Swiss News

Fighting on Yemen's west coast has prompted thousands of people to flee by boat across the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

Nach den Landtagswahlen in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern und Berlin kommentiert Marcel Fratzscher, Präsident des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin), die Wahlergebnisse wie folgt: 

Dieser Wahltag war ein weiterer schlechter Tag für unsere Demokratie. Die AfD hat in beiden Bundesländern stark zugelegt. Da in beiden Ländern nun Dreierkoalitionen zur Regierungsbildung nötig sein werden, dürfte die Umsetzung dringend notwendiger Reformprogramme noch schwieriger werden.

Diese Wahlergebnisse sind ein weiteres Misstrauensvotum für die Bundesregierung. Für die Bundesregierung wird es nun noch schwieriger werden, den Mut und die politische Unterstützung für ein grundlegendes Reformprogramm zu mobilisieren. Wenn CDU, CSU und SPD weiterhin an ihren roten Linien festhalten, wird sich die politische Lähmung verfestigen, die wirtschaftliche Schwäche fortsetzen und die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Wahlsiegs der AfD 2029 weiter steigen.

Das Versprechen eines Tankrabatts zwei Tage vor der Wahl hat wohl weder der CDU noch der SPD entscheidend geholfen. Die falsche Lehre für die Bundesregierung wäre nun der Versuch, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger mit Wahlgeschenken wie dem Tankrabatt ruhigzustellen. Die Energiekrise wird sich mit hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit verschärfen. Die Bundesregierung braucht jetzt einen überzeugenden Plan, wie sie Menschen und Unternehmen sozial und wirtschaftlich ausgewogen entlastet. Dafür wird sie das Steuersystem reformieren und Subventionen abbauen müssen. Genauso wichtig sind Strukturreformen, die Deutschland wirtschaftlich voranbringen und die Sorgen der Menschen nachhaltig beantworten.

Deutschland hat noch immer alle Karten in der Hand, um seine eigene Zukunft zu bestimmen. Dafür braucht es jetzt jedoch einen Pakt zwischen Politik und Wirtschaft: mutige Reformen umzusetzen und auch seitens der Wirtschaft mehr Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Stetes Klagen über die Politik wird nicht ausreichen, um Deutschland zukunftsfähig zu machen.

DIGITAL 08H : Avez-vous tenté votre chance ?

Le tirage DIGITAL 08H N°196 a livré son verdict !

Lundi 21 Septembre 2026

Avez-vous joué ?

Avez-vous misé sur vos numéros porte-bonheur ?

RÉSULTAT : 33 • 22 • 54 • 50 • 47

Félicitations aux heureux gagnants !

Pas encore cette fois ? Gardez le sourire.

Rendez-vous à 11H pour le prochain tirage.

Jouez dans les points de vente ou : Tapez *590# ou rendez-vous sur lnbloto.bj

Jouez avec modération et responsabilité. Le jeu doit rester un plaisir.

RECEVEZ LA CROIX DU LUNDI 21 SEPTEMBRE 2026

A Bassila, dans le département de la Donga, un apprenti boucher a été condamné à une peine de 8 ans de prison pour viol sur une fille mineure.

Un apprenti boucher habitant le quartier Zongo Haoussa à Bassila, est en prison pour viol sur mineure. Les faits selon le bulletin d'information de l'Institut national de la femme (INF), remontent au mardi 20 août 2019.
Ce jour-là, aux environs de 19h, une voisine du quartier aperçoit une fillette devant la chambre du prévenu. Surprise, elle interpelle la fillette qui lui explique que sa sœur aînée, âgée de 8 ans, y serait enfermée avec l'apprenti boucher âgé de 35 ans. Ainsi, la dame ouvrit la porte et vit la fillette « toute nue, allongée sur un pagne blanc étalé au sol ». A ses côtés, le mis en cause, accroupi, et « tout aussi nu ».

Interpellé et placé en détention, l'apprenti boucher a été situé sur son sort le 6 février 2024. La Chambre des infractions commises à raison du sexe de la Cour de répression des infractions économiques et du terrorisme (CRIET), l'a condamné à une peine de 8 ans de prison et 500 000 francs de dommages et intérêts pour la victime.

Ne voulant pas s'en tenir à cette décision de la justice, le prévenu a interjeté appel. Le 2 avril 2026, la Chambre d'appel de la CRIET statuant en matière criminelle des infractions commises à raison du sexe confirme la première décision en toutes ses dispositions.

Le prévenu habite dans un studio communément appelé « Entrée coucher », situé en bordure d'une ruelle très empruntée par la plupart des enfants du quartier. Il profite de cet emplacement et de l'absence ou de l'inattention des parents pour attirer « régulièrement les fillettes avec des biscuits et quelques pièces de monnaie afin d'abuser sexuellement d'elles ».

F. A. A.

DIGITAL 00H : Avez-vous tenté votre chance ?

Le tirage DIGITAL 00H N°195 a livré son verdict !

Lundi 21 Septembre 2026

Avez-vous joué ?

Avez-vous misé sur vos numéros porte-bonheur ?

RÉSULTAT : 63 • 83 • 09 • 18 • 08

Félicitations aux heureux gagnants !

Pas encore cette fois ? Gardez le sourire.

Rendez-vous à 08H pour le prochain tirage.

Jouez dans les points de vente ou : Tapez *590# ou rendez-vous sur lnbloto.bj

Jouez avec modération et responsabilité. Le jeu doit rester un plaisir.

In a world undergoing tumultuous transition, sustainable futures are at stake. Disruptive policy-making is on the rise, taking the form of new waves of authoritarian nationalism and the systematic erosion of rules-based politics. Yet, reform initiatives are simultaneously taking shape. Rather than proclaiming the collapse of the multilateral order or focusing on disruptive trends, this volume highlights the institutions, actors and coalitions that are advancing and shaping reform to sustain and rebuild cooperation in a multipolar world. It builds on the premise that,
in this era of concurrent disruption and reform, Germany and Europe need to invest in politics of cooperation and perseverance. Drawing on research and policy engagement by the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) and its partner networks, the publication identifies practical and political pathways for reform. These include opportunities for middle-power coalitions; new forms of plurilateral cooperation and institutional adaptation; reconfigured partnership and financing architectures; and new cultures of cooperation and political leadership. These pathways are explored across four thematic sections: geopolitics, partnerships and a new global order; multilateralism in a multipolar world; sustainable transformation architectures; and (social) innovation and transformative capabilities. The volume does not seek to resolve the tension between disruption and reform, but to equip its readers to understand where reform is already taking shape and the actors who may need to be persuaded or supported to take the lead. It thereby aims to offer the expertise and inspiration needed to turn disruptive change into reform dynamics that enable the pursuit of sustainable futures.

Table of Contents: 

Introduction: Sustainable Futures at Stake? The Case for Politics of Cooperation and Perseverance (Hornidge, Anna-Katharina / Axel Berger)

1) Geopolitics, Partnerships, and a New Global Order

From Crisis to Change: The Future of Global Peace and Security (Fiedler, Charlotte / Jasmin Lorch / Karina Mross)

Reforming the WTO in an Age of Power-Based Trade (Brandi, Clara)

Europe’s International Cooperation as a Key Component of a Stable World Order (Keijzer, Niels / Mark Furness)

2) Multilateralism in a Multipolar World

A bold post-UN80 reform agenda for the next UN Secretary-General (Novoselova Anna / Ronny Patz)

The Geopolitics of a Global Sustainability Framework Beyond 2030 (Leininger, Julia)

Environmental Multilateralism in 2026: more robust than disruption narratives suggest (Bauer, Steffen / Niklas Wagner / Ines Dombrowsky)

3) Sustainable Transformation Architectures

Development Finance: Proposals to Make Blended Finance (Finally) Deliver (Berensmann, Kathrin / Bao-We-Wal Bambe)

Domestic Revenue Mobilisation, the Financing Gap and why Tax Expenditures Matter (Sen, Kunal / Christian von Haldenwang

Global Health Beyond 2030: Protecting Ambition in a Fragmented World (von Haaren, Paula)

4) (Social) Innovation and Transformative Capabilities

AI’s Potential to Facilitate More Agile Development Cooperation (Sinanoglu, Semuhi / Michael Roll)

Resilience in Knowledge Infrastructures: Science at a Juncture (Effert, Sarah-Lea / Anna-Katharina Hornidge)

Training Competencies to Navigate Tectonic Shifts and Shape Change (Domingues, Joãao Vitor / Sven Grimm / Zahrina Tamimi)

Futuring Politics of Cooperation and Perseverance: A Possible World in 2040 (Effert, Sarah-Lea / Sven Grimm / Christopher Wingens)

How do local elections affect societal peace after civil war? Existing research focuses on national elections or secession risks. This article examines municipal elections in post-war Mozambique and their impact on social cohesion (positive horizontal and vertical societal relations). Based on 33 semi-structured interviews conducted in Maputo and Nampula in 2019, the analysis finds limited but positive effects, mainly through improved state-society relations, more inclusive representation, and a greater sense of belonging. However, these gains are constrained by an autocratic context and centralised party structures. Against theoretical expectations, local elections neither enhanced inter-party cooperation nor intensified social divisions.

How do local elections affect societal peace after civil war? Existing research focuses on national elections or secession risks. This article examines municipal elections in post-war Mozambique and their impact on social cohesion (positive horizontal and vertical societal relations). Based on 33 semi-structured interviews conducted in Maputo and Nampula in 2019, the analysis finds limited but positive effects, mainly through improved state-society relations, more inclusive representation, and a greater sense of belonging. However, these gains are constrained by an autocratic context and centralised party structures. Against theoretical expectations, local elections neither enhanced inter-party cooperation nor intensified social divisions.

Les autorités ont fait état d'au moins deux morts et 20 blessés à la suite des bombardements.

Zusammenfassung:

21. September 2026 – Die Bundesregierung will die hohen Kraftstoffpreise mit einem Tankrabatt und einem Preisdeckel abfedern. Der Tankrabatt kostet Bund und Länder rund 2,5 Milliarden Euro. Eine Auswertung der 1,6 Milliarden teuren Maßnahme vom Frühsommer zeigt, dass davon ein dreistelliger Millionenbetrag nicht bei den Verbraucher*innen ankam, sondern bei den Mineralölunternehmen blieb. Am stärksten profitiert zudem, wer am meisten verbraucht. Ein Preisdeckel belastet den Staatshaushalt zwar nicht, wird in der Praxis aber oft zum Zielpreis, an dem sich auch die günstigen Tankstellen nach oben orientieren. Und er bedeutet erheblichen bürokratischen Aufwand: Er muss laufend festgelegt, angepasst und kontrolliert werden. Wenn man entlasten will, wären direkte Zahlungen an einkommensschwache Haushalte und kleine Betriebe zielführender als Eingriffe in den Preis. Der Auszahlungsweg dafür steht seit Ende 2024 bereit und wurde bislang nicht genutzt.

Bonn, 21. September 2026. Indiens Entscheidung aus dem Jahr 2025, den Indus-Wasservertrag auszusetzen, beeinträchtigt Pakistans Wassersicherheit und die Sicherheitsbeziehungen zwischen Indien und Pakistan und könnte zudem zur Aushöhlung des Völkerrechts beitragen.

Im April 2025 setzte Indien den Indus-Wasservertrag (Indus Waters Treaty, IWT) nach einem tödlichen militanten Anschlag in Pahalgam im indisch verwalteten Kaschmir „außer Kraft“. Am 31. August 2026 entschied der Ständige Schiedshof in Den Haag einstimmig, dass Indiens Aussetzung oder Kündigung gemäß dem Vertrag und dem Völkerrecht unzulässig sei. Indien wies das Urteil jedoch umgehend zurück, bestritt die Zuständigkeit des Gerichts für seine hoheitlichen Entscheidungen und erklärte, dass es die Außerkraftsetzung des IWT aufrechterhalten werde. Dies könnte nicht nur schwerwiegende Folgen für die Wassersicherheit Pakistans und die Sicherheitsbeziehungen zwischen Indien und Pakistan haben, sondern auch zu einer umfassenderen Aushöhlung des Völkerrechts beitragen.

Der Indus-Wasservertrag

Das Indus-Flussgebiet versorgt über 200 Millionen Menschen in Pakistan (über 80 Prozent der Bevölkerung) und etwa 100 Millionen Menschen im Nordwesten Indiens. Der 1960 unter Vermittlung der Weltbank ausgehandelte IWT weist Indien die ausschließliche Nutzung der drei östlichen Flüsse (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) und Pakistan die der drei westlichen Flüsse (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) zu, vorbehaltlich bestimmter Nutzungen, die Indien im stromaufwärts gelegenen Kaschmir gestattet sind, darunter Laufwasserkraftwerke innerhalb bestimmter Grenzen. Der Vertrag schreibt den Datenaustausch über alle Flüsse vor, die nach Pakistan fließen. Er sieht einen dreistufigen Streitbeilegungsmechanismus vor, und zwar durch i) die Ständige Indus-Kommission, ii) einen neutralen Sachverständigen und iii) ein Schiedsverfahren vor einem Ad-hoc-Schiedsgericht. Die Entscheidung, den IWT auszusetzen, ist beispiellos für einen Vertrag, der oft als ein seltener Erfolg in der grenzüberschreitenden Wasserkooperation bezeichnet wird und mehr als sechs Jahrzehnte an Feindseligkeiten zwischen den Vertragsstaaten überstanden hat, darunter die Kriege von 1965, 1971 und 1999.

Pakistans Wassersicherheit

Indiens Vorgehen birgt hydrologische Risiken für Pakistan, da es die etablierten Vereinbarungen zur Weitergabe hydrologischer und technischer Informationen unterbricht, die für die Hochwasservorhersage und Katastrophenvorsorge flussabwärts von entscheidender Bedeutung sind. Die Überschwemmungen von 2025 verdeutlichten die Risiken einer geschwächten institutionellen Kommunikation, als Warnungen Berichten zufolge über diplomatische Kanäle statt über die Ständige Indus-Kommission übermittelt wurden. Seit der Aussetzung des IWT hat Indien den Ausbau der Wasserkraft und andere Maßnahmen zur Wasserbewirtschaftung an den westlichen Flüssen beschleunigt, was nach pakistanischer Befürchtung Indiens Fähigkeit stärken könnte, die derzeit nach Pakistan fließenden Wassermengen zu regulieren und abzuleiten.

Sicherheitsbeziehungen zwischen Indien und Pakistan

Indiens Entscheidung vom April 2025 entstand nicht in einem politischen Vakuum. Nach einem tödlichen militanten Anschlag in Uri im indisch verwalteten Kaschmir im September 2016 erklärte der indische Premierminister Narendra Modi, dass „Blut und Wasser nicht zusammen fließen können“, womit er die Bewirtschaftung des Indus ausdrücklich mit Indiens Sicherheitsbeziehungen zu Pakistan verknüpfte. Nach der Aussetzung des Abkommens im Jahr 2025 wurde diese Sprache noch deutlicher. Indiens Wasserminister C.R. Patil erklärte im Juni 2026, die Regierung arbeite daran, sicherzustellen, dass in den kommenden Jahren „kein einziger Tropfen“ Wasser nach Pakistan fließen werde.

Eine solche Rhetorik löste Gegenreaktionen aus, die die Spannungen weiter verschärften. Nach der Aussetzung warnte Pakistans Nationaler Sicherheitsausschuss, dass jeder Versuch, das Pakistan im Rahmen des IWT zugeteilte Wasser abzuleiten oder zu stoppen, einen „Kriegsakt“ darstellen würde. Der ehemalige Außenminister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari warnte sogar vor einem möglichen „nuklearen Armageddon-Szenario“. Dies zeigt einen sich verschärfenden Prozess der Versicherheitlichung um das Thema Wasser zwischen zwei atomar bewaffneten Nachbarn.

Aushöhlung des Völkerrechts?

Der Ständige Schiedshof hat vier Urteile gefällt, seit Indien den Vertrag im April 2025 außer Kraft gesetzt hat. Diese gingen auf Verfahren zurück, die Pakistan 2016 wegen der Wasserkraftprojekte Kishanganga und Ratle im indisch verwalteten Kaschmir eingeleitet hatte. Pakistan berief sich auf ein Schiedsverfahren gemäß Artikel IX und Anhang G des IWT und argumentierte, dass der Streit weiterreichende Fragen der Vertragsauslegung betreffe, während Indien später gemäß Artikel IX und Anhang F einen neutralen Sachverständigen beantragte und argumentierte, dass es sich bei den Fragen primär um technische Aspekte handele. Die Weltbank setzte beide Verfahren im Jahr 2016 aus und forderte Indien und Pakistan auf, den Streit bilateral beizulegen, nahm sie jedoch im Jahr 2022 wieder auf, nachdem sie zu dem Schluss gekommen war, dass die Pattsituation selbst ein Risiko für den Vertrag darstellte. Am 31. August 2026 ordnete der Ständige Schiedshof Einschränkungen beim Bau des Ratle-Wasserkraftwerks bis 90 Tage nach der Entscheidung des neutralen Sachverständigen an, die für Juli 2027 erwartet wird. Vorerst sollte die Entscheidung des neutralen Sachverständigen abgewartet werden, bevor am Standort Ratle weitere Tatsachen geschaffen werden. Eine anhaltende Aussetzung des Vertrags könnte jedoch das Vertrauen in das internationale Wasserrecht schwächen und zu einer allgemeinen Aushöhlung des Völkerrechts beitragen.

Die Einhaltung der Regeln des Indus-Wasservertrags ist für die Wassersicherheit Pakistans und zur Vermeidung einer militärischen Eskalation zwischen Indien und Pakistan von großer Bedeutung. Damit würde Indien zudem ein starkes Signal für seine Achtung des Völkerrechts setzen.

Privaten Unternehmen wichtige Aufgaben zu übertragen, ist oft richtig. Aber bei einer derart potenten Technologie wie KI ist dies keine Option mehr. , Künstliche Intelligenz wird derzeit viel mit Atomkraft verglichen, weil sie die vielleicht größte Bedrohung unserer Zeit sein könnte. Selbst Mitarbeitende mancher KI-Unternehmen sehen eine Wahrscheinlichkeit von mehr als zehn Prozent, dass KI in den kommenden Jahren die Menschheit auslöschen wird. ...

Gender mainstreaming in the water sector has gained increasing attention in international and national governance frameworks, yet its translation into meaningful change for women and in gender relations more broadly, in a context where both institutional arrangements and accelerating climate change are intensifying challenges around water access, control, use, and governance, remains a persistent challenge. This report examines this gap in the Moroccan context, focusing on two complementary entry points: an overview of gender mainstreaming efforts and institutional advances in the water and irrigation sectors; and the everyday realities of women farmers and cooperative members in the oasis regions of Boudnib and the Drâa Valley. Combining document analysis and institutional interviews with in-depth fieldwork, the study asks whether and how national gender mainstreaming commitments translate into tangible shifts in women’s water access, livelihoods, and decision-making power on the ground.
The findings point to a more nuanced picture. Morocco has made genuine institutional progress: gender is now formally embedded in constitutional principles, water law, sectoral strategies, and national planning instruments, and donor-financed irrigation projects have demonstrated that integrated gender approaches can yield concrete results. Yet these gains remain fragile, often conditional on external support or on the commitment of individual champions within institutions, a dependence that poses significant risks to their sustainability. Outside donor-supported projects, gender analysis is often absent from programme design, and formal inclusion, such as in land programmes, cooperatives, or training schemes, does not automatically translate into effective control over water, labour, or decisions. Many adaptive initiatives are shaped as much by women’s own agency as by the institutional programmes formally available to support them, whose reach remains uneven and frequently contingent on literacy, mobility, and institutional connections. Deeper structural constraints, including historical exclusion from water governance bodies, the growing individualisation of groundwater access, and socio-cultural norms that limit women’s recognition as farmers and irrigators, remain insufficiently taken into account by current approaches. The report concludes with five recommendations calling for stronger institutional anchoring, cross-sectoral coordination, reformed empowerment indicators, and a gradual reduction of dependence on donor financing.

By Anis Chowdhury
SYDNEY, Sep 21 2026 (IPS)

The UN General Assembly will soon vote – most likely favourably – on Bangladesh’s request to postpone the country’s graduation from the UN’s Least Developed Country (LDC) category, currently scheduled for November this year. The request for a 3-year extension was endorsed by the ECOSOC following the recommendation of the UN’s Committee for Development Policy (CDP). It is highly likely that the extension will also be justifiably granted to Nepal and Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao, PDR) – the two other countries scheduled to graduate with Bangladesh, given the fast deteriorating global economic situation and recent natural disaster in Nepal. In fact, the same argument for an extension may be admissible to all prospective graduating countries, such as Solomon Islands (2027), Cambodia (2029) and Senegal (2029).

Anis Chowdhury

However, this raises some serious questions regarding the LDC category itself and the successive 10-year support programmes for LDCs.

The background

The United Nations established the LDC category in 1971 for low-income countries facing severe structural barriers to sustainable development and to direct special international support toward them such as preferential market access, financial aid, and technical cooperation. The idea of a special category for low-income, structurally weak countries originated in the first session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in 1964.

Since the creation of the LDC category, the UN organised five international conferences, the first being in 1981, to draw up comprehensive ten-year frameworks for supports with specific goals. The current programme is the Doha Programme of Action (DPOA) for the Decade 2022–2031, preceded by the Istanbul Programme of Action (IPOA) for the Decade 2011–2020.

The decision to establish a separate LDC category was undoubtedly commendable. The global consensus around the comprehensive action programmes also reflected the goodwill of the international community.

However, none of the programmes could reduce the vulnerability of LDCs. The number of LDCs steadily increased from the 1971 list of 25 countries, reaching a peak of 51 countries in 2003. The number now stands at 46, still nearly double that of the original list. Only 9 countries exited the list – one, Sikkim, through India’s annexation in 1975.

Although the inclusion of newly independent countries partly explains the lengthening of the LDC list, one cannot avoid the judgement of an overall failure of the international community’s good-intentioned programmes. This is especially so in light of the development successes of countries which did not join the group despite their eligibility.

The Reckoning

The failure became staggering by the time the international community met in Istanbul in 2011. After four decades since the special LDC category was created, only three countries – Botswana, Cabo Verde and Maldives – exited the group. Furthermore, the post-graduation experience has been disappointing.

For example, life-expectancy in Botswana, the first country to exit the LDC group, declined from 61.6 years in 1988 to 50.08 years in 2003, while it remains one of the most unequal countries in the world, holding the 9th highest income Gini coefficient globally. Botswana, although hailed for macroeconomic stability, failed to transform structurally with the share of manufacturing hovering below 6% of GDP, and it remains extremely vulnerable to fluctuations in international commodity markets, especially diamond. Thus, growth has declined significantly since the mid-2000s and the unemployment rate has increased to very high levels, around 26%.

Therefore, the core goals and targets of the IPOA included:

• Enable half of all LDCs to achieve graduation status by 2020.
• Attain sustained, equitable, and inclusive economic growth of at least 7% annually.
• Strengthen education, health, and nutrition.
• Build productive bases and diversify economies to generate decent jobs, especially for youth

Unfortunately, only 6 countries – Maldives, Samoa, Equatorial Guinea, Vanuatu, Bhutan and São Tomé and Príncipe graduated – during 2011-2024, and 3 countries – Bangladesh, Nepal and Lao PDR – became eligible to graduate this year. Again, the experience is not very encouraging for the graduated countries, while the fear of graduation has gripped the countries soon to graduate.

In 2021, UNCTAD concluded that 50 years of LDC experience is “sobering”. It found that half of the LDCs fell behind the rest of the world in terms of per capita income and other dimensions of development. Hence, the economic gap between these countries and the rest of the world has widened over the last 50 years.

Rejecting “LDC insult”

Zimbabwe, a land-locked country, rejected the UN’s recommendation to be classified as a LDC in 2006 despite facing severe economic hardships. Zimbabwe viewed the UN recommendation “to be downgraded to LDC status” as an insult, while the neighbouring land-locked Zambia was among the first group of countries classified as an LDC in 1971.

When Zimbabwe’s per capita GDP plunged to USD341 in 2008, resource-rich Zambia’s per capita GDP was around USD1,376. Today, after more than half a century as an LDC, the per capita GDP of Zambia, one of the world’s leading producers of copper, cobalt, and semi-precious gemstones like emeralds, is around USD1,318, while Zimbabwe’s per capita GDP recovered within a decade to around USD3,445 in 2017.

Vietnam, coming out of a quarter century long devasting war in 1975, facing the challenge of unifying the country during the worst global economic situation with a paltry per capita income of around USD85, chose not to join the LDC group. Instead of aid dependence, it opted for the trade and investment route to development. Today, its per capita GDP is approximately USD5,066, while Bangladesh which joined the LDC group in 1975 with a per capita income of around USD230 could manage to raise its per capita GDP to approximately USD2,960.

The Republic of Korea (ROK), one of the poorest countries of the world in the 1960s, could also join the LDC group in 1971 when it was created; but it did not. Maintaining its policy independence and choosing the trade and investment route, ROK has become a full-fledged developed country in 1996 (member of OECD) within three decades. It managed to increase its per capita GDP from USD158 in 1960 to USD36,227 in 2025.

What may have gone wrong?

UNCTAD attributed the “sobering” experience to the LDCs’ inability to exploit international support measures (ISMs) strategically to develop their productive capacity. Others offered different reasons such as failure to understand the complex development process and appreciate the dangers associated with increased integration of structurally weak economies to the rapidly changing global economic system.

Add to these, complicity. Countries joining the group took ISMs as guaranteed; they did not take serious steps to mobilise domestic resources, diversify their economies and expand markets. Take the case of Bangladesh, a country regarded as the best utiliser of ISMs.

Bangladesh’s tax-GDP ratio is dismally low, experiencing a decline from a peak of around 10% to around 7%. Its ready-made garment (RMG) sector’s dominance increased from around 67% of export earnings in 2018 when the country first met the graduation criteria to around 85% by 2025 while it should have been declining as the graduation deadline was approaching.

Bangladesh has also failed to diversify its export markets away from the EU and the USA, accounting for close to 80% of RMG exports. It does not have any meaningful trade agreement with any country or trading bloc, while Vietnam has 17 bilateral FTA and is a member of Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership as well as Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world’s largest free trade agreement, covering roughly 30% of global GDP.

Ironically, the sector that propelled Bangladesh’s industrialisation, made the country more vulnerable. Worst, too big to ignore, the RMG sector has captured Bangladesh’s political and policy space. The CDP’s recommendation in favour of Bangladesh’s extension request has been made subject to the country’s commitment to reforms. However, political will for reforms may waver when the state is captured by a dominant sector.

Curse or Boon?

Thus, what was supposed to be a boon, for many LDCs, the category has become a curse, trapping them in a perpetual state of underdevelopment and vulnerability. It fits the narrative of William Easterly’s The White Man’s Burden; unfortunately, the international community may feel burdened and grant an extension to the “fearful” LDCs even when its “good-intentioned” efforts have produced so little good.

Anis Chowdhury, Emeritus Professor, Western Sydney University (Australia). He held senior UN positions in Bangkok and New York and served as Special Assistant to the Chief Advisor for Finance (with the status and rank of State Minister) in the Professor Yunus-led Interim Government. E-mail: anis.z.chowdhury@gmail.com; a.chowdhury@westernsydney.edu

IPS UN Bureau

 

 

 

 

Related Articles

• The Tale of Three Countries: Policy Independence Matters for Development
• The Political Economy of Bangladesh’s LDC Graduation

A group of armed defectors from the RSF arrives in the west of Omdurman on 19 August 2026. Credit: Ebrahim Hamid/AFP

By Andrew Firmin
LONDON, Sep 21 2026 (IPS)

Sudan’s civil war grinds on. It’s close to three and a half years since the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia began their battle for supremacy, and the two forces and their allies continue to slaughter civilians with impunity. As a recent UN report makes clear, the killing is enabled by numerous foreign powers that continue to supply weapons, personnel and logistical support. They have made a civil conflict their proxy war, and their self-interest is sustaining the killing.

Drone warfare

Things are relatively quiet in the capital, Khartoum, where the curfew was recently lifted following its recapture by the SAF last year, but the RSF still controls significant areas, with fighting concentrated in the Darfur and Kordofan regions to the west and Blue Nile state in the southeast.

Both sides now extensively use drones to kill civilians. In February, a suspected RSF drone strike on an aid convoy in South Kordofan killed three humanitarian workers and wounded four more. In May, a suspected SAF drone strike on a crowded market in Ghubaysh, an RSF-controlled town in West Kordofan, killed 28 people as they shopped for food. In August, another likely SAF strike on a court session in an RSF-controlled village killed 35 people.

The RSF are attacking El Obeid, a city of around half a million people in North Kordofan. RSF drones have hit hospitals and schools. People fear a repeat of what happened when the RSF took the city of El Fasher last October. The UN’s Fact-Finding Mission concluded that the ensuing massacre, in which the RSF killed at least 60,000 people, bore the ‘hallmarks of genocide’, with ethnically targeted killings and widespread sexual violence.

Humanitarian and civic space emergency

The war has caused the world’s largest humanitarian crisis. Over 11 million people have been forcibly displaced within Sudan or to surrounding countries, and around 20 million are experiencing acute food insecurity.

There’s a great need for the help civil society offers, but it’s hard for humanitarian organisations to provide aid because of security dangers and access and movement restrictions. The Sudanese government is also attacking the ability of civil society organisations to operate. In February, authorities revoked the licences of four organisations with missions to provide aid, help victims and promote peace.

Journalists, particularly women journalists, are under attack, making it harder to tell the truth about what’s happening on the ground. In January, the Sudanese Journalists Syndicate recorded that 14 journalists and other media workers had been killed in 2025. In December 2025, it was reported that 40 per cent of women journalists had experienced sexual assault, physical violence, harassment or threats.

Foreign powers behind the war

Sudan’s people can expect little help from the deadlocked UN Security Council. In August, the US government proposed a resolution to expand an arms embargo that currently applies to Darfur to the whole country, explicitly including drones. The Sudanese government condemned the proposal and Russia rejected it, which, given its veto power as a permanent member, means the resolution won’t advance further unless significantly watered down.

Russia initially sold weapons to both the RSF and SAF but more recently has swung behind the SAF, becoming a major arms supplier in return for gold and a potential Red Sea naval base. It’s joined by several other states with a direct stake in the conflict. The UN’s Fact-Finding Mission has set out how the SAF are using foreign-supplied drones while transnational networks are keeping the RSF supplied.

Alongside Russia, states that supply arms or other military support to the SAF, or have done so at some point since the war began, include Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Turkey and Ukraine. Those that have backed the RSF in various ways include the Central African Republic, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, South Sudan, Uganda and, most notoriously, the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Weapons originating from countries including Canada, China, Israel and the UK have also been used. In most cases, states deny involvement.

There’s ample evidence that the UAE extensively supplies the RSF with mercenaries and weapons via African transit routes, in return for gold and in the hope of securing a regional foothold. The UAE funded Colombian mercenaries who played an active role alongside the RSF in the slaughter in El Fasher. It was recently revealed that individuals and entities linked to the RSF’s leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, have acquired properties worth over US$24 million in Dubai, likely paid for with smuggled gold.

The UAE’s reliance on states that border Sudan to allow its convoys to cross brings the risk of conflict spillovers, as seen in alleged SAF airstrikes on a military convoy in Chad in August.

Push for accountability

A new initiative to hold foreign figures accountable offers some hope for justice. In June, the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights and a group of civil society organisations made a legal submission to the International Criminal Court (ICC), asking it to investigate several foreign officials for aiding and abetting crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes in Sudan. The submission provided evidence of the involvement of the governments of Egypt, Iran, Turkey and the UAE.

The ICC has an ongoing investigation into the situation in Darfur, scene of a 2003-2005 genocide. It has confirmed that human rights crimes committed during the current war fall under its jurisdiction as part of this investigation, and in June it announced it had ‘concrete evidence’ linking RSF leaders to atrocities in El Fasher.

It’s vital that leaders responsible for human rights crimes face justice, and this must include the leaders of the countries waging a proxy war. If there is to be peace and justice, the impunity of the foreign powers that are sustaining the war must be challenged.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

 

 

 

 

President Mahmoud Abbas of Palestine. Credit: UN Photo

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 21 2026 (IPS)

When Yasser Arafat was denied a US visa for his second visit to New York to address the United Nations back in 1988, the General Assembly defied the United States by temporarily moving the UN’s highest policymaking body to Geneva—perhaps for the first time in UN history—providing a less hostile political environment and a platform for the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

Arafat, who first addressed the UN in 1974, took a swipe at Washington when he prefaced his statement in Geneva by remarking, “It never occurred to me that my second meeting with this honorable Assembly, since 1974, would take place in the hospitable city of Geneva.”

The US last week denied visas to the Palestinian delegation, led by President Mahmoud Abbas, who was due to address the General Assembly on September 24. The delegates were also denied visas last year.

In the official list of speakers released last week, Abbas has been designated “Head of State” (HS) of the “State of Palestine.”

The U.S. State Department criticized Abbas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) for pursuing the “unilateral recognition of a conjectural Palestinian state” through international bodies rather than negotiated bilateral talks.

As a rebuff to the US, the General Assembly voted overwhelmingly last week to allow President Abbas and other high-level Palestinian officials to participate and address the annual gathering of world leaders via video, outsmarting the US—electronically.

The resolution was adopted with a 152-3 vote (with four countries abstaining). This decision directly addresses the decision by the United States to deny entry visas to the high-level Palestinian delegation—including Abbas—marking the second consecutive year the delegation has been barred from attending the UN high-level meeting of world political leaders.

The resolution was opposed only by the United States, Israel, and Paraguay, with Colombia, Honduras, Panama, and Peru abstaining.

So far, the UN expects about 73 Heads of State, 45 Heads of Government, 49 Ministers, 11 Vice-Presidents, and one Crown Prince to address the General Assembly through September 28.

Alongside the mandated meetings, there are about 168 events that are scheduled during the high-level week, and last week, Member States have submitted about 1,000 requests for bilateral meetings amongst themselves.

The bilateral meetings with the Secretary-General are also in the process of being scheduled.

The UN has also issued 1,935 press passes for visiting journalists and an additional 1,290 press passes for official media.

Dr. Stephen Zunes, a professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, where he serves as coordinator of the program in Middle Eastern Studies, told Inter Press Service (IPS) under the 1947 US-UN Headquarters agreement that the United States is obliged to allow foreign leaders to address the General Assembly.

“That’s why previous administrations allowed even the likes of Muammar Qaddafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Idi Amin, Suharto, and other nasty characters to visit.”

(According to one definition, “ruthless autocrats” are political leaders who hold absolute power and use severe oppression, violence, and censorship to maintain control. Throughout history, these dictators have suppressed political opposition, eliminated civil liberties, and caused massive human suffering.)

Now, however, the Trump administration is banning representatives of the government of Palestine—a permanent non-member state of the United Nations—from coming to New York despite their recognizing Israel, renouncing terrorism, and calling for peace, said Dr. Zunes.

And there have been no objections, he said, from Democratic leaders in the US Congress. The problem, therefore, is not that the State of Palestine is a brutal dictatorship or violating international legal norms—the United States has no problems with that.

“The problem is that they are Palestinians. This is bigotry, pure and simple,“ he said.

The General Assembly could have relocated to Geneva, as they did in 1988. However, concerns about the costs and the carbon footprint, combined with access to modern communications technologies, have led them to allow the Palestinian leadership to Zoom in, said Dr. Zunes.

While going to Geneva would have been a more powerful statement, the support by such an overwhelming majority of the world’s nations can still be seen as a rebuke of Washington’s continued opposition to Palestine’s right to exist, declared Dr Zunes.

Mouin Rabbani, Managing Editor, Jadaliyya, an independent ezine produced by the Arab Studies Institute, told IPS the United States has once again demonstrated itself to be unfit to play the role of host nation of the United Nations. It considers the Host Country Agreement as something to be honored on a voluntary basis rather than a series of binding obligations.

The US government considers it perfectly normal to behave like a gangster state and openly violate its obligations by refusing entry to foreign delegates on the most specious of pretexts, he pointed out.

This is not a matter of the Trump administration. Nearly four decades ago, its predecessor, the Reagan administration, also refused entry to a Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat.

What is particularly noteworthy on this occasion, he said, is that the US government is explicitly identifying the Palestinian recourse to the ICJ and ICC as legitimate grounds to refuse the participation of the Palestinian leader in the GA.

“This is the conduct of one gangster state acting on behalf of another (Israel) and demonstrates in the clearest manner possible that the US cannot and should not be entrusted with hosting the UN HQ.”

The Palestinians should of course be demanding that the GA conduct its session outside the US. The problem is that they are led by the exceptionally weak-kneed Mahmoud Abbas, who seems to continue to believe that absorbing these outrageous violations without confronting them forcefully will earn him brownie points with Trump and Netanyahu, which of course they won’t, declared Rabbani.

Meanwhile, responding to questions from journalists, UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said last week the Secretary-General deeply regrets the announcement by the United States extending sanctions that would deny visas to members of the Palestine Liberation Organization and officials of the Palestinian Authority to participate in meetings of the United Nations.

“The Secretary-General is concerned about the impact of this decision on the ability of the State of Palestine to participate fully in the work of the United Nations. The full participation of all delegations in the work of the organization is essential to its proper functioning”.

The Secretary-General takes note of the arrangements adopted yesterday by the General Assembly for the participation of the State of Palestine in the eighty-first session.

The Secretary-General urges the host country to ensure that visas are issued to all delegations in accordance with its obligations under the Headquarters Agreement and will continue to engage with the United States authorities to this end.

Meanwhile, key details of the General Assembly decision include the following:

• Scope of Virtual Access:

• The approved measure not only permits President Abbas to deliver his address virtually but also extends video-participation rights to any senior Palestinian officials for any UN meetings or conferences over the next year if they remain blocked from traveling to the U.S.

• The U.S. Stance:

• The Trump administration extended existing visa sanctions, citing security concerns and accusing the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) of failing to comply with legal commitments and attempting to “internationalize” the conflict through global tribunals.

• On-the-Ground Representation:

While the high-level traveling delegation was barred, Palestinian diplomats who are already permanently accredited to the UN in New York will continue to represent them.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

 

 

 

Die Wahlsieg-Party der Berliner Linken sorgt für Aufruhr. Clan-Chef Issa Remmo und ein Anti-Israel-Aktivist feierten mit. CDU-Bürgermeister Wegner spricht von einem «verstörenden Signal».

In Zusammenarbeit mit blue Sport präsentiert Blick die Highlights der Partie FC Lausanne-Sport – FC Lugano (0:4).

In Zusammenarbeit mit blue Sport präsentiert Blick die Highlights der Partie FC Vaduz – FC Thun (1:2).