Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

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

IPI in partnership with the French Ministry of Armed Forces, cohosted the 2024 Peacekeeping Observatory Annual Workshop on May 29, 2024. The full-day workshop focused on the implementation of recommendations from the New Agenda for Peace that pertain to peace operations. This hybrid event convened over fifty participants, including UN personnel, member states, and other experts from civil society organizations.

Held at a critical moment of reflection on the future of peace operations, the workshop provided an opportunity for participants to deliberate on efforts to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of missions in today’s political environment and ahead of the Summit of the Future, to be held on September 22 and 23, 2024, in New York.

The workshop was divided into four sessions:

Session 1: Understanding Resolution 2719: What Comes Next for the UN and AU?

This session featured experts from the UN/African Union (AU) Partnerships Team in the UN Department of Peace Operations (DPO) and the UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA), the Permanent Observer Mission of the AU to the UN, and civil society organizations. Participants discussed the impact of Security Council Resolution 2719 on peace operations and the UN–AU partnership. The discussion highlighted the need for enhanced coordination and strategic alignment between the UN and the AU, the importance of flexible and adaptive mechanisms to support AU-led peace operations, and joint efforts in political, financial, and operational planning to ensure effective implementation and oversight.

Session 2: Lessons Learned from the Support Office Model

During this session experts examined the work of the UN Support Office in Somalia (UNSOS) as a model for UN support to AU-led missions, with a focus on its operational support to the African Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS.) It featured key contributions from Assistant Secretary-General and Head of UNSOS Aisa Kirabo Kacyira and her senior adviser, as well as other independent experts. The dialogue highlighted the significance of UNSOS in enhancing the logistical and operational effectiveness of ATMIS through robust partnerships, joint strategic planning and trust-building with key stakeholders. However, participants also recognized that challenges such as unmet expectations, limited financing, and the lack of alignment of military and political strategies persist and necessitate a continuous focus on collaboration, accountability, and adaptable support frameworks for future missions.

Lunch Session: Briefing on Negotiations around the Pact for the Future and Language on Peace Operations

Within this session, representatives of the permanent missions of Namibia and Germany to the UN briefed the attendants on negotiations around the Pact for the Future with a focus on the language on peace operations. The briefers highlighted areas of relative consensus among member states, including broad-based support for peace operations, as well as some areas that have been more politically difficult to negotiate. The briefers also reflected on the need for further peacekeeping reforms to address future peace and security challenges. In addition, they highlighted the importance of ensuring peace enforcement is undertaken in service of a political process and ensuring sustainable and adequate financing and support.

Session 3: Strengthening the Institution of UN Peacekeeping

The final session recognized the need to fortify UN peace operations as an important tool for collective security, alongside growing efforts to support partner-led operations. It emphasized the need for UN peacekeeping structures to adapt to contemporary challenges through innovative approaches and modern technology and to learn from past failures. Participants called for strengthening the tools the UN has at its disposal to address threats in multiple domains and the need to rebuild trust with local populations.

As part of the 2024 Peacekeeping Observatory project, IPI is publishing a series of issue briefs on UN peace operations and the New Agenda for Peace, including “Implementing Resolution 2719: What Next for the UN and AU?” authored by Jenna Russo and Bitania Tadesse; “The Support Office Model in Somalia: Lessons Learned and Implications for Future Settings,” authored by Paul Williams; and “The Protection of Civic Space in UN Peacekeeping Operations,” authored by Lauren McGowan.

The Peacekeeping Observatory is a multiyear IPI project examining emerging issues and challenges in peace operations. It is funded by the French Ministry of Armed Forces.

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

The Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the UN, in partnership with IPI, the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Mozambique to the UN, the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom to the UN, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), hosted a policy forum on May 20th on “25 Years of POC and the UN Security Council: Challenges and Opportunities.”

This year marks 25 years since the Security Council first recognized the protection of civilians (POC) as a matter of international peace and security. Since then, POC has become widely institutionalized within the council’s work, as well as the UN more broadly, elevated as a core issue on the council’s agenda, and designated as a priority among mandated peacekeeping tasks.

At the same time, POC continues to face significant challenges resulting from flagrant violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws (IHL/IHRL), including by some UN member states. These violations not only have devastating consequences for civilians in conflict settings but are also a symptom of an erosion of the normative frameworks that underpin the international system. This erosion calls into question the role of the UN Security Council in protecting and upholding such norms, especially as in some cases council members have been directly or indirectly involved in violations.

The purpose of this event was to take stock of the council’s engagement with POC over the past 25 years and assess opportunities for it to further strengthen POC norms amid contemporary political and security challenges. This conversation took place as the international community prepares to mark the 75th anniversary of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, presenting an opportune moment for wider reflection on the fundamental principles of IHL/IHRL that underpin the POC agenda.

Speakers:
Naz K. Modirzadeh, Professor of Practice, Founding Director, Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, Harvard Law School
Laetitia Courtois, Permanent Observer and Head of Delegation, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
Hichem Khadhraoui, Executive Director, Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC)
Edem Wosornu, Director, Operations and Advocacy Division (OAD), United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)

Moderator:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and COO, International Peace Institute

Closing remarks:
H.E. Pascale Christine Baeriswyl, Permanent Representative of Switzerland to the UN

IPI’s Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) team, in partnership with the Gender and Security Sector Lab (GSS), hosted a virtual research workshop on “Analyzing the Effectiveness of Institutional Training for Preventing Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment (SEAH) in Peacekeeping.” This May 17th event and related research are part of the Gender and Peace Operations Project, a multi-year initiative of the IPI WPS program funded by the Government of Canada’s Elsie Initiative.

One of the ways that the UN seeks to combat SEAH is through training. This research project seeks to understand how training at the national and international level (completed in-academy, in-service non-academy, pre-deployment, or during deployment) on topics related to gender and SEAH can influence perceptions (and potentially behavior) of military and police while deployed in UN peace operations. This discussion will support an upcoming report co-authored by IPI and GSS on the effectiveness of training for SEAH in peacekeeping.

To better understand the relationship between institutional training and SEAH, the researchers will employ a series of statistical tests, using cross-national survey responses from security personnel from ten different countries and twelve security institutions. This data was collected using the Measuring Opportunities for Women in Peace Operations (MOWIP) methodology for barrier assessments of military and police. With this data, the researchers will evaluate whether surveyed personnel who have engaged in different types of training (general gender or WPS training, training on the prevention of SEA, gender training for leadership, institutional harassment training, or specialized gender training on preventing sexual violence or civilian protection) have 1) different knowledge of gender mainstreaming policies and practices, such as UNSCR 1325; 2) different views of the integration and participation of women in peacekeeping; and 3) different beliefs and perceptions of SEAH.

Over 30 people attended the research workshop, with participation from civil society, academia, peace operations and training personnel, as well as various UN entities, including the Office of the Special Coordinator on Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (UN-OCSEA). The policy paper for this project will be released towards the end of 2024.

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

This May 8th roundtable discussion, the final in a series of three sessions in partnership with the Permanent Mission of Singapore, focused on the topic of small states and their role in global governance relating to new and emerging issues such as cybersecurity, digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and outer space.

These frontier domains pose both immense opportunities for development and potential risks that could further widen divides between and within countries. Small states must work together to build multilateral governance frameworks, rules, and norms that allow them to effectively manage the challenges posed by these issues, while not stifling innovation and growth. At the same time, they must find ways to level the playing field in the development and deployment of new technologies, so that all can benefit equitably, especially the small states themselves.

To guide the conversation, participants considered the following questions:

• What are the particular challenges faced by small states in dealing with emerging technologies, and are there existing avenues in the UN or other multilateral platforms that can help them to address these?
• What important elements ought to be considered in establishing governance frameworks and norms vis-à-vis frontier issues, that would help to build the most conducive environment for small and developing states to best harness the potential and opportunities of technologies?
• How can small states best contribute to growing global conversations on frontier issues and project their voices in these efforts, and how can they support each other in their endeavors?

The event was co-organized in collaboration with the Permanent Missions of Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Jamaica, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Namibia, New Zealand, Samoa, Senegal, Switzerland, and Qatar.

Discussions will be captured in a final report to be prepared at the conclusion of the roundtable series.

Ratcliffe et al. (2024, JEP 93, Art. 102199) raise concern about the exclusion of purely qualitative research from JEP, as proposed by Schultz and McCunn’s editorial stance published in 2022. We support Ratcliffe et al.’s call for equal recognition of qualitative work alongside quantitative work in environmental psychology. Our article aims to contribute to this debate by presenting five additional points that emphasise the importance of qualitative contributions in advancing environmental psychology research. Through illustrative examples, we demonstrate how qualitative methods can reveal overlooked aspects, empower marginalised groups, promote social justice, and adapt to dynamic contexts and sensitive topics. We argue that qualitative research is as rigorous as quantitative research and offers insights that quantitative measures may fail to capture. Embracing qualitative contributions alongside quantitative work would advance interdisciplinary dialogue, strengthen environmental psychology and promote a comprehensive understanding of human-environment relationships.

Ratcliffe et al. (2024, JEP 93, Art. 102199) raise concern about the exclusion of purely qualitative research from JEP, as proposed by Schultz and McCunn’s editorial stance published in 2022. We support Ratcliffe et al.’s call for equal recognition of qualitative work alongside quantitative work in environmental psychology. Our article aims to contribute to this debate by presenting five additional points that emphasise the importance of qualitative contributions in advancing environmental psychology research. Through illustrative examples, we demonstrate how qualitative methods can reveal overlooked aspects, empower marginalised groups, promote social justice, and adapt to dynamic contexts and sensitive topics. We argue that qualitative research is as rigorous as quantitative research and offers insights that quantitative measures may fail to capture. Embracing qualitative contributions alongside quantitative work would advance interdisciplinary dialogue, strengthen environmental psychology and promote a comprehensive understanding of human-environment relationships.

Ratcliffe et al. (2024, JEP 93, Art. 102199) raise concern about the exclusion of purely qualitative research from JEP, as proposed by Schultz and McCunn’s editorial stance published in 2022. We support Ratcliffe et al.’s call for equal recognition of qualitative work alongside quantitative work in environmental psychology. Our article aims to contribute to this debate by presenting five additional points that emphasise the importance of qualitative contributions in advancing environmental psychology research. Through illustrative examples, we demonstrate how qualitative methods can reveal overlooked aspects, empower marginalised groups, promote social justice, and adapt to dynamic contexts and sensitive topics. We argue that qualitative research is as rigorous as quantitative research and offers insights that quantitative measures may fail to capture. Embracing qualitative contributions alongside quantitative work would advance interdisciplinary dialogue, strengthen environmental psychology and promote a comprehensive understanding of human-environment relationships.

Les Sénégalais se sont rendus aux urnes le 24 mars 2024 afin d’élire leur président. La victoire a été emportée par Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye, candidat de l’opposition alors âgé de 43 ans. Investi le 2 avril 2024, il est ainsi devenu le cinquième président de la République du Sénégal. Cet événement pourrait marquer un tournant dans l’histoire récente du pays. Il prouve une fois de plus la place particulière qu’occupe le Sénégal dans le contexte politique global de la région Afrique de l’Ouest/Sahel, où les prises de pouvoir par les militaires se sont multipliées ces dernières années. Cette élection se positionne à contresens d’une tendance à l’autocratisation, aujourd’hui d’ampleur mondiale.
Depuis trois ans, le Sénégal traversait une crise politique profonde qui avait amené l’État constitutionnel à son point de rupture. S’il est vrai que les institutions de l’État avaient alors pu démontrer leur stabilité et leur résilience, et les acquis de l’État de droit démocratique être garantis jusqu’à nouvel ordre, avec la participation décisive d’une société civile forte, des faiblesses étaient néanmoins apparues au cours de cette crise dans les domaines de la justice ainsi que de la liberté d’expression et de la liberté de la presse. Les forces de sécurité avaient violemment réprimé les protestations et les manifestations d’une partie de la population contre l’arrestation et la détention de politiciens de l’opposition, que celle-ci considérait comme illégales. Ces mesures avaient coûté la vie à plusieurs dizaines de personnes et en avaient blessé plusieurs centaines d’autres. Plus d’un millier d’individus avaient été placés en détention, sans qu’une procédure judiciaire régulière n’ait été engagée à leur encontre. Faye lui-même était encore emprisonné jusqu’à dix jours avant son élection. Il est donc très étonnant que le Sénégal ait réussi à surmonter cette crise, et la manière dont le pays y est parvenu l’est tout autant. Le présent article examine les facteurs politiques, sociaux et constitutionnels ayant conduit à l’émergence d’une issue favorable de ce conflit. La crise, qui a depuis trouvé une heureuse conclusion, et le programme du nouveau président suggèrent que le Sénégal tend lui aussi à redéfinir l’État ainsi que son profil d’attributions et de performance, observée depuis plusieurs années dans la région Afrique de l’Ouest/Sahel, en recourant à des approches fondées sur la démocratie.
Faye et ses alliés ont déclaré la guerre à la classe politique établie de longue date. Ils ont promis à leur électorat de procéder à des réformes fondamentales des institutions de l’État, de rationaliser, simplifier et optimiser le fonctionnement de l’administration publique et se sont engagés à lutter résolument contre les tendances à la corruption, au clientélisme et au détournement de fonds, de biens et de ressources publics qui se sont nettement accentuées ces dernières années. Par leur vote sans équivoque, les électrices et les électeurs leur ont clairement signifié leur volonté de voir ce projet mené à bien. L’entrée en fonction du président Faye entraîne en outre un réajustement partiel des rapports de force au sein de la Communauté économique des États de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (CEDEAO). Au cours des prochaines années, de nouveaux changements interviendront dans différents États de la région au profit d’une génération plus jeune d’élites politiques. À l’avenir, l’Allemagne et l’Union européenne devront davantage reconnaître et intégrer dans leur action le fait que les nations africaines reprennent conscience de leur identité culturelle propre et qu’elles affirment avec de plus en plus de force, dans le cadre de leur discours politique, leur ambition d’affirmer leur souveraineté.

Les Sénégalais se sont rendus aux urnes le 24 mars 2024 afin d’élire leur président. La victoire a été emportée par Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye, candidat de l’opposition alors âgé de 43 ans. Investi le 2 avril 2024, il est ainsi devenu le cinquième président de la République du Sénégal. Cet événement pourrait marquer un tournant dans l’histoire récente du pays. Il prouve une fois de plus la place particulière qu’occupe le Sénégal dans le contexte politique global de la région Afrique de l’Ouest/Sahel, où les prises de pouvoir par les militaires se sont multipliées ces dernières années. Cette élection se positionne à contresens d’une tendance à l’autocratisation, aujourd’hui d’ampleur mondiale.
Depuis trois ans, le Sénégal traversait une crise politique profonde qui avait amené l’État constitutionnel à son point de rupture. S’il est vrai que les institutions de l’État avaient alors pu démontrer leur stabilité et leur résilience, et les acquis de l’État de droit démocratique être garantis jusqu’à nouvel ordre, avec la participation décisive d’une société civile forte, des faiblesses étaient néanmoins apparues au cours de cette crise dans les domaines de la justice ainsi que de la liberté d’expression et de la liberté de la presse. Les forces de sécurité avaient violemment réprimé les protestations et les manifestations d’une partie de la population contre l’arrestation et la détention de politiciens de l’opposition, que celle-ci considérait comme illégales. Ces mesures avaient coûté la vie à plusieurs dizaines de personnes et en avaient blessé plusieurs centaines d’autres. Plus d’un millier d’individus avaient été placés en détention, sans qu’une procédure judiciaire régulière n’ait été engagée à leur encontre. Faye lui-même était encore emprisonné jusqu’à dix jours avant son élection. Il est donc très étonnant que le Sénégal ait réussi à surmonter cette crise, et la manière dont le pays y est parvenu l’est tout autant. Le présent article examine les facteurs politiques, sociaux et constitutionnels ayant conduit à l’émergence d’une issue favorable de ce conflit. La crise, qui a depuis trouvé une heureuse conclusion, et le programme du nouveau président suggèrent que le Sénégal tend lui aussi à redéfinir l’État ainsi que son profil d’attributions et de performance, observée depuis plusieurs années dans la région Afrique de l’Ouest/Sahel, en recourant à des approches fondées sur la démocratie.
Faye et ses alliés ont déclaré la guerre à la classe politique établie de longue date. Ils ont promis à leur électorat de procéder à des réformes fondamentales des institutions de l’État, de rationaliser, simplifier et optimiser le fonctionnement de l’administration publique et se sont engagés à lutter résolument contre les tendances à la corruption, au clientélisme et au détournement de fonds, de biens et de ressources publics qui se sont nettement accentuées ces dernières années. Par leur vote sans équivoque, les électrices et les électeurs leur ont clairement signifié leur volonté de voir ce projet mené à bien. L’entrée en fonction du président Faye entraîne en outre un réajustement partiel des rapports de force au sein de la Communauté économique des États de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (CEDEAO). Au cours des prochaines années, de nouveaux changements interviendront dans différents États de la région au profit d’une génération plus jeune d’élites politiques. À l’avenir, l’Allemagne et l’Union européenne devront davantage reconnaître et intégrer dans leur action le fait que les nations africaines reprennent conscience de leur identité culturelle propre et qu’elles affirment avec de plus en plus de force, dans le cadre de leur discours politique, leur ambition d’affirmer leur souveraineté.

Les Sénégalais se sont rendus aux urnes le 24 mars 2024 afin d’élire leur président. La victoire a été emportée par Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye, candidat de l’opposition alors âgé de 43 ans. Investi le 2 avril 2024, il est ainsi devenu le cinquième président de la République du Sénégal. Cet événement pourrait marquer un tournant dans l’histoire récente du pays. Il prouve une fois de plus la place particulière qu’occupe le Sénégal dans le contexte politique global de la région Afrique de l’Ouest/Sahel, où les prises de pouvoir par les militaires se sont multipliées ces dernières années. Cette élection se positionne à contresens d’une tendance à l’autocratisation, aujourd’hui d’ampleur mondiale.
Depuis trois ans, le Sénégal traversait une crise politique profonde qui avait amené l’État constitutionnel à son point de rupture. S’il est vrai que les institutions de l’État avaient alors pu démontrer leur stabilité et leur résilience, et les acquis de l’État de droit démocratique être garantis jusqu’à nouvel ordre, avec la participation décisive d’une société civile forte, des faiblesses étaient néanmoins apparues au cours de cette crise dans les domaines de la justice ainsi que de la liberté d’expression et de la liberté de la presse. Les forces de sécurité avaient violemment réprimé les protestations et les manifestations d’une partie de la population contre l’arrestation et la détention de politiciens de l’opposition, que celle-ci considérait comme illégales. Ces mesures avaient coûté la vie à plusieurs dizaines de personnes et en avaient blessé plusieurs centaines d’autres. Plus d’un millier d’individus avaient été placés en détention, sans qu’une procédure judiciaire régulière n’ait été engagée à leur encontre. Faye lui-même était encore emprisonné jusqu’à dix jours avant son élection. Il est donc très étonnant que le Sénégal ait réussi à surmonter cette crise, et la manière dont le pays y est parvenu l’est tout autant. Le présent article examine les facteurs politiques, sociaux et constitutionnels ayant conduit à l’émergence d’une issue favorable de ce conflit. La crise, qui a depuis trouvé une heureuse conclusion, et le programme du nouveau président suggèrent que le Sénégal tend lui aussi à redéfinir l’État ainsi que son profil d’attributions et de performance, observée depuis plusieurs années dans la région Afrique de l’Ouest/Sahel, en recourant à des approches fondées sur la démocratie.
Faye et ses alliés ont déclaré la guerre à la classe politique établie de longue date. Ils ont promis à leur électorat de procéder à des réformes fondamentales des institutions de l’État, de rationaliser, simplifier et optimiser le fonctionnement de l’administration publique et se sont engagés à lutter résolument contre les tendances à la corruption, au clientélisme et au détournement de fonds, de biens et de ressources publics qui se sont nettement accentuées ces dernières années. Par leur vote sans équivoque, les électrices et les électeurs leur ont clairement signifié leur volonté de voir ce projet mené à bien. L’entrée en fonction du président Faye entraîne en outre un réajustement partiel des rapports de force au sein de la Communauté économique des États de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (CEDEAO). Au cours des prochaines années, de nouveaux changements interviendront dans différents États de la région au profit d’une génération plus jeune d’élites politiques. À l’avenir, l’Allemagne et l’Union européenne devront davantage reconnaître et intégrer dans leur action le fait que les nations africaines reprennent conscience de leur identité culturelle propre et qu’elles affirment avec de plus en plus de force, dans le cadre de leur discours politique, leur ambition d’affirmer leur souveraineté.

Für Biodiversität bietet das Kunming-Montreal Globale Rahmenabkommen zusammen mit dem neuen UN-Abkommen zum Schutz der Biodiversität auf Hoher See ein einmaliges Gelegenheitsfenster. Der WBGU empfiehlt das Leitbild eines multifunktionalen Flächenmosaiks: Schutz und Nutzung werden so zusammen gedacht, dass Mehrgewinne für Natur und Mensch entstehen. Deutschland sollte international entschlossen vorangehen und Prozesse zur Umsetzung beider Abkommen aufsetzen, Dialogforen und Vorreiterkoalitionen initiieren sowie eine Bildungs- und Kommunikationsoffensive starten. Biodiversitätsförderung sollte nicht allein aus Steuergeldern finanziert werden, sondern Private einbeziehen, etwa durch die Umwidmung umweltschädlicher Subventionen und durch klare Berichterstattung und Taxonomie. Die Kosten des Nichthandelns sollten verstanden werden. Die Staatengemeinschaft hat sich 2022 auf einen neuen globalen Rahmen für die Biodiversität (GBF) und 2023 auf das Abkommen zum Schutz der Biodiversität auf Hoher See (BBNJ) geeinigt. Dieser politische Konsens spiegelt die wissenschaftlich erwiesene Dringlichkeit von Biodiversitätsschutz und belegt die Kooperationsbereitschaft zu diesem Thema selbst in Jahren angespannter internationaler Beziehungen. Biodiversität ist ein Gemeingut und essenzielle Voraussetzung für eine gesunde Zukunft der Menschen und der Arten, mit denen sie die Erde teilen. Sie ermöglicht Ökosystemleistungen, z. B. die Bereitstellung sauberen Trinkwassers oder die Bestäubung von Nutz- und Wildpflanzen, für deren Sicherung Arten und Ökosysteme angemessen große und vernetzte Flächen brauchen. Der WBGU schlägt vor, die Flächenziele des GBF entsprechend dem Leitbild eines multifunktionalen Flächenmosaiks umzusetzen, in dem Schutz und Nutzung so zusammen gedacht werden, dass Mehrgewinne für Natur und Mensch generiert werden. Dieses Leitbild bietet allen Akteuren Orientierung für biodiversitätsschonendes und -förderndes Verhalten.

Für Biodiversität bietet das Kunming-Montreal Globale Rahmenabkommen zusammen mit dem neuen UN-Abkommen zum Schutz der Biodiversität auf Hoher See ein einmaliges Gelegenheitsfenster. Der WBGU empfiehlt das Leitbild eines multifunktionalen Flächenmosaiks: Schutz und Nutzung werden so zusammen gedacht, dass Mehrgewinne für Natur und Mensch entstehen. Deutschland sollte international entschlossen vorangehen und Prozesse zur Umsetzung beider Abkommen aufsetzen, Dialogforen und Vorreiterkoalitionen initiieren sowie eine Bildungs- und Kommunikationsoffensive starten. Biodiversitätsförderung sollte nicht allein aus Steuergeldern finanziert werden, sondern Private einbeziehen, etwa durch die Umwidmung umweltschädlicher Subventionen und durch klare Berichterstattung und Taxonomie. Die Kosten des Nichthandelns sollten verstanden werden. Die Staatengemeinschaft hat sich 2022 auf einen neuen globalen Rahmen für die Biodiversität (GBF) und 2023 auf das Abkommen zum Schutz der Biodiversität auf Hoher See (BBNJ) geeinigt. Dieser politische Konsens spiegelt die wissenschaftlich erwiesene Dringlichkeit von Biodiversitätsschutz und belegt die Kooperationsbereitschaft zu diesem Thema selbst in Jahren angespannter internationaler Beziehungen. Biodiversität ist ein Gemeingut und essenzielle Voraussetzung für eine gesunde Zukunft der Menschen und der Arten, mit denen sie die Erde teilen. Sie ermöglicht Ökosystemleistungen, z. B. die Bereitstellung sauberen Trinkwassers oder die Bestäubung von Nutz- und Wildpflanzen, für deren Sicherung Arten und Ökosysteme angemessen große und vernetzte Flächen brauchen. Der WBGU schlägt vor, die Flächenziele des GBF entsprechend dem Leitbild eines multifunktionalen Flächenmosaiks umzusetzen, in dem Schutz und Nutzung so zusammen gedacht werden, dass Mehrgewinne für Natur und Mensch generiert werden. Dieses Leitbild bietet allen Akteuren Orientierung für biodiversitätsschonendes und -förderndes Verhalten.

Für Biodiversität bietet das Kunming-Montreal Globale Rahmenabkommen zusammen mit dem neuen UN-Abkommen zum Schutz der Biodiversität auf Hoher See ein einmaliges Gelegenheitsfenster. Der WBGU empfiehlt das Leitbild eines multifunktionalen Flächenmosaiks: Schutz und Nutzung werden so zusammen gedacht, dass Mehrgewinne für Natur und Mensch entstehen. Deutschland sollte international entschlossen vorangehen und Prozesse zur Umsetzung beider Abkommen aufsetzen, Dialogforen und Vorreiterkoalitionen initiieren sowie eine Bildungs- und Kommunikationsoffensive starten. Biodiversitätsförderung sollte nicht allein aus Steuergeldern finanziert werden, sondern Private einbeziehen, etwa durch die Umwidmung umweltschädlicher Subventionen und durch klare Berichterstattung und Taxonomie. Die Kosten des Nichthandelns sollten verstanden werden. Die Staatengemeinschaft hat sich 2022 auf einen neuen globalen Rahmen für die Biodiversität (GBF) und 2023 auf das Abkommen zum Schutz der Biodiversität auf Hoher See (BBNJ) geeinigt. Dieser politische Konsens spiegelt die wissenschaftlich erwiesene Dringlichkeit von Biodiversitätsschutz und belegt die Kooperationsbereitschaft zu diesem Thema selbst in Jahren angespannter internationaler Beziehungen. Biodiversität ist ein Gemeingut und essenzielle Voraussetzung für eine gesunde Zukunft der Menschen und der Arten, mit denen sie die Erde teilen. Sie ermöglicht Ökosystemleistungen, z. B. die Bereitstellung sauberen Trinkwassers oder die Bestäubung von Nutz- und Wildpflanzen, für deren Sicherung Arten und Ökosysteme angemessen große und vernetzte Flächen brauchen. Der WBGU schlägt vor, die Flächenziele des GBF entsprechend dem Leitbild eines multifunktionalen Flächenmosaiks umzusetzen, in dem Schutz und Nutzung so zusammen gedacht werden, dass Mehrgewinne für Natur und Mensch generiert werden. Dieses Leitbild bietet allen Akteuren Orientierung für biodiversitätsschonendes und -förderndes Verhalten.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become a hallmark of China's global rise. While the BRI has unfolded as a global platform focused on bilateral relations, the Chinese government has also tried to expand links between the BRI and international organizations, notably the United Nations. Available evidence about UN–BRI relations suggests, however, that an initial honeymoon phase with mushrooming projects and public endorsements was followed by a sharp decline in engagement. This article argues that a focus on inter-governor legitimation attempts helps understand the rise and fall of UN–BRI relations. Based on publicly available evidence, internal documentation and stakeholder interviews, it shows how legitimation informed motivations on both sides to invest in UN–BRI relations, and how western opposition subsequently led to UN entities reducing their engagement. Empirically, the article contributes to the literature on China's global role, evolving power relations at the UN, and the proliferation of geopolitically motivated flagship initiatives across UN member states. Conceptually, it speaks to the expanding debate about legitimation in world politics through a more systematic engagement with relational legitimation dynamics. A focus on one-sided or mutual legitimation attempts offers a conceptual tool for analysing how interactions among global governors and their audiences unfold, and how international organizations try (and fail) to strengthen their resilience in light of an increasingly polarized membership.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become a hallmark of China's global rise. While the BRI has unfolded as a global platform focused on bilateral relations, the Chinese government has also tried to expand links between the BRI and international organizations, notably the United Nations. Available evidence about UN–BRI relations suggests, however, that an initial honeymoon phase with mushrooming projects and public endorsements was followed by a sharp decline in engagement. This article argues that a focus on inter-governor legitimation attempts helps understand the rise and fall of UN–BRI relations. Based on publicly available evidence, internal documentation and stakeholder interviews, it shows how legitimation informed motivations on both sides to invest in UN–BRI relations, and how western opposition subsequently led to UN entities reducing their engagement. Empirically, the article contributes to the literature on China's global role, evolving power relations at the UN, and the proliferation of geopolitically motivated flagship initiatives across UN member states. Conceptually, it speaks to the expanding debate about legitimation in world politics through a more systematic engagement with relational legitimation dynamics. A focus on one-sided or mutual legitimation attempts offers a conceptual tool for analysing how interactions among global governors and their audiences unfold, and how international organizations try (and fail) to strengthen their resilience in light of an increasingly polarized membership.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become a hallmark of China's global rise. While the BRI has unfolded as a global platform focused on bilateral relations, the Chinese government has also tried to expand links between the BRI and international organizations, notably the United Nations. Available evidence about UN–BRI relations suggests, however, that an initial honeymoon phase with mushrooming projects and public endorsements was followed by a sharp decline in engagement. This article argues that a focus on inter-governor legitimation attempts helps understand the rise and fall of UN–BRI relations. Based on publicly available evidence, internal documentation and stakeholder interviews, it shows how legitimation informed motivations on both sides to invest in UN–BRI relations, and how western opposition subsequently led to UN entities reducing their engagement. Empirically, the article contributes to the literature on China's global role, evolving power relations at the UN, and the proliferation of geopolitically motivated flagship initiatives across UN member states. Conceptually, it speaks to the expanding debate about legitimation in world politics through a more systematic engagement with relational legitimation dynamics. A focus on one-sided or mutual legitimation attempts offers a conceptual tool for analysing how interactions among global governors and their audiences unfold, and how international organizations try (and fail) to strengthen their resilience in light of an increasingly polarized membership.

On 24 March 2024, presidential elections were held in Senegal, with opposition politician Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye, who was 43 at the time, emerging as the winner. On 2 April 2024, he was sworn in as the fifth President of the Republic of Senegal. This event may mark a turning point in the country’s recent history. It once again demonstrates Senegal’s special position in the overall political context of the West Africa/Sahel region, in which military coups have increasingly taken place in recent years. This election runs counter to the current trend of increasing autocracy – at a global level too. During the three years prior to the election, Senegal suffered a deep political crisis that tested the constitutional state to its limits. Although the state institutions demonstrated their stability and resilience during this period and the achievements of democracy and the rule of law were able to be secured for the time being, due in large part to the country’s strong civil society, weaknesses became apparent during this crisis in connection with the judiciary, freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Security forces used violence to stifle protests and demonstrations by parts of the population against what they saw as the illegal arrest and imprisonment of opposition politicians. Dozens of people died and several hundreds were injured as a result of these measures. Well over a thousand people were imprisoned without a proper trial. Up until ten days before his election as president, Faye himself was still in prison under these conditions. This makes it all the more remarkable that – and how – Senegal managed to overcome this crisis. The present article examines the political, social and constitutional factors that led to what now looks set to be a positive outcome of this conflict. The crisis, which has been overcome for the time being, and the new president’s programme suggest that Senegal, too, is following a trend observed for some years now in the West Africa/Sahel region involving a redefinition of the state and of its duties, powers and services – and is doing so by democratically sound means. Faye and his partners have been battling the long-established political class. They promised their voters fundamental reforms of the state institutions and a rationalisation and streamlining of the public administration. Moreover, they vowed to take resolute steps to fight corruption, clientelism and embezzlement of public finances, goods and resources, which have all been increasing considerably in recent years. The unambiguous election result has given them a clear mandate to do so. The inauguration of President Faye will also partly alter the balance of power within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). In the years ahead, there will be further shifts towards a younger generation of political elites in various countries in the region. In future, Germany and the European Union will need to pay greater attention to the fact that the African states are placing more emphasis on their own cultural identity and are increasingly asserting their own sovereignty in political discourse.

On 24 March 2024, presidential elections were held in Senegal, with opposition politician Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye, who was 43 at the time, emerging as the winner. On 2 April 2024, he was sworn in as the fifth President of the Republic of Senegal. This event may mark a turning point in the country’s recent history. It once again demonstrates Senegal’s special position in the overall political context of the West Africa/Sahel region, in which military coups have increasingly taken place in recent years. This election runs counter to the current trend of increasing autocracy – at a global level too. During the three years prior to the election, Senegal suffered a deep political crisis that tested the constitutional state to its limits. Although the state institutions demonstrated their stability and resilience during this period and the achievements of democracy and the rule of law were able to be secured for the time being, due in large part to the country’s strong civil society, weaknesses became apparent during this crisis in connection with the judiciary, freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Security forces used violence to stifle protests and demonstrations by parts of the population against what they saw as the illegal arrest and imprisonment of opposition politicians. Dozens of people died and several hundreds were injured as a result of these measures. Well over a thousand people were imprisoned without a proper trial. Up until ten days before his election as president, Faye himself was still in prison under these conditions. This makes it all the more remarkable that – and how – Senegal managed to overcome this crisis. The present article examines the political, social and constitutional factors that led to what now looks set to be a positive outcome of this conflict. The crisis, which has been overcome for the time being, and the new president’s programme suggest that Senegal, too, is following a trend observed for some years now in the West Africa/Sahel region involving a redefinition of the state and of its duties, powers and services – and is doing so by democratically sound means. Faye and his partners have been battling the long-established political class. They promised their voters fundamental reforms of the state institutions and a rationalisation and streamlining of the public administration. Moreover, they vowed to take resolute steps to fight corruption, clientelism and embezzlement of public finances, goods and resources, which have all been increasing considerably in recent years. The unambiguous election result has given them a clear mandate to do so. The inauguration of President Faye will also partly alter the balance of power within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). In the years ahead, there will be further shifts towards a younger generation of political elites in various countries in the region. In future, Germany and the European Union will need to pay greater attention to the fact that the African states are placing more emphasis on their own cultural identity and are increasingly asserting their own sovereignty in political discourse.

On 24 March 2024, presidential elections were held in Senegal, with opposition politician Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye, who was 43 at the time, emerging as the winner. On 2 April 2024, he was sworn in as the fifth President of the Republic of Senegal. This event may mark a turning point in the country’s recent history. It once again demonstrates Senegal’s special position in the overall political context of the West Africa/Sahel region, in which military coups have increasingly taken place in recent years. This election runs counter to the current trend of increasing autocracy – at a global level too. During the three years prior to the election, Senegal suffered a deep political crisis that tested the constitutional state to its limits. Although the state institutions demonstrated their stability and resilience during this period and the achievements of democracy and the rule of law were able to be secured for the time being, due in large part to the country’s strong civil society, weaknesses became apparent during this crisis in connection with the judiciary, freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Security forces used violence to stifle protests and demonstrations by parts of the population against what they saw as the illegal arrest and imprisonment of opposition politicians. Dozens of people died and several hundreds were injured as a result of these measures. Well over a thousand people were imprisoned without a proper trial. Up until ten days before his election as president, Faye himself was still in prison under these conditions. This makes it all the more remarkable that – and how – Senegal managed to overcome this crisis. The present article examines the political, social and constitutional factors that led to what now looks set to be a positive outcome of this conflict. The crisis, which has been overcome for the time being, and the new president’s programme suggest that Senegal, too, is following a trend observed for some years now in the West Africa/Sahel region involving a redefinition of the state and of its duties, powers and services – and is doing so by democratically sound means. Faye and his partners have been battling the long-established political class. They promised their voters fundamental reforms of the state institutions and a rationalisation and streamlining of the public administration. Moreover, they vowed to take resolute steps to fight corruption, clientelism and embezzlement of public finances, goods and resources, which have all been increasing considerably in recent years. The unambiguous election result has given them a clear mandate to do so. The inauguration of President Faye will also partly alter the balance of power within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). In the years ahead, there will be further shifts towards a younger generation of political elites in various countries in the region. In future, Germany and the European Union will need to pay greater attention to the fact that the African states are placing more emphasis on their own cultural identity and are increasingly asserting their own sovereignty in political discourse.