Thread by @althecat

This seems to be the most interesting bit of Friday's UN Media briefing regarding the long-awaited "Black Sea Initiative" which was needed to prevent a financial, food and energy crisis globally, the implications of which are hard to fathom.

Unfortunately we as yet seem to know very little about the full details of the two agreements which are part of this.

The Black Sea initiative is related to shipping in the Black Sea. A 2nd agmnt (signed an hour or so later) lifts Russian fertiliser export sanctions - I think.

A third extremely important component of what the UNSG was seeking to achieve here was to free up financing for developing nations to ensure that they are in a position to plant, harvest and distribute crops.

My questions about all this are: 1. on timing, and 2. on finance - which is the critical ingredient in making this plan actually work - and something which Ms Rebecca Greenspan of UNCTAD was leading the effort on.

Correction: The official who was leading this efforts name is Rebecca Grynspan not Greenspan. Not to be confused with the former Fed Reserve Chairman.

Here is the briefing back on April 13th which launched all this.

UNSG @antonioguterres describes the crisis as a mother of all crises moment - which is correct - and then hands over to Grynspan who does a great job of talking about the challenges - which were and are monumental.

In the 3 and a bit months since - 2nd half April, questions on progress with this deal have been daily in UN Press Briefings, with nothing forthcoming except to confirm that the parties are still talking.

Here is the UN's reporting on the signing of the intiative in which UNSG describes it as:

“A beacon of hope – a beacon of possibility – a beacon of relief -- in a world that needs it more than ever.”

He often talks like this and in this case it is justified.

Absent a set of mechanisms that prevents well over 50% of the world's population being plunged into poverty and unable to pay for energy and fuel - the probability of global civil unrest on a scale hitherto only seen during the World Wars is truly terrifying.

Which is why the question here relates to the details.

First on timing: This agreement arriving as summer is winding down - is too late to affect northern hemisphere developing world agricultural production in any meaningful manner.

And as most of the world's land mass and people are in the northern hemisphere we will only find out next year what impact 4-5 months of no Russian fertiliser exports will have on global agriculture.

But the really difficult part of what Rebecca Grynspan was trying to achieve in this effort related to finance. She talks about this extensively in her April 13th briefing - effectively the ask here was to achieve a massive departure from normal global financing norms.

Similar issues (i.e. of existential necessity with relation to climate change adaptation and resilience funding) also came up at #COP26. The outcome there was to establish some working groups to look at it over the coming 3-4 years.

Here is the video of the signing of the Black Sea Initiative (BSI) >>

Towards the end of the UN briefing it is revealed that the Fertiliser/Sanctions part of the deal was actually signed before the BSI.

It was also revealed that texts of the two agreements would not be released unless the parties to them agreed to do so.

In his remarks at the signing the UNSG @AntonioGuterres remarked that the agreements “will bring relief for developing countries on the edge of bankruptcy and the most vulnerable people on the edge of famine.”

At this stage however we have to take him at his word on this, and trust Russia to honour whatever agreements have been made. The @FT probably has the most useful coverage of these aspects of the deal. ft.com/content/126de7…

And its clear that while there is an agreement - the acrimony is still flying every which way.

Well worth reading the full report, but notably absent from it is any clarity or understanding about how the financing part of this might work to ensure economies in the global south - which are being crushed by high food and energy prices are able to purchase what they need.

E.G. these points attributed to UN NSC's spokesman John Kirby sounds a bit sniffy.

"..the US was not part of arranging the deal. Kirby voiced scepticism that Russia would fully comply. 'We’re hopeful that this deal is going to make a difference, but we’re clear-eyed about it.'"

Whilst this is unquestionaly a monumental breakthrough for the global south, for the @UN, Turkey, Kyiv & Russia - a cynic might also wonder whether the deal has been pushed through as August is fast approaching - because the key decision makers have summer holidays planned.

We shall see. And hopefully this breakthrough - and the unknown compromises which made it possible - will also accelerate an end to the war.

/ENDS

@Threadreaderapp Unroll