Agrégateur de flux

Die internationale Ordnung ist in einem tiefgreifenden Wandel, wobei Großmachtrivalitäten eine Neu-ordnung globaler Machtstrukturen vorantreiben. Dies hat auch Auswirkungen auf die europäische Entwicklungspolitik. In vielen EU-Mitgliedstaaten gehen die Mittel für öffentliche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (ODA) zurück; gleichzeitig richten EU-Länder ihre verbleibenden Mittel stärker an Eigeninteressen aus. Bislang werden diese Reformen weitestgehend bilateral ausdefiniert, wohingegen eine politische Debatte über Rolle, Mehrwert und gemeinsame Ausgestaltung der EU-Entwicklungspolitik weitestgehend fehlt. Doch ohne eine Stärkung der europäischen Zusammenarbeit wird es Europa nicht gelingen, auf die aktuellen weltpolitischen Umbrüche eine adäquate Antwort zu geben.
In diesem Policy Brief argumentieren wir, dass Reformbestrebungen in der europäischen Entwick-lungspolitik die Zusammenarbeit und Komplementarität stärken müssen, um wirksam auf die veränderte geopolitische Lage reagieren zu können. Unsere Analyse zeigt vier inhaltliche Handlungsfelder, auf die sich laufende Reformprozesse europäischer Akteure konzentrieren und auf denen Entwicklungspolitik wichtige Beiträge leisten soll:
1. Wirtschaftsförderung und Einbindung des Privatsektors; 2. Sicherheitspolitik; 3. Steuerung und Gestaltung von Migration; 4. Menschliche Entwicklung und Armutsreduktion, insbesondere in LDCs (Least Developed Countries).
Eine gemeinsame strategische Ausrichtung Europas auf diesen Handlungsfeldern fehlt jedoch bisher. Diese gemeinsamen strategischen Prioritäten auszuhandeln erfordert eine Neubelebung des politischen Dialogs zwischen EU-Institutionen und Mit-gliedstaaten sowie eine Weiterentwicklung des „Team Europe“-Ansatzes. „Team Europe 2.0“ hätte dann zwei Funktionen: die inhaltliche Komplementarität „nach innen“ zu stärken durch eine Verständigung darauf, wie die unterschiedlichen Akteure jeweils zu gemeinsam festgelegten Zielsetzungen beitragen; und „nach außen“, um sichtbar zu machen, wofür Europa strategisch steht.
Kernelement von Team Europe 2.0 sollte ein verbesserter inhaltlicher Austausch in themenspezifi-schen, informellen Gruppen unter Führung einzelner Mitgliedstaaten und der Kommission sein. Solche „thematischen Champions“ könnten die Entwicklung gemeinsamer Strategien für größere, transformative Initiativen erleichtern. Ein verbesserter politischer Dialog und inhaltliche Abstimmung in Schlüsselbe-reichen der europäischen Entwicklungspolitik sind Voraussetzungen für ein geeintes und strategischeres Auftreten von „Team Europe“ nach außen, auch in multilateralen Kontexten.

Die internationale Ordnung ist in einem tiefgreifenden Wandel, wobei Großmachtrivalitäten eine Neu-ordnung globaler Machtstrukturen vorantreiben. Dies hat auch Auswirkungen auf die europäische Entwicklungspolitik. In vielen EU-Mitgliedstaaten gehen die Mittel für öffentliche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (ODA) zurück; gleichzeitig richten EU-Länder ihre verbleibenden Mittel stärker an Eigeninteressen aus. Bislang werden diese Reformen weitestgehend bilateral ausdefiniert, wohingegen eine politische Debatte über Rolle, Mehrwert und gemeinsame Ausgestaltung der EU-Entwicklungspolitik weitestgehend fehlt. Doch ohne eine Stärkung der europäischen Zusammenarbeit wird es Europa nicht gelingen, auf die aktuellen weltpolitischen Umbrüche eine adäquate Antwort zu geben.
In diesem Policy Brief argumentieren wir, dass Reformbestrebungen in der europäischen Entwick-lungspolitik die Zusammenarbeit und Komplementarität stärken müssen, um wirksam auf die veränderte geopolitische Lage reagieren zu können. Unsere Analyse zeigt vier inhaltliche Handlungsfelder, auf die sich laufende Reformprozesse europäischer Akteure konzentrieren und auf denen Entwicklungspolitik wichtige Beiträge leisten soll:
1. Wirtschaftsförderung und Einbindung des Privatsektors; 2. Sicherheitspolitik; 3. Steuerung und Gestaltung von Migration; 4. Menschliche Entwicklung und Armutsreduktion, insbesondere in LDCs (Least Developed Countries).
Eine gemeinsame strategische Ausrichtung Europas auf diesen Handlungsfeldern fehlt jedoch bisher. Diese gemeinsamen strategischen Prioritäten auszuhandeln erfordert eine Neubelebung des politischen Dialogs zwischen EU-Institutionen und Mit-gliedstaaten sowie eine Weiterentwicklung des „Team Europe“-Ansatzes. „Team Europe 2.0“ hätte dann zwei Funktionen: die inhaltliche Komplementarität „nach innen“ zu stärken durch eine Verständigung darauf, wie die unterschiedlichen Akteure jeweils zu gemeinsam festgelegten Zielsetzungen beitragen; und „nach außen“, um sichtbar zu machen, wofür Europa strategisch steht.
Kernelement von Team Europe 2.0 sollte ein verbesserter inhaltlicher Austausch in themenspezifi-schen, informellen Gruppen unter Führung einzelner Mitgliedstaaten und der Kommission sein. Solche „thematischen Champions“ könnten die Entwicklung gemeinsamer Strategien für größere, transformative Initiativen erleichtern. Ein verbesserter politischer Dialog und inhaltliche Abstimmung in Schlüsselbe-reichen der europäischen Entwicklungspolitik sind Voraussetzungen für ein geeintes und strategischeres Auftreten von „Team Europe“ nach außen, auch in multilateralen Kontexten.

Die internationale Ordnung ist in einem tiefgreifenden Wandel, wobei Großmachtrivalitäten eine Neu-ordnung globaler Machtstrukturen vorantreiben. Dies hat auch Auswirkungen auf die europäische Entwicklungspolitik. In vielen EU-Mitgliedstaaten gehen die Mittel für öffentliche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (ODA) zurück; gleichzeitig richten EU-Länder ihre verbleibenden Mittel stärker an Eigeninteressen aus. Bislang werden diese Reformen weitestgehend bilateral ausdefiniert, wohingegen eine politische Debatte über Rolle, Mehrwert und gemeinsame Ausgestaltung der EU-Entwicklungspolitik weitestgehend fehlt. Doch ohne eine Stärkung der europäischen Zusammenarbeit wird es Europa nicht gelingen, auf die aktuellen weltpolitischen Umbrüche eine adäquate Antwort zu geben.
In diesem Policy Brief argumentieren wir, dass Reformbestrebungen in der europäischen Entwick-lungspolitik die Zusammenarbeit und Komplementarität stärken müssen, um wirksam auf die veränderte geopolitische Lage reagieren zu können. Unsere Analyse zeigt vier inhaltliche Handlungsfelder, auf die sich laufende Reformprozesse europäischer Akteure konzentrieren und auf denen Entwicklungspolitik wichtige Beiträge leisten soll:
1. Wirtschaftsförderung und Einbindung des Privatsektors; 2. Sicherheitspolitik; 3. Steuerung und Gestaltung von Migration; 4. Menschliche Entwicklung und Armutsreduktion, insbesondere in LDCs (Least Developed Countries).
Eine gemeinsame strategische Ausrichtung Europas auf diesen Handlungsfeldern fehlt jedoch bisher. Diese gemeinsamen strategischen Prioritäten auszuhandeln erfordert eine Neubelebung des politischen Dialogs zwischen EU-Institutionen und Mit-gliedstaaten sowie eine Weiterentwicklung des „Team Europe“-Ansatzes. „Team Europe 2.0“ hätte dann zwei Funktionen: die inhaltliche Komplementarität „nach innen“ zu stärken durch eine Verständigung darauf, wie die unterschiedlichen Akteure jeweils zu gemeinsam festgelegten Zielsetzungen beitragen; und „nach außen“, um sichtbar zu machen, wofür Europa strategisch steht.
Kernelement von Team Europe 2.0 sollte ein verbesserter inhaltlicher Austausch in themenspezifi-schen, informellen Gruppen unter Führung einzelner Mitgliedstaaten und der Kommission sein. Solche „thematischen Champions“ könnten die Entwicklung gemeinsamer Strategien für größere, transformative Initiativen erleichtern. Ein verbesserter politischer Dialog und inhaltliche Abstimmung in Schlüsselbe-reichen der europäischen Entwicklungspolitik sind Voraussetzungen für ein geeintes und strategischeres Auftreten von „Team Europe“ nach außen, auch in multilateralen Kontexten.

Craignant que Budapest ne change de cap sous une nouvelle direction, Bratislava porte l'affaire devant la plus haute juridiction de l'UE

The post La Slovaquie va contester la législation européenne interdisant les importations de gaz russe appeared first on Euractiv FR.

« C'est complètement dingue », a déclaré un député européen à propos d'un soumissionnaire chinois proposant un prix inférieur de plus de moitié à celui de son concurrent suédois

The post Indignation face à un géant chinois sur le point de décrocher un contrat européen de 320 millions d’euros en Afrique appeared first on Euractiv FR.

President Trump could come to represent the restrained, reasonable wing of the GOP.

DRAFT REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Global Europe
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Development
Robert Biedroń, Michael Gahler

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

DRAFT REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Global Europe
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Development
Robert Biedroń, Michael Gahler

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

The international order is undergoing profound change as rivalry among major powers realigns the global balance. This is also having an impact on European development policy. In many European Union (EU) member states, funding for official development assistance (ODA) is declining. At the same time, EU countries are reforming their development policies and increasingly channelling their remaining resources towards priorities that serve primarily their own interests. So far, these reforms have largely been defined bilaterally, whereas a political debate on the role, added value and joint objectives of EU development policy is largely absent. Yet, without strengthening European cooperation in development policy, Europe will not succeed in providing an adequate response to the current upheavals in global politics.
In this policy brief, we argue that reform efforts in European development policy must strengthen co-operation and complementarity to respond effectively to the changed geopolitical landscape. Our analysis identifies four key policy areas where European actors are pursuing ongoing reforms and where development policy should make significant contributions: 
1) promoting economic cooperation and private-sector engagement, 2) security policy, 3) managing and shaping migration and 4) human development including poverty reduction, particularly in least developed countries (LDCs). So far, a joint European strategic direction in these areas has been lacking. Negotiating these shared priorities requires a revitalisation of the political dialogue between EU institutions and member states, as well as further development of the “Team Europe” approach. “Team Europe 2.0” would then have two functions: to strengthen substantive complementarity “internally” through an understanding of how the various actors individually contribute to jointly defined objectives; and “externally” by making visible what Europe stands for strategically.
A key element of Team Europe 2.0 should be an improved substantive dialogue among member states and within issue-specific, informal groups co-facilitated by individual member states and the European Commission. Such “thematic champions” could initiate the development of joint strategies for larger, transformative initiatives. Improved political dialogue and coordination on substance in key areas of European development policy are prerequisites for a united and more strategic external presence of “Team Europe”, including in multilateral contexts.

 

 

The international order is undergoing profound change as rivalry among major powers realigns the global balance. This is also having an impact on European development policy. In many European Union (EU) member states, funding for official development assistance (ODA) is declining. At the same time, EU countries are reforming their development policies and increasingly channelling their remaining resources towards priorities that serve primarily their own interests. So far, these reforms have largely been defined bilaterally, whereas a political debate on the role, added value and joint objectives of EU development policy is largely absent. Yet, without strengthening European cooperation in development policy, Europe will not succeed in providing an adequate response to the current upheavals in global politics.
In this policy brief, we argue that reform efforts in European development policy must strengthen co-operation and complementarity to respond effectively to the changed geopolitical landscape. Our analysis identifies four key policy areas where European actors are pursuing ongoing reforms and where development policy should make significant contributions: 
1) promoting economic cooperation and private-sector engagement, 2) security policy, 3) managing and shaping migration and 4) human development including poverty reduction, particularly in least developed countries (LDCs). So far, a joint European strategic direction in these areas has been lacking. Negotiating these shared priorities requires a revitalisation of the political dialogue between EU institutions and member states, as well as further development of the “Team Europe” approach. “Team Europe 2.0” would then have two functions: to strengthen substantive complementarity “internally” through an understanding of how the various actors individually contribute to jointly defined objectives; and “externally” by making visible what Europe stands for strategically.
A key element of Team Europe 2.0 should be an improved substantive dialogue among member states and within issue-specific, informal groups co-facilitated by individual member states and the European Commission. Such “thematic champions” could initiate the development of joint strategies for larger, transformative initiatives. Improved political dialogue and coordination on substance in key areas of European development policy are prerequisites for a united and more strategic external presence of “Team Europe”, including in multilateral contexts.

 

 

The international order is undergoing profound change as rivalry among major powers realigns the global balance. This is also having an impact on European development policy. In many European Union (EU) member states, funding for official development assistance (ODA) is declining. At the same time, EU countries are reforming their development policies and increasingly channelling their remaining resources towards priorities that serve primarily their own interests. So far, these reforms have largely been defined bilaterally, whereas a political debate on the role, added value and joint objectives of EU development policy is largely absent. Yet, without strengthening European cooperation in development policy, Europe will not succeed in providing an adequate response to the current upheavals in global politics.
In this policy brief, we argue that reform efforts in European development policy must strengthen co-operation and complementarity to respond effectively to the changed geopolitical landscape. Our analysis identifies four key policy areas where European actors are pursuing ongoing reforms and where development policy should make significant contributions: 
1) promoting economic cooperation and private-sector engagement, 2) security policy, 3) managing and shaping migration and 4) human development including poverty reduction, particularly in least developed countries (LDCs). So far, a joint European strategic direction in these areas has been lacking. Negotiating these shared priorities requires a revitalisation of the political dialogue between EU institutions and member states, as well as further development of the “Team Europe” approach. “Team Europe 2.0” would then have two functions: to strengthen substantive complementarity “internally” through an understanding of how the various actors individually contribute to jointly defined objectives; and “externally” by making visible what Europe stands for strategically.
A key element of Team Europe 2.0 should be an improved substantive dialogue among member states and within issue-specific, informal groups co-facilitated by individual member states and the European Commission. Such “thematic champions” could initiate the development of joint strategies for larger, transformative initiatives. Improved political dialogue and coordination on substance in key areas of European development policy are prerequisites for a united and more strategic external presence of “Team Europe”, including in multilateral contexts.

 

 

Credit: Rajesh Jantilal/AFP

By Andrew Firmin
LONDON, Apr 20 2026 (IPS)

On 7 April, the government of Cameroon published a list of 16 of its citizens confirmed killed fighting for Russia against Ukraine. That means the number of Cameroon citizens killed in this distant war has likely surpassed a hundred, making the country the biggest victim of a Russian recruitment drive increasingly focused on Africa.

Conflict attrition

When Vladimir Putin launched Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he probably assumed the war would be over in days. But now it has ground on past the four-year mark, and Russia’s tactics have brought horrendous loss of life on both sides. Putin treats his soldiers’ lives as disposable, throwing wave after wave of troops at Ukrainian lines in what have been called ‘meat grinder’ assaults. Amid pervasive disinformation, casualty estimates vary widely. A project to count confirmed deaths puts Russian military fatalities at over 206,000, while some estimates reach 1.3 million. Russia is reportedly losing soldiers faster than it can replace them.

Putin has turned to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un: since 2024, North Korean forces have been fighting alongside Russian troops. Over 20,000 have been deployed, with a reported 6,000 casualties. Russia has also recruited from Central Asian countries and long-term allies such as Cuba. Ukraine too has brought in thousands of foreign fighters, including Colombian mercenaries. Now Russia is increasingly turning to Africa.

Russia’s African strategy

Putin has spent years cultivating relationships with African states, helping Russia resist international isolation and counter pressure from western states. The military relationship has been two-way: Russian mercenaries from the shadowy Wagner Group, now closely controlled by the government, have been deployed in as many as 18 African countries, including Burkina Faso, the Central African Republic and Mali. In some, they fight alongside government forces against insurgent groups; in others, including Libya, where two rival governments contest power, and Sudan, home to a brutal civil war, they’re backing one of two sides fighting for power. Wherever they operate, Russian mercenaries are accused of committing atrocities.

Russia’s arrival has come with some public support, cast as an alternative to the former colonial power France and promising more equal partnerships. When Wagner forces entered Mali in 2022, crowds lined the roads to greet them, waving Russian flags. Extensive pro-Russia disinformation campaigns typically precede Russia’s military involvement, laying the groundwork for such welcomes.

The relationship is extractive: in return for soldiers, Russia typically receives natural resources, including diamonds and gold, which help sustain a war that, despite Russia’s anti-imperialist posturing in Africa, is fundamentally imperial.

Repressive Central and West African governments, several run by military juntas or former army leaders who’ve traded their uniforms for civilian clothes, value a partner with no interest in scrutinising their human rights performance. Civil society organisations and media that try to expose human rights abuses by Russian forces come under attack.

From Africa to the frontlines

Russia is now exploiting the economic insecurity of many young African men, recruiting them to serve – and possibly die – on the Ukrainian front. Extensive recent civil society research has verified that Russia has so far recruited 1,417 African nationals, with the true figure almost certainly higher. The numbers have increased year on year, indicating a systematic plan. Egypt has supplied the most recruits, followed by Cameroon and Ghana. Of 1,417 verified recruits, 316, 22 per cent, have reportedly been killed.

Some recruits have expressed support for Russia online. Others are attracted by the promise of Russian citizenship and wages that far exceed anything they could earn at home. They may compare Russia’s apparent openness, signalled by its recent relaxation of visa requirements, with Europe’s increasing hostility towards migrants.

Others who’ve managed to escape report being conned. Fake job adverts made them believe they were signing up for civilian or support roles, including jobs as plumbers and security guards. On arrival, recruits are forced sign Russian-language contracts they can’t read, given minimal training and dispatched to the frontlines. The average service length of those killed is just six months, evidence that Russia treats them as expendable.

Intermediaries – including social media influencers who promote recruitment, travel agencies and people trafficking networks – are profiting from supplying recruits. In a bizarre political twist, Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla, a daughter of former South African president Jacob Zuma, is among those accused of recruiting Africans, including some falsely told they’d be trained as bodyguards for her father’s party. In December, South African police arrested five people on charges related to the recruitment of South Africans, including a journalist known for spreading pro-Russia propaganda.

Pressure for accountability

As evidence has accumulated, several African governments have taken action. The government of Togo warned its citizens about the dangers and, when several Togolese soldiers were captured in Ukraine, confirmed they’d been lured there by false promises of jobs and educational opportunities. Last year, the government of Botswana announced it was investigating the cases of two young men who believed they were signing up for a short-term military training programme but were forced to fight. In February, Ghana’s foreign minister confirmed that at least 55 of his country’s citizens had been killed and travelled to Ukraine to seek the release of Ghanaian prisoners of war. Police in Kenya and South African have arrested people trafficking gangs and closed down recruitment agencies. The Kenyan government recently announced Russia had agreed to stop recruiting Kenyan citizens, offering evidence that sustained bilateral pressure can produce results.

But many other African governments remain in denial, placing warm relations with Russia above the lives of their citizens. By doing so, they’re making clear that those lives are as disposable to them as they are to Russia.

Far more states must press Russia to end its abusive recruitment practices. And for international partners who claim to care about the welfare of young Africans, there’s a clear starting point: help address the economic conditions that create a ready pool of desperate recruits and drop the hostile migration policies that make Russia, of all places, look like a desirable destination.

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

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

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Également dans l'édition de lundi : Charles Michel, les bus sénégalais, le directeur de l'OLAF, les milliards de la Hongrie, Sánchez encensé

The post « Les commissaires n’ont absolument aucun rôle » appeared first on Euractiv FR.

The country's preference for an open and predicable international order is shared by most of its Asian neighbors.

Lee Jae Myung is the first foreign leader to visit Vietnam since the confirmation of the country's new leadership earlier this month.

UNDP collaborations have shown what is possible when satellite data and recovery planning work together. Credit: UNDP

By Mukul Bhola and Devanand Ramiah
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 20 2026 (IPS)

We are stuck in response mode. But what good is an ambulance without a hospital?

Climate shocks are intensifying. Conflict is at record levels. Economies are fragile. Humanitarian appeals grow larger each year, while donor countries prioritise domestic and security concerns. One emergency follows another. Recovery slips further out of reach.

For years, the logic was straightforward: first save lives, then rebuild them. But in an era of overlapping shocks, that division is costly. By the time recovery begins, families have sold livestock, businesses have closed, children have left school, and local institutions are weaker than before. Crisis becomes the default condition.

If we want fewer protracted emergencies, recovery must start on day one.

The first 48 hours after a crisis are decisive. When authorities know which roads are blocked, which clinics are damaged, which markets are underwater, they can act immediately. Debris can be cleared before trade stalls. Water systems can be repaired before disease spreads. Small enterprises can reopen before savings disappear.

Until recently, a major obstacle was the speed and reliability of information. Governments were often forced to plan with fragmented or delayed data. Damage figures arrived weeks late. Assessments overlapped. Resources were deployed based on rough estimates rather than solid evidence.

That constraint is rapidly diminishing.

In Burundi after storms damaged thousands of homes, a rapid assessment measured losses to farms, houses, public infrastructure and businesses. Credit: UNDP Burundi

In recent years, collaboration between UNDP and the United Nations Satellite Centre, hosted at United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), has shown what is possible when satellite data and recovery planning work together.

High-resolution imagery can now identify damaged buildings within days. Follow-up checks on the ground turn those findings into clear estimates of debris, lost livelihoods, disrupted services and the cost of rebuilding.

This is not simply faster mapping. It is a coordinated process: rapid satellite images, quick damage analysis, ground checks and immediate use of the results to guide recovery priorities and investment decisions.

In Colombia after widespread flooding, ground teams confirmed crop losses and blocked river transport, allowing recovery efforts to begin. Credit: UNDP Colombia

In Jamaica, when Hurricane Melissa struck in 2025, satellite images quickly showed the extent of the damage. Recovery teams used that information to estimate debris and plan its removal, reopening transport routes and clearing the way for reconstruction.

In Colombia’s 2024 rainy season, intensified by Tropical Storm Rafael, radar images revealed widespread flooding in Chocó and La Guajira. Ground teams confirmed crop losses and blocked river transport, allowing recovery efforts to begin before more families were forced to move.

Credit: UNDP Jamaica

After El Niño-driven storms, floods and landslides displaced hundreds of thousands in Burundi and damaged thousands of homes, a rapid assessment measured losses to farms, houses, public infrastructure and businesses. Those estimates helped set national recovery priorities and supported early talks with funders.

The pattern is consistent: when impact data arrives early, recovery decisions improve, creating the conditions for crises to shorten. Technology alone does not achieve this. Institutions that can operationalize evidence do.

The technology continues to improve. With stronger collaboration, credible estimates of physical damage and economic impact can now often be produced within 48 hours. Obstacles remain, including imagery access, weather and capacity constraints, but progress is unmistakable.

The financing architecture, however, still reflects the older reality. Emergency funding is designed to move quickly. Recovery financing often requires additional assessments, new appeals or prolonged negotiations. The result is a predictable lag between knowing the damage and investing in repair.

That lag is no longer defensible. When development actors and satellite analysts produce validated impact estimates within days, financing decisions should align with that speed.

Breaking the cycle of repeated emergency appeals will require more than improved analysis. It will require donors and institutions to treat early recovery as integral to response and to align financing with the pace of evidence.

In an age of permanent crisis, responding sequentially is a luxury the system can no longer afford. The first 48 hours should not only save lives. They should set recovery in motion.

Mukul Bhola is Director, United Nations Satellite Centre, UNITAR; Devanand Ramiah is Director of Crisis Readiness, Response and Recovery, UNDP

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Rescue workers survey the damage in the town of Toul in Lebanon’s Nabatieh governorate in the south, following bombing by Israel in response to rocket attacks by militant group Hezbollah. Credit: Action Against Hunger

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Apr 20 2026 (IPS)

Aid groups have welcomed a ten-day ceasefire agreed between Israel and Lebanon but warn only a permanent halt to fighting can allow for the kind of response needed to address the dire humanitarian situation in the country.

A ten-day truce ​to enable peace negotiations between the two countries came into effect on April 16. It can be extended by mutual agreement by both sides after that period.

The ceasefire comes after more than a month of conflict following Israel’s response to rocket attacks by the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah.

Since March 2, more than 2,000 people have been killed and 7,000 wounded in Israeli attacks, according to the Lebanese health ministry. Meanwhile, more than 1.2 million – one fifth of the estimated total population – are internally displaced, including over 400,000 children, according to humanitarian organisations, and Israeli strikes have destroyed essential civilian infrastructure and heavily affected healthcare services.

This has deepened what was already a fragile humanitarian situation following years of economic problems, a Syrian refugee crisis, and previous conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.

And while the attacks may have stopped, many people continue to face displacement, massive destruction and a lack of access to basic services and real relief will only come with a long-term end to fighting.

“We welcome the truce as a critical pause in violence, but it is not enough. Only a permanent ceasefire will allow for a response at the scale required—one that reaches families across all of Lebanon, including those in border areas who remain among the most vulnerable,” Suzanne Takkenberg, Lebanon Country Director of humanitarian group Action Against Hunger (ACF), told IPS.

Following the announcement of the truce, there have been reports of huge numbers of displaced people returning to their home towns. Aid groups have warned, though, that many are likely to return to find they have no homes left, or even if they do, conditions are so bad it will be impossible to remain there.

“Families are beginning to return to their homes, but the scale of destruction is staggering. Many are finding their houses damaged or completely destroyed, with no access to water, electricity, or basic services. People who fled with almost nothing are now returning to even less—facing conditions that make dignified living impossible,” said Takkenberg.

The destruction has been worst in the south of the country. Israel has been looking to create what it has called a “security zone”, keeping troops in an area around 10 kilometres deep inside southern Lebanon. Reports suggest many villages in that area have been utterly destroyed.

Recent, intense Israeli airstrikes targeted Tyre, Lebanon, causing significant casualties and damage to residential areas and infrastructure. The strikes were part of an ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. Credit: Action Against

“This new buffer zone that Israel is talking about – from videos I’ve seen, it’s completely demolished. We don’t expect them to allow [people] to return there, and I don’t think people will be trying to move back to that buffer zone,” Elizabeth Cossor, Head of Country Office Lebanon at Terre des hommes, which is providing humanitarian aid to children and their families in the country, told IPS.

“Hundreds of thousands of people are expected to remain displaced. They’re not going to be able to return. That’s really devastating [for them],” she added.

The impacts of the attacks on civilians have alarmed rights groups and humanitarian organisations.

A coalition of NGOs last week released a report documenting the effects of Israeli attacks on the civilian population.

It highlighted how the continued displacement in the country is driving significant health and protection risks, with women, children, the elderly and persons with disabilities disproportionately affected.

Reports indicate high instances of respiratory infections due to cold temperatures in collective shelters, gastroenteritis cases linked to insufficient food and cooking facilities, and disruption to treatment for patients with chronic diseases. Shelters are invariably overcrowded and lack adequate water and sanitation infrastructure, severely limiting privacy, dignity and psychological safety for residents, the group said. Moreover, roughly 88% of those displaced are living outside collective shelters, many in cars, public spaces or other insecure settings, the groups said.

Children have been impacted especially hard by the fighting.

Aid groups working with children have highlighted serious problems with child nutrition. According to Action Against Hunger, while 24 percent of the population faces acute food insecurity, around 15 percent of children aged 6 to 23 months in displacement zones are being fed only milk.

Meanwhile, one in five children in Lebanon has been forced from their homes by the conflict, with many suffering acute psychological distress and anxiety, according to UNICEF.

“The humanitarian situation for children in Lebanon is severe and deeply alarming. Over the past 46 days, children have paid a devastating price, with reports of at least 172 children killed and 661 injured. More than 415,000 children have been displaced, some for the third or fourth time. Their most urgent needs are safety, healthcare, safe water, nutrition, psychosocial support, child protection and access to learning,” Ricardo Pires, Communication Manager at UNICEF, told IPS.

“Children have been uprooted repeatedly, many are under acute stress, and essential services have been badly disrupted. The health system is still operating, but under severe strain. Hospitals and health workers have come under repeated impact, facilities have been damaged or forced to close, and access to care is increasingly difficult in high-risk and isolated areas. The destruction already caused to homes, schools, hospitals, water systems and roads means many children and families are likely to face serious hardship for some time, even if the fighting stops. It continues to have serious humanitarian consequences for children and families,” he added.

Cossor said the conflict could have a long-term impact on a generation of Lebanese kids.

“We still don’t have a sense of just how many children have lost their parents, their caregivers. We’re visiting hospitals where children are waking up and discovering that they’ve lost their parents and, you know, it’s just devastating. For those who also cannot return to their childhood home, you know, they’re not in school, missing family, they’ve lost their homes…. They’re losing part of their childhood, their connection to the place of their family, the place of their community. This has very long-term impacts for children,” she said.

As well as highlighting the harm caused to the civilian population, the NGOs’ report pointed to serious concerns regarding compliance with International Humanitarian Law (IHL), particularly the principles of distinction, proportionality and precautions in attacks. Likewise, IHL affords special protection to medical and humanitarian personnel and infrastructure, yet the conflict has been marked by a concerning number of attacks affecting healthcare and growing restrictions on humanitarian access, the groups said.

They also called for adherence to the IHL by all parties to the conflict, as well as urgent, sustained, and flexible funding from the international community to support the growing needs of displaced persons and those remaining in vulnerable areas.

International help will be vital given the damage that has been done, no matter what efforts the Lebanese government makes to help the population.

“The government will repair things as best they can in the cities that are north – again, north of that buffer zone area. They will do their best to restore, rehabilitate, but services will be heavily impacted. Eight bridges [in southern Lebanon] have now been destroyed, and Lebanese forces have managed to sort of put rubble together so that the last destroyed bridge is passable one car at a time. But that’s not enough to start bringing big trucks of humanitarian assistance or to start bringing in food and vegetables and other medical supplies and other things that they need in the south,” said Cossor.

“Infrastructure is destroyed, including in heavily populated areas. The Lebanese government will need enormous assistance to restore this infrastructure,” she added.

Beyond these problems, another major concern is the fragility of the current ceasefire – within hours of it coming into force, there were reports of violations.

UNICEF’S Pires said the ceasefire offered a critical opportunity to improve humanitarian access and begin restoring basic services in all areas impacted by the recent attacks. He warned, though, that if it collapsed, there would be “a grave risk of further killing, injury, displacement and trauma”.

“The weapons must remain silent and humanitarian access and workers must be protected at all times,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The Iran war has altered the Gulf’s balance of power—and the kingdom’s calculus.

Armenia's security apparatus is gearing up for the parliamentary elections on 7 June, which are set to be decisive. A defeat for Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's ruling party may jeopardise the country's pivot towards Europe and the United States which [...]

Behind the scenes, negotiations over the vote on Taiwan's special defence budget – which is currently deadlocked – are taking [...]