Les services de la Gendarmerie nationale ont mené une opération d’envergure dans la wilaya de Sétif, aboutissant au démantèlement d’un atelier clandestin spécialisé dans la […]
L’article Sétif : ils fabriquaient de fausses épices dans un atelier clandestin, un réseau arrêté est apparu en premier sur .
L’équipe d’Algérie s’apprête à entrer dans une phase décisive de la Coupe d’Afrique des nations CAN-2025 en affrontant la RD Congo, ce mardi, dans le […]
L’article Algérie – RD Congo : à quelle heure et sur quelles chaînes voir le match ? est apparu en premier sur .
Pro-Democracy protesters gather in front of the headquarters of the Sudanese army in the capital, Khartoum. Credit: Masarib/Ahmed Bahhar via UN News
By Robert Misik
VIENNA, Austria, Jan 5 2026 (IPS)
Consider our political systems not merely as battlegrounds of passions, ideologies and economic interests, but as systematically functioning arrangements of interactions, akin to game theory. In recent decades, we have witnessed the dissolution of large homogeneous groups into numerous subgroups — a patchwork of minorities.
This fragmentation, compounded by individualisation and the resulting weakening of strong political bonds, has profound consequences for democratic governance.
In nations with majority voting systems, this process fragments the party system itself. As dissatisfaction with political parties grows – initially quietly but eventually becoming pronounced – new parties emerge, further splintering the political landscape.
This increasing fragmentation complicates government formation and makes majorities more precarious. Often, only coalitions that can agree on the lowest common denominator are formed. Consequently, the outcomes of politics do not necessarily improve; in most cases, they worsen.
A vicious circle
Decisive action, bold moves and clear leadership have become increasingly elusive. This reinforces dissatisfaction and the prevailing sentiment among voters that politicians are failing to achieve meaningful results. Doubts about the effectiveness of the political system become self-perpetuating, creating a situation where decisive politics is nearly impossible.
The rise of populists and right-wing extremists is both a consequence of this stagnation and a further catalyst — a ratchet effect. Right-wing agitators stoke discontent, transforming it into anger and outrage while exploiting negative emotions.
As they gain strength, democratic politics becomes more paralysed, often preoccupied with defending against radicalism, preventing the worst outcomes, and forming coalitions whose members can agree on little more than a lacklustre commitment to ‘more of the same’.
When social cohesion erodes, the radical right gains ground — which then leads to even more division. The perceived polarisation and alienation that accompanies the rise of right-wing extremism increases the perception of social disintegration and decay.
Democracy gives rise to its own threats
In a sense, right-wing radicalism is itself the problem that it then laments in a subsequent cycle. It is the disintegration that it denounces. In this way, it contributes to the chain of evidence that reinforces authoritarian reflexes. Authoritarianism feeds authoritarianism.
These framework conditions of political systems – fragmentation and the resulting weakness of action – lead German democracy theorist Veith Selk to diagnose that modernisation and social change are increasingly putting democracy under stress, making a reversal unlikely.
This presents a rather depressing diagnosis of decline: democracy gives rise to its own threats.
Additionally, globalisation necessitates ‘global governance’, which, even under favourable circumstances, has historically produced solutions at an unbearably slow pace and is now reaching its limits amid chaotic multilateralism.
Conversely, ‘de-globalisation’ – through national power politics, tariffs and trade wars – provides no relief and instead creates new problems, such as the loss of sales markets, disrupted supply chains and a consequent decline in economic growth, potentially destroying whole economic sectors.
Europe’s mounting crises
The emergencies of the future are already on the horizon. The climate catastrophe threatens not only our livelihoods but also has tangible economic repercussions. Crop failures due to droughts and floods are already contributing to rising inflation in the cost of living, particularly for vegetables and fruit.
This situation is certain to become much more severe. Even if successful, socio-economic transformation will be costly. Insurance companies may face financial difficulties, asset portfolios could lose value rapidly, and if we are unfortunate, a sudden ‘Minsky moment’ could trigger a downward spiral leading to a financial crisis.
Ageing populations are already straining public finances, with healthcare and care systems becoming increasingly expensive, pushing European welfare states to their financial limits.
Government debt is rising, and under current conditions, it will be more challenging to “grow out” of debt than it was in the past. Growth will be harder to mobilise, and austerity is not a viable alternative, as contraction strategies lead to dire consequences. These are all concerning prospects.
Here are a few highlights:
Germany’s economy has stagnated for six years, and private investment remains weak. France is facing a budget deficit of 5.8 per cent and a public debt ratio of 113 per cent of GDP, while sliding from one government crisis to another. Political actors are unable to achieve a socially just change of course that would reconcile savings in the pension system with additional revenue from wealth taxes.
Austria was projected to have a budget deficit of six per cent, prompting left-wing Keynesian Finance Minister Markus Marterbauer to assemble a package of tightening measures aimed at reducing the deficit to 4.5 per cent by 2025.
Ensuring that large fortunes contribute to costs through higher taxation is not only a matter of fairness but also an economic necessity — yet there is a lack of parliamentary majorities for decisive measures nearly everywhere.
There is a growing desire for politics to provide sensible solutions instead of getting bogged down in petty details.
A whole panorama of emergencies is unfolding before us. As noted earlier, most of those in power have little energy or flexibility to think and act beyond daily problems. This situation has tangible and psychopolitical effects: citizens feel that things are deteriorating and that serious trouble is brewing, while simultaneously sensing that those in power are merely tinkering with details.
For many, this leads to outright fear and a generally pessimistic mood, which in turn fuels the rise of right-wing radicals.
The political forces of the left and the conservative centre must, above all, demonstrate their ability to act together. A few years ago, the prevailing view was that various political camps should dare to engage in more conflict to make democratic life more vibrant.
At that time, there were complaints about everyone crowding into the centre and becoming interchangeable. However, we find ourselves in a different situation today.
There is a growing desire for politics to provide sensible solutions instead of getting bogged down in petty details or wasting time on pointless culture wars. The left may need to acknowledge that states are reaching their financial limits, while conservatives must recognise that clientele politics, which ensures free rides for the super-wealthy, is no longer viable.
Urgent issues require swift action, and all of this comes at a high cost.
Rhetoric is no longer effective, and pandering to the extreme right leads nowhere. Conservatives, in particular, need to understand this, as they sometimes give the impression that they view fascists as merely slightly more radical conservatives (or conservatives as moderate fascists).
This perception is not only misguided; it also highlights a significant identity crisis within traditional conservatism. Fortunately, some are beginning to realise that authoritarianism is not a relative; it is the enemy. The best way to undermine it is to demonstrate a commitment to action.
Robert Misik is a writer and essayist. He publishes in many German-language newspapers and magazines, including Die Zeit and Die Tageszeitung.
This is from a joint publication by Social Europe and IPS Journal.
Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), Brussels, Belgium
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Security Council Meets on Threats to International Peace and Security. Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten
By Cecilia Russell
UNITED NATIONS & JOHANNESBURG, Jan 5 2026 (IPS)
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed deep concern about the immediate future of Venezuela.
In a statement read by Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo, Guterres told the Security Council’s emergency meeting he was deeply concerned about “possible intensification of the instability in the country, the potential impact on the region, and the precedent it may set for how relations between and among states are conducted.”
On Saturday, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that he was putting Venezuela under temporary American control following the capture of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Adela Flores, in a raid and whisking them to New York to face charges, including drug trafficking.
Guterres stated at the emergency Security Council meeting, which was set to discuss threats to international peace and security, that the situation in Venezuela has been a matter of regional and international concern for many years.
“Attention on the country only grew following the contested presidential elections in July 2024. The panel of electoral experts I appointed at the Venezuelan Government’s request to accompany the elections highlighted serious issues. We have consistently called for full transparency and the complete publication of the results of the elections.”
Yet, he said, it was necessary to respect international law.
“I have consistently stressed the imperative of full respect, by all, for international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, which provides the foundation for the maintenance of international peace and security.
“I remain deeply concerned that rules of international law have not been respected with regard to the 3 January military action.”
Guterres called on all Venezuelan actors to engage in an inclusive, democratic dialogue in which all sectors of society can determine their future.
Jeffrey Sachs, the President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, urged the UN Security Council to declare an immediate cessation and desist from any explicit or implicit threats or use of force against Venezuela.
He also requested the council demand the United States terminate its naval quarantine and all related coercive military measures undertaken without Security Council authorization.
Merchy de Freitas, founder and executive director of Transparencia Venezuela, the national chapter of Transparency International, said the country ranked among the world’s most corrupt countries, with over 500 documented cases involving USD 72 billion, mostly public funds.
She said there was a symbiotic relationship between the Maduro regime and criminal organizations, which have exploited national parks and the Amazon for gold and other illicit activities. The crisis has led to a decrease in state income, affecting basic services and causing severe humanitarian issues, including a lack of electricity, food, and medical care.
“The government has captured all institutions, beginning with the justice institutions,” she said. “We need a transparent state that is accountable and that will guarantee the rule of law and human rights.”
De Freitas called for a transparent and accountable state, respect for human rights, and the release of political prisoners.
A representative from Columbia expressed concern over what it considers a “violation of international law and the UN Charter and expressed concern over the regional impact, including a potential migration crisis.
She emphasized the importance of respecting sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the principles of peaceful conflict resolution while expressing concerns over the regional impact, including potential migration crises, and calling for de-escalation and diplomatic solutions.
Russia and China, among others, condemned the United States’ action.
However, the United States informed the council that it had launched a “law enforcement operation” against Maduro and Flores, accusing them of “narcoterrorism and drug trafficking.”
Maduro, who was indicted by a New York grand jury, faces serious charges for his role in a conspiracy involving cocaine trafficking and international weapons trafficking, he told the council.
He justified the operation because Maduro’s presidency was illegitimate due to his manipulation of Venezuela’s electoral system and commented that even the UN had questioned his legitimacy. The United States also highlighted the destabilizing impact of Maduro’s regime, including the largest refugee crisis in the world, with over 8 million Venezuelans fleeing.
“Maduro and his cronies have partnered with some of the most violent and prolific drug traffickers and narcoterrorists in the world for decades, facilitating the flood of illegal drugs coming into the United States,” the representative told the Security Council, reminding the council that the United Nations had documented the excesses of the Maduro government.
The action by the United States had taken place after Trump had exhausted diplomacy, he said.
“The United States will not waver in its actions to protect Americans from the scourge of narcoterrorism and seeks peace, liberty and justice for the great people of Venezuela.”
Venezuela’s representative denounced the events of January 3, 2026, as an illegitimate armed attack by the US government.
“The events of January 3 constitute a flagrant violation of the UN Charter perpetrated by the US government, in particular, the principal violation of the principle of sovereign equality of states, of the absolute prohibition of the use or threat of use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state,” he said.
“Today, it is not only Venezuela sovereignty that is at stake, but also the credibility of international law, the authority of this organization, and the validity of the principle that no state can set itself up as a judge, jury, and executor of the world order.”
He denied the country was dysfunctional.
“Venezuela would like to inform this body and the international community that its institutions are functioning normally, that constitutional order has been preserved, and that the state exercises effective control over all of its territory in accordance with our Constitution.
While Spain said they did not recognize the Maduro presidency, they were concerned that the United States’ action would set a worrying precedent.
“We share the view that fighting organized crime in the region is a priority, but that fight can only be waged through international cooperation. We also share the view that it is a priority to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms in Venezuela,” the representative said, adding that it would “work to unite Venezuelans, men and women. Spain is committed to dialogue and peace, because force never brings more democracy.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau