate change, being one of the most pressing issues today, has been addressed by many countries at the local, regional and global level. In this issue briefing, Dr. Kevin Casas-Zamora, Secretary-General of the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance discusses the challenges, strengths, and opportunities that democracy faces in tackling climate change. He states that the main challenges in tackling climate change are based on short-termism, self-referring mechanisms, and elements of governing capacities. Furthermore, he argues that democracy shows strength in this sense as a system of governance that allows for a strong civil society, free flow of information, societal consensus, and peaceful transformations of conflicts.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Democracy, and Participatory Budgeting
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
53. IS CLIMATE CHANGE DRIVING GLOBAL CONFLICT?
- Author:
- Nina von Uexkull and Halvard Buhaug
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Political Violence @ A Glance
- Abstract:
- While former US President Donald Trump frequently denied man-made climate change, the Biden administration has pledged to make climate change a priority, including for national security. In line with years of thinking within the defense sector, the Biden-Harris team refers to climate change as a “threat multiplier,” pointing to risks of regional instability and resource competition driven by worsening environmental conditions. This perspective also aligns with the initiatives of other countries that have pushed climate security in the UN Security Council and other international bodies.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Climate Change, International Security, Conflict, and Armed Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
54. PTSS Virtual Global Alumni Community of Interest Workshop: The Impact of the COVID–19 Pandemic on Terrorism and Counterterrorism
- Author:
- James K. Wither
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies
- Abstract:
- This paper presents the findings of a George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies (GCMC) Counterterrorism (CT) Virtual Global Alumni Community of Interest (COI) workshop held on January 20-21, 2021. The objectives of the workshop were as follows: Analyze the effect of the coronavirus pandemic on terrorism and CT nationally and internationally. Identify the extent to which the pandemic has created vulnerabilities that terrorists have been able to exploit to mount attacks and/or attract new recruits. Explore the extent to which the pandemic might make societies more vulnerable to terrorism and irregular warfare in the longer term and the reasons why this could happen. Formulate policy recommendations for the global counterterrorism community from the perspective of GCMC CT Alumni. The virtual workshop was structured around four panels, each with two alumni panelists with practical or academic expertise on the selected topics. GCMC CT faculty acted as panel moderators. The panels examined the impact of the pandemic on terrorist financing as well as terrorism and CT in the Middle East, the Americas, and the Sahel in Africa. Thirty selected global alumni took part in the workshop and raised additional questions and comments after the formal panel sessions. Initially, planning for the COI took place in spring 2020, when it was wrongly assumed that the worst of the pandemic would be over by 2021 and assessments of its impact would, therefore, be relatively conclusive. However, given the continued threat posed by COVID-19, with countries around the world still suffering from its impact, the assessments below must be regarded as interim. Therefore, the workshop made no specific policy recommendations. Marshall Center CT faculty members, along with their colleagues at the Daniel K. Inouye Asia–Pacific Center for Security Studies (APCSS), have researched the impact of the pandemic on terrorism since March 2020.1 The COI followed a survey of alumni on the impact of the pandemic on terrorism and CT conducted in October 2020.2 Over four hundred military and civilian counterterrorism practitioners responded to the survey from Europe, North and South America, Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. Unsurprisingly, many of the conclusions from the recent workshop are similar to impact statements in the earlier survey.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Terrorism, Military Strategy, Counter-terrorism, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
55. If you Can't Beat Them, Join Them: Should States Embrace Bitcoin?
- Author:
- Jesse Colzani
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- Bitcoin – the most secure and well-established technology to store value[1] – was created in 2008 to challenge the state’s centralised monopoly on money. It is a digital currency worth 1 trillion US dollars that knows no boundaries and is not controlled by any central authority. Although it is considered a threat to the established order, countries and institutional actors are gradually realising Bitcoin can also be a tool to advance their economic and geopolitical interests. Today, governments find themselves in the difficult position of having to decide whether Bitcoin should be integrated into their economies and governance structures or if they should continue to oppose, block or seek to co-opt the digital currency. But to understand Bitcoin and make an informed decision, one has to first appreciate the different components of its ecosystem.
- Topic:
- Political Economy, Governance, Currency, Digital Policy, and Bitcoin
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
56. A Roundtable on Lauren Turek, To Bring the Good News to All Nations: Evangelical Influence on Human Rights and U.S. Foreign Relations
- Author:
- Andrew Preston, Darren Dochuk, Christopher Cannon Jones, Kelly J. Shannon, Vanessa Walker, and Lauren F. Turek
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
- Abstract:
- Historians of the United States and the world are getting religion, and our understanding of American foreign relations is becoming more rounded and more comprehensive as a result. Religion provides much of the ideological fuel that drives America forward in the world, which is the usual approach historians have taken in examining the religious influence on diplomacy; it has also sometimes provided the actual nuts-and-bolts of diplomacy, intelligence, and military strategy.1 But historians have not always been able to blend these two approaches. Lauren Turek’s To Bring the Good News to All Nations is thus a landmark because it is both a study of cultural ideology and foreign policy. In tying the two together in clear and compelling ways, based on extensive digging in various archives, Turek sheds a huge amount of new light on America’s mission in the last two decades of the Cold War and beyond. Turek uses the concept of “evangelical internationalism” to explore the worldview of American Protestants who were both theologically and politically conservative, and how they came to wield enough power that they were able to help shape U.S. foreign policy from the 1970s into the twenty-first century. As the formerly dominant liberal Protestants faded in numbers and authority, and as the nation was gripped by the cultural revolutions of the 1960s, evangelicals became the vanguard of a new era in American Christianity. Evangelicals replaced liberal Protestants abroad, too, as the mainline churches mostly abandoned the mission field. The effects on U.S. foreign relations were lasting and profound.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Religion, International Affairs, History, Culture, Book Review, Christianity, and Diplomatic History
- Political Geography:
- United States and Global Focus
57. A Roundtable on Christopher Dietrich, A Companion to U.S. Foreign Relations
- Author:
- Thomas W. Zeiler, Grant Madsen, Lauren F. Turek, and Christopher Dietrich
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
- Abstract:
- When David Anderson, acting as a conduit for editors at the Journal of American History, approached me at a SHAFR meeting in 2007 to write a state-of- the-field essay, I accepted, in part because we were sitting in a bar where I was happily consuming. The offer came with a responsibility to the field. I was serving as an editor of our journal, Diplomatic History, as well as the editor of the digitized version of our bibliography, American Foreign Relations Since 1600: A Guide to the Literature. Because these positions allowed me to survey our vibrant field, accepting the offer seemed natural. And I was honored to be asked to represent us. Did I mention we were drinking? I’m sure that Chris Dietrich accepted the invitation to oversee this next-gen pioneering Companion volume from Peter Coveney, a long-time editorial guru and booster of our field at Wiley-Blackwell, for similar reasons. This, even though there were times when, surrounded by books and articles and reviews that piled up to my shoulders in my office (yes, I read in paper, mostly), I whined, cursed, and, on occasion, wept about the amount of sources. What kept me going was not only how much I learned about the field, including an appreciation for great scholarship written through traditional and new approaches, but both the constancy and transformations over the years, much of it due to pressure from beyond SHAFR that prompted internal reflections. Vigorous debate, searing critiques, sensitive adaptation, and bold adoption of theory and methods had wrought a revolution in the field of U.S. diplomatic history, a moniker itself deemed outmoded.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, History, and Diplomatic History
- Political Geography:
- United States and Global Focus
58. A Roundtable on Michael Kimmage, The Abandonment of the West
- Author:
- Christopher McKnight Nichols, Heather Marie Stur, Brad Simpson, Andy Rotter, and Michael Kimmage
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
- Abstract:
- The title of this book evokes numerous Donald Trump tweets, statements, and threats over the past five years. It also raises questions: was Trump pro-West or not, and how does his administration and its policies compare to those of his predecessors? Trumpism and the related, inchoate policies of “America First” were firmly positioned against the organizational structures and assumptions of the so-called liberal international order, or rules-based order. Trump’s targets ranged from NATO to the World Health Organization (WHO). From his speech at Trump Tower announcing his run for office to statements we heard during his efforts to contest the results of the 2020 election, Trump promulgated racist, particularist claims about which peoples and groups counted (white ones), which immigrants should be allowed in (northern European) and which should be banned (Muslims, those from “shithole” countries), and what wider heritages they fit into or “good genes” they were blessed with.
- Topic:
- International Cooperation, Liberal Order, Donald Trump, Anti-Westernism, Rivalry, Clash of Civilizations, and America First
- Political Geography:
- United States and Global Focus
59. The Remittance Effect: A Lifeline for Developing Economies Through The Pandemic and into Recovery
- Author:
- Oxford Economics
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Oxford Economics
- Abstract:
- The rising value of remittance flows into developing countries in recent years is often not widely appreciated. At a macro level, remittances support growth and are less volatile than other private capital flows, tending to be relatively stable through the business cycle. At a micro level, remittances benefit recipient households in developing countries by providing an additional source of income and lower incidences of extreme poverty. Remittances act as a form of 'social insurance', supporting households' capabilities to resist economic shocks. Remittances help recipient households to increase spending on essential goods and services, invest in healthcare and education, as well as allowing them to build their assets, both liquid (cash) and fixed (property), enhancing access to financial services and investment opportunities. Understanding the role and importance of remittances is particularly important at the current juncture, with the global economy experiencing a uniquely sharp and synchronized shock as a result of COVID-19. This report examines the available evidence on remittance flows and their potential economic effects. The report explores and shows how remittance flows remain a crucial lifeline in supporting developing economies through the current pandemic crisis and into the recovery. Although remittances slowed during the pandemic, they remained more resilient than other private capital flows, making them even more important as a source of foreign inflows for receiving countries. While the World Bank estimates that remittance flows to developing countries (low-and-middle income economies) contracted by 7.0% in 2020, this decline is likely to have been far less severe than the downturn in private investor capital. Looking forward, the World Bank predicts that remittance flows to developing countries will contract by a further 7.5% in 2021. But the outlook remains subject to a high degree of uncertainty with both upside and downside risks. A wider set of dynamics – including central bank data outturns for 2020, economic outlooks for the world economy in 2021, survey data and remittance consumer market fundamentals – suggest that while there are downside risks, there is also potential that 2020 and 2021 will not turn out as weak as predicted by the World Bank and for a period of strong remittance growth in the medium-term as sender economies recover and demand from developing economies remains high.
- Topic:
- Development, Recovery, Economic Development, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
60. Freeing Fiscal Space: A human rights imperative in response to COVID-19
- Author:
- Ignacio Saiz
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Institute for Development and Peace
- Abstract:
- Of the many dimensions of inequality that the COVID-19 pandemic has magnified, inequality between countries is one of the most glaring, yet one of the least effectively addressed. While the pandemic’s immediate health impacts have been felt in countries across all income levels, its eco- nomic consequences have been particularly dev- astating in countries of the Global South. Fuelling these inequalities is the disparity of resources that countries count on to respond to the crisis. International cooperation has never been more essential to address this disparity and enable all countries to draw on the resources they need to tackle the pandemic and its economic fallout. Besides the provision of emergency financial support, wealthier countries and international financial institutions (IFIs) need to cooperate by lifting the barriers their debt and tax policies and practices impose on the fiscal space of low- and middle-income countries. As this article explores, such cooperation is not only a global public health imperative. It is also a binding human rights obli- gation. Framing it as such could play an impor- tant role in generating the accountability and political will that has so far been sorely lacking.
- Topic:
- Fiscal Policy, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus