Dans les supermarchés et marchés de la capitale congolaise, la vente promotionnelle d'articles dont la date de péremption approche se généralise. Si ces rabais séduisent les ménages au budget limité, ils soulèvent des inquiétudes majeures quant à la sécurité sanitaire des consommateurs.
Les avis des clients sont partagés
This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of security policy education over the past four decades (1984–2024). It traces the transition from the „Simplicity of Destruction”—defined by Cold War nuclear deterrence and Realist state-centric models—to the „Complexity of Resilience,” necessitated by hybrid threats, climate change, and algorithmic warfare. The article identifies four distinct eras: the Strategic Calculus of the Cold War, the Post-1991 Broadening of the security agenda, the Post-9/11 Asymmetric Turn, and the current era of Hybridity and Technological Supremacy. This report places special emphasis on the technological pulse of security, mapping the shift from nuclear physics to artificial intelligence and quantum vulnerabilities. Furthermore, the study examines pedagogical shifts from theoretical lecturing to immersive wargaming and „Red Teaming.” Finally, it provides a case study of the Hungarian educational landscape, documenting the transition from the Marxist-Leninist military doctrines of the 1980s to the „Comprehensive Approach” of the National University of Public Service (NKE).
I. 1984–1991: The Era of Strategic Calculus
In 1984, security policy education was a disciplined, almost clinical exercise in strategic mathematics. Dominated by the Neorealist paradigm—exemplified by Kenneth Waltz’s *Theory of International Politics* (1979)—the curriculum was built on the assumption that the international system is anarchic and states are rational, unitary actors. Students of the era focused on „Hard Power”: the measurable capability of a state to coerce others through military or economic might.
The pedagogical cornerstone was Nuclear Strategy. Concepts like Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), the dynamics of the „Nuclear Triad,” and the intricacies of the SALT and START treaties formed the core of the syllabus. Security was synonymous with defense, and defense was synonymous with the state. The educational objective was to train analysts who could calculate second-strike capabilities and interpret the movement of tank divisions across the North German Plain. It was a world of high stakes but clear ontological boundaries.
II. 1991–2001: The Great Widening
The collapse of the Soviet Union acted as an ontological shock to the field. Security policy education underwent what scholars call „The Widening.” The Copenhagen School, led by Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver, introduced Securitization Theory, arguing that „security” is not an objective condition but a social construct—a „speech act.”
In 1994, the UNDP Human Security Report fundamentally shifted the referent object of security from the „State” to the „Individual.” Education began to include economic, food, health, and environmental security. Students were no longer just studying throw-weights of ICBMs; they were analyzing the security implications of the Balkan wars, ethnic conflict, and the collapse of „failed states.” This decade introduced the idea that security is multidisciplinary, requiring insights from sociology, economics, and environmental science.
III. 2001–2014: The Asymmetric Turn
The attacks of September 11, 2001, forced a pivot toward asymmetry. The pedagogical focus shifted from state-on-state conflict to Counter-Insurgency (COIN) and non-state actors. Mary Kaldor’s concept of „New Wars”—where the distinction between soldier and civilian, and between war and organized crime, blurs—became essential reading.
The 2006 publication of the US Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual (FM 3-24) influenced civilian curricula worldwide, emphasizing „winning hearts and minds” and the „Comprehensive Approach.” This era also marked the rise of Critical Migration Studies. Scholars like Jef Huysmans (2006) highlighted how the „securitization of migration” transformed border management into a primary security concern. Education now required an understanding of cultural anthropology and the psychology of radicalization.
**IV. 2014–2024: Hybridity and Global Resilience**
Since the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the subsequent full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, security education has grappled with „Hybrid Warfare.” Frank Hoffman’s theories on the blending of conventional, irregular, and cyber tactics redefined the curriculum. The focus has moved toward „Total Defense” and Societal Resilience—the ability of a nation’s infrastructure and population to withstand and recover from systemic shocks.
Climate Security (Parenti, 2011) has moved from the periphery to the centre. Students today analyse resource scarcity, water wars, and climate-induced migration not as „soft” issues, but as „threat multipliers” that can destabilise entire regions. The 2024 curriculum is characterised by „Grand Strategy” in an era of Great Power Competition (GPC), where the Arctic, the Indo-Pacific, and Outer Space are the new frontiers of confrontation.
**V. The Technological Pulse: From Nuclear Physics to Algorithmic Warfare**
Technological innovation has always been the „silent engine” of security policy. In the 1980s, security technology was largely about nuclear physics and ballistic engineering. The 1990s introduced the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), focusing on precision-guided munitions and the „system of systems” (Owens, 2000).
The 2000s saw the „Unmanned Revolution,” as drones (Singer, 2009) changed the ethics and practice of targeted killing. Today, the focus is on AI, Algorithmic Warfare, and Quantum Security. Security programs must now teach „Digital Forensics” and prepare for „Q-Day” (the point when quantum computers can break current encryption). The speed of the OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) is now determined by machine learning, forcing students to contemplate a future where „meaningful human control” over lethal force is the primary ethical and strategic challenge (Scharre, 2018).
III. 2001–2014: The Asymmetric Turn
The attacks of September 11, 2001, forced a pivot toward asymmetry. The pedagogical focus shifted from state-on-state conflict to Counter-Insurgency (COIN) and non-state actors. Mary Kaldor’s concept of „New Wars”—where the distinction between soldier and civilian, and between war and organised crime, blurs—became essential reading.
The 2006 publication of the US Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual (FM 3-24) influenced civilian curricula worldwide, emphasising „winning hearts and minds” and the „Comprehensive Approach.” This era also marked the rise of Critical Migration Studies. Scholars such as Jef Huysmans (2006) have highlighted how the „securitization of migration” transformed border management into a primary security concern. Education now required an understanding of cultural anthropology and the psychology of radicalization.
IV. 2014–2024: Hybridity and Global Resilience
Since the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the subsequent full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, security education has grappled with „Hybrid Warfare.” Frank Hoffman’s theories on the blending of conventional, irregular, and cyber tactics redefined the curriculum. The focus has moved toward „Total Defense” and Societal Resilience—the ability of a nation’s infrastructure and population to withstand and recover from systemic shocks.
Climate Security (Parenti, 2011) has moved from the periphery to the center. Students today analyze resource scarcity, water wars, and climate-induced migration not as „soft” issues, but as „threat multipliers” that can destabilize entire regions. The curriculum of 2024 is characterized by „Grand Strategy” in an era of Great Power Competition (GPC), where the Arctic, the Indo-Pacific, and Outer Space are the new frontiers of confrontation.
V. The Technological Pulse: From Nuclear Physics to Algorithmic Warfare
Technological innovation has always been the „silent engine” of security policy. In the 1980s, security technology was largely about nuclear physics and ballistic engineering. The 1990s introduced the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), focusing on precision-guided munitions and the „system of systems” (Owens, 2000).
The 2000s saw the „Unmanned Revolution,” as drones (Singer, 2009) changed the ethics and practice of targeted killing. Today, the focus is on AI, Algorithmic Warfare, and Quantum Security. Security programs must now teach „Digital Forensics” and prepare for „Q-Day” (the point when quantum computers can break current encryption). The speed of the OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) is now determined by machine learning, forcing students to contemplate a future where „meaningful human control” over lethal force is the primary ethical and strategic challenge (Scharre, 2018).
VI. From Lecturing to Wargaming: Pedagogical Evolution
The way we teach security has changed as much as the content. Traditional lectures are increasingly supplemented by active, immersive methods. Wargaming (Perla, 1990) has seen a massive resurgence, allowing students to simulate complex crisis management scenarios in a low-risk environment.
„Red Teaming”—the practice of viewing a problem from an adversary’s perspective (Heuer, 1999)—is now a standard skill taught in intelligence and policy tracks. Furthermore, the rise of Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) has democratized research. In 1984, satellite imagery was the exclusive domain of superpowers; today, students are trained to geolocate conflict zones and verify human rights abuses using commercial satellite data and social media, turning the classroom into a real-time intelligence hub.
VII. The Hungarian Experience: From Zrínyi to NKE
In Hungary, the evolution of security education followed a unique historical trajectory. In 1984, the Zrínyi Miklós Military Academy was the center of education, operating within the strict ideological framework of Marxist-Leninist military doctrine and Warsaw Pact requirements. The focus was on conventional land warfare and „Socialist Patriotism.”
The 1990s brought a period of rapid „NATO-ization.” Curriculum reform focused on civilian oversight of the military, democratic accountability, and interoperability with Western allies. The 2012 establishment of the National University of Public Service (NKE) marked a turning point, integrating military, law enforcement, and diplomatic education. This „Comprehensive Approach” reflects the Hungarian reality: security is no longer just a military matter but involves disaster management, cyber defense, and public administration. Today, Hungarian students study within a framework that balances European integration with the specific challenges of the Carpathian Basin.
Conclusion
The evolution from 1984 to 2024 represents a fundamental shift from the „Simplicity of Destruction” to the „Complexity of Resilience.” Security policy education is no longer just about counting tanks or calculating megatons; it is about understanding the fragile, interconnected nodes of a globalized world. As we look toward the next forty years, the challenge for educators will be to foster „Security Literacy”—the ability to navigate a world where a computer virus can be as deadly as a kinetic missile, and where the most important battlefield is often the cognitive resilience of the population.
References
* Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & De Wilde, J. (1998). *Security: A New Framework for Analysis*. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
* Hoffman, F. G. (2007). *Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars*. Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.
* Heuer, R. J. (1999). *Psychology of Intelligence Analysis*. Center for the Study of Intelligence.
* Huntington, S. P. (1957). *The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations*. Harvard University Press.
* Huysmans, J. (2006). *The Politics of Insecurity: Fear, Migration and Asylum in the EU*. Routledge.
* Kaldor, M. (1999). *New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era*. Stanford University Press.
* Lowenthal, M. M. (2022). *Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy* (9th ed.). CQ Press.
* Nye, J. S. (2004). *Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics*. PublicAffairs.
* Owens, W. A. (2000). *Lifting the Fog of War*. Johns Hopkins University Press.
* Parenti, C. (2011). *Tropic of Chaos: Climate Change and the New Geography of Violence*. Nation Books.
* Perla, P. P. (1990). *The Art of Wargaming*. Naval Institute Press.
* Rid, T. (2013). *Cyber War Will Not Take Place*. Oxford University Press.
* Scharre, P. (2018). *Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War*. W. W. Norton & Company.
* Singer, P. W. (2009). *Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the Twenty-first Century*. Penguin Press.
* UNDP. (1994). *Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security*. Oxford University Press.
* U.S. Army. (2006). *FM 3-24 Counterinsurgency*. Headquarters, Department of the Army.
* Waltz, K. N. (1979). *Theory of International Politics*. Addison-Wesley.
* Zenko, M. (2015). *Red Team: How to Succeed by Thinking Like the Enemy*. Basic Books.
A From Kinetic Warfare to Complex Resilience: The Evolution of Security Policy Education (1984–2024) bejegyzés először Biztonságpolitika-én jelent meg.
La Côte d’Ivoire célébrera prochainement la restitution par la France d’une pièce d’importance : un tambour à fentes, long de 3,30 mètres et pesant 430 kg. Connue sous le nom de Djidji Ayôkwé, cette pièce était officiellement réclamée depuis 2019 par les autorités ivoiriennes. Après une phase de restauration et de longs mois d’atermoiements, l’objet a regagné la Côte d’Ivoire le 13 mars dernier, 110 ans après avoir été pillé par les colons français. Sa restitution témoigne de l’importance que revêt le retour de pièces à forte teneur symboliques pour les populations africaines. Elle pointe aussi la lenteur de ces processus : rendre ce tambour aura pris… quatre ans et demi !
Pour accélérer et généraliser ces restitutions, le Parlement français vient d’adopter une loi-cadre, un texte majeur – longtemps repoussé – qui vient concrétiser la promesse formulée par Emmanuel Macron en novembre 2017 à Ouagadougou de rendre possible ces restitutions. Mais, avec la création d’une commission nationale de restitutions, en sus de comités scientifiques bilatéraux, et en l’absence de trajectoire financière pour développer la recherche de provenance, la France entretient le flou quant à sa réelle ambition en matière de restitutions de biens culturels à l’Afrique.
À téléchargerL’article Restitution des biens culturels pillés durant la colonisation : la France de retour au premier plan ? est apparu en premier sur IRIS.
The next ordinary meeting of the Subcommittee on Human Rights is scheduled to take place on 22-23 June 2026 in Brussels.
L'Église orthodoxe serbe va créer une nouvelle Université de Saint-Sava, avec le soutien de l'État. Le statut de cet établissement - public ou privé ? - est incertain, mais le projet manifeste surtout le soutien politique de la hiérarchie orthodoxe au régime d'Aleksandar Vučić.
- Le fil de l'Info / Serbie, orthodoxie, Vucic, Courrier des Balkans, Culture et éducation, ReligionsL'Église orthodoxe serbe va créer une nouvelle Université de Saint-Sava, avec le soutien de l'État. Le statut de cet établissement - public ou privé ? - est incertain, mais le projet manifeste surtout le soutien politique de la hiérarchie orthodoxe au régime d'Aleksandar Vučić.
- Le fil de l'Info / Serbie, orthodoxie, Vucic, Courrier des Balkans, Culture et éducation, ReligionsResidents in Phú Yên, Vietnam, relied on a small wooden boat during a flood. Climate change and El Niño disrupted the livelihood of millions of people in Asia and the Pacific. Credit: Pexels/Long Bà Mùi Source: ESCAP
By Kareff Rafisura
BANGKOK, Thailand, May 11 2026 (IPS)
Climate models are converging: El Niño is likely to return by mid-2026 and could be strong. According to the World Meteorological Organization, it could emerge as early as May–July 2026, with several national hydrometeorological agencies in Asia and the Pacific already issuing alerts.
El Niño makes headlines not because it is rare, but because it amplifies climate risks. Past events have triggered major humanitarian crises, driving drought, food insecurity and public health emergencies across Asia and the Pacific. While each Niño event differs, their impacts tend to follow recognizable regional patterns.
In countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Timor Leste, strong El Niño events have repeatedly brought drought, forest fires, agricultural losses and water stress, with patterns reinforced even during the weaker 2018–2019 El Niño. These impacts provide clear signals of risks concentrated across food, water, health and livelihood systems.
In practical terms, an El Niño event is only fully established when the atmosphere reinforces the warming of oceans. As not all warmings reach that stage, this is where uncertainty lies, including how strong the event will become. While forecasts will improve in the coming months, historical impacts already indicate where risks are likely to concentrate.
To understand the risks, it helps to look at how past events have unfolded in the region. Strong events in 1971–73, 1982–83 and 1997–98 triggered widespread droughts, forest fires and vector-borne diseases, such as dengue, across South and South-East Asia and the Pacific.
While impacts vary by location, the pattern is consistent: risk intensity is highest where exposure overlaps with underlying vulnerabilities caused by poverty, food insecurity and malnutrition, as well as heavy dependence on subsistence farming.
The 2015–2016 El Niño is the strongest of this century and can serve as a useful reference should current conditions develop into a comparable event, given similar early warming patterns. The joint ESCAP and ASEAN report, Ready for the Dry Years, states that during this event, more than 70% of South-East Asia’s land area experienced drought, exposing over 200 million people to severe drought at its peak.
While El Niño affects large areas, its impacts are most severe where climatic exposure overlaps with structural vulnerability. This year, these risks are unfolding in a more complex climate and socioeconomic context, with tighter fiscal space, higher debt levels and persistent global economic uncertainty, as highlighted in the ESCAP Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2026.
At the same time, remittances, an important source of income for countries such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines and Sri Lanka are being affected, weakening a key buffer that has historically helped households cope with shocks.
Together, these pressures leave governments and households less able to absorb climate shocks than during previous El Niño cycles.
Climate change is amplifying baseline risks. Higher temperatures increase evapotranspiration (process of heat making water evaporate faster), reduce soil moisture and intensify drought conditions. The Ready for the Dry Years report shows that droughts increasingly occur under warmer conditions, magnifying their impacts.
Climate variability is now interacting with long-term warming trends, increasing systemic risks.
The implication is clear: waiting for certainty can increase exposure to avoidable losses. Historical evidence and current signals already provide a sufficient basis for early, no-regret action.
Because the impacts of El Niño align with extremes expected to intensify under climate change, there is a strong case for investing in resilience across scenarios. Three priority areas stand out.
First, turn climate forecasts into actionable decisions on the ground. Seasonal forecasts provide valuable signals, but decisions require localized insight: where water stress will emerge, where crops are likely to fail and which communities are most at risk. Advances in satellite data and analytics now allow near-real-time monitoring of soil moisture, vegetation health and water availability, and should be used to guide targeted preparedness.
Second, early financing is a no-regret investment in resilience. The impacts of El Niño are cumulative and can outlast the event itself. Acting early through social protection, support to farmers and better water management reduces long-term costs and protects hard-won development gains. In a context of constrained fiscal space, anticipatory action limits downstream losses.
Third, strengthen coordination across sectors. El Niño affects multiple sectors simultaneously, including agriculture, water, energy and public health. Coordinated responses enable faster and more efficient actions with benefits that extend beyond a single event.
Even as uncertainty remains around the strength of the evolving event, historical experience makes a clear case for early action to strengthen long-term resilience.
Kareff Rafisura is Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Haiti leidet seit Jahrzehnten unter zahlreichen humanitären, politischen, wirtschaftlichen und sicherheitspolitischen Krisen, die einander überlagern und verheerende Folgen für die lokale Bevölkerung haben. Bisherige Stabilisierungsversuche waren kaum erfolgreich. Die 5.500 Mann starke sogenannte »Einheit zur Bekämpfung von Banden« (Gang Suppression Force, GSF) hat am 1. April 2026 die Nachfolge der von Kenia geführten Multinationalen Sicherheitsunterstützungsmission (MSS) angetreten. Es ist die zwölfte Friedens- und Stabilisierungsmission, die Haiti seit 1990 erlebt. Die GSF wird als VN-mandatierte Mission geführt und operiert vor allem mit zunächst 800 Militärkräften aus dem Tschad. Damit unternehmen die Vereinten Nationen einen gewagten Versuch, die Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität zum zentralen Ansatzpunkt ihrer Missionen nach Kapitel VII der VN-Charta zu machen – und das in einer extrem komplexen politischen, sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Lage in Haiti.
Röviddel a rendszerváltás után, az 1990-es évek elején átalakult a hazai mezőgazdasági repülés. Az addig biztos munka és megélhetés szinte egyik napról a másikra bizonytalanná vált, a szakmában maradó pilóták és repülőgép-szerelők pedig egy újfajta kihívással szembesültek: a vállalkozói életformával. Beszélgetésünk harmadik részében ezt a nem könnyű időszakot idézzük fel László Ferenccel.
- Hogyan élted meg a Repülőgépes Szolgálat végét és a vállalkozói létbe való átmenetet?
- Már néhány évvel korábban is ment a lázadozás, hogy mi ugyanazért a tarifáért dolgozunk, mint az előző évtizedekben. Amikor a régi öregek kezdték, egy jó helyen lévő mezőgazdasági pilóta majdnem többet keresett, mint egy Malév kapitány. Aztán változtak a dolgok, a Malévnél komoly fizetések voltak, nálunk pedig megállt minden. Amikor mi kezdtünk, a körépület volt Budaörsön és egy faház. Aztán felépült az ötemeletes irodaház, és akkor mondtuk, hogy ebből baj lesz. Egy darabig még alakultak brigádok, de később már nem. Szükségmegoldásként ekkor jelentek meg a kétpilótás brigádok. Azt vettük észre, hogy az üzemeltető állomány állandó maradt, az irodaházban viszont olyan osztályok lettek, amiről addig nem is tudtunk és mindegyik tele lett. A hangárosok is látták, hogy rengeteg irodista van. A vállalati üdülőbe már nem is tudtunk menni, mert ők januárban lefoglalták a helyeket. Megvolt, hogy mennyit dolgoztunk, tudtuk, hogy mennyi a tarifa, a szorzóval felszoroztuk és gyakorlatilag megcsináltuk helyettük a saját bérszámfejtésünket. Amikor jött a számítógépes csoport, nekem mindig reklamálnom kellett, mert soha nem stimmeltek a számok. Akkora lázadás volt, hogy a TV-híradó is foglalkozott vele, de olyan nagy változások nem történtek.
Written by Laurence Amand-Eeckhout.
The integration of artificial intelligence into healthcare and daily life could deeply impact people’s health and wellbeing, bringing health benefits but also introducing new challenges. Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed healthcare by supporting clinicians in improving diagnostics, predicting health risks, and personalising treatments in fields such as radiology, oncology, cardiology, and rare diseases, and streamlining hospital management. It offers opportunities to make healthcare more effective, accessible for all, with better outcomes for patients and national health systems. It also supports pharmaceutical development. Beyond clinical settings, citizens use AI chatbots to obtain health information and wellness advice, although this carries risks of misinformation and over-reliance. While AI offers benefits for vulnerable groups, it also carries age-specific risks that require careful attention. For older adults, AI offers remote monitoring, assistive technologies, and companionship tools, but risks replacing rather than complementing human interaction. Young people and children using AI face serious risks including exposure to harmful content, emotional dependency, privacy violations, and reduced critical thinking. Across all age groups, excessive or poorly designed AI use is linked to anxiety, sleep disorders, sedentarism and social withdrawal. Use of AI companions can backfire, deepening isolation or even triggering mental health crises in vulnerable users. The EU AI Act and sector-specific legislation aim to govern these risks while fostering innovation. Realising AI’s health benefits ultimately requires robust human oversight, strong safeguards, and digital skills, with a commitment to keeping human connection and care at the centre, as AI cannot replace face-to-face contact and community structures.
Read the complete briefing on ‘Health and wellbeing in the age of artificial intelligence‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.