Haiti calls for urgent regional gang-fighting support as US shies off funding
Top Haitian ministers called for urgent security support from neighbors at a meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) on Thursday, while the U.S. signaled it would not continue current funding aimed at holding back the nation's armed gangs.
Powerful gangs, armed with guns the U.N. believes are trafficked largely from the United States and across the land border with the Dominican Republic, have taken control of most of the capital and expanded to the central plateau and agricultural heartlands, displacing over 1 million people.
'While we remain determined to assist the Haitian people achieve the peace, security and prosperity they deserve, the United States cannot continue shouldering such a significant financial burden,' U.S. Caribbean Affairs deputy assistant secretary Barbara Feinstein said at the meeting.
The U.S. has cut much overseas aid and frozen some funding it earlier pledged to support a U.N.-backed mission in Haiti, and earlier this week Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested that OAS should play a greater role in supporting Haiti's security, such as mobilizing a force.
'The OAS is uniquely positioned not only as a forum for diplomacy, but as a vehicle for coordinated, concrete action,' Feinstein added.
A handful of countries have pledged troops to the mission, but only a fraction of these have deployed. The Kenyan-led force remains under-resourced and has had little success in helping police hold off gangs' advances in and beyond the capital.
OAS special advisor Jared Genser recommended that unless the mission is proven capable of providing security for Haitians, the U.N. Security Council should vote to convert it to a formal peacekeeping mission – a measure repeatedly requested by Haitian leaders but opposed by veto members China and Russia.
Haitian Defense Minister Jean-Michel Moise said the situation was being fueled by gangs profiting off cocaine trafficking from Colombia to buyer nations and arms trafficking from the United States by sea and across the Dominican border.
'This criminal economy fuels a local war machine,' he said. 'Haiti is on the brink of being fully controlled by criminal gangs and we cannot allow that to happen. We desperately need the help of the international community.'
Haiti counts about 12,000 police and 1,000 military officers for a population of nearly 12 million, officials said.
Moise also called for restrictions – including some based on implications in human rights abuses – on selling arms to Haiti's government to be eased, citing gangs' easy access to militarized weapons.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
a day ago
- TimesLIVE
US vetoes UN Security Council demand for Gaza ceasefire
The US on Wednesday vetoed a draft UN Security Council resolution that demanded an 'immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire' between Israel and Hamas militants in Gaza and unhindered aid access across the war-torn enclave. The other 14 countries on the council voted in favour of the draft as a humanitarian crisis grips the enclave of more than 2-million people, where famine looms and aid has only trickled in since Israel lifted an 11-week blockade last month. 'The US has been clear: We would not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas and does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza,' acting US ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea told the council before the vote, arguing it would also undermine US-led efforts to broker a ceasefire. Washington is Israel's biggest ally and arms supplier. The Security Council vote came as Israel pushes ahead with an offensive in Gaza after ending a two-month truce in March. Gaza health authorities said Israeli strikes killed 45 people on Wednesday, while Israel said a soldier died in fighting. Britain's UN ambassador Barbara Woodward criticised the Israeli government's decisions to expand its military operations in Gaza and severely restrict humanitarian aid as 'unjustifiable, disproportionate and counterproductive'. Israel has rejected calls for an unconditional or permanent ceasefire, saying Hamas cannot stay in Gaza. Israel's UN ambassador Danny Danon told the council members who voted in favour of the draft: 'You chose appeasement and submission. You chose a road that does not lead to peace. Only to more terror.' Hamas condemned the US veto, describing it as showing 'the US administration's blind bias' towards Israel. The draft Security Council resolution had also demanded the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and others.
Eyewitness News
a day ago
- Eyewitness News
Anger as US blocks Gaza ceasefire resolution at UN Security Council
UNITED NATIONS - UN Security Council members criticised the United States Wednesday after it vetoed a resolution calling for a ceasefire and unrestricted humanitarian access in Gaza, which Washington said undermined ongoing diplomacy. It was the 15-member body's first vote on the situation since November, when the United States - a key Israeli ally - also blocked a text calling for an end to fighting. "Today, the United States sent a strong message by vetoing a counterproductive UN Security Council resolution on Gaza targeting Israel," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement after Wednesday's 14 to 1 vote. He said Washington would not support any text that "draws a false equivalence between Israel and Hamas, or disregards Israel's right to defend itself. "The United States will continue to stand with Israel at the UN." The draft resolution had demanded "an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza respected by all parties." It also called for the "immediate, dignified and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups," and demanded the lifting of all restrictions on the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza. Hamas, whose unprecedented attack inside Israel on 7 October 2023 sparked the war, condemned the "disgraceful" US veto, reiterating accusations of "genocide" in Gaza, something Israel vehemently rejects. The veto "marks a new stain on the ethical record of the United States of America," the group said in a statement, accusing Washington of "legitimizing genocide, supporting aggression, and rationalising starvation, destruction, and mass killings." 'MORAL STAIN' Pakistan's ambassador to the UN Asim Ahmad meanwhile said the failed resolution would "remain not only a moral stain on the conscience of this council, but a fateful moment of political application that will reverberate for generations." China's ambassador to the UN Fu Cong said: "today's vote result once again exposes that the root cause of the council's inability to quell the conflict in Gaza is the repeated obstruction by the US." The veto marks Washington's first such action since US President Donald Trump took office in January. Israel has faced mounting international pressure to end its war in Gaza. That scrutiny has increased over flailing aid distribution in Gaza, which Israel blocked for more than two months before allowing a small number of UN vehicles to enter in mid-May. The United Nations, which warned last month the entire population in the besieged Palestinian territory was at risk of famine, said trickle was far from enough to meet the humanitarian needs. 'JUDGED BY HISTORY' "The Council was prevented from shouldering its responsibility, despite the fact that most of us seem to be converging on one view," said France's ambassador to the UN Jerome Bonnafont. Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian ambassador to the UN, said after the Security Council vote he would now ask the General Assembly to pass a resolution calling for a ceasefire. Israel's ambassador to the UN Danny Danon, however, said that the Palestinian plan to put the resolution to a vote at the General Assembly, where no country can veto it, was pointless, telling countries "don't waste more of your energy." "This resolution doesn't advance humanitarian relief and undermines it. It ignores a working system in favour of political agendas," he said. "The United Nations must return to its original purpose - promoting peace and security - and stop these performative actions," Rubio said.
Daily Maverick
2 days ago
- Daily Maverick
When we think about hunger we don't think about peace — here's why we should
Hunger isn't just about food. It's about power. It's about who gets to eat, who decides and who is heard. If we're serious about justice, then no one should be hungry. In South Africa, hunger is not just about empty stomachs, but also about unequal systems. It exists in crèches that exclude children whose parents can't pay fees, in homes where grant applications fail quietly, and in the lives of people with disabilities navigating systems that overlook their most basic needs. The student who is excluded from funding because they are considered too poor to afford university, yet not poor enough to qualify for state assistance, caught in the gap of eligibility. The woman who sits at the traffic lights with her child asking for small change or food. The problem is not that the country does not produce enough food, the problem is about who eats and who does not. Hunger is not just about food, it is about power, it is about peace, and it is deeply gendered. Women, especially Black women, carry the heaviest load in South Africa's food crisis. They cook, stretch budgets, sell in the informal economy and absorb the emotional violence of food insecurity. They go hungry so children can eat. And when food runs out, so does safety. As we've seen time and again, from the Covid lockdowns to the July KwaZulu-Natal unrest, scarcity breeds violence and is expressed against Black bodies. Despite producing enough food to feed everyone, South Africa has more than 63.5% of households facing food insecurity. We live in a country with one of the world's most progressive constitutions, in which section 27 guarantees the right to food and water. Yet every day millions go hungry. And too often we forget who exactly is being left behind. Hunger is a multidimensional crisis that undermines health through malnutrition, poor disease resistance and skipped medication. It fractures social cohesion, creating stigma, shame and desperation, worsening economic outcomes, especially for women and young people already at the margins. Women in informal settlements skip antiretrovirals because they can't take them on an empty stomach. The missing population that is not reported on include those not in employment, education or training, outside of the Not in Education, Employment or Training (Neets) active or inactive. There are people who are not in employment who are not receiving social grants and are not in the youth category, including children who are not in early childhood development, and are left without resources to access food. Despite policy interventions such as school feeding schemes, social grants and the 2023 SAHRC-led right-to-food study commissioned by the Department of Agriculture, significant structural gaps remain. Many interventions are not reaching those outside formal systems – such as children excluded from early childhood development programmes or people with disabilities navigating inaccessible services. These omissions reveal a deeper issue: our food security mechanisms are not designed with the most marginalised in mind, reinforcing cycles of invisibility and exclusion. This is not just a failure of delivery. It is a failure of vision. If we think of hunger only as a developmental or nutritional issue, we miss its full impact. Hunger is relational. It creates shame, fuels desperation and destabilises communities. We need to stop treating hunger like an economic inconvenience and start addressing it as a political and peace issue, one that is deeply gendered. The Centre for Social Justice, under the leadership of Professor Thuli Madonsela, has reframed hunger as a constitutional crisis. In the recent expert symposium I attended on 10 April in Pniel discussions rightly rooted the right to food in section 27 of the Constitution, making the case for structural change that is systems-based and a rights-driven approach to food insecurity. The research on Gendered Dimensions of Hunger and Peacebuilding by the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation and University College Dublin drives the conversation further, urging for a widened lens where food security is a catalyst for peace. Because hunger, when it intersects with gender, exclusion and poverty, becomes something even more dangerous – a disruptor of peace. A participant in the ongoing research said that in one of the dialogues they conducted a man asked: 'How do you expect me and my people to engage on peace when we are hungry?' Let's be clear: we have the policy tools, we have the research and we have the constitutional mandate. What's needed now is a shift in mindset from hunger as a welfare issue to hunger as a peace and justice imperative. When hunger intersects with gender inequality, disability and exclusion, it fuels gender-based violence, erodes trust in the state and drives protests, looting and resentment. As the UN Security Council warned in 2025, hunger isn't just a consequence of conflict. It's a cause. We must act like it. That means embedding gender, peace and inclusion into every food policy. It means tracking how hunger affects social cohesion, how it exacerbates violence, how it chips away at democratic trust. It means giving voice and space to those most affected not after the fact, but as architects of the solutions. If we are serious about building a future rooted in justice and peace, then we must start treating hunger as both a political emergency and a moral failure. This means going beyond food parcels and short-term aid. We need women-led food and peace councils that place care, equity and lived experience at the heart of decision-making. We need disability-sensitive food access tools that acknowledge the everyday barriers disabled people face in reaching nourishment. And above all, we must ensure that no child goes invisible simply because their stomach is empty outside of school hours. Hunger is not just a symptom it is a warning signal. And ignoring it now means paying the price in conflict, unrest and fractured futures. Hunger isn't just about food. It's about power. It's about who gets to eat, who decides and who is heard. If we're serious about justice, then no one should be hungry – not a mother, not a child, not a person navigating hunger with a disability. Because food justice is peace work. Because peace doesn't start in Parliament – a place where conflict should be dealt with – it starts in homes where children eat, with women who aren't forced to trade their bodies for bread, and with the ability of persons with disabilities to access food without stigma. Where food security is not a charity but a human right. So, what would it look like to build a hunger strategy rooted in gender justice and peace? We are at a turning point. With the National Food and Nutrition Security Plan (2024-29) in development, and a government of national unity on the table, the political moment is ripe. But the question remains: will we continue with business-as-usual? Or will we reimagine hunger as the crisis of dignity, justice and peace that it is? As one working at the intersection of gender, hunger, and peace, I say this: until hunger is addressed as a breach of peace and women are recognised as leaders in healing it, our democratic promises remain half-written. We don't often think of food when we talk about peace. But we must – because in every empty stomach lies a silent protest against injustice. If we want peace to flourish, it must begin with food security, dignified women and inclusive food systems. DM Naledi Joyi is a gender programme officer at the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation. Her work focuses on the intersections of gender-based violence, food systems and structural inequality. She has conducted research across rural and urban South Africa and post-conflict Liberia, exploring how violence is embedded in institutions, economies and everyday survival.
