Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

La Cour de cassation belge a jugé mercredi 22 octobre qu'une plainte pénale déposée contre la présidente de la Commission européenne était irrecevable, mettant fin à trois ans de procédure, a confirmé à Euractiv un porte-parole de la Cour bruxelloise et des avocats.

The post Belgique : la Cour de cassation met fin à une procédure engagée contre Ursula von der Leyen concernant un accord sur les vaccins Covid appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Trump hatte Sanktionen zuvor hinausgezögert, in der Hoffnung, den russischen Präsidenten Wladimir Putin mit einer weicheren Linie zum Einlenken zu bewegen.

Parliament adopted its priorities for the UN Climate Change Conference in Belém, Brazil, urging the COP30 to recommit to limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Die Ankündigung erfolgt nur wenige Stunden, nachdem US-Präsident Donald Trump Spaniens geringe Verteidigungsausgaben erneut kritisiert hatte.

Zehnjähriges Projekt sieht Wiedereröffnung des Justus-Lipsius-Gebäudes für 2036 vor.

Die Einigung in Brüssel fiel nur wenige Stunden nach dem Schritt Washingtons, Sanktionen gegen die russischen Ölkonzerne Rosneft und Lukoil zu verhängen.

Am 10. Oktober 2025 hat das Forschungsprojekt MINDSET_Clean_H2 einen Workshop zur Wasserstoff-Wirtschaft in Deutschland und Frankreich gemeinsam mit Stakeholdern aus der Industrie und Wissenschaft an der TU München veranstaltet. Franziska Holz und Lukas Barner haben das Projektteam vom DIW Berlin ...

Der Begriff „Globaler Süden“ erfreut sich seit Jahren wachsender Beliebtheit. Oft wird er als knappe Referenz für Teile der Welt verwendet, die lange als „Entwicklungsländer“ oder „Dritte Welt“ bezeichnet wurden. Für viele bringt er die gemeinsame historische Erfahrung von Kolonialisierung und Marginalisierung in Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika auf den Punkt und verweist auf den Anspruch, globale Prozesse proaktiv mitzugestalten.

Der Begriff „Globaler Süden“ erfreut sich seit Jahren wachsender Beliebtheit. Oft wird er als knappe Referenz für Teile der Welt verwendet, die lange als „Entwicklungsländer“ oder „Dritte Welt“ bezeichnet wurden. Für viele bringt er die gemeinsame historische Erfahrung von Kolonialisierung und Marginalisierung in Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika auf den Punkt und verweist auf den Anspruch, globale Prozesse proaktiv mitzugestalten.

Der Begriff „Globaler Süden“ erfreut sich seit Jahren wachsender Beliebtheit. Oft wird er als knappe Referenz für Teile der Welt verwendet, die lange als „Entwicklungsländer“ oder „Dritte Welt“ bezeichnet wurden. Für viele bringt er die gemeinsame historische Erfahrung von Kolonialisierung und Marginalisierung in Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika auf den Punkt und verweist auf den Anspruch, globale Prozesse proaktiv mitzugestalten.

The United Nations is a multilateral organization with near-universal reach. With few exceptions, United Nations rules and regulations apply to all 193 Member States. The operational activities for development of the United Nations system, however, are organized along a binary logic by which “developed” countries provide funding to United Nations entities and “developing” countries receive United Nations support. Against the backdrop of ongoing discussions under the United Nations Secretary-General’s UN80 initiative, we suggest that the United Nations reform its development work to ensure that it engages all Member States. Universalizing United Nations development functions – i.e., mandating the Organization’s development pillar to engage with countries of all income categories – is a key step towards a more effective multilateral development system.

The United Nations is a multilateral organization with near-universal reach. With few exceptions, United Nations rules and regulations apply to all 193 Member States. The operational activities for development of the United Nations system, however, are organized along a binary logic by which “developed” countries provide funding to United Nations entities and “developing” countries receive United Nations support. Against the backdrop of ongoing discussions under the United Nations Secretary-General’s UN80 initiative, we suggest that the United Nations reform its development work to ensure that it engages all Member States. Universalizing United Nations development functions – i.e., mandating the Organization’s development pillar to engage with countries of all income categories – is a key step towards a more effective multilateral development system.

The United Nations is a multilateral organization with near-universal reach. With few exceptions, United Nations rules and regulations apply to all 193 Member States. The operational activities for development of the United Nations system, however, are organized along a binary logic by which “developed” countries provide funding to United Nations entities and “developing” countries receive United Nations support. Against the backdrop of ongoing discussions under the United Nations Secretary-General’s UN80 initiative, we suggest that the United Nations reform its development work to ensure that it engages all Member States. Universalizing United Nations development functions – i.e., mandating the Organization’s development pillar to engage with countries of all income categories – is a key step towards a more effective multilateral development system.

Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-pnyjgm").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-pnyjgm").fadeIn(300);});});

IPI in partnership with UN Women and the Mexican Network for Feminist Foreign Policy, with the support of the Open Society Foundations (OSF), cohosted a side event held on the margins of the 4th Ministerial Conference on Feminist Foreign Policies, on the topic of “Sharing Regional Best Practices to Localize Feminist Foreign Policies”  October 22nd, in Paris, France.

This multistakeholder event brought together civil society representatives from Latin America and Africa, UN stakeholders, and government officials. Its connected activists and policymakers, strengthened both North-South and South-South collaboration, and shared best practices in localizing feminist foreign policy approaches. The conversation also highlighted emerging research on community-based care initiatives.

This event convened policymakers, member state representatives, and civil society experts to exchange context-specific strategies for localizing feminist foreign policies.

Panelists:
Ambassador Ethel Davis, Ambassador At-Large, Policy Advisory Council, Government of Liberia
Ambassador Arlene Tickner, Ambassador At-Large for Gender Issues and Global Feminist Politics, Government of Colombia
Toni Haastrup, African Feminist Collective for Feminist Informed Policies
Elizabeth Guadalupe Mosqueda Rivera, Collegiate Director of Consorcio Oaxaca and Representative from the Mexican Network for Feminist Foreign Policy
Jennifer Piscopo, Director of the Gender Institute and Professor of Gender and Politics, Royal Holloway University of London; Principle Investigator of CaRI: Care, Rights, and Inclusion Project
Evyn Papworth, Policy Analyst, Women, Peace and Security, IPI

Moderator:
Phoebe Donnelly, Head of Women, Peace and Security Program for IPI

The post Sharing Regional Best Practices to Localize Feminist Foreign Policies appeared first on International Peace Institute.

A Design Terminal és a Nemzeti Tehetség Központ szervezésében ötödik alkalommal indul el a Start Program.

Pontosan egy évtizede dolgozik a Nemzeti Kutatási, Fejlesztési és Innovációs Hivatal a hazai KFI ökoszisztéma építésén. Egy ilyen kerek évforduló jó alkalom a múlt eredményeinek értékelésére, de legalább ilyen fontos a jövő lehetőségeinek feltérképezése is. Ahelyett, hogy önmagunkat helyeznénk a középpontba, a támogatott vállalkozások, kutatóhelyek és projektek sikereit emeljük ki, amelyek az innováció és a gazdasági fejlődés motorjai Magyarországon.

This discussion paper advances a new vision for the United Nations (UN)’s development function at a moment when the organisation is facing profound pressures and persistent scepticism about its relevance. Although a consensus exists that reform is overdue, past initiatives have been too incremental, focusing on coordination and efficiency without addressing deeper institutional and political pathologies. The result is a UN development system that has grown financially large but is losing political significance. It is increasingly shaped by donor earmarking, entrenched patronage and a project delivery model that bears little resemblance to how national development actually occurs.
Our vision marks a significant departure from the UN’s historical role as an aid channel predicated on the North-South divide. Instead, the UN’s future relevance lies in leveraging its universal legitimacy, normative authority and convening power.
We argue for a UN development system that:
1. Acts as a trusted knowledge facilitator: providing high-level and technical advice, supporting peer exchange and helping governments navigate complex policy trade-offs in ways that are independent, politically informed and normatively grounded.
2. Engages in public advocacy that matters: elevating norms, correcting misinformation and shaping national debates in line with globally agreed standards, with sensitivity to national contexts.
3. Applies universality in practice: moving beyond the outdated distinction between donor and recipient to engage with all member states – including middle- and high-income countries – through global monitoring and peer accountability.
4. Serves as an actor of last resort in fragile settings: providing operational support only where national governments cannot or will not act, with strict sunset clauses and safeguards against unintentional harm.
This reconceptualisation is not primarily about money. It implies a financially smaller but politically stronger UN development system that is less dependent on donors and more relevant to today’s multipolar world. The real benchmark for success is not the volume of aid provided but the quality of advice, advocacy and resulting cooperation.
Reaching this vision will be difficult. The UN’s development apparatus is shaped by vested interests, path dependency and political inertia. Yet, opportunities for change exist. The collapse of traditional aid financing, the insistence of middle-income countries on equitable partnerships and fatigue with the current project-heavy model all point towards the need for a new approach. The Secretary-General’s UN80 Initiative offers a platform for bold ideas, but only if the debate moves beyond technical fixes and acknowledges the political trade-offs inherent in transformation.

Stephen Browne is a visiting lecturer at universities in the UK, Switzerland and India. He spent more than 30 years in the UN development system and has published many books and articles on the UN and foreign assistance.
Frederik Matthys is Senior Advisor at Tomorrow Is Possible with a focus on sustainable development, international cooperation and multilateral reform.
Detlef Palm worked for UNICEF for 30 years in country offices and at headquarters. He served as the focal point for programme policy, an auditor and a representative.

This discussion paper advances a new vision for the United Nations (UN)’s development function at a moment when the organisation is facing profound pressures and persistent scepticism about its relevance. Although a consensus exists that reform is overdue, past initiatives have been too incremental, focusing on coordination and efficiency without addressing deeper institutional and political pathologies. The result is a UN development system that has grown financially large but is losing political significance. It is increasingly shaped by donor earmarking, entrenched patronage and a project delivery model that bears little resemblance to how national development actually occurs.
Our vision marks a significant departure from the UN’s historical role as an aid channel predicated on the North-South divide. Instead, the UN’s future relevance lies in leveraging its universal legitimacy, normative authority and convening power.
We argue for a UN development system that:
1. Acts as a trusted knowledge facilitator: providing high-level and technical advice, supporting peer exchange and helping governments navigate complex policy trade-offs in ways that are independent, politically informed and normatively grounded.
2. Engages in public advocacy that matters: elevating norms, correcting misinformation and shaping national debates in line with globally agreed standards, with sensitivity to national contexts.
3. Applies universality in practice: moving beyond the outdated distinction between donor and recipient to engage with all member states – including middle- and high-income countries – through global monitoring and peer accountability.
4. Serves as an actor of last resort in fragile settings: providing operational support only where national governments cannot or will not act, with strict sunset clauses and safeguards against unintentional harm.
This reconceptualisation is not primarily about money. It implies a financially smaller but politically stronger UN development system that is less dependent on donors and more relevant to today’s multipolar world. The real benchmark for success is not the volume of aid provided but the quality of advice, advocacy and resulting cooperation.
Reaching this vision will be difficult. The UN’s development apparatus is shaped by vested interests, path dependency and political inertia. Yet, opportunities for change exist. The collapse of traditional aid financing, the insistence of middle-income countries on equitable partnerships and fatigue with the current project-heavy model all point towards the need for a new approach. The Secretary-General’s UN80 Initiative offers a platform for bold ideas, but only if the debate moves beyond technical fixes and acknowledges the political trade-offs inherent in transformation.

Stephen Browne is a visiting lecturer at universities in the UK, Switzerland and India. He spent more than 30 years in the UN development system and has published many books and articles on the UN and foreign assistance.
Frederik Matthys is Senior Advisor at Tomorrow Is Possible with a focus on sustainable development, international cooperation and multilateral reform.
Detlef Palm worked for UNICEF for 30 years in country offices and at headquarters. He served as the focal point for programme policy, an auditor and a representative.

This discussion paper advances a new vision for the United Nations (UN)’s development function at a moment when the organisation is facing profound pressures and persistent scepticism about its relevance. Although a consensus exists that reform is overdue, past initiatives have been too incremental, focusing on coordination and efficiency without addressing deeper institutional and political pathologies. The result is a UN development system that has grown financially large but is losing political significance. It is increasingly shaped by donor earmarking, entrenched patronage and a project delivery model that bears little resemblance to how national development actually occurs.
Our vision marks a significant departure from the UN’s historical role as an aid channel predicated on the North-South divide. Instead, the UN’s future relevance lies in leveraging its universal legitimacy, normative authority and convening power.
We argue for a UN development system that:
1. Acts as a trusted knowledge facilitator: providing high-level and technical advice, supporting peer exchange and helping governments navigate complex policy trade-offs in ways that are independent, politically informed and normatively grounded.
2. Engages in public advocacy that matters: elevating norms, correcting misinformation and shaping national debates in line with globally agreed standards, with sensitivity to national contexts.
3. Applies universality in practice: moving beyond the outdated distinction between donor and recipient to engage with all member states – including middle- and high-income countries – through global monitoring and peer accountability.
4. Serves as an actor of last resort in fragile settings: providing operational support only where national governments cannot or will not act, with strict sunset clauses and safeguards against unintentional harm.
This reconceptualisation is not primarily about money. It implies a financially smaller but politically stronger UN development system that is less dependent on donors and more relevant to today’s multipolar world. The real benchmark for success is not the volume of aid provided but the quality of advice, advocacy and resulting cooperation.
Reaching this vision will be difficult. The UN’s development apparatus is shaped by vested interests, path dependency and political inertia. Yet, opportunities for change exist. The collapse of traditional aid financing, the insistence of middle-income countries on equitable partnerships and fatigue with the current project-heavy model all point towards the need for a new approach. The Secretary-General’s UN80 Initiative offers a platform for bold ideas, but only if the debate moves beyond technical fixes and acknowledges the political trade-offs inherent in transformation.

Stephen Browne is a visiting lecturer at universities in the UK, Switzerland and India. He spent more than 30 years in the UN development system and has published many books and articles on the UN and foreign assistance.
Frederik Matthys is Senior Advisor at Tomorrow Is Possible with a focus on sustainable development, international cooperation and multilateral reform.
Detlef Palm worked for UNICEF for 30 years in country offices and at headquarters. He served as the focal point for programme policy, an auditor and a representative.