News

UN: SDG 2, Zero Hunger may not be Achieved in 2030

Published

2 years ago

July 24, 2024

Ochuwa Ibrahim

UN: SDG 2, Zero Hunger may not be Achieved in 2030
***1/5th of Africans Faced Hunger in 2023

By: Michael Mike

The World is at the risk of not achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 and Zero Hunger by 2030.

The annual report, launched this year in the context of the G20 Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty Task Force Ministerial Meeting in Brazil, issued by five United Nations (UN) agencies has warned.

The report which showed that the world has been set back 15 years, with levels of undernourishment comparable to those in 2008-2009, disclosed that around 733 million people faced hunger in 2023, equivalent to one in eleven people globally and one in five in Africa, according to the latest State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (SOFI) published on Wednesday by five United Nations specialized agencies.

A statement on Thursday by the United Nations agencies said despite some progress in specific areas such as stunting and exclusive breastfeeding, an alarming number of people continue to face food insecurity and malnutrition as global hunger levels have plateaued for three consecutive years, with between 713 and 757 million people undernourished in 2023—approximately 152 million more than in 2019 when considering the mid-range (733 million).

The statement said: “Regional trends vary significantly: the percentage of the population facing hunger continues to rise in Africa (20.4 percent), remains stable in Asia (8.1 percent)—though still representing a significant challenge as the region is home to more than half of those facing hunger worldwide —and shows progress in Latin America (6.2 percent). From 2022 to 2023, hunger increased in Western Asia, the Caribbean, and most African subregions.

“If current trends continue, about 582 million people will be chronically undernourished in 2030, half of them in Africa, warn the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the UN World Food Programme (WFP), and the World Health Organisation (WHO). This projection closely resembles the levels seen in 2015 when the Sustainable Development Goals the were adopted, marking a concerning stagnation in progress.”

The report highlighted that access to adequate food remains elusive for billions. In 2023, around 2.33 billion people globally faced moderate or severe food insecurity, a number that has not changed significantly since the sharp upturn in 2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Among those, over 864 million people experienced severe food insecurity, going without food for an entire day or more at times.

The report added that this number has remained stubbornly high since 2020 and while Latin America showed improvement, broader challenges persist, especially in Africa where 58 percent of the population is moderately or severely food insecure.

“The lack of economic access to healthy diets also remains a critical issue, affecting over one-third of the global population. With new food price data and methodological improvements, the publication reveals that over 2.8 billion people were unable to afford a healthy diet in 2022. This disparity is most pronounced in low-income countries, where 71.5 percent of the population cannot afford a healthy diet, compared to 6.3 percent in high-income countries. Notably, the number dropped below pre-pandemic levels in Asia and in Northern America and Europe, while it increased substantially in Africa.

“While progress has been made in increasing exclusive breastfeeding rates among infants to 48%, achieving global nutrition targets will be a challenge. Low birthweight prevalence has stagnated around 15%, and stunting among children under five, while declining to 22.3%, still falls short of achieving targets. Additionally, the prevalence of wasting among children has not seen significant improvement while anaemia in women aged 15 to 49 years has increased,” the report further said.

According to the report: “Similarly, new estimates of adult obesity show a steady increase over the last decade, from 12.1 percent (2012) to 15.8 percent (2022). Projections indicate that by 2030, the world will have more than 1.2 billion obese adults. The double burden of malnutrition – the co-existence of undernutrition together with overweight and obesity – has also surged globally across all age groups. Thinness and underweight have declined in the last two decades, while obesity has risen sharply.

“These trends underscore the complex challenges of malnutrition in all its forms and the urgent need for targeted interventions as the world is not on track to reach any of the seven global nutrition targets by 2030, the five agencies indicate.

“Food insecurity and malnutrition are worsening due to a combination of factors, including persisting food price inflation that continues to erode economic gains for many people in many countries. Major drivers like conflict, climate change, and economic downturns are becoming more frequent and severe. These issues, along with underlying factors such as unaffordable healthy diets, unhealthy food environments and persistent inequality, are now coinciding simultaneously, amplifying their individual effects.”

This year’s report’s theme “Financing to end hunger, food insecurity and all forms of malnutrition’’, emphasized that achieving SDG 2 Zero Hunger requires a multi-faceted approach, including transforming and strengthening agrifood systems, addressing inequalities, and ensuring affordable and accessible healthy diets for all. It calls for increased and more cost-effective financing, with a clear and standardized definition of financing for food security and nutrition.

The heads of the five UN agencies, FAO Director-General QU Dongyu; IFAD President Alvaro Lario; UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell; WFP’s Executive Director Cindy McCain; and WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus write in the report’s Foreword: “Estimating the gap in financing for food security and nutrition and mobilizing innovative ways of financing to bridge it must be among our top priorities. Policies, legislation and interventions to end hunger and ensure all people have access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food (SDG Target 2.1), and to end all forms of malnutrition (SDG Target 2.2) need significant resource mobilization. They are not only an investment in the future, but our obligation. We strive to guarantee the right to adequate food and nutrition of current and future generations”.

The statement said, as highlighted during a recent event in the High-Level Political Forum at UN headquarters in New York, the report underscores that the looming financing gap necessitates innovative, equitable solutions, particularly for countries facing high levels of hunger and malnutrition exacerbated by climate impacts.

It said: “Countries most in need of increased financing face significant challenges in access. Among the 119 low- and middle-income countries analyzed, approximately 63 percent have limited or moderate access to financing. Additionally, the majority of these countries (74 percent) are impacted by one or more major factors contributing to food insecurity and malnutrition. Coordinated efforts to harmonize data, increase risk tolerance, and enhance transparency are vital to bridge this gap and strengthen global food security and nutrition frameworks.

The FAO Director-General, Qu Dongyu said: “Transforming agrifood systems is more critical than ever as we face the urgency of achieving the SDGs within six short years. FAO remains committed to supporting countries in their efforts to eradicate hunger and ensure food security for all. We will work together with all partners and with all approaches, including the G20 Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty, to accelerate the needed change. Together, we must innovate and collaborate to build more efficient, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable agrifood systems that can better withstand future challenges for a better world.”

IFAD President, Alvaro Lario: “The fastest route out of hunger and poverty is proven to be through investments in agriculture in rural areas. But the global and financial landscape has become far more complex since the Sustainable Development Goals were adopted in 2015. Ending hunger and malnutrition demands that we invest more – and more smartly. We must bring new money into the system from the private sector and recapture the pandemic-era appetite for ambitious global financial reform that gets cheaper financing to the countries who need it most.”

UNICEF Executive Director, Catherine Russell: “Malnutrition affects a child’s survival, physical growth, and brain development. Global child stunting rates have dropped by one third, or 55 million, in the last two decades, showing that investments in maternal and child nutrition pay off. Yet globally, one in four children under the age of five suffers from undernutrition, which can lead to long-term damage. We must urgently step-up financing to end child malnutrition. The world can and must do it. It is not only a moral imperative but also a sound investment in the future.”

WFP Executive Director, Cindy McCain: “A future free from hunger is possible if we can rally the resources and the political will needed to invest in proven long-term solutions. I call on G20 leaders to follow Brazil’s example and prioritize ambitious global action on hunger and poverty. “We have the technologies and know-how to end food insecurity – but we urgently need the funds to invest in them at scale. WFP is ready to step up our collaboration with governments and partners to tackle the root causes of hunger, strengthen social safety nets and support sustainable development so every family can live in dignity.”

WHO Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus: “The progress we have made on reducing stunting and improving exclusive breastfeeding shows that the challenges we face are not insurmountable. We must use those gains as motivation to alleviate the suffering that millions of people around the world endure every day from hunger, food insecurity, unhealthy diets and malnutrition. The substantial investment required in healthy, safe and sustainably produced food is far less than the costs to economies and societies if we do nothing.”

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World is an annual report jointly prepared by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the UN World Food Programme (WFP) and the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Since 1999, it has monitored and analysed the world’s progress towards ending hunger, achieving food security and improving nutrition. It also provides an in-depth analysis of key challenges for achieving these goals in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The report targets a wide audience, including policymakers, international organizations, academic institutions and the general public.

This year’s theme is timely and relevant in the run-up to the Summit of the Future, and the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in 2025.

UN: SDG 2, Zero Hunger may not be Achieved in 2030

News

HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERING MUST NOT BE REDUCED TO EGO CONTESTS

Published

35 minutes ago

May 15, 2026

Ochuwa Ibrahim

HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERING MUST NOT BE REDUCED TO EGO CONTESTS

By: Frank Tietie

The unfortunate events surrounding the aborted hearing of the bail application filed on behalf of Justice Crack are deeply troubling and represent a sad commentary on the administration of justice in matters affecting personal liberty and fundamental human rights.

While a lawyer who has authority to withdraw an application scheduled for hearing before a court may determine who leads a team of counsel, no lawyer possesses the unilateral authority to withdraw an application already filed on behalf of a client without the express consent and instruction of that client.

Accordingly, it was wrong for the court to have permitted the withdrawal of the bail application filed on behalf of Justice Crack by Marshall Abubakar, Esq., unless there was clear authorisation from Justice Crack himself consenting to such withdrawal. The implication of that development is grave because it further delayed the hearing of the application of a man who has already endured prolonged detention.

Equally disappointing was the conduct of every lawyer present who failed to oppose the withdrawal of the application. By allowing arguments over seniority, representation, and professional hierarchy to overshadow the urgent necessity of securing the liberty of an oppressed citizen, the entire defence team failed in its sacred duty to the cause of justice.

The position becomes even more disturbing when viewed against the provisions of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, which clearly empower the court to adopt written addresses already before it even where counsel elect not to orally move an application. In other words, there was absolutely no justification for allowing avoidable disputes among counsel to frustrate proceedings in a matter fundamentally concerning liberty and human dignity.

Human rights litigation is not a platform for personal glory, ego contests, or professional grandstanding. It is a solemn calling that demands self-effacement, sacrifice, austerity, discipline, and unwavering commitment to the protection of the human person above all else. Lawyers who undertake human rights causes must constantly remember that the suffering client and not the lawyer’s prestige remains the true centre of every struggle for justice.

The development at the court over such an insignificant procedural disagreement has understandably generated public concern and disappointment. I therefore call on the Comrade-President, Omoyele Sowore, in his capacity as the avowed defender of the oppressed as well as the family of Justice Crack, to urgently take definitive steps regarding his legal representation in order to avoid any further setbacks capable of undermining the pursuit of justice in this matter.

The liberty of a citizen must never become collateral damage in professional rivalries among lawyers.

Frank Tietie, Esq.
Human Rights Lawyer &
Executive Director,
Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Rights (CASER)

HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERING MUST NOT BE REDUCED TO EGO CONTESTS

News

Taiwan in the Crossfire of History, Law, and Power: A Feature Analysis of Competing Claims and the One-China Question

Published

46 minutes ago

May 15, 2026

Ochuwa Ibrahim

Taiwan in the Crossfire of History, Law, and Power: A Feature Analysis of Competing Claims and the One-China Question

By: Michael Olukayode

The status of Taiwan remains one of the most enduring and strategically sensitive disputes in modern international relations — a question where history, law, identity, and geopolitics collide without easy resolution. It is not merely a territorial disagreement between Beijing and Taipei; it is a layered contest over legitimacy, sovereignty, and the meaning of statehood in a shifting global order.

Across recent scholarly salons and policy interventions in Africa and beyond — particularly the Abuja media salon hosted by the China General Chamber of Commerce in Nigeria — a striking convergence has emerged around the One-China Principle, even as interpretations of its implications remain sharply contested.

The Historical Fault Line: 1949 and the Birth of Two Political Realities

The modern Taiwan question originates in the Chinese Civil War, which ended in 1949 with the Communist Party of China establishing the People’s Republic of China on the mainland while the defeated Kuomintang (KMT) government retreated to Taiwan.

As Professor Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim forcefully stated at the Abuja salon:

“Taiwan is not a sovereign entity, it has no independence and it is not a member of the United Nations.”

From Beijing’s perspective, this was not the creation of two states but the continuation of one China under different administrations.

This position aligns with the broader Chinese narrative repeatedly emphasized in diplomatic discourse, including the categorical assertion that:

“Taiwan has never been a country, was never one in the past, and will never be one in the future.”

Taiwan, however, evolved in a very different direction. Over decades, it developed into a functioning democratic polity with its own political institutions, elections, military structure, and constitutional governance.

This divergence produces what scholars describe as a central paradox: a de facto state operating with constrained de jure recognition, facing a sovereign claim from a rising global power.

The Legal Architecture: UN Resolution 2758 and Competing Interpretations

A cornerstone of Beijing’s argument is United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758, which restored China’s seat at the United Nations in 1971.

At the Abuja salon, Professor Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim insisted:

“This resolution has explicitly established… that there is only one seat for China in the United Nations, leaving no room for ‘two Chinas’ or ‘one China, one Taiwan’.”

From this perspective, Taiwan is not a separate subject of international law but part of China whose representation is subsumed under Beijing.

Taiwan and its supporters contest this interpretation, arguing that Resolution 2758 addresses representation — not sovereignty — leaving Taiwan’s political status deliberately unresolved.

This legal ambiguity has become what many scholars now describe as structured uncertainty, sustaining diplomatic flexibility while preventing formal resolution.

Beijing’s Position: Sovereignty, Reunification, and Historical Mission

China’s position is rooted in sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national rejuvenation.

As reiterated by President Xi Jinping:

“The great tide of compatriots on both sides of the strait becoming closer, more connected and coming together will not change. This is the verdict of history.”

In Chinese official discourse, reunification is not framed as a negotiable issue but as a historical inevitability tied to national revival.

This perspective was reinforced in Abuja by African analysts who align with Beijing’s framing of sovereignty as non-negotiable, with Professor Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim emphasizing that Africa’s diplomatic alignment reflects a global consensus increasingly anchored in the One-China Principle.

Taiwan’s Position: Democracy, Identity, and De Facto Sovereignty

Taiwan’s position rests on lived political reality and democratic self-governance.

While officially still called the Republic of China, Taiwan functions as an independent political system with its own elections, judiciary, military, and constitution.

Its leadership under President Lai Ching-te emphasizes Taiwan’s distinct political identity and rejects Beijing’s sovereignty claims.

From Beijing’s perspective, this is framed as separatism. From Taiwan’s perspective, it is democratic self-determination.

The result is a deeply entrenched ideological divide: territorial integrity versus political identity.

Strategic Ambiguity and Global Power Politics

A critical dimension of the Taiwan issue is the role of external powers, particularly the United States.

Washington’s policy of strategic ambiguity — recognizing the One-China framework while maintaining unofficial relations with Taiwan — is widely seen as both stabilizing and contradictory.

At the Abuja salon, Prof. Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim and other speakers framed external engagement with Taiwan as part of what they described as “separatist encouragement,” while emphasizing African alignment with Beijing’s position.

Africa’s Diplomatic Alignment and the One-China Consensus

A recurring theme in Abuja was overwhelming African diplomatic alignment with Beijing.

As multiple presenters emphasized:

“As of May 2026, 53 out of 54 African nations adhere to the One-China policy.”

The only exception remains Eswatini.

At the salon, Prof. Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim argued that this position reflects historical continuity in African diplomacy:

“African nations have consistently stood with China on issues concerning its sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Dr. Segun Showunmi, who is an Ace Public affairs analyst and social impact expert, with experience in governance, policy and civic engagement added that this alignment is not merely political but developmental:

“That consistency created trust and in international politics, trust often translates into investment, infrastructure, and strategic cooperation.”

The Abuja Diplomatic Intervention: China’s Official Position

A defining moment of the salon came from the representative of the Chinese state — the Counsellor of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Nigeria, Ms.Dong Hairong— who reiterated Beijing’s formal position in unambiguous terms:

“There is only one China in the world, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of China.”

This intervention anchored the entire discussion within the framework of Chinese sovereignty doctrine and reinforced that diplomatic relations with China are premised on acceptance of the One-China Principle.

⸻

Prof. Sam Amadi: Strategic Ambiguity as Diplomatic Reality

Professor Sam Amadi, a policy strategist and law and governance expert, Director, Abuja School of Social and Political Thoughts,
introduced a more analytical framing, arguing that global practice is defined not by clarity but by managed contradiction.

He stated:

“The One-China principle and One-China policy are clear, but difficult to operationalise.”

He further explained:

“What we have today is strategic ambiguity… meaning they acknowledge, but at the same time, they engage.”

For Amadi, the central question for Africa is not ideological but practical:

“Should we foreclose ambiguity and advance a straight One-China principle, which will exclude all kinds of trade and engagement with Taiwan?”

His conclusion favored diplomatic exclusivity with calibrated economic engagement.

Strategic Realism: Why the Status Quo Persists

Despite rhetorical intensity, the Taiwan issue persists in its unresolved form due to structural constraints:

China cannot accept formal separation without undermining sovereignty doctrine
Taiwan cannot accept reunification without losing political autonomy
The United States benefits strategically from ambiguity
African states largely align diplomatically with Beijing while prioritizing development ties

As Professor Amadi summarized:

“We acknowledge these principles, but we go back there and also deal with Taiwan in trade… using strategic ambiguity.”

Conclusion: History as Contest, Diplomacy as Equilibrium

The Abuja salon underscored a broader truth about the Taiwan question: it is not merely a territorial dispute but a global governance dilemma.

On one side stands China’s categorical assertion, echoed in Abuja:

“There is only one China.”

On the other stands Taiwan’s democratic identity and de facto autonomy.

Between them lies a global system that simultaneously enforces principle and tolerates ambiguity.

As reflected across the Abuja interventions, including those of Prof. Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim, Dr. Segun Showunmi, Prof. Sam Amadi, and the Chinese diplomatic Counsellor, the Taiwan question endures not because it lacks answers — but because every available answer carries strategic consequences the world is unwilling to fully accept.

And so Taiwan remains what it has become in the 21st century: not only a territorial dispute, but a permanent stress test of international order itself.

Taiwan in the Crossfire of History, Law, and Power: A Feature Analysis of Competing Claims and the One-China Question

News

Zulum: Consensus Remains Preferred Option for APC Primaries in Borno

Published

3 hours ago

May 15, 2026

Ochuwa Ibrahim

Zulum: Consensus Remains Preferred Option for APC Primaries in Borno

By: Our Reporter

Borno State Governor, Babagana Umara Zulum, has called on aspirants seeking various elective positions under the All Progressives Congress (APC) and party stakeholders to adopt consensus as the preferred mode for candidate emergence ahead of the party primaries.

The APC primary elections are scheduled to commence on Friday, 15 May, with the House of Representatives primaries and climax on Saturday, 23 May, with the presidential primaries.

Governor Zulum made the call on Thursday during a critical stakeholders’ meeting held at the Multipurpose Hall of the Government House in Maiduguri, stressing that consensus remains the most viable option for strengthening party unity.

“Let me start by appreciating all our stakeholders for the support and commitment to advancing the course of our great party, APC, and our administration,” Zulum said.

“As we prepare for the party primaries, which will commence on Friday, I want to remind all our aspirants contesting various elective positions that consensus is the best and most viable option for the party in our state. However, if we are unable to arrive at a consensus, we will go for direct primaries,” he added.

The governor further emphasized his commitment to democratic principles, assuring stakeholders that no candidate would be imposed on any constituency.

“As a democrat, I will not force any candidate on a particular constituency, but rather encourage us to continue consultations with stakeholders for consensus candidates to emerge,” Zulum stated.

He urged aspirants to reflect on the past, project better opportunities in the future and maintain party loyalty, noting that those who may not secure tickets in the 2027 elections could still have chances ahead.

Governor Zulum also announced that aspirants who voluntarily withdraw from contests would be considered for appointments and other opportunities at both the federal and state levels.

To facilitate consultations across the state, the governor constituted zonal consultative committees headed by the Deputy Governor, Umar Usman Kadafur, for the Southern Zone; APC Deputy National Chairman (North), Ali Bukar Dalori, for the Central Zone; and Senator Mohammed Tahir Monguno for the Northern Zone.

Governor Zulum also formally presented the APC consensus governorship candidate, Mustapha Gubio, to stakeholders, fulfilling the promise he made during the high-level stakeholders’ meeting held on 25 April.

APC Deputy National Chairman, Hon Ali Bukar Dalori, and State Chairman of the Party, Hon. Bello Ayuba, all re-echo the need for consensus as the means of primary election in the state.

They emphasized that consensus will strengthen party cohesion and unity in the run-up to the 2027 general elections.

The meeting was attended by prominent personalities, including Deputy Governor Umar Usman Kadafur, the APC consensus Gubernatorial candidate, Engr Mustapha Gubio, APC Deputy National Chairman (North), Hon. Ali Bukar Dalori, Former Governor, Senator Maina Ma’aji Lawan, Senators Mohammed Tahir Monguno, Mohammed Ali Ndume, and Kaka Shehu Lawan SAN, serving and former members of the House of Representatives, APC state chairman, former Nigerian Ambassador to China, Amb. Baba Ahmed Jidda, Speaker, Borno State House of Assembly, and other members of the House.

Others include the Secretary to the state government, the acting Chief of Staff, the Commissioner’s designate, Special Advisers, Local Government Chairmen, APC party executives, and other stakeholders.

Zulum: Consensus Remains Preferred Option for APC Primaries in Borno