UN trade agency says it faces 'painful' cuts as countries navigate tariffs
GENEVA, June 18 (Reuters) - The United Nations trade and development agency, tasked with helping developing countries access the global economy, faces "painful" cuts as part of broader reforms prompted by a decline in global donor funding, its secretary general said.
Rebeca Grynspan told Reuters she was concerned that UNCTAD's work will be hampered while demand for its services grows, as countries seek information on the impact of sweeping tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump.
For UNCTAD's 2026 budget, Grynspan said she and her team had proposed cutting 70 posts, out of a total of about 500.
"This is painful. There's no way to disguise this ... we haven't cut that number of posts ever in one budget," she said.
"It really will constrain the organization and the things that we can do."
U.N. agencies like UNCTAD are having to cut costs amid a financial crisis triggered in part by the U.S., which has provided nearly a quarter of the world body's funding, and longer term liquidity problems.
"What worries me the most is the possibility to respond to countries in their needs fast enough," Grynspan said.
Grynspan, who is part of the task force on broader UN80 reforms to improve efficiency and cut costs at the U.N., said she was involved in discussions on how to better divide tasks among the U.N's development agencies through collaboration.
The U.N. Secretariat, the global body's executive arm, is preparing to slash its $3.7 billion budget by 20%. About 75 agencies and departments faced a June 13 deadline to propose budget cuts. The U.N. in Geneva is proposing leaving the historic Palais Wilson, which houses its human rights office.
The final decision on UNCTAD's proposed budget will be made by the U.N. Secretariat and member states in September.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Major network TRIPLES data on its SIM-only plans – get 300GB for just £20p/m
THOSE of you considering switching networks have a brilliant opportunity to upgrade your SIM plan. Voxi is currently offering an incredible deal, with its 100GB SIM-only plan tripling to 300GB for just £20 a month. 1 Voxi, 100GB 300GB data for £20/month (Unlimited social, music, and video use) BUY FROM VOXI I keep a close eye on SIM-only deals, and this one from Voxi is easily one of the best to land in a while. Instead of cutting prices, Voxi has taken a different approach, tripling the data on two of its most popular plans, without raising the monthly cost. Deals like this offer serious value, especially if you're after more data without spending more. For heavier users, the 300GB plan at £20 a month strikes a great balance between generous data and solid value. It's a smart pick if you burn through gigabytes streaming, scrolling, or gaming, but don't quite need to pay the premium for unlimited. If you're after something lighter, the 25GB plan has also been bumped up to 75GB for just £12 per month, a great option for more moderate users. One of the deal clinchers is that many of Voxi's plans come with data-free use of social media, music, or video apps. This means you can spend hours scrolling through TikTok, streaming Spotify, or bingeing on Netflix without worrying about eating into your data. If you're not a heavy user but want plenty of data to play with, Voxi is a network worth considering. And since Voxi runs on Vodafone's network, you can expect reliable coverage wherever you are. Like many smaller SIM providers, Voxi piggybacks on the Vodafone network, which recently joined forces with Three, making the network stronger than ever. It's always worth checking your area with Voxi's coverage map, so you can be confident of a strong connection before signing up. Best Voxi SIM-only deals Voxi have a selection of SIM-only plans for every kind of data user, many of which either come with free social, music, or video use. Voxi's SIM-only plans run on rolling 1-month contracts, so there's no long-term commitment. You can switch or cancel at any time, which is ideal if you like to keep your options open. These boosted deals are currently set to end on July 17th, so there's only a limited window to lock in the savings. It's shaping up to be a strong month for savvy SIM shoppers, too. I've spotted a similar Smarty double data SIM-only deal, offering 200GB for just £12 per month, and shares the same network coverage. If you're eyeing a new handset instead, there are some tempting Android offers floating around. One major provider is throwing in a free tech bundle worth £410 when you grab the latest Honor phone, with plans starting from £20 a month. I've pulled together a full roundup of the best SIM-only deals across all the major networks, so you can find the right plan for your budget.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Europe must stand without the US – but the latest war in the Middle East shows it has no idea how
The rupture in the transatlantic relationship has left European leaders struggling to know how to think, let alone act, with any autonomy. Europe most urgently needs a mind of its own on the Middle East. Tragically, EU governments were just beginning to turn the page after a year and a half of complicity with the Israeli government's war crimes in Gaza. Donald Trump's obscene plans for a Gaza 'riviera' and 'humanitarian' initiatives that breach humanitarian principles were creating distance with the US, and European governments were starting to craft their own course. France and Saudi Arabia had planned a conference on the two-state solution, which might have led to Paris's recognition of Palestinian statehood. More significantly, the EU had accepted a review of the EU-Israel association agreement, which, in light of Israel's war crimes, should lead to the suspension of EU preferential trade with Tel Aviv, but now may not. However, Israel's military attack on Iran and the US's ambiguous yet evident support for this belligerence have upended Europe's shift towards greater autonomy and moral clarity. Of course, there is no love for the Iranian regime in EU capitals because of its human rights violations and military cooperation with Russia, notably in the war in Ukraine. Moreover, Europe rightly remains adamant that Iran should not have nuclear weapons. There is particular alarm over the International Atomic Energy Agency's most recent report on Iran's breaches of the non-proliferation treaty. But we have traditionally stood firm on the need to resolve the Iranian nuclear question through diplomacy. This is why in the early 2000s European negotiators invented the 'E3/EU format', comprising diplomats from France, Germany and the UK alongside the EU high representative to mediate on Iran's nuclear file. Today that world is gone. When Trump launched a direct negotiation with Iran, Europe was sidelined, excluded from any mediation process. Now, with Israel's military assault on Iran, we have failed to position ourselves with the necessary clarity: where was the denunciation of the bombing as a breach of the UN charter (article 2), and the additional protocol to the Geneva conventions (article 56), which specifically prohibits attacks against a state's nuclear facilities? It is one thing to uphold Israel's (or any other state's) right to self-defence. Quite another to legitimise pre-emptive strikes. This chronic impotence arises because Europe has traditionally viewed the world through a transatlantic lens. On most international issues, it has, for decades, worked hand-in-glove with Washington, using aid, trade, diplomacy, sanctions, defence and EU integration to support US foreign policy aims, convinced that the overarching values and interests were shared. Only on rare occasions have European countries openly opposed the US – as France and Germany did with the Bush administration over the US-led war on Iraq in 2003. Even where there is a difference of approach, Europe has sought to influence US foreign policy by mitigating its hard edges rather than thwarting it. European mediation on the Iran nuclear weapons question, for example, led to the joint comprehensive plan of action in 2015. And as the global rivalry between the US and China deepened, EU governments distanced themselves from US calls for decoupling the western and Chinese economies, instead promoting the softer alternative of 'de-risking'. Trump's foreign policy wrecking ball, however, has created a world in which Europeans have to stand on their own feet. And they are struggling. On Ukraine, Europe has learned the hard way and stands firm, maintaining financial and military assistance to Kyiv while exploring ways of filling the gaps in the event of US disengagement. But apart from Ukraine, we are at a loss. It is true that Europe has toughened up on Beijing; it is no longer starry-eyed about China's belt and road initiative and the strategic risk posed by Beijing's policies in Europe. The EU has started screening Chinese investments in Europe and raised tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles. But Trump's mixed signals mean that Europe needs to figure out alone what it thinks and wants from Beijing. The EU cannot afford a trade war on multiple fronts, especially if its own trade talks with Washington derail. European governments also know that there is no way they can meet climate neutrality by 2050, now enshrined in law, without cooperating with China, which is a leader in the green economy. Even in the unlikely event of a comprehensive 'deal' between Trump and Xi Jinping, it's hard to imagine Europeans reverting to the old days in which China was solely viewed as an economic partner and ally in defence of multilateralism. Europeans need to develop their own ideas and policies independently of an erratic White House, but they don't know how to get there. In its political wavering on the latest war, Europe has neither won favour from Washington nor improved its standing with Israel. In the meantime, it has lost all credibility as an honest broker with Iran. The cherry on the cake is that Russia has angled itself as a possible mediator instead, with Trump winking at this preposterous proposition. The risk is that Europe will also now block its own route to a more morally principled approach to the horrors in Gaza: the coming days will tell if the EU suspends its trade agreement with Israel, or if that too is put on the back burner. Ukraine is Europe's foremost security interest. Yet war, chaos and nuclear proliferation in the Middle East – which could be the unwanted consequence of the Israel-Iran war – are more consequential for Europe than for the US. So far, the European response is a far cry from thought or action, independent of the US. Nathalie Tocci is a Guardian Europe columnist
BBC News
5 hours ago
- BBC News
Be ready to be shocked and offended at university, students told
Students should be ready to be shocked and offended at university, according to the man in charge of ensuring free speech on Ahmed, from the Office for Students (OfS), which regulates universities, told the BBC that exposure to views which students might find offensive was "part of the process of education".It comes as the OfS published guidance for universities in England on how a new law, designed to protect free speech, will work when it comes into force from had requested clarity from the OfS on how to best uphold freedom of speech, after the University of Sussex was fined £585,000 for failing to do so in March. The university was issued with the fine earlier this year under existing powers, after the OfS said its policy on trans and non-binary equality had a "chilling effect" on freedom of Stock had previously resigned from her post as philosophy professor at the university, following protests by students against her gender-critical university has begun a legal challenge against the fine, arguing that the investigation was flawed. Universities UK, which represents 141 institutions, said at the time of the fine that it would write to the OfS to clarify what would represent a breach of freedom of speech now say they are "pleased" the OfS has taken on feedback, and would "make sure universities are appropriately supported to comply" with the new this summer, the new law will place a stronger responsibility on universities in England to uphold freedom of speech and academic OfS can sanction universities, with the potential for fines to run into millions of pounds, if they are found to have failed to do every aspect of university life - from protests to debates, training and teaching - is covered by the new guidelines on how the law will be returning students, or those starting university this year, there may be not be a noticeable immediate change, but Dr Ahmed says the law is about the freedom for anything to be discussed or directly to students, the director for free speech said: "You should expect to face views you might find shocking or offensive, and you should be aware that's part of the process of education."He added that students should be able to express any view, no matter how offensive it is to others, as long as it is not outside what is generally allowed by law, such as harassment or unlawful discrimination. 'Be respectful of everyone's opinions' Paris and Marie-Louise, who both study mental health nursing at the University of Salford, said they felt that being respectful of others' opinions is key. Paris said she thought it was important to be able to "express your emotions and feelings without being disrespectful", and allow others to do so too."I think it's important to be able to allow other people to express themselves, because at the end of the day everyone's gone through different situations that may lead to them having different opinions," she Marie-Louise said freedom of speech "doesn't mean you have to be nasty" or "act out of manner", but rather "just stay true to yourself".In the OfS guidelines, 54 detailed scenarios are used to explore how the new law might be interpreted, with some likely to provoke debate and even looks at "simulated military checkpoints" as part of student protests about Palestine - something that has happened in the United States, but not on campuses in the right for peaceful student protests is balanced with universities being able to limit the time and place they happen, in order to ensure no students are intimidated or prevented from attending guidelines also make it clear that any agreements with foreign states that enable censorship on campus must be changed or scrapped. 'Offensive, shocking, controversial or disturbing' But not everyone accepts there are serious issues around freedom of expression at challenged on the scale of the issue, Dr Ahmed pointed to polling carried out for the OfS, which he said suggests a fifth of academics do not feel free to discuss controversial topics in their issues most frequently highlighted by those expressing concern were race and racism, as well as sex and gender, with women more likely to feel unable to speak out. The guidelines also make clear that the OfS expects universities to support and protect academics whose views might provoke protest from students, and not to delay speaking up in their Ahmed told the BBC universities could not sack a lecturer "simply because that person expresses views students find offensive, shocking, controversial or disturbing - and that's essential to academic freedom."What is less clear is what happens when an academic leaves a job because they feel the situation is Jo Phoenix won a case for constructive dismissal with the Open University, and a tribunal found she had faced harassment for her gender-critical employment tribunal, due to take place next year, will look at an allegation by a different academic that he was constructively dismissed after students boycotted his teaching over his opinion that racial diversity programmes had gone too the meantime, the law will come into effect, with a complaints system to follow. Students will be able to complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator if they feel free speech or academic freedom is not upheld, while academics or visiting speakers will go direct to the OfS. Universities have expressed unease about the new system, pointing out they already have a legal obligation to uphold free speech. A Universities UK spokesperson said: "We strongly agree that universities must be places where free speech is protected and promoted."It added that issues were complex, and said it was pleased the regulator had taken on board feedback on its previous draft guidelines.
