Incident Report: Politically Motivated Violence and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Summary of Incident

• On September 10, 2025, political commentator Charlie Kirk was fatally shot while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.
• The event has been widely classified as an act of political violence, prompting widespread condemnation from public officials.
• The incident highlights the need for a broader examination of violence and its impact on societal stability and development objectives.

Analysis of Violence in the Context of SDG 16

• The assassination directly contravenes the aims of Sustainable Development Goal 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, which seeks to significantly reduce all forms of violence and promote the rule of law.
• This event necessitates a critical analysis of violence beyond interpersonal acts to include structural forms that prevent the establishment of peaceful and inclusive societies.
• Achieving SDG 16 requires addressing not only overt acts of aggression but also the systemic failures and policies that inflict harm and undermine justice and institutional accountability.

Structural Violence as an Obstacle to Achieving the SDGs

Health, Well-being, and Basic Services (SDG 3 & SDG 6)

1. Healthcare Systems: Policies that result in an estimated 45,000 deaths annually from lack of health insurance are in direct opposition to SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being. Institutional practices, such as the denial of care for profit, represent a systemic failure to protect human life and well-being.
2. Environmental Justice: The Flint, Michigan water crisis, which caused multiple deaths and long-term health problems, including impaired brain development in children, exemplifies a failure to provide access to safe resources as mandated by SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. This governmental neglect constitutes a form of structural violence that disproportionately harms vulnerable communities.

Poverty, Hunger, and Inequality (SDG 1, SDG 2, & SDG 10)

• Political decisions that lead to increased homelessness and food insecurity undermine progress toward SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger). When deprivation is a foreseeable outcome of policy, it functions as a form of systemic violence.
• Political rhetoric and policies that target marginalized groups, including queer people and racial minorities, perpetuate harm and contravene the objective of SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities.
• Foreign policy decisions that provide material support to regimes engaged in conflict and human rights abuses are inconsistent with the global commitment to fostering peace under SDG 16.

Conclusion: Re-evaluating Violence to Foster Inclusive and Sustainable Societies

Key Findings

• A narrow definition of violence that focuses solely on interpersonal acts overlooks the pervasive impact of structural violence, which systematically impedes progress on the Sustainable Development Goals.
• Structural violence, manifested in policies concerning healthcare, environmental safety, poverty, and inequality, is a primary barrier to building a just and sustainable world.
• A comprehensive approach to achieving SDG 16 must involve holding institutions accountable for policies that result in death, psychological harm, or deprivation. Addressing both interpersonal and structural violence is essential to creating truly peaceful, just, and inclusive societies.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article’s central theme is political violence, both interpersonal (the murder of Charlie Kirk) and structural. It critiques how institutions and government policies can perpetuate violence, injury, and death, directly connecting to the goal of promoting peaceful societies and ensuring justice.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article explicitly links political decisions to negative health outcomes. It cites the “45,000 deaths per year because people cannot afford health insurance” and the “impaired brain development” of children in Flint due to poisoned water, highlighting failures in ensuring healthy lives.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The text points out that systemic violence is often directed at specific, vulnerable groups. It mentions “extreme violence against queer people, Palestinians and other racial minorities,” which directly relates to the goal of reducing inequality and ensuring the inclusion and safety of all people.

• SDG 1: No Poverty & SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  The article redefines violence to include “starvation or deprivation of resources.” It discusses how political decisions can lead to homelessness and hunger, framing these issues not as mere tragedies but as forms of political violence, connecting them to the goals of eradicating poverty and hunger.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  The Flint, Michigan water crisis is used as a key example of political violence. The article states that the government’s failure to provide clean water led to “12 deaths” and severe health consequences, which is a direct failure to meet the goal of ensuring access to clean water.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  • Target 16.1: “Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.” The article directly discusses the murder of Charlie Kirk and other deaths resulting from systemic failures, such as those in Flint and from lack of healthcare, which are all related to this target.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  • Target 3.8: “Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services…” The article’s mention of “45,000 deaths per year because people cannot afford health insurance” and patients being “denied coverage” points directly to a failure to achieve this target.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  • Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… race, ethnicity… or other status.” The article’s focus on violence against “queer people, Palestinians and other racial minorities” highlights a lack of safety and inclusion for these groups, which this target aims to address.

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  • Target 1.2: “By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty…” The article discusses how government policies create “unhoused populations,” a key dimension of poverty that this target seeks to reduce.

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  • Target 2.1: “By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.” The article identifies “starvation” and “hunger” as forms of political violence resulting from policy decisions, directly relating to the goal of this target.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  • Target 6.1: “By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.” The detailed example of the Flint water crisis, where government inaction led to a poisoned water supply, is a clear illustration of the failure to meet this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for Target 16.1 (Reduce Violence)

  The article provides specific data points that can serve as indicators of violent deaths. It mentions the singular “murder of a man like Charlie Kirk” and the “12 deaths” resulting from the Flint water crisis. These numbers directly measure “related death rates.”

• Indicator for Target 3.8 (Universal Health Coverage)

  A clear, quantifiable indicator is provided: “45,000 deaths per year because people cannot afford health insurance.” This statistic measures the fatal consequences of a lack of universal health coverage.

• Indicator for Target 6.1 (Clean Water)

  The article implies indicators for measuring access to safe water by citing the consequences of its absence in Flint: “thousands of children having impaired brain development and 12 deaths.” The number of people suffering health impacts from contaminated water is a powerful indicator.

• Indicator for Target 10.2 (Reduce Inequalities)

  While not providing a number, the article implies an indicator by referencing “extreme violence against queer people, Palestinians and other racial minorities.” The number of violent incidents or hate crimes reported against these specific demographic groups would be a direct measure of progress (or lack thereof) toward their inclusion and safety.

• Indicator for Targets 1.2 & 2.1 (Poverty & Hunger)

  The article implies that the size of “unhoused populations” and the prevalence of “hunger” and “starvation” are direct indicators of systemic political violence. Tracking the number of people experiencing homelessness or food insecurity would measure the impact of the policies discussed.

4. SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Summary

Source: dailycampus.com