Feed aggregator

From Silicon Valley to Strasbourg to Moscow, a loose alliance is rewriting the rules of power without asking for your vote

The uptick in business sentiment comes despite Germany’s profound economic weakness – which shows no sign of abating anytime soon

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
CAMPINAS, Brazil, Aug 26 2025 (IPS)

The Global South had little voice, let alone influence, in shaping the economically ‘neoliberal’ and politically ‘neoconservative’ globalisation leading to contemporary geopolitical economic conflicts. Pacifist non-aligned cooperation for sustainable development offers the best way forward.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Peace, Freedom, Neutrality
Realising non-alignment for our times should begin with current realities rather than abstract, ahistorical principles. 2025 is also the 70th anniversary of the beginnings of non-alignment, first mooted at the Asia-Africa summit in Bandung, Indonesia.

The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) was established in 1967 by anti-communist governments of the region. In 1973, its leaders agreed the area should be a Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality (ZOPFAN).

The world was deemed unipolar American discourse after the first Cold War. Meanwhile, most of the Global South remained non-aligned in what the Rest see as a multipolar world.

Despite critical dissent, the West seems to have lost interest in preserving peace. Unsurprisingly, the US and its NATO allies increasingly ignore the United Nations. Foreign military interventions since the first Cold War already exceed the many of that longer era.

During World War II, military production generated growth and employment in Germany, Japan and the US. But surely, development today is best achieved peacefully and cooperatively.

Pacifist non-alignment should cut unnecessary military spending. Although big powers compete for hegemony by weaponising international relations, they will still try to ‘buy’ support from the non-aligned.

Realistically, most small developing nations cannot lead international peace-making. But they can and should be a stronger moral force urging justice, peace, freedom, neutrality, development, and international cooperation.

Return of the Global South
The Group of 77 (G77) developing countries’ caucus and the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) were both established in 1964. Headquartered in Geneva, UNCTAD is part of the UN Secretariat but has been steadily marginalised.

The G77 has a formal presence throughout the UN multilateral system. It now has over 130 members, including China, but its impact outside New York in recent decades has been limited.

Sustainability challenges and planetary heating are generally worse in the tropics, where most people in developing countries are. Meanwhile, hunger worldwide has worsened since 2014, while World Bank-reported income poverty has risen since the COVID-19 pandemic.

An inclusive and equitable multilateralism can better address the world’s challenges, especially peace and sustainable development – so crucial for progress in our dark times.

Global South needs better voice
While working for Goldman Sachs, Lord Jim O’Neill referred to Brazil, Russia, India, and China as the BRIC countries.

With South Africa joining, ostensibly representing Africa, they soon began meeting regularly. As members of the G20 group of the world’s twenty largest economies, the BRICS initially lobbied on financial issues.

They have since incorporated other large economies of the South, but also incurred the wrath of President Trump. While some nations have sought to join the enlarged BRICS plus (BRICS+), a few have hesitated after being invited.

BRICS has no record of strong and consistent advocacy of the interests of smaller developing economies. Most financially weak small nations doubt that BRICS+ will serve them well.

Higher US interest rates have triggered massive capital inflows, especially from the poorest countries, depriving them of finance at a time of greater need.

Meanwhile, aid levels have fallen tremendously, especially with Trump 2.0. Official development assistance (ODA) to the Global South is now below 0.3% of GDP, less than half the 0.7% commitment made in 1969.

Lowering tax rates has further squeezed the West’s already limited budgetary resources as stagnation deepens. Trump’s tariffs, US expenditure cuts, and greater Western military spending deepen worldwide economic contraction.

Non-alignment for our times
The Global South must urgently promote a new non-alignment for multilateral peace, development, and international cooperation to address Third World challenges better.

Even IMF number two, Gita Gopinath, agrees that developing countries should opt for non-alignment to benefit from not taking sides in the new Cold War.

With the exception of Brazil’s Lula, leadership by statesmen with international standing beyond their national stature largely passed with Nelson Mandela.

A few dynamic new leaders have emerged, but have not taken on the responsibilities of Global South leadership. Such leadership is in short supply despite the urgent need.

It is much easier to revive, reform, and reinvigorate NAM than to start from scratch. Although it has been less influential in recent decades, it can be revitalised.

Also, foreign policies are typically less subject to other typical national domestic policy considerations. Hence, they do not vary as much with the governments of the day.

Also, most developing country governments must appear to protect national interests to secure political support and legitimacy for survival.

Hence, conservative, even reactionary governments may take otherwise surprising anti-hegemonic positions in multilateral fora, especially with growing widespread resentment of bullying for extortion.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Can East Asia Show the Way?
• Will Europe Wage Peace?
• New Geopolitics Worse for Global South
• The Global South in the New Cold War
• IMF Urges Non-alignment in Second Cold War
• Deepening Stagflation: Out of the Frying Pan into the Fire
• War or Peace, Barbarism or Hope

Brussels has developed distinct ecodesign and industrial carbon management policies. Combining them could stimulate the market for sustainable products.

Forecasts point to a positive economic outlook for Kazakhstan, with moderate to strong GDP growth driven by sectors including oil, services, and infrastructure.

To disrupt disinformation, a dual-front strategy is needed: curbing the supply of AI-enabled falsehoods while transforming the psychological and cultural structures.

The deadly attack killed at least 20 people, including five journalists.

European states would be primary targets for Moscow.

The Trump administration is throwing away a chance to end HIV worldwide.

A new book argues that the world’s two biggest economies need a bit more of each other’s cultures.

Pramila Patten, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, briefs the Security Council during the meeting on women, peace and security. Credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

By Naomi Myint Breuer
UNITED NATIONS, Aug 25 2025 (IPS)

Sexual violence against women and children during wars should not be considered collateral damage. “It is strategy, it is systematic, and it is used more and more,” Permanent Representative of Denmark to the United Nations (UN) Christina Markus Lassen said.

Lassen was speaking at the August 19 Security Council meeting on Women and Peace and Security after the 16th annual Report of the Secretary-General on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence revealed a 25 percent increase in conflict-related sexual violence from the previous year and concerning global trends on the use of sexual violence as a form of torture and against prisoners of war.

Women and girls made up 92 percent of the victims; sexual violence against children increased by 35 percent, the report, which was published on August 14 said.

“Proliferating and escalating conflicts were marked by widespread conflict-related sexual violence, amid record levels of displacement and increased militarization,” the report found.

Widespread displacement, food insecurity and access to small and light weapons were cited as factors increasing the risk of sexual violence, especially for women and girls. Firearms are used in 70–90 percent of recorded cases.

The report, which covers 21 countries in the period from January to December 2024, found the most violations recorded in the Central African Republic (CAR), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Haiti, Somalia and South Sudan. Victims other than women and girls included men, boys, persons with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, racial and ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities. Victims ranged from ages one to 75.

Panamanian ambassador to the UN and current president of the Security Council, Eloy Alfaro de Alba, called the report “deeply sobering” in a statement on behalf of the Security Council signatories of the Shared Commitments on Women, Peace and Security on August 19.

“These crimes persist where legal systems fail, justice is denied and survivors are silenced by stigma and fear of reprisals,” he said.

Patten reminded the Security Council that a lack of access to services and safe reporting channels, as well as many instances of women being killed after sexual violence, means the report underrepresents the issue.

“These alarming figures do not reflect the global scale and prevalence of these crimes,” her office added in a press release.

The report listed 63 State and non-State parties responsible for or suspected of perpetrating sexual violence in armed conflicts on the Security Council’s agenda. In a new appendix section, the report listed parties to be on notice for potential listing in the next report. The list included Israel and Russia for potential violations by armed and security forces against prisoners of war.

At the August 19 Security Council meeting, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, criticized the inclusion of Russia on the list. He explained that Russia complies with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and upholds the rights of prisoners of war.

“We can safely say that the information in the UN SG annual Report on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence does not reflect reality,” he said.

The report highlighted an increase in sexual violence perpetrated in the form of torture, humiliation and information extraction, especially targeting men and boys in Myanmar, Palestine, Syria, Yemen and Ukraine. Sexual violence is also used to establish control over territories and natural resources, recruit fighters and perpetrate extremist ideologies, according to the report, including in Ukraine.

Polyanskiy said Russian law enforcement agencies have found no evidence of sexual violence committed by Russian soldiers against Ukrainians and that the report is using unsubstantiated sources and no evidence to make these claims against Russia.

“[The UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine] is still refusing to provide a list of those who allegedly died in Bucha, therefore confirming the staged and propaganda nature of this disgusting provocation,” he said.

He called the investigations subjective, non-credible and biased.

“Russia has officially refused to cooperate with [the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine and the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine] because of their blatant bias and their purely anti-Russian bent of their work,” Polyanskiy said.

He claimed that the Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Sexual Violence in Conflict holds a double standard, as they refuse to cooperate with Russia, which has attempted to bring to light crimes committed by Ukrainian servicemen against citizens.

“Conflict-related sexual violence is absolutely heinous and unacceptable, but it is also heinous to try to manipulate this issue and politicize it,” he said. “It undermines international efforts to ensure punishment for such crimes.”

The Permanent Representative of Denmark to the UN, Christina Markus Lassen, urged Russia and Israel to grant the UN access to the ground to monitor the situation. She called on Russia to withdraw its forces from Ukraine and hold perpetrators of sexual violence accountable.

Other trends reported on were the use of physical violence accompanying sexual violence, such as summary executions, as well as abductions and trafficking for sexual slavery and exploitation. Many survivors and their children experienced socioeconomic exclusion and impoverishment as a result of deep-rooted stigma surrounding sexual violence victims.

Alfaro de Alba stressed the importance of protecting health infrastructure, supporting women-led organizations and enhancing gender-sensitive early warning systems to address the issue. He also called for consistent funding for the response to sexual violence and the transition from condemnation to “prevention, accountability and innovation.”

“We call for an end to impunity for sexual and gender-based violence and demand accountability as the norm for these crimes,” he said. “Accountability shifts shame from victims to perpetrators and helps break cycles of violence.”

The report recommends that the Security Council’s sanctions committees target consistent perpetrators with sanctions. The SG called on parties to implement the specific measures outlined in the 2019 Security Council Resolution 2467 for the prevention of sexual violence. The report also called for clear orders prohibiting sexual violence, ensuring accountability, and granting UN access to affected areas.

Victims were often unable to reach healthcare providers within the 72-hour window when care is most urgent. Parties in conflict often prevented humanitarian resources from reaching survivors, according to the report. Healthcare facilities were destroyed at unprecedented levels, and service providers were attacked, harassed, and threatened. Reported compliance with international humanitarian law was low. Due to declining UN peace operations, the UN system is no longer capable of providing support to survivors.

“Services are least available at the very moment when survivors need them most,” Pramila Patten, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, told the Security Council.

She and other members of the Council, such as Lassen, reminded them that victims are actively targeted.

“Sexual violence is routinely used as a tactic of war. Lives are torn apart, and communities are shattered by violence and silence enforced at gunpoint,” Lassen said. “Conflict-related sexual violence is not collateral damage. It is strategy, it is systematic, and it is used more and more.”

Patten called on the Security Council for urgent measures.

“Can we afford to undercut multilateral cooperation at a time when militarism is on the march and the clock is being turned back on women’s rights?” she asked the Council. “The price tag will be more chaos and hostility, erasing decades of development and fanning the flames of future conflict.”

Yet, Polyanskiy downplayed the importance of the issue, telling the Security Council that conflict-based sexual violence is only one aspect of the Women and Peace and Security agenda.

“[Sexual violence] is not the root cause of the emergence of conflict and should not be viewed in isolation of other important factors on the agenda,” he said.

He also criticized universalizing the issue, as he said each conflict has its own “reasons and evolves differently.” He said this creates a superficial and unproductive response.

But Patten stressed the importance of providing survivors with a “life of dignity” and action to eliminate sexual violence. According to Pratten, addressing this issue holds great meaning.

“Survivor-centered, multi-sectoral services are not a soft issue but rather the ultimate expression of political will,” she said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById({js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

By CIVICUS
Aug 25 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS speaks about the Iranian regime’s execution of political prisoners with Safora Sadidi, a human rights activist with the Women’s Committee and Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Safora lost her father and six family members to the theocratic regime, and has dedicated over two decades to the Iranian Resistance’s international efforts.

Safora Sadidi

On 27 July, Iranian authorities executed two political prisoners, Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani, in Ghezel Hesar prison, Alborz province. They were accused of being affiliated with the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI/MEK), an opposition group, and their charges included ‘waging war against God’. Their trial lasted only five minutes. The regime executed at least 96 prisoners in July alone, just ahead of the anniversary of a 1988 massacre in which the state killed an estimated 30,000 political prisoners. The surge in executions is part of an intensified crackdown on dissent as the regime faces mounting international pressure.

How do the recent executions connect to your experience and what do they reveal about the regime’s strategy?

The killings of Ehsani and Hassani are a painful echo of my personal tragedy. I lost seven members of my family in the struggle against this religious dictatorship, including my father. Like Behrouz and Mehdi, he was a member of the PMOI/MEK and was executed in 1988 along with 30,000 other political prisoners whose only ‘crime’ was demanding freedom and justice. I was six years old and losing my father was the heaviest burden of my childhood. It’s a grief that never leaves you, and it resurfaces with every announcement of another life taken.

Last week, another five political prisoners were forcibly transferred to the site where Behrouz and Mehdi were executed. They are next in line, and at imminent risk.

As the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Iran has stated, the killing spree continues because the architects of the 1988 massacre never faced consequences. Many of them now hold senior positions in the government, and impunity fuels their brutality.

Executions are a political weapon that exposes the regime’s strategy for survival: terror. Since its first day in power, it has ruled through systematic repression, executing dissidents at home and exporting terrorism abroad. To date, it has executed over 120,000 people.

The recent surge in executions shouldn’t be mistaken for strength: it’s a desperate act of a collapsing dictatorship. History shows mass killings are the final resort of failing regimes, and that’s exactly what we are seeing in Iran today. When state media praises the 1988 massacre as a ‘successful historical experience’ to be repeated, it exposes its only remaining tool to cling to power. The regime intensifies repression because it senses its end is near.

The fact that prisoners like Ehsani and Hassani were executed despite European Parliament resolutions and widespread international condemnation is a sign of a profound internal crisis. It also reveals that the regime’s primary war is not against any foreign power, but against the Iranian people, particularly women and young people, who it fears most. These killings are meant to frighten us into submission. But they are backfiring: with every drop of blood spilled, people’s resolve to overthrow this regime becomes a hundred times stronger.

What challenges do women human rights defenders face?

In Iran’s medieval dictatorship, gender apartheid is the law, with stoning and public executions of women as official policy. As a woman, I face double repression: from the regime’s institutionalised misogyny and from its political narrative, which seeks to erase women’s role in the opposition.

Those who dare to resist face severe brutality. Pregnant women and teenage girls as young as 13 have been executed, and mothers have been raped and tortured in cages designed to break their will. Yet it is their resilience that inspires generations. Take Maryam Akbari Monfared, a mother of three who has spent almost 16 years behind bars without a break, simply for demanding justice for siblings executed in the 1988 massacre. The regime has said she won’t be released unless she renounces her call for accountability, but she refuses to do so. Her courage inspires countless others.

What truly frightens authorities is that women keep organising, learning and leading despite the risks. They show their bravery in all-female teams of resistance units, risking their lives on the frontlines and motivating all of Iran to rise against the dictatorship. As Maryam Rajavi, president-elect of the Iranian Resistance, has said: the courage and leadership of women will strike the regime where it least expects it. That’s why I and so many others are willing to pay the price.

How do families of victims support each other?

Our greatest strength is solidarity. The bonds between the families of the executed and political prisoners began at the prison gates and grew into a united front that has resisted two dictatorships – first the Shah, now the mullahs – for some 60 years. We are bound by a shared love of freedom, a desire for justice and a common enemy: the regime that took our loved ones.

What cements that bond is the cause for which our parents, children and siblings gave their lives: the liberation of Iran. My father’s and 120,000 other people’s blood was spilled by a regime that thought it could extinguish this desire for freedom – but it was wrong. Before his execution, my dad sent me a cassette tape with a message: ‘My daughter’s heart is her homeland. And because her homeland is captive, her heart is also captive’. His sacrifice taught me, and millions of young Iranians, that we must fight to win back our homeland.

Knowing I am not alone gives me strength. Together with other families of the executed and political prisoners, we transform grief into resolve. We provide each other with moral and material support, organise memorials, run international campaigns and document every crime of this regime. We stand side by side in courtrooms, at conferences and on the streets, making sure the world hears the truth.

This is a deeply rooted, organised resistance, built on the sacrifices of those before us. We keep the flame of resistance alive while supporting the new generation of resistance units fighting for a democratic Iran. Rajavi’s 10-Point Plan offers a path to that future.

How should world leaders respond to the regime’s brutality?

As someone who has lived through this system’s brutality, I want the international community to truly understand the cost of silence. For too long, a shameful policy of appeasement has bought time for the mullahs, leading to more executions, more repression and more terror exported abroad. When the world remains largely silent, it gives a green light for state murders to continue. The consequences are devastating: in 2023, Iran accounted for 74 per cent of the world’s recorded executions. Silence and inaction are complicity. The world must choose between standing with Iranian people or their executioners.

But mere verbal condemnations aren’t enough. We need tangible action: states should make all political and economic relations with this regime conditional on a complete halt to executions. We also demand accountability for those we’ve lost. We call on the international community to apply the principle of universal jurisdiction to bring the perpetrators to justice – including those responsible for the 1988 massacre – and judge them for committing crimes against humanity. The evidence is ready and the witnesses are waiting.

The international community must also reject the false choice between war and appeasement. There is a democratic alternative: the National Council of Resistance of Iran. We ask world leaders to end appeasement and stand on the right side of history, alongside Iran’s people.

GET IN TOUCH
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Israel vs Iran: new war begins while Gaza suffering continues CIVICUS Lens 19.Jun.2025
Iran: ‘The regime is executing protesters to create fear and suppress any attempt at new mobilisation’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Asal Abasian 24.Feb.2024
Iran: ‘The regime uses executions to maintain its grip on power through fear and intimidation’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Jasmin Ramsey 15.Feb.2024

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Donald Trump a déclaré lundi 25 août que les dirigeants de l’UE l’avaient qualifié de « président de l’Europe » pour « plaisanter ».

The post Donald Trump prétend que les dirigeants de l’UE l’appellent le « président de l’Europe » appeared first on Euractiv FR.

“They call me the president of Europe," the US president said. "Which is an honour. I like Europe. And I like those people. They’re good people. They’re great leaders.”

What MPs will be asked to endorse for now is the scale of the effort: almost €44 billion in savings to shrink France’s spiralling deficit

Paris et Berlin vont aplanir leurs divergences concernant le projet d’avion de combat de sixième génération FCAS, a insisté l’Élysée à quelques jours d’une réunion entre Emmanuel Macron et le chancelier allemand Friedrich Merz.

The post « Pas de plan B » pour le FCAS, affirme la France avant une réunion Macron-Merz appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Brentford manager Keith Andrews "fully expects" Newcastle target Yoane Wissa to stay at Brentford.

Brauchen wir künftig Gaskraftwerke mit Kohlendioxid-Abscheidung, Atomkraft oder gar die Kernfusion? In dieser Folge sprechen Wolf-Peter Schill und Alexander Roth mit Prof. Anke Weidlich (Universität Freiburg) über eine Studie der Wissenschaftsakademien zur möglichen Rolle solcher Grundlastkraftwerke ...

The Caucasus and north Balkans regions were most affected by the drought followed by Bulgaria and Kosovo

Les contrôles le long de la frontière de 1,2 km qui sépare l’Espagne et Gibraltar devraient cesser en janvier 2026 pour les 15 000 travailleurs frontaliers qui la traversent chaque jour depuis l’Espagne, rapporte le quotidien espagnol El País.

The post Frontière Gibraltar-Espagne : « le dernier mur d’Europe occidentale » disparaîtra en 2026 appeared first on Euractiv FR.