Collaborative on Global Children's Issues

Amid deep funding cuts and increasingly hostile narratives toward migrant and displaced populations, especially in recent months, community-based organizations, particularly those led by youth, have been forced to adapt, resist, and develop new forms of action.

This complex scenario calls for deeper reflection. The webinar, “Youth Leading Change: Responses and Recommendations for a Failing Aid System,” co-sponsored by the Georgetown University Collaborative on Global Children's Issues, the Kuja Platform, and Global Fund for Children, brought together three young leaders to share the strategies and responses of youth-led organizations to the current crises of the aid system, focusing on their strengths, lessons learned, and perspectives on the future of aid. This post highlights their insights on advocating for youth rights amid today’s aid crises and provides key recommendations for donors and funders seeking to make a meaningful impact.

Building Sustainability From Within

Faced with the compounding effects of budget cuts and reduced international support, many youth-led organizations have had to find creative ways to sustain their work. Adopting new models of sustainability, such as entrepreneurship and community-led fundraising, has been crucial in keeping local organizations afloat.

To mitigate the volatility of the current aid system, Wardah Noor, founder and CEO of xWave Pakistan, emphasizes the importance of reducing dependencies and generating their own revenue. Her team responded to the cuts in funding by launching a service bank and building a revenue engine rooted in community-based entrepreneurship. This approach helped them to continue their local programs and youth mentorship initiatives, even if it meant working with fewer resources and a reduced scope.

Drawing on her experience, she encourages small organizations to develop self-sustaining, revenue-generating systems as a way to cope with the consequences of funding cuts. Beyond being a short-term adaptation strategy, this approach is also an opportunity to prepare for the future. She recommends that funders and international NGOs include dedicated support for organizational capacity in their involvement:

"We need to build our capacity to be prepared for crises like these, and the same goes for funders. If organizations need to build that capacity, then funders need to support them. When this crisis is maybe over, or time passes and new perspectives emerge, those grants should have a fixed component where funders dedicate a part of it to building the capacity of the organization—of the founders, the team, or the leadership—so they can respond to such crises. So I think capacity building—and not just capacity building in terms of training, but spending a part of the budget on building capacity for the organization—is needed in the future."

However, to develop these responses, organizations need more flexible grants and trust-based relationships with funders. This way, community-led organizations can make decisions based on their priorities and strengthen their institutions beyond the scope of project funding.

Noor also invites international NGOs and donors to act as connectors, and not just funders, by helping open new doors and expanding networks: "They can introduce us to more people who are interested in causes like ours (...) so that youth organizations across the world can keep doing the impactful work they're doing."

The Impact of Anti-Migrant Narratives

Another key topic raised during the conversation was the rise of anti-migrant and anti-refugee narratives, and how these increasingly threaten both the funding and day-to-day operations of youth-led organizations working with migrant, refugee, and host communities.

As Krista Rivas, global leader at the Tertiary Refugee Student Network (TRSN), explains, these narratives are having a profound impact on their work: "They deepen the barriers to accessing services and increase mistrust and rejection. In the end, people are exposed to new forms of violence simply for having been forced to leave their country." These discourses not only reinforce discrimination on the ground, but they also start to close the doors to funding, limiting the ability of youth-led initiatives to continue their work.

In the field of education, donors, INGOs, and policymakers must do more to support access to higher education for displaced and refugee youth. As Krista emphasizes, access is not only about entering university—it's about justice, dignity, and future opportunities. Higher education should not be viewed as something isolated, but rather as a pathway to growth, contribution, and long-term inclusion. One of her key recommendations is the development of inclusive policies that recognize migrants as a strategic resource. Higher education can support this by offering real opportunities to displaced youth, benefiting not only individuals but also the host societies.

"Something fundamental to investors, organizations, and everyone who can get involved is that we need a long-term vision. Refugee youth don't study only for themselves—they study to contribute, to lead, to return and rebuild, or to stay and invest in the communities that welcomed them. This is truly an investment with a guaranteed return. But for that to happen, governments and international organizations must stop seeing us as a burden or a statistic and start seeing us for what we are: a strategic resource. We have real potential to support development. No country can grow without investing in its youth—and that includes those of us who were forced to cross a border."

Adultcentrism and the Role of Youth Participation

Adultcentrism is another major challenge. Donors and international NGOs should shift their approach to decision-making, prioritizing meaningful youth leadership and participation—not just during project implementation, but also in the design, budgeting, and policy-setting stages. This shift involves acknowledging the key role young-led organizations play: They are closer to the communities, understand the risks, and are often the first point of contact for those in need.

Kimberly Barrios, vice president of Jóvenes Artistas por la Justicia Social (Guatemala), explains that one of the main challenges faced by youth-led organizations is the lack of recognition: Youth are not seen as valid actors in decision-making spaces, despite making up a significant share of the population (around 50% in Guatemala, for instance).

Additionally, many young people feel unrepresented in traditional civil society organizations, which pushes them to create their own forms of organizing. Generational gaps in methodology and culture also pose a challenge. One example is artivism, which, according to Kimberly, is often unrecognized or even criminalized as a legitimate form of expression.

Like Krista, Kimberly emphasizes the importance of being heard: "We don't need donors to impose their ideas when we know our territories and understand our needs. But we can build new processes together, new ways of working, and better ways to support those who need it most."

A Call for Greater Flexibility

In the face of political crises, inequality, forced displacement, and weak local and national government responses, many youth-led organizations have turned to international cooperation. This support has been key to the growth of youth movements. However, as we've seen throughout the year, the international aid and funding landscape is undergoing significant shifts. In this changing context, flexible funding becomes increasingly important.

Among the limitations of traditional funding, Kimberly highlights that structured donors (despite their valuable and committed work) often impose rigid conditions, as they fund only specific actions, leaving little room for strategic or flexible use of resources. As a result, youth organizations struggle to prepare for crises, innovate, or respond quickly to changing needs. She also notes that this rigidity often sidelines topics that are central to young people's lives. In Guatemala, for example, art serves as a key tool for peaceful expression and social transformation, yet it remains undervalued by many major donors.

Another key recommendation is to make the aid system more accessible. Many youth-led initiatives are excluded due to barriers such as English-only applications, legal registration requirements, and complex paperwork. Simpler processes, flexible funding, and support that respects local languages and contexts would make a meaningful difference.

According to Kimberly, a flexible donor not only allows organizations to continue during times of crisis but also supports the development of leadership skills and institutional capacity.She also advocates for flexible models, which enable organizations to explore diverse activities, such as investing in art, using creative methods, and developing community-based processes outside traditional formats.

"We (youth-led organizations) are learning in new ways—new methods, new ways of teaching… I think it's key for donors to move past the idea that learning has to happen in hotels or conference rooms. It can happen under trees, in communities, in remote areas, where the impact is often greater because people feel at ease in their own spaces. Donors should open their minds. Even if they can't fully change their funding structure, they can still reallocate parts of the budget: To support local trainings, renovate a small school in a rural town, or bring art into those spaces."

To Learn More

Throughout this recap, we've learned from these young leaders who shared their experiences and valuable recommendations for other organizations encountering similar challenges, as well as for those in a position to support their initiatives. To learn more, we invite you to watch the full webinar “Youth Leading Change: Responses and Recommendations for a Failing Aid System.” These recommendations are based on presentations by Krista Rivas Gutierrez, global leader of the Tertiary Refugee Student Network (TRSN); Wardah Noor, founder and CEO of xWave Pakistan; and Kimberly Barrios, vice-president of Jóvenes Artistas por la Justicia Social (JAxJS).

Mara Tissera Luna is a 2024-2025 collaborative fellow at the Georgetown University Collaborative on Global Children’s Issues and a consultant for the Kuja Platform, focusing on child protection, gender-based violence, forced migration, participation, and localization in Latin America and the Caribbean.

This blog post was first published by Kuja.

War Crimes Against Ukrainian Children Are at Risk of Being Insufficiently Investigated

As Russia’s war in Ukraine continues into its third year and peace negotiations are failing, one of the most urgent issues remains the fate of the thousands of Ukrainian children who have been abducted and militarized by Russia. These crimes represent an egregious violation of international law and threaten the future of Ukraine’s youngest generation. As such, understanding, addressing, and prioritizing this issue in future peace negotiations is critical.

Forcible Deportation

The Russian government is forcibly deporting and militarizing Ukrainian children from temporarily occupied territories in Ukraine. The first step of this crime involves the illegal and forcible deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia, where they are placed in “temporary accommodation centers.” While Ukraine has officially identified 19,546 cases of forcible deportations, Ukraine’s 5 AM Coalition estimates the true number could range from 260,000 to 700,000. As of June 2025, only 1,359 children have been returned. Russian authorities target both orphans and children with parents, often under the pretense of sending them to “rehabilitation” camps. Every instance of these crimes committed by the Russian authorities and their accomplices in the occupied territories must be comprehensively documented. Without meticulous records, the possibility of achieving justice, international legal accountability, and the reunification of Ukrainian children and families is severely undermined and peace negotiations will be impossible

Russia’s “Youth Army” and Militarization

The second step of these Russian crimes is forced ideological re-education, military training, and participation in paramilitary organizations such as the “Yunarmiya,” “Movement of the First,” and “Eagles of Russia.” Through these groups, children are indoctrinated with Russian patriotism and receive training in firearms, tactics, and drone operations. These actions are intended to prepare Ukrainian children to fight against their own country as members of the Russian military.

This practice constitutes a grave violation of international law. It threatens the physical and mental health of Ukrainian children, disrupts their moral and psychological state, and aims to destroy their Ukrainian identity. The return of these children, whether they were deported to the Russian Federation or held within temporarily occupied territories, must be prioritized in any negotiations to end the war.

At the core of Russia’s effort to systematically militarize Ukrainian children is Yunarmiya, or the “Youth Army”—a youth movement created by Russia’s Ministry of Defense in 2016 to boost declining enlistment numbers. With 1.3 million members and $80 million in annual state funding, the group trains children as young as six in military skills and anti-Western ideology, glorifying Russian war “heroes” and preparing children for future combat.

As Russia’s casualties in Ukraine mount, the Youth Army’s influence has grown more dangerous, particularly for Ukrainian children trapped in occupied territories. By 2021, 29,000 children in Russian-occupied Crimea and 7,500 in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions had already been recruited. Since the full-scale invasion, reports have documented forced recruitment in newly occupied areas like Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

There are growing concerns that Russia could forcibly conscript these children to fight against their own country—a clear war crime in violation of Article 8 of the Rome Statute. This fear isn’t unfounded: Since 2022, Russia has forcibly conscripted up to 60,000 Ukrainian men, including a few thousand from occupied Donetsk and Luhansk. At least 75 of them have been killed.

Indoctrination in Camps

Beyond Yunarmiya, Russia operates so-called “educational” camps to indoctrinate children, often under the guise of therapy or “post-traumatic adaptation.” These camps are active not only inside Russia but across temporarily occupied Ukrainian regions.

A report by Yale’s Humanitarian Research Lab identified facilities like the School of Future Commanders in Russian-occupied Crimea, organized by Yunarmiya, which hosted around 50 Ukrainian children. Another program, the Leader Youth Club (formerly Wagner Youth), launched in early 2023 by the Wagner mercenary group, encourages youth aged 16-25 to build drones for Russia’s military.

Additionally, Vympel summer camps, linked to Russian special forces, now operate over 100 branches across 50 Russian regions. These centers promote military training and propaganda, raising serious concerns that Russian authorities are funneling deported Ukrainian children into institutions designed to prepare them to fight in Russia’s wars.

American Partnership and Possible Contributions to the Investigation of Crimes Against Ukrainian Children

Who will continue to track and document these crimes now that U.S. support is disappearing? What war crimes against Ukrainian children most urgently require international advocacy and investigation? These questions were central to a recent webinar, “Negotiating the End of the War in Ukraine: Who is on the Children's Side?”, where I spoke about the similarities between forced deportations during the Soviet period and current practices and the critical need to document war crimes against children. A just peace will be impossible if the global community does not fully understand and attend to the forced deportation and militarization of Ukrainian children.

We are encouraged by the bipartisan group of legislators, led by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota), who introduced Senate Resolution 236, calling for the return of abducted Ukrainian children before any peace agreement is finalized to end the war against Ukraine. Yet, the sentiment of senators must be followed by meaningful actions and support for the documentation and prosecution of war crimes against children.

The Georgetown University Collaborative on Global Children’s Issues has compiled a list of resources that can help inform a comprehensive child protection response.

How Does Halting U.S. Funding Harm Future Reunification Attempts?

In January 2025, the U.S. Department of State confirmed that it would abruptly terminate funding for critical initiatives supporting the documentation of Russian war crimes against Ukrainian children. Among the most high-profile was Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab, a critical effort to track and expose the mass deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia. Since 2022, the lab has published 13 reports and contributed evidence to six International Criminal Court cases, including the arrest warrants issued for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Children’s Rights Commissioner Maria Lvova-Belova. The lab also maintains a vital database of 30,000 deported children and key satellite imagery used to monitor their movements, which now risks being lost. 

However, Yale’s crucial work is only part of the picture. The funding termination has also affected other U.S.-supported programs, including Save Ukraine, the Regional Centre for Human Rights (RCHR), and the Atrocity Crimes Advisory Group for Ukraine. These organizations, which operate directly in Ukraine, have not received the same level of media attention, yet their contributions to identifying, reunifying, and supporting Ukrainian children are no less valuable.

Following public and political pressure in response to the sudden funding cuts, the U.S. administration granted Yale a six-week funding extension to allow for the transfer of its documents and archives to EUROPOL. However, this temporary reprieve does not undo the long-term damage from the funding cuts. The loss of sustained funding jeopardizes the continuity of this essential work to investigate war crimes against children and risks data degradation, stalling future reunification efforts, and leading to poorer outcomes for the children. Ongoing support is critical to ensure that these war crimes are thoroughly investigated, every child is returned, and the perpetrators are brought to justice.  This urgency was underscored in a June 11 bipartisan letter from several members of the U.S. Congress to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, which called for the restoration of funding for the lab through the next fiscal year.

The Role of Ukrainian Organizations in Documenting War Crimes Committed Against Ukrainian Children

Given the highly complex nature of investigating Russian war crimes on the ground, it is crucial to recognize that supporting Ukrainian organizations working to document crimes and reunite children with their families is an effective and strategic policy choice. These organizations face ongoing funding challenges, but continue to seek new support as they consistently deliver meaningful results in an increasingly difficult operational environment. International partners who express concern must also support this frontline response.

The primary initiative on returning Ukrainian children is Bring Kids Back UA, a strategic action plan formed by the President of Ukraine. It unites the efforts of the Ukrainian government, partner countries, and international organizations to rescue children who have been forcefully deported from Ukraine. Also, with assistance from international organizations, the Ukrainian government, through the Office of the Presidential Commissioner for Children's Rights and Rehabilitation, led by Daria Herasymchuk, and the Office of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, led by Dmytro Lubinets, is engaged in a concerted effort to identify and reunite children who have been deported with their families and caregivers. Despite the slow progress, each successful reunification represents a victory. These cases illustrate the necessity for prompt action, as children are more likely to recover physical and psychological well-being if they are located and reunited in a timely manner and receive comprehensive support.

Several non-governmental organizations are also involved in documenting Russian war crimes against Ukrainian children, including the Regional Centre for Human Rights, Centre for Civil Education “Almenda,” and Where Are Our People? (a project of the PR Army).  Non-governmental organisations such as Save Ukraine and Helping to Leave also play a pivotal role in facilitating the evacuation and rehabilitation of children who have fled conflict zones. In addition, Charity foundation “East SOS” has been instrumental in assisting Ukrainian children and providing documentation to support legal investigations. 

I am a member of the East SOS documentary team, which has been preparing analytical reports and articles about Russian war crimes against Ukrainian children, working to preserve evidence and uphold justice and the right to truth since 2014. Since February 24, 2022, the team has recorded over 800 testimonies and documented over 1,500 alleged war crimes, including testimonies from children forcibly taken by Russia. Children from the occupied Luhansk region, in particular, have spoken about paramilitary groups established by the Russian occupation administration in occupied Ukrainian territories, which forcibly enlist young men. They have also described propaganda lessons and being forced to sing the Russian anthem at official events in educational institutions. Our research team carefully records and analyzes these facts and preserves the testimonies for the pursuit of justice, including submitting this as evidence to the International Criminal Court.

A Test for U.S. Leadership

The abduction and militarization of Ukrainian children are not just human rights violations—they are war crimes. They demand a strong, unwavering international response. These children deserve the chance to return to their families, grow up without fear, and reclaim their Ukrainian identity.

With its actions to withdraw support for essential efforts to return these children, the United States risks sending the message that these crimes are negotiable. The question is now clear: Does the United States still support recognizing the abduction of children as a war crime, or is it prepared to trade their futures for an ill-defined “peace”?

Vladyslav Havrylov is a collaborative fellow with the Collaborative on Global Children's Issues at Georgetown University. He is also an invited analytical expert with the Charity foundation "East-SOS," where he works to document Russian war crimes against Ukrainian children in the aftermath of the full-scale Russian invasion.