ARTICLE 1 : “Multilateralism faces a toxic brew of debt, climate crisis and war.

It’s
time for a reboot”
📍 Source : The Guardian – Nov 25, 2024

Multilateralism is under attack. A toxic brew of multiplying conflicts, worsening climate impact,
new pandemics and spiralling debt has brought the system to its knees, appearing almost
incapable of properly addressing these converging crises. Adding the unknowns of a Trump
administration into the mix will do little to allay concerns.

My own critiques of the current multilateral system are well documented, but I do not
subscribe to the view that it has no future. What’s needed is a total reboot.

By the end of the year, we have a unique opportunity to demonstrate that multilateralism can
address these challenges. Next month, the world’s wealthier countries will decide what they
can commit in development finance to further support the world’s low-income countries at the
World Bank-led International Development Association’s (IDA) 21st

These pledges are made only every three years. The decisions made in South Korea will
therefore determine how equipped we are to meet the challenges on the horizon. Among
countries that have already made pledges ahead of the meeting are Poland and Norway, with
a 100% and 50% increase over their previous contributions. Others must now follow suit.

“Funding health and education

The IDA’s track record is strong. In 2024, it committed $31.2bn (£24.3bn) to projects in low-
income countries, with more than 70% going to Africa. As a result of IDA commitment
between 2012 and 2023, more than 1 billion people received essential health services, 117
million people gained access to improved water services, and 92 million people obtained new
or improved electricity services.
Since 1960, 35 nations have graduated from IDA, with many, such as India and South Korea
– which has announced a 45% increase in its contribution this year – returning as donors, the
best proof of success nurtured.

This replenishment comes at a critical time, and there may be no second chances. The
stakes are unusually high, both for people in low-income countries and for the reputation of
the financial multilateral system. The higher-income countries’ decisions come at a tipping
point.

Implementation of the UN’s sustainable development goals has veered totally off-track for
poorer countries, drowning in the very same toxic brew of conflict, climate crisis and post-
Covid debt. Let us avoid a blinkered view. Unmet expectations feed frustration and anger,
fuelling instability and conflicts. Less development in these countries means more insecurity
globally.

The ageing Bretton Woods global financial system, to which IDA belongs, is increasingly
challenged for its inability to properly address these countries’ specific needs. But this isn’t
just about need, it’s also about opportunity.

Africa is home to a wealth of key assets. The continent is forecast to have the world’s largest,
youngest workforce within just 10 years – provided these young people get the relevant
skills. And they will have the entrepreneurial and innovative mindsets needed in this rapidly
changing world.

Africa also owns major reserves of critical and low-carbon minerals, a huge carbon-sink
potential and a wealth of biodiversity, all crucial for the world’s green transition.

The IDA can play a pivotal role in turning this potential into reality. Funding health and
education remain vital, but access to energy, digital advancement, AI and climate-resilient
and sustainable infrastructure and cities will be the gamechangers.

Access to energy is a prime example. Without it, there can be no development, no health, no
education, no jobs, no sustainable business opportunities. Closing the energy gap for the
continent’s 600 million people is essential.

I don’t expect the IDA to solve all the challenges. In my foundation’s recent report, Financing
Africa: Where is the Money?, we conclude that the funding is often there, but without the
relevant mechanisms to use it efficiently. For example, we are still waiting for the
mechanisms to ensure that the $650bn of additional special drawing rights (SDRs) pledged
after Covid, more than two years ago now, benefit those who need it most. This is an
unacceptable waste.

Money is an important part of the equation, but not the whole story. In parallel to just
replenishing IDA’s resources, we need to seriously work on allocation mechanisms and
processes.

The world is watching to see whether the already developed countries, and the institutions
they established to ensure a peaceful and prosperous world, are equal to the challenges we
share today.
The stakes are high in a rapidly evolving geopolitical order. We have an opportunity to reboot
multilateralism – we need to take it.

📰 Article 2 : "How NASA's Artemis Accords Promote Global Space Cooperation"

📍 Source : The Guardian – Oct 20, 2024

Space agency has expanded its diplomatic reach in recent months, signing 12 of 45
signatories since January.

It was a simple pledge made amid the excitement of a landmark moment in space
exploration: “We go together,” Bill Nelson, the head of Nasa, promised the world as the
agency prepared to launch Artemis 1, its first moon-capable rocket in more than half a
century.

Now, nearly two years on from that successful uncrewed mission, and as the US – despite
delays – edges ever closer to placing humans on the lunar surface for the first time since
1972, the resonance of Nelson’s message has become clear.

Nasa has matched its giant leaps in space with less prominent, but equally significant,
smaller steps on the ground, signing up almost a quarter of the world’s nations to the Artemis
Accords, a global alliance setting guiding principles for the peaceful future exploration of
deep space.

The expansion of its diplomatic reach has quickened significantly in recent months, with 12 of
the now 45 signatories joining since January. Estonia became the most recent this week, at
the International Astronautical Congress, the world’s largest space conference in Milan, and
Nelson is spending his weekend in Bulgaria and Romania, two more members of what he
calls the Artemis generation, talking with space and government officials.

A diverse range of partners will be crucial, experts say, to Nasa’s plans to land a crew,
including the first woman and first person of color on the moon, in 2026, and its longer-range
ambitions for reaching Mars. Prior collaboration between nations spawned the international
space station, but the scale of the Artemis project is unprecedented.

“This is the US facilitating a global effort to ensure that, with Artemis, we’re not just building
better technology, but building a better future,” said Michael Gold, a former Nasa associate
administrator for space policy and partnerships and who led its office of international and
interagency relations.
“At their core, the Artemis Accords are a preemptive strike against conflict and to ensure we
have a peaceful future. As we crafted them, we wanted to ensure they were as inclusive as
possible, that any nation which wanted to support responsible, safe and sustainable
exploration could do so.

“It’s important that we not only take our astronauts to space, but we launch our values of
peace, respect for the rule of law, of open science, of sustainable activities. That’s what the
accords represent, and that’s something the US, or any one nation, cannot conduct or
succeed in on their own.”

Notably absent from the list of signatories are China and Russia, who are working together
on a proposed international lunar research station (ILRS) for the moon’s south pole by 2035.
Nelson has warned China is masking its military ambitions in space through a civilian
program, and many observers see the country’s call for 50 countries, including western
nations, to join the ILRS project, as a direct challenge to the Artemis Accords.

Gold, now chief growth officer at Redwire, a Florida-based leading supplier of infrastructure
for the commercial space industry, sees more subtle messaging in the Nasa approach.

“Space is inherently global. There is more that unites us than separates us, for signatories
and non-signatories of the accords alike,” he said.

“Remember the accords were designed to be a beginning of a discussion, not an ending.

“And because the accords have been signed by 45 nations, if any nation acts in a fashion
that is counter to their values, you’ve at least created a context where those kinds of
activities would be condemned and viewed as breaking what is quickly becoming traditional
international law.
“So even for nations that haven’t signed, the accords are having a substantive and real
effect. You can’t force any country to sign, but what we can do is lead by example, show what
good looks like, and I believe that has a non-trivial impact.”

Giovanni Zanalda, director of Duke University’s Rethinking Diplomacy Program and co-
founder of its Space Diplomacy Lab, said Nasa has been particularly successful in attracting
smaller countries with no previously apparent interest in space.

“Some don’t have space capabilities yet but are interested and excited about joining, to be
part of a dialog,” he said.

“Even small countries realize they depend on assets in space, satellite data and images for
different reasons, agriculture, weather related issues, checking on deforestation trends. So
even countries you would not have thought two years ago were so interested in space and
the moon, it’s a different situation, it’s a very different world.”

Zanalda said the growth of the private space industry, from large players such as SpaceX to
smaller start-ups vying for a share, has made the market more global, which, he believes,
has fueled the urgency for internationally accepted principles.

“Certain governments are investing more and more in these activities, which makes sense
because so much of our daily lives, whether we’re in the US, Italy, Rwanda or the Philippines,
depends on assets in space. That’s why some of the discussions now are about future rules
and regulations for certain activities,” he said.

“The goal of getting back to the moon is close, and the technology, the scientific knowledge,
the training, is there, in terms of both astronauts and in terms of private companies that are
able to deliver whatever they need to deliver on the moon.

“So the urgency is there. The rapid increase in the number of countries joining the accords,
as well as the geographical spread, are the result of the steady diplomatic leg work done by
Nasa, the state department and other US government agencies over the last couple of years.

“Personally, I see the accords, as well as other diplomatic initiatives, as a practical approach
to tackle present and future global challenges. [There’s a] need for flexible diplomacy.”