
War-torn nations face growing poverty and hunger crisis
WASHINGTON: The world's most desperate countries are falling further and further behind, their plight worsened by conflicts that are growing deadlier and more frequent.
That is the sobering conclusion of the World Bank's first comprehensive study of how 39 countries contending with 'fragile and conflict-affected situations'' have fared since the COVID-19 pandemic struck in 2020.
'Economic stagnation — rather than growth — has been the norm in economies hit by conflict and instability,' said Ayhan Kose, the World Bank's deputy chief economist.
Since 2020, the 39 countries, which range from the Marshall Islands in the Pacific to Mozambique in sub-Saharan Africa, have seen their economic output per person fall by an average 1.8 percent a year. In other developing countries, by contrast, it grew by an average of 2.9 percent a year over the same period.
The World Bank finds that countries involved in high-intensity conflict — which result in more than 150 deaths per million people — experience a cumulative drop of 20% in their gross domestic product, or the output of goods and services, after five years.
More than 420 million people in the fragile economies are living on less than $3 a day — the bank's definition of extreme poverty. That is more than the combined total of everywhere else, even though the 39 countries account for less than 15 percent of the world's population.
Many of these countries have long-standing problems with crumbling infrastructure, weak governance, and low educational standards.
People in the 39 countries get an average of just six years of schooling, three years fewer than those in other low- and middle-income countries. Life expectancy is five years shorter, and infant mortality is twice as high.
Increasing conflicts have made things worse.
In the 2000s, the world saw an annual average of just over 6,000 conflicts — in which organized groups used armed force against other groups or civilians and caused at least one death. Now the yearly average exceeds 20,000.
The conflicts are more lethal, too: In the 2000s, they took an average of fewer than 42,000 lives a year. From 2000 through 2024, the number averaged almost 194,000.
Of the 39 countries, 21 are involved in active conflicts, including Ukraine, Sudan, Ethiopia, and Gaza.
The World Bank finds that countries involved in high-intensity conflict — which result in more than 150 deaths per million people — experience a cumulative drop of 20 percent in their gross domestic product, or the output of goods and services, after five years.
More conflict also means more hunger: The World Bank estimated that 18 percent — around 200 million — of the people in the 39 countries are 'experiencing acute food insecurity'' compared with just 1 percent in other low and middle-income countries.
Some countries have managed to escape the cycle of conflict and economic fragility. Kose cites Nepal; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Rwanda; and Sri Lanka as relative success stories.
And the World Bank report notes that the 39 countries do enjoy strengths, including natural resources such as oil and natural gas, and a lot of young, working-age people at a time when many economies are aging.
'Some of them are very rich when it comes to their tourism potential,'' Kose said.
'But you need to have security established. You and I are not going to go and visit these places unless they are safe, even though they might be the most beautiful places in the world.''
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Arab News
27 minutes ago
- Arab News
Pakistan urges India to abide by Indus Waters Treaty after world court's supplemental award
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Monday urged India to restore the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), which ensures water for 80 percent Pakistani farms, and fulfil its obligations, days after the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) announced a supplemental award on the proceedings instituted by Pakistan against India over Indus waters. India announced it was putting the 1960 World Bank-mediated treaty in abeyance a day after an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that New Delhi blamed on Pakistan, an allegation Islamabad denies. Pakistan has previously said the treaty has no provision for one side to unilaterally pull back and that any blocking of river water flowing to Pakistan will be considered 'an act of war.' In its supplemental award on the proceedings instituted by Pakistan against India over two hydroelectric projects, the court ruled on June 27 that India's decision of holding the IWT in abeyance did not deprive the court of its competence to adjudicate Pakistan's complaints against its neighbor. Pakistan has opposed some of hydroelectric projects by India, saying they violate the World Bank-mediated treaty on the sharing of the Indus waters. In response to the supplemental award announced by the Court of Arbitration, Pakistan's Foreign Office said the court found hearing the Pakistan-India dispute over Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects found that it has a continuing responsibility to advance these proceedings in a timely, efficient and fair manner. 'The Court of Arbitration decided to announce this supplemental award in the wake of India's illegal and unilateral announcement to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance,' the Pakistani Foreign Office said in a statement. 'The award vindicates Pakistan's position that the Indus Waters Treaty remains valid and operational, and that India has no right to take a unilateral action about it. We urge India to immediately resume the normal functioning of the Indus Waters Treaty, and fulfil its treaty obligations, wholly and faithfully.' Last week, the PCA said it had previously found that once a proceeding before a court of arbitration is properly initiated, as in the present case, 'there must be a strong presumption against the incidental loss of jurisdiction over the matters placed before it by subsequent acts, such as the appointment of a neutral expert.' Weeks after India's suspension of the treaty, the court issued a procedural order on May 16 and requested the parties to provide written submissions on the effect, if any, of these recent developments before the court. Pakistan filed written submissions and no submissions were filed by India, but the court said it had considered New Delhi's position. 'The current phase of the proceedings before the Court concerns the overall interpretation and application of the Treaty's provisions on hydro-electric project design and operation, as well as the legal effect of past decisions of dispute resolution bodies under the Treaty,' it said. 'Accordingly, the text of the Treaty, read in light of its object and purpose, does not to allow either Party, acting unilaterally, to hold in abeyance or suspend an ongoing dispute settlement process.' Under the IWT, India has been given the right to generate hydroelectricity through run-of-the-river projects on the western rivers subject to specific criteria for design and operation. The pact also gives the right to Pakistan to raise objections to designs of Indian hydroelectric projects on the western rivers. On July 6, 2023, the PCA had issued its award on competence after considering India's objections. In a unanimous decision, the court had ruled that it was competent to consider and determine the disputes set forth in Pakistan's request for arbitration in the case. Pakistan had initiated the present arbitral proceedings before the court on August 19, 2016. The South Asian neighbors have been arguing over hydroelectric projects on the shared Indus river and its tributaries for decades, with Pakistan complaining that India's planned hydropower dams will cut flows on the river, which feeds 80 percent of its irrigated agriculture. The PCA noted on Friday that the principal issue concerned the implications, if any, that India's decision to hold the treaty in 'abeyance' may have on the competence of the court. 'Paragraph 16 of Annexure G to the Treaty provides that '[s]ubject to the provisions of this Treaty and except as the Parties may otherwise agree, the Court shall decide all questions relating to its competence',' the PCA said. 'Accordingly, the Court found that it was for the Court — and the Court alone — to answer the question before it.' New Delhi's halting of the water agreement was one of a series of tit-for-tat diplomatic measures taken by both countries in the immediate aftermath of the April 22 attack in Kashmir, which resulted in a four-day military conflict between the neighbors in May.


Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
EPA Employees Put Names to 'Declaration of Dissent' Over Agency Moves Under Trump
A group of Environmental Protection Agency employees on Monday published a declaration of dissent from the agency's policies under the Trump administration, saying they undermine the EPA's mission of protecting human health and the environment. More than 170 EPA employees put their names to the document, with about 100 more signing anonymously out of fear of retaliation, according to Jeremy Berg, a former editor-in-chief of Science magazine who is not an EPA employee but was among non-EPA scientists or academics to also sign. The latter figure includes over 70 Nobel laureates. The letter represents rare public criticism from agency employees who could face blowback for speaking out against a weakening of funding and federal support for climate, environmental, and health science. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health made a similar move earlier in June. 'Since the agency's founding in 1970, EPA has accomplished (its) mission by leveraging science, funding, and expert staff in service to the American people. Today we stand together in dissent against the current administration's focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise,' the letter read. Agency spokespeople did not immediately respond Monday to messages seeking comment. Employees want the EPA to get back to its mission. 'I'm really sad. This agency that was a superhero for me in my youth – we're not living up to our ideals under this administration. And I really want us to,' said Amelia Hertzberg, an environmental protection specialist at the EPA who has been on administrative leave since February from the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights while the administration works to close down her department. Hertzberg's work focused on the most vulnerable groups impacted by pollution: pregnant and nursing people, young children and babies, the elderly, people with preexisting and chronic health conditions, and people living in communities exposed to higher levels of pollution. 'That wasn't supposed to be controversial, but it's become so in this political climate,' she said. 'Americans should be able to drink their water and breathe their air without being poisoned. And if they aren't, then our government is failing,' she said. Berg, who also directed the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at NIH from 2003–2011, said the dissent isn't motivated by partisan criticism. He said the employees hope it will help the EPA get back to the mission for which it was established – which only matters if you breathe air and drink water. The letter outlines what the EPA employees see as five main concerns: undermining public trust, ignoring scientific consensus to benefit polluters, reversing EPA's progress in America's most vulnerable communities, dismantling the Office of Research and Development, and promoting a culture of fear, forcing staff to choose between their livelihood and well-being. EPA has cut funding and rolled back federal regulations. Under Administrator Lee Zeldin, EPA has cut funding for environmental improvements in minority communities, vowed to roll back federal regulations that lower air pollution in national parks and tribal reservations, wants to undo a ban on a type of asbestos, and proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas. Zeldin began reorganizing the EPA's research and development office as part of his push to slash their budget and gut their study of climate change and environmental justice. And he's seeking to roll back pollution rules that an Associated Press examination found were estimated to save 30,000 lives and $275 billion every year. 'People are going to die,' said Carol Greider, a Nobel laureate and professor of molecular and cellular biology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who also signed the letter. She described last week's East Coast heat wave as evidence of the ways people are feeling the effects of climate change. 'And if we don't have scientists at the EPA to understand how what we do that goes into the air affects our health, more people are going to die,' she added. Berg said the declarations of dissent from both the NIH and EPA employees are noteworthy because they represent scientists speaking out as their careers are on the line. Even non-agency employees have to consider whether the government will withdraw research funding. Greider, asked about fears of repercussions or retaliation, said she's living the repercussions of everything. She regularly meets with graduate students who are worried about pursuing scientific careers as labs lose funding. 'It's a long-term problem if we aren't supporting the next generation of scientists,' she said. 'That's decades worth of loss.'


Al Arabiya
2 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
The Latest: July Deadline for Trump's Tax and Spending Bill Approaches
Monday could be a pivotal day for Senate Republicans who are racing to meet President Donald Trump's Fourth of July deadline to pass legislation that contains big tax breaks and spending cuts. The House is being called back to session for votes as soon as Wednesday if the Senate can pass the bill. Meanwhile, Trump says he is not planning to extend a 90-day pause on tariffs on most nations beyond July 9, when the negotiating period he set would expire. Here's the latest: Senate Republicans sprint on Trump's big bill after a weekend of setbacks. The Senate will try to sprint ahead on President Donald Trump's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts after a weekend of setbacks. An all-night session to consider an endless stream of proposed amendments–called a vote-a-rama–was abruptly postponed. It's now scheduled to launch when the Senate gavels open Monday. With Democrats united against the Republican president's legislation, the voting could take all day. The day ahead could be pivotal for Republicans who are racing to meet Trump's Fourth of July deadline to pass the bill. The House is being called back to session for votes as soon as Wednesday if the Senate can pass the bill. Trump suggests no extension on tariff pause. Speaking to Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business, Trump reiterated his desire to send a 'very fair' letter to each country letting them know what their tariff rates will be. The president said, 'I don't think I'll need to extend the pause on higher tariffs,' which are supposed to take effect on July 9. He mused about what one of his letters could say. 'Dear Mr. Japan, here's the story: you're going to pay a twenty-five percent tariff on your cars,' he said. Congo's top diplomat tells AP she trusts US to uphold its part of peace deal. Congo's foreign minister dismisses skepticism about the Trump administration's mediation role in a peace deal for her mineral-rich country, telling the Associated Press she is confident the US will uphold its part of the deal. Therese Kayikwamba Wagner spoke to the AP after signing a deal with her Rwanda counterpart to end decades of bloody fighting in eastern Congo. The Trump administration agreed to use its influence to honor the press–both countries to honor the deal. In return, the US hopes for improved American access to east Congo's critical minerals. Some Congolese are skeptical. They fear the US will take the minerals without helping calm a conflict that has killed 6 million. 'The United States has been a reliable partner on many other issues that we have dealt with,' Wagner told the AP. 'So there is no doubt in this moment … when it comes to the credibility of the US as a partner, be it for a peace process where we have signed a very important agreement today or for investment from the US,' she said.