Les registres d'inscription à l'examen du Brevet d'Études du Premier Cycle (BEPC), session de 2026 sont ouverts jusqu'au 2 février 2026.
Les inscriptions des candidats au Brevet d'Études du Premier Cycle (BEPC), session de 2026 ont débuté depuis ce lundi 5 janvier 2025. Selon le communiqué de la ministre des Enseignements secondaire, technique et de la formation professionnelle, Véronique Tognifodé, les opérations se déroulent au niveau des Directions départementales des enseignements secondaire, technique et de la formation professionnelle (DDESTFP) sur toute l'étendue du territoire national. Les inscriptions seront clôturées lundi 2 février 2026.
A.A.A
A man walks past a campaign poster for the military’s proxy party USDP ahead of strictly controlled elections in Myanmar. Credit: Guy Dinmore/IPS
By Guy Dinmore
YANGON, Myanmar and BANGKOK , Jan 6 2026 (IPS)
With thousands of civilians killed in years of civil war and over 22,000 political prisoners still behind bars, no one was surprised that early results from Myanmar’s first but tightly controlled elections since the 2021 coup show the military’s proxy party speeding to victory.
“How can you hold elections and bomb civilians at the same time?” asked Khin Ohmar, a civil rights activist outside Myanmar who is monitoring what the resistance forces and a shadow government reject as “sham” polls.
The junta had already cleared the path towards its stated goal of a “genuine, disciplined multi-party democratic system” by dissolving some 40 parties that refused to register for polls, which they regard as illegitimate, with their leaders and supporters still in prison.
These include the National League for Democracy (NLD) and its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, who won a landslide second term in the 2020 elections – only for the results to be annulled by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, a coup leader and self-appointed acting president. Mass street protests were crushed in early 2021 and war spread across Myanmar.
Although these elections will deliver just a façade of the legitimacy craved by some of the generals, they did succeed in projecting a power and authority that was quickly slipping away just two years ago as long-standing ethnic armed groups and newly formed People’s Defence Forces (PDFs) inflicted a series of humiliating defeats on the junta.
“The tide has turned in favour of the military,” commented a veteran Myanmar analyst in Yangon, crediting China, which reined in the ethnic groups on its shared border, fully embraced Min Aung Hlaing and, along with Russia, delivered the arms, technology and training needed to peg back the resistance.
Campaigners for the pro-military USDP canvas residents and check voters lists in Yangon ahead of the December 28 parliamentary election that excluded major anti-junta parties. Credit: Guy Dinmore/IPS
The regime’s air power and newly acquired drones have been deployed to ruthless effect, often hitting civilian targets in relatively remote areas where the resistance has grassroots support. Air strikes were stepped up as the elections approached. Major cities like Yangon were calm; people subdued.
Bombs dropped on Tabayin township in the Sagaing Region on December 5 killed 18 people, including many in a busy tea shop, AFP reported. On December 10, air strikes on a hospital in the ancient capital of Mrauk-U in Rakhine State were reported to have killed 10 patients and 23 others. The regime accused the insurgent Arakan Army and PDFs of using it as a base.
“I don’t think that anyone believes that those elections will be free and fair,” UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres stated while visiting the region ahead of the polls. He called on the junta to end its “deplorable” violence and find “a credible path” back to civilian rule.
In contrast, the Trump administration declared in November that the junta’s election plans were “free and fair” and removed Temporary Protected Status from Myanmar refugees in the US, saying their country was safe for them to return to.
“I’ll be jailed if I don’t vote,” said Min, a Yangon taxi driver, only half-joking on the eve of voting in Yangon, the commercial capital. “And what difference does it make? We are ruled by China and Xi Jinping, not Min Aung Hlaing,” he added.
With the polls spread over three stages, the first 102 townships voted on December 28. Others will follow on January 11 and January 25 to make a total of 265 of Myanmar’s 330 townships scheduled to vote for the bicameral national parliament and assemblies in the 14 regions and states.
Residents in downtown Yangon check their names on the electoral register and then cast their votes in a polling station on December 28. Credit: Guy Dinmore/IPS
No voting is to be held at all in the remaining 65 townships that the election commission deemed too unsafe.
Voting in the first round in Yangon, an urban and semi-rural sprawl of seven million people, proceeded calmly and slowly on a quiet Sunday – despite intense efforts, and sometimes threats, by the regime to boost the turnout.
In 2020 and 2015 – when Myanmar arguably held the region’s most open and fair elections and the military’s proxy Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), was soundly defeated – people gaily posted images of their ink-stained little fingers on social media as evidence of their vote after weeks of packed rallies and vibrant campaign rallies.
But not this time. Social media posts hurled insults, some comic and vulgar, at the regime. Those eager to support the resistance’s boycott but who were afraid of reprisals were relieved if they found their names had been omitted by mistake on electoral lists. Electronic voting machines in use for the first time made it impossible to leave a blank.
But as in past elections, a solid core of people close to the military and its web of powerful economic interests turned out to vote for the USDP.
“We are choosing our government,” declared one man exiting a polling station in central Yangon with his family, apparently USDP supporters. One proudly waved his little finger dipped in indelible ink.
How can you hold elections and bomb civilians at the same time? - Khin Ohmar, civil rights activist
Turnout for the first round was put by regime officials at 52 percent. This compares with about 70 percent in the past two elections. China’s special envoy – sent as an official observer, along with others from Russia, Belarus, Vietnam and Cambodia – praised the elections.
On January 2, the election commission unexpectedly issued partial results: the USDP, led by retired generals, had won 38 of 40 seats in the lower house where votes had been tallied to date. No one blinked.
The USDP campaign message focused on two main elements – get out and vote with all your family, and back a USDP government to restore stability and progress to Myanmar.
Its underlying message was a reminder that the last USDP administration, led by President Thein Sein introduced socio-economic and political reforms and ceasefire negotiations with ethnic groups after securing a large majority in the 2010 elections when the NLD and other opposition groups were also absent.
Aung San Suu Kyi, then under house arrest, was released just after the 2010 polls and went on to contest and win a seat in a 2012 by-election ahead of the NLD’s own sweeping victory in 2015. Aung San Suu Kyi governed in a difficult power-sharing arrangement with the military for the next five years and was thrown back into prison in the coup.
For now a large proportion of Myanmar’s population lives in areas under junta control, including all 14 of the state and regional capitals, swollen by an influx of people fleeing conflict. The military also holds major seaports and airports and – to varying degrees – the main border crossings for China and Thailand.
But in terms of territory, over half of Myanmar is in the hands of disparate ethnic armed groups and resistance forces. Alliances are fluid and negotiable.
The shadow National Unity Government is trying to establish its own authority over liberated territory, looking to cement a consensus around the concept of a democratic and federal Myanmar free of the military’s interference – something that has eluded the country since independence from British colonial rule in 1948.
Front lines shift back and forth as the military struggles to regain control over the Bamar heartlands of central Myanmar, once considered their bastion, while stretched elsewhere after losing vast tracts of border areas since the coup. Several million people have fled the country or are internally displaced.
Once again there is some speculation that a “smooth” election and the formation of a USDP government in April will lead to a gesture signalling the military’s confidence, such as a possible ending of forced conscription and the release of some political prisoners. Project power, then collect legitimacy.
“Political prisoners are used as bait,” said Khin Ohmar, the civil rights activist in Bangkok. “The world would at least have to applaud.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
The UN report, released last month, calls for a fundamental recalibration of global security and development strategies, prioritizing diplomacy and international cooperation to reverse the current trend of escalating military spending. Credit: UNDP
By Alice Slater
NEW YORK, Jan 6 2026 (IPS)
The United Nations issued a year end Fact Sheet: Rising global military expenditures, starkly illuminating that last year’s record high of $2.7 trillion in military expenditures, caused a cascade of devastating consequences to human well-being, the environment, possibilities for avoiding climate collapse, as well as blows to employment, ending hunger and poverty, providing health care, education, and other ills, due to a lack of adequate funding support.
The Fact Sheet does an admirable job of illustrating the shocking maldistribution of States massive military expenditures and what that money could buy in many instances, such as to end hunger and malnutrition, provide clean water and sanitation, education, environmental remediation, and so much more.
But isn’t it time for the UN to issue a Fact Sheet: Lost Opportunities to Halt Rising Military Expenditures and Heal the Earth? After all, just this summer on the 80th Anniversary of WWII, Russia and China issued a Joint Statement by the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on Global Strategic Security in which they urged that in acknowledging that anniversary and the founding of the United Nations, States and their associations “should not seek to ensure their own security at the expense and to the detriment of the security of other States.” adding that ”the destinies of the peoples of all countries are interrelated.”
Even a cursory examination of the sorry history of the United States and its nuclear alliance, in seeking to secure military domination at the expense of Russia and China, shows a sad list of missed opportunities to accept Russia and China’s offers to negotiate for peace and disarmament, which would have freed up trillions of dollars over the years to address the crisis we now face for preserving all life on earth.
The most recent opportunity that should be on the list, (met with deafening silence by the corrupt western media, laboring under the heavy thumb of their corporate military sponsors, who delight in the billions lining their pockets to produce the burgeoning war machine) was China and Russia’s Joint Statement criticizing the US misbegotten Golden Dome space project and opposing any countries use of outer space for armed confrontation.”
They urged negotiations based on the Russian-Chinese draft treaty to prevent weapons and use of force in outer space, proposed at the UN Committee on Disarmament in 2008 and 2014, where consensus is required to negotiate a treaty and the United States vetoed it each time, preventing any discussion. Amazingly, they further pledged that to prevent an arms race in outer space and promote peace in space, they would “agree to promote on a global scale the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to deploy weapons in outer space.” In other words, No First Use.
While peace in space is the most recent Lost Opportunity, the first Lost Opportunity happened in 1946 when President Truman rejected Stalin’s proposal that the US turn the bomb over to international supervision at the newly formed UN, so Russia got the bomb.
President Reagan rejected Gorbachev’s plea to give up Star Wars as a condition for both countries to eliminate all their nuclear weapons when the wall came down and Gorbachev released all of Eastern Europe from Soviet occupation, thus losing the opportunity to abolish our nuclear arsenals.
More Lost Opportunities: the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) up to Russia’s border despite promises made when the wall came down that NATO would not expand east of a reunified Germany:
President Clinton’s refusal of Putin’s offer to go down to 1000 bombs each, and then call all nuclear states to negotiate for their elimination, provided the US stopped developing missile sites in Romania.
President Bush walked out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and put the new base in Romania; President Trump put one in Poland.
President Obama rejected Putin’s offer to negotiate a treaty to ban cyber war! [i]
Had the US been more open over the years to cooperation, instead of losing so many opportunities to make peace, we would be so much more able to deal with the urgency of preserving a livable planet for all and avoiding the dire consequences enumerated in the new UN Fact Sheet on global military expenditures. It’s still not too late to take up the Russian-Chinese proposal for peace in space. May wiser heads prevail.
Alice Slater serves on the Boards of World BEYOND War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, and is a UN NGO Representative for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Jan 6 2026 (IPS)
While US President Donald Trump has blamed the BRICS and foreign investors for de-dollarisation, his rhetoric, actions and policy measures are mainly responsible for the trend’s recent acceleration.
Jomo Kwame Sundaram
Threats and reactionsDespite some temporary reversals, the dollar’s post-World War II role as world reserve currency has gradually declined over the decades, especially since the 1970s. Ben Norton has argued that several Trump measures have accelerated this trend.
Trump claims his supposedly ‘reciprocal tariffs’ will reduce the US trade or current account deficit with the rest of the world. But if countries cannot export to the US, they cannot earn dollars to meet their trade and investment needs.
Many believe Trump’s tariffs and other threats are enhancing US leverage vis-à-vis others, but their reactions, including defensive countermeasures, are accelerating de-dollarisation.
Trump’s measures, such as his insistence on bilateral negotiations, have alarmed most nations, including long-time allies. As nations, including allies, rethink their economic relations with and vulnerability to the US, de-dollarisation inadvertently accelerates.
Trump vs the Fed
The US Federal Reserve Bank’s overnight lending or funds rate has been higher since 2022, responding to higher consumer price inflation following the pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
As the Fed raised interest rates, yields on US government debt rose. But Trump now wants the Fed to cut interest rates to reduce the high debt servicing costs of both the government and private corporations.
In 2024, the US federal government paid about 3% of GDP in debt interest alone. Although such debt exceeds 120% of GDP, debt service costs are deemed manageable as long as interest rates remain low.
Trump’s pressures on the Fed to cut interest rates have inadvertently undermined investor confidence and prompted ‘flights [from dollar assets] to safety’.
Trump’s recent campaign against his earlier Fed chair appointee, Jerome Powell, has inadvertently raised investor concerns about his espoused monetary policy priorities.
Inflation fears persist
Investors now worry that Trump is pressuring the Fed to cut interest rates. They believe this will stoke inflation and cause the dollar to fall against other major currencies. As Trump is seen forcing down interest rates, he risks being blamed for persistent inflation.
If the Fed buys US Treasuries to reduce yields, for a new round of ‘quantitative easing’ (QE), dollar asset investments will realise lower, if not negative, real yields.
Although inflation hawks’ worst fears of higher inflation have not materialised so far, few believe tariffs will not raise inflation.
Expecting Trump 2.0 to impose more tariffs, many US companies stockpiled imports before April 2. As tariffs took effect and stocks declined, prices rose.
Many investors have sold their dollar assets as monetary authorities worldwide seek alternatives to the greenback. Such sell-offs lower the dollar’s value, further spurring de-dollarisation.
Trump now wants to lower US Treasury bond yields as foreign governments and investors seek alternatives to holding dollar assets.
Many are considering switching to non-dollar assets despite stagnation tendencies elsewhere in the Global North, especially in Europe and Japan. If investors stop buying dollar assets or sell them to purchase non-dollar assets, de-dollarisation will gain momentum.
Foreign demand falling
Washington is understandably worried that foreign investors will dump Treasury securities. In 2015, a third was held by foreigners, but this has since fallen to under a quarter.
The ‘Mar-A-Lago Accord’ proposal, which requires foreign governments to hold US Treasury ‘century bonds’ for 100 years despite assured losses, will compound resentment.
Lowering Treasury bond yields is both risky and difficult due to the highly financialised US economy. Past bond market turmoil has triggered stock market selloffs, lowering Treasury yields, share prices and tax revenue.
Government and corporate borrowing costs rise together. As trillions of dollars’ worth of corporate bonds mature over the next two years, high interest rates will raise corporations’ borrowing costs. Many want to refinance at lower interest rates.
These efforts to bring down interest rates are apparent to all. But lower interest rates and negative ‘actual yields’ for Treasury securities will ensure high inflation persists.
De-dollarisation accelerating?
Trump’s actions, especially threats of tariffs and sanctions, have elicited diverse reactions, often undermining dollar hegemony and accelerating de-dollarisation.
Many recent developments have undermined public confidence in the US government and the rule of law, accelerating de-dollarisation.
As investors sold US assets in mid-2025, the dollar saw its biggest fall since the 1973 oil price hike. It fell by over 10% against other major currencies, triggering temporary falls in the prices of many financial assets, including equities and bonds.
Since then, there has been increased capital market uncertainty and volatility, as in the US bond market, although a strong rally followed the ensuing stock market crash.
In many recent episodes of financial volatility, dollar liquidity was considered the safe option. But in 2025, confidence in dollar assets fell, prompting selloffs and de-dollarisation.
Thus far, Trump has been adept at managing short-term volatility, but his style implies no one knows when the music will stop.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Le Tribunal de commerce de Cotonou a condamné, le 30 décembre 2025, la société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL à rembourser le solde d'un prêt à l'Association pour la Promotion de l'Epargne Crédit à la Base Communautaire (P.E.B. Co BETHESDA).
Un concours financier de quatre millions neuf cent mille (4.900.000) FCFA a été octroyé par l'Association pour la Promotion de l'Epargne Crédit à la Base Communautaire (P.E.B. Co BETHESDA) à la société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL. Pour garantir ce prêt, la société emprunteuse avait constitué une garantie de cinq cent quatre-vingt-dix mille (590.000) FCFA.
La société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL indique qu'elle effectué des versements sur « le compte mobile money personnel de l'agent collecteur » afin d'éviter d'accumuler les impayés.
L'Association P.E.B. Co BETHESDA conteste le montant de la dette et adresse une mise en demeure à la société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL.
La société saisit la justice, le 16 juillet 2025, pour obtenir un arrêté contradictoire des comptes.
Un terrain d'entente a finalement été trouvé par les parties à travers un protocole d'accord qui a fixé le capital restant dû, majoré des intérêts et pénalités, à la somme de 2 870 915 FCFA.
À l'issue de paiements partiels ultérieurs, le tribunal a constaté que le reliquat de la créance s'élevait à 2 400 915 FCFA.
La société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL a reconnu ce montant. Mais elle a sollicité un délai de grâce d'un an pour « mieux organiser sa solvabilité ».
Le Tribunal de commerce de Cotonou a opposé une fin de non-recevoir à cette demande de moratoire. Le tribunal a motivé sa décision en soulignant que la société « ne fait aucune offre de paiement réaliste et ne justifie pas non plus les difficultés de trésorerie qu'elle prétend rencontrer ». Par ailleurs, le juge a rappelé que le recouvrement de ces fonds est essentiel pour l'association P.E.B. Co BETHESDA, qui doit répondre aux « besoins de financement de sa clientèle ».
En conséquence, le tribunal « condamne la société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL au paiement de la somme de deux millions quatre cent mille neuf cent quinze (2.400.915) francs CFA » au profit de l'association P.E.B. Co BETHESDA.
En plus du remboursement de la créance, la société AASHIRWA HOUSE HOLD SARL devra supporter l'intégralité des frais de la procédure, selon le jugement N°028/2025/CJ3/S1/TCC rendu en premier ressort le 30 décembre 2025.
M. M.
Lors d'une cérémonie solennelle ce lundi 05 janvier 2025 à Cotonou, deux hauts responsables de l'armée ont officiellement reçu leurs nouveaux attributs de généraux.
Le Chef d'État-Major Général, Fructueux Gbaguidi, a été élevé au grade de Général de Corps d'Armée. Il arbore désormais quatre étoiles dorées. À ses côtés, le patron de la Garde républicaine, Dieudonné Tévoèdjrè, accède au rang de Général de brigade.
Ces promotions, actées fin décembre par le président Patrice Talon, interviennent dans un climat de vigilance accrue. Le Bénin fait face à une menace djihadiste persistante à ses frontières nord.
Le ministre de la Défense, Alain Fortunet Nouatin, a salué des officiers incarnant « la fidélité à la République » et une « rigueur professionnelle » exemplaire. Pour le gouvernement, ce renforcement du commandement répond à la nécessité d'une « maturité stratégique » face aux groupes armés.
Le contexte politique a également pesé sur la cérémonie. Le ministre Nouatin a fait une allusion directe aux récentes tensions politiques. Il a rappelé qu'après une tentative de coup d'État avortée, la discipline militaire reste la priorité absolue. « La stabilité institutionnelle ne saurait jamais être tenue pour acquise », a martelé le ministre devant un parterre de personnalités, dont le ministre d'État Romuald Wadagni.
Des profils de terrain
Les deux promus sont des purs produits de l'élite militaire, anciens enfants de troupe. Fructueux Gbaguidi est un officier de terrain aguerri, passé par le maintien de la paix de l'ONU et la diplomatie militaire.
Dieudonné Tévoèdjrè commande actuellement la Garde républicaine, unité d'élite chargée de la protection des institutions.
QUELQUES IMAGES
Pro-Democracy protesters gather in front of the headquarters of the Sudanese army in the capital, Khartoum. Credit: Masarib/Ahmed Bahhar via UN News
By Robert Misik
VIENNA, Austria, Jan 5 2026 (IPS)
Consider our political systems not merely as battlegrounds of passions, ideologies and economic interests, but as systematically functioning arrangements of interactions, akin to game theory. In recent decades, we have witnessed the dissolution of large homogeneous groups into numerous subgroups — a patchwork of minorities.
This fragmentation, compounded by individualisation and the resulting weakening of strong political bonds, has profound consequences for democratic governance.
In nations with majority voting systems, this process fragments the party system itself. As dissatisfaction with political parties grows – initially quietly but eventually becoming pronounced – new parties emerge, further splintering the political landscape.
This increasing fragmentation complicates government formation and makes majorities more precarious. Often, only coalitions that can agree on the lowest common denominator are formed. Consequently, the outcomes of politics do not necessarily improve; in most cases, they worsen.
A vicious circle
Decisive action, bold moves and clear leadership have become increasingly elusive. This reinforces dissatisfaction and the prevailing sentiment among voters that politicians are failing to achieve meaningful results. Doubts about the effectiveness of the political system become self-perpetuating, creating a situation where decisive politics is nearly impossible.
The rise of populists and right-wing extremists is both a consequence of this stagnation and a further catalyst — a ratchet effect. Right-wing agitators stoke discontent, transforming it into anger and outrage while exploiting negative emotions.
As they gain strength, democratic politics becomes more paralysed, often preoccupied with defending against radicalism, preventing the worst outcomes, and forming coalitions whose members can agree on little more than a lacklustre commitment to ‘more of the same’.
When social cohesion erodes, the radical right gains ground — which then leads to even more division. The perceived polarisation and alienation that accompanies the rise of right-wing extremism increases the perception of social disintegration and decay.
Democracy gives rise to its own threats
In a sense, right-wing radicalism is itself the problem that it then laments in a subsequent cycle. It is the disintegration that it denounces. In this way, it contributes to the chain of evidence that reinforces authoritarian reflexes. Authoritarianism feeds authoritarianism.
These framework conditions of political systems – fragmentation and the resulting weakness of action – lead German democracy theorist Veith Selk to diagnose that modernisation and social change are increasingly putting democracy under stress, making a reversal unlikely.
This presents a rather depressing diagnosis of decline: democracy gives rise to its own threats.
Additionally, globalisation necessitates ‘global governance’, which, even under favourable circumstances, has historically produced solutions at an unbearably slow pace and is now reaching its limits amid chaotic multilateralism.
Conversely, ‘de-globalisation’ – through national power politics, tariffs and trade wars – provides no relief and instead creates new problems, such as the loss of sales markets, disrupted supply chains and a consequent decline in economic growth, potentially destroying whole economic sectors.
Europe’s mounting crises
The emergencies of the future are already on the horizon. The climate catastrophe threatens not only our livelihoods but also has tangible economic repercussions. Crop failures due to droughts and floods are already contributing to rising inflation in the cost of living, particularly for vegetables and fruit.
This situation is certain to become much more severe. Even if successful, socio-economic transformation will be costly. Insurance companies may face financial difficulties, asset portfolios could lose value rapidly, and if we are unfortunate, a sudden ‘Minsky moment’ could trigger a downward spiral leading to a financial crisis.
Ageing populations are already straining public finances, with healthcare and care systems becoming increasingly expensive, pushing European welfare states to their financial limits.
Government debt is rising, and under current conditions, it will be more challenging to “grow out” of debt than it was in the past. Growth will be harder to mobilise, and austerity is not a viable alternative, as contraction strategies lead to dire consequences. These are all concerning prospects.
Here are a few highlights:
Germany’s economy has stagnated for six years, and private investment remains weak. France is facing a budget deficit of 5.8 per cent and a public debt ratio of 113 per cent of GDP, while sliding from one government crisis to another. Political actors are unable to achieve a socially just change of course that would reconcile savings in the pension system with additional revenue from wealth taxes.
Austria was projected to have a budget deficit of six per cent, prompting left-wing Keynesian Finance Minister Markus Marterbauer to assemble a package of tightening measures aimed at reducing the deficit to 4.5 per cent by 2025.
Ensuring that large fortunes contribute to costs through higher taxation is not only a matter of fairness but also an economic necessity — yet there is a lack of parliamentary majorities for decisive measures nearly everywhere.
There is a growing desire for politics to provide sensible solutions instead of getting bogged down in petty details.
A whole panorama of emergencies is unfolding before us. As noted earlier, most of those in power have little energy or flexibility to think and act beyond daily problems. This situation has tangible and psychopolitical effects: citizens feel that things are deteriorating and that serious trouble is brewing, while simultaneously sensing that those in power are merely tinkering with details.
For many, this leads to outright fear and a generally pessimistic mood, which in turn fuels the rise of right-wing radicals.
The political forces of the left and the conservative centre must, above all, demonstrate their ability to act together. A few years ago, the prevailing view was that various political camps should dare to engage in more conflict to make democratic life more vibrant.
At that time, there were complaints about everyone crowding into the centre and becoming interchangeable. However, we find ourselves in a different situation today.
There is a growing desire for politics to provide sensible solutions instead of getting bogged down in petty details or wasting time on pointless culture wars. The left may need to acknowledge that states are reaching their financial limits, while conservatives must recognise that clientele politics, which ensures free rides for the super-wealthy, is no longer viable.
Urgent issues require swift action, and all of this comes at a high cost.
Rhetoric is no longer effective, and pandering to the extreme right leads nowhere. Conservatives, in particular, need to understand this, as they sometimes give the impression that they view fascists as merely slightly more radical conservatives (or conservatives as moderate fascists).
This perception is not only misguided; it also highlights a significant identity crisis within traditional conservatism. Fortunately, some are beginning to realise that authoritarianism is not a relative; it is the enemy. The best way to undermine it is to demonstrate a commitment to action.
Robert Misik is a writer and essayist. He publishes in many German-language newspapers and magazines, including Die Zeit and Die Tageszeitung.
This is from a joint publication by Social Europe and IPS Journal.
Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), Brussels, Belgium
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Security Council Meets on Threats to International Peace and Security. Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten
By Cecilia Russell
UNITED NATIONS & JOHANNESBURG, Jan 5 2026 (IPS)
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed deep concern about the immediate future of Venezuela.
In a statement read by Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo, Guterres told the Security Council’s emergency meeting he was deeply concerned about “possible intensification of the instability in the country, the potential impact on the region, and the precedent it may set for how relations between and among states are conducted.”
On Saturday, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that he was putting Venezuela under temporary American control following the capture of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Adela Flores, in a raid and whisking them to New York to face charges, including drug trafficking.
Guterres stated at the emergency Security Council meeting, which was set to discuss threats to international peace and security, that the situation in Venezuela has been a matter of regional and international concern for many years.
“Attention on the country only grew following the contested presidential elections in July 2024. The panel of electoral experts I appointed at the Venezuelan Government’s request to accompany the elections highlighted serious issues. We have consistently called for full transparency and the complete publication of the results of the elections.”
Yet, he said, it was necessary to respect international law.
“I have consistently stressed the imperative of full respect, by all, for international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, which provides the foundation for the maintenance of international peace and security.
“I remain deeply concerned that rules of international law have not been respected with regard to the 3 January military action.”
Guterres called on all Venezuelan actors to engage in an inclusive, democratic dialogue in which all sectors of society can determine their future.
Jeffrey Sachs, the President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, urged the UN Security Council to declare an immediate cessation and desist from any explicit or implicit threats or use of force against Venezuela.
He also requested the council demand the United States terminate its naval quarantine and all related coercive military measures undertaken without Security Council authorization.
Merchy de Freitas, founder and executive director of Transparencia Venezuela, the national chapter of Transparency International, said the country ranked among the world’s most corrupt countries, with over 500 documented cases involving USD 72 billion, mostly public funds.
She said there was a symbiotic relationship between the Maduro regime and criminal organizations, which have exploited national parks and the Amazon for gold and other illicit activities. The crisis has led to a decrease in state income, affecting basic services and causing severe humanitarian issues, including a lack of electricity, food, and medical care.
“The government has captured all institutions, beginning with the justice institutions,” she said. “We need a transparent state that is accountable and that will guarantee the rule of law and human rights.”
De Freitas called for a transparent and accountable state, respect for human rights, and the release of political prisoners.
A representative from Columbia expressed concern over what it considers a “violation of international law and the UN Charter and expressed concern over the regional impact, including a potential migration crisis.
She emphasized the importance of respecting sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the principles of peaceful conflict resolution while expressing concerns over the regional impact, including potential migration crises, and calling for de-escalation and diplomatic solutions.
Russia and China, among others, condemned the United States’ action.
However, the United States informed the council that it had launched a “law enforcement operation” against Maduro and Flores, accusing them of “narcoterrorism and drug trafficking.”
Maduro, who was indicted by a New York grand jury, faces serious charges for his role in a conspiracy involving cocaine trafficking and international weapons trafficking, he told the council.
He justified the operation because Maduro’s presidency was illegitimate due to his manipulation of Venezuela’s electoral system and commented that even the UN had questioned his legitimacy. The United States also highlighted the destabilizing impact of Maduro’s regime, including the largest refugee crisis in the world, with over 8 million Venezuelans fleeing.
“Maduro and his cronies have partnered with some of the most violent and prolific drug traffickers and narcoterrorists in the world for decades, facilitating the flood of illegal drugs coming into the United States,” the representative told the Security Council, reminding the council that the United Nations had documented the excesses of the Maduro government.
The action by the United States had taken place after Trump had exhausted diplomacy, he said.
“The United States will not waver in its actions to protect Americans from the scourge of narcoterrorism and seeks peace, liberty and justice for the great people of Venezuela.”
Venezuela’s representative denounced the events of January 3, 2026, as an illegitimate armed attack by the US government.
“The events of January 3 constitute a flagrant violation of the UN Charter perpetrated by the US government, in particular, the principal violation of the principle of sovereign equality of states, of the absolute prohibition of the use or threat of use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state,” he said.
“Today, it is not only Venezuela sovereignty that is at stake, but also the credibility of international law, the authority of this organization, and the validity of the principle that no state can set itself up as a judge, jury, and executor of the world order.”
He denied the country was dysfunctional.
“Venezuela would like to inform this body and the international community that its institutions are functioning normally, that constitutional order has been preserved, and that the state exercises effective control over all of its territory in accordance with our Constitution.
While Spain said they did not recognize the Maduro presidency, they were concerned that the United States’ action would set a worrying precedent.
“We share the view that fighting organized crime in the region is a priority, but that fight can only be waged through international cooperation. We also share the view that it is a priority to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms in Venezuela,” the representative said, adding that it would “work to unite Venezuelans, men and women. Spain is committed to dialogue and peace, because force never brings more democracy.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 5 2026 (IPS)
The statistics are staggering: while military spending keeps skyrocketing, Official Development Assistance (ODA)– from the rich to some of the world’s poorer nations– has been declining drastically.
According to a Fact Sheet released by the UN last week, the $2.7 trillion allocated in just one year (2024) to global military spending amounted to $334 for every person on the planet; the size of the entire Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of all African countries; more than half the GDP of all Latin American countries; 750 times the 2024 UN regular budget; and almost 13 times the amount of ODA provided by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2024
Over 100 countries increased their military budgets, with the top ten spenders alone accounting for 73% of the total. Despite making up about a quarter of the UN’s Member States and nearly 20% of the world’s population, African nations collectively account for less than 2% of global military spending.
If the current trend continues, warns UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterre, military spending could increase to $3.5 trillion by 2030 and exceed $4.7 trillion, potentially climbing to $6.6 trillion, by 2035. A $6.6 trillion spending is equivalent to almost five times the level at the end of the cold war, six times the lowest global level (1998), and two and a half times the level spent in 2024 ($2.7 trillion).
James E. Jennings, PhD, President, Conscience International, told IPS while the world was celebrating a Happy New Year January 1, those who have read global military budgets for 2026 can only weep.
The recently released UN fact sheet on worldwide spending for weapons and military expenses reveals a fearful future for humanity in the coming decades. “That’s because of the vast disparity between our lust for power and dominance as opposed to our lack of concern for the growing millions of people living in abject poverty,” he said.
Such conditions, he pointed out, guarantee that children who lack clean water and sanitation will suffer from easily curable diseases and have little access to education. “There is a direct connection between buying airplanes, tanks, and bombs, and taking food out of the mouths of babies. Even a tiny percentage of the money spent annually on arms would alleviate world hunger in just a few years.”
Another way of understanding the issue is the global distribution of wealth, disadvantaging the Global South. Health, especially children’s health, is primary. It could be radically transformed by vaccinations and medicines that are readily available and cheap compared to military equipment and technology.
Education is the top prize that can transform lives and societies but is unavailable to many people in the world’s neediest countries. What is most worrisome to those who are paying attention is the fact that military expenditures are rising. Where that will lead if the trend continues is dreadful to contemplate, declared Dr Jennings.
Meanwhile, the UN Fact Sheet says:
Less than 4% ($93 billion) of $2.7 trillion is needed annually to end world hunger by 2030.
The 38-membe OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) points out that ODA is currently on “a significant decline”, with major donor countries like the U.S., France, Germany, and the UK cutting aid budgets, leading to projected drops of 9-17% in 2025 after a 9% fall in 2024, impacting the poorest nations and vital services like health.
This marks a sharp reversal after years of growth, driven by domestic spending (like refugee costs) and shifting priorities.
Alice Slater, who serves on the Boards of World BEYOND War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space and a UN NGO Representative for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, told IPS the UN’s Fact Sheet, starkly illuminating last year’s record high of $2.7 trillion in military expenditures, caused a cascade of devastating consequences to human well-being, the environment, possibilities for avoiding climate collapse, as well as blows to employment, ending hunger and poverty, providing health care, education, and other ills, due to a lack of adequate funding support.
The Fact Sheet, she said, does an admirable job of illustrating the shocking maldistribution of States massive military expenditures and what that money could buy in many instances, such as to end hunger and malnutrition, provide clean water and sanitation, education, environmental remediation, and so much more.
In a message to world leaders last week, Guterres said: ·“As we enter the new year, the world stands at a crossroads. Chaos and uncertainty surround us. People everywhere are asking: Are leaders even listening? Are they ready to act?”
Today, the scale of human suffering is staggering – over one-quarter of humanity lives in areas affected by conflict. More than 200 million people globally need humanitarian assistance, and nearly 120 million people have been forcibly displaced, fleeing war, crises, disasters or persecution.
“As we turn the page on a turbulent year, one fact speaks louder than words: global military spending has soared to $2.7 trillion, growing by almost 10 per cent.”
Yet, as humanitarian crises around the world intensify, global military spending is projected to more than double – from $2.7 trillion in 2024 to an astonishing $6.6 trillion by 2035 – if current trends persist. Data shows that $2.7 trillion is thirteen times the amount of all global development aid combined and is equivalent to the entire Gross Domestic Product of the continent of Africa.
“On this New Year, let’s resolve to get our priorities straight. A safer world begins by investing more in fighting poverty and less in fighting wars. Peace must prevail,” urged Guterres.
In September 2025, the Secretary-General, as requested by UN Member States in the 2024 Pact for the Future, launched a report that revealed a stark imbalance in global spending. Called The Security We Need: Rebalancing Military Spending for a Sustainable and Peaceful Future, the report examines the difficult trade-offs presented by the increasing global military spending, making a powerful case for investing in peace and in people’s futures:
“It’s clear the world has the resources to lift lives, heal the planet, and secure a future of peace and justice,” says Guterres. “In 2026, I call on leaders everywhere: Get serious. Choose people and planet over pain.”
“This New Year, let’s rise together: For justice. For humanity. For peace.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau