Agrégateur de flux

WHO team visits the pediatric oncology ward at the King Hussein Cancer Centre in Amman, Jordan. November 2025. Credit: WHO

By Shreya Komar
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 18 2026 (IPS)

When a child is diagnosed with cancer, their chances of survival should not depend on where they live, yet according to the WHO, more than 80 percent of children with cancer in high-income countries are cured, compared with fewer than 30 percent in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

The key gap lies in access to available medicines. In East Africa, hospitals report frequent stockouts of essential chemotherapy agents, with shortages affecting 32–49 percent of critical medicines such as methotrexate and etoposide. Survival therefore depends less on the discovery of new therapies and more on whether children are able to access and complete uninterrupted treatment.

“No child should be denied a chance of survival because the medicines they need are unavailable, unaffordable, or out of reach,” affirmed Dr Carlos Rodriguez-Galindo, Executive Vice President of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.

In efforts to combat this issue and in honor of Childhood Cancer Awareness Month, the World Health Organization (WHO) and its collaborators at the Global Platform for Access to Childhood Cancer Medicines published a new strategy report with a roadmap to strengthen the global market and improve the circulation of childhood cancer medicines in many LMICs.

Each year, an estimated 400,000 children develop cancer. Unlike many adult cancers, childhood cancer is generally not preventable. As a result, the most effective strategy for improving outcomes is to ensure that children receive a prompt and accurate diagnosis, followed by effective, evidence-based treatment and tailored supportive care.

The report highlighted many key barriers LMICs face when implementing this strategy. First, the supply of essential childhood cancer medicines is unreliable and depends on a small number of manufacturers, especially for medicines that meet international quality standards.

Secondly, LMICs often buy small amounts of cancer medicines, making supply less reliable and prices higher due to perceived low demand. Limited government funding and poor planning can also lead to shortages. Cancer medicines may take years to become available in LMICs because of slow approval processes. There is little investment in medicines designed specifically for children, especially for low-resource settings. This is partly because childhood cancer affects fewer people, making it a smaller market for companies.

“Persistent market challenges continue to affect access for children, and it is critical that we continue to work together to enhance the reliability and affordability of childhood cancer medicines,” said Dr. Kennedy Lishimpi, Permanent Secretary for Technical Services, Ministry of Health, Zambia.

Most types of childhood cancer can be cured with widely available generic medicines and other forms of treatment, including surgery and radiotherapy. Yet children in LMICs often face significant barriers to accessing these lifesaving interventions. Lower survival rates are driven by delays in diagnosis, difficulties obtaining an accurate diagnosis, limited access to appropriate therapy, treatment abandonment, death from treatment-related toxicity, and avoidable relapse.

Improving access to childhood cancer care, including essential medicines and technologies, has the potential to improve survival across all income settings.

The report also mentions how cost of treatment was another big barrier to care. In some cases, More than 70 percent of children being treated for leukaemia stop or do not complete their cancer treatment due to financial reasons.

The Global Platform prioritized a set of ten interventions in the report that will be implemented over 2026-2030. These included working more closely with medicine companies, increasing the number of reliable suppliers, speeding up medicine approval, improving planning and purchasing, and strengthening access to affordable, quality-assured childhood cancer medicines. The interventions also focused on supporting research, improving price information, including these medicines in national health coverage, and encouraging the development of new treatments.

“Rather than focusing only on individual products or prices, market shaping interventions aim to strengthen overall market health by improving the conditions required for sustainable access,” the report states.

In practice, this could look like integrating childhood cancer medications into national health benefit packages. For example, in 2024, Nepal declared free treatment for children with cancer at public health facilities.

“Where the price is more friendly, there are plenty of suppliers; that’s sort of the goal we’re trying to reach,” said Rongrong Liu, program manager from St. Jude’s global operations.

Additionally, the report also mentions that voluntary licensing could play an important role in improving access to new childhood cancer medicines in LMICs by allowing other quality-assured manufacturers to produce medicines that are still protected by patents. This could increase the number of suppliers, improve competition, lower prices, and help medicines reach LMICs sooner, reducing delays caused by high costs or dependence on a single manufacturer. The Global Platform plans to work with companies that own these medicines to negotiate licensing agreements for priority medicines. These agreements would allow selected manufacturers to produce and supply the medicines in LMICs under agreed conditions.

“At the beginning, we have focused only on clinical forecast, but in reality there are a lot of logistical parameters that we need to consider,” said Alessio Mola, pharmacist at WHO, emphasizing the importance of the proposed market strategies.

The newly launched roadmap provides good guidance on strengthening child cancer medicine markets and supply systems and is an essential step toward closing the survival gap and ensuring that where a child is born does not determine whether they survive cancer.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

 

 

 

Without the resources to educate, train and economically include refugees, displacement will continue to drive onward migration

By Linda Latsko Lockhart
NAIROBI, Kenya, Sep 18 2026 (IPS)

For the young women I met through Global Give Back Circle’s HER Lab in Kenya, displacement was not the end of ambition. It had interrupted school, separated families from stability, and narrowed the choices available to them. But it had not erased their hopes. What they wanted was not pity. They wanted skills, work, confidence and the chance to rebuild their lives with dignity.

Linda Latsko Lockhart

Kevine Muhimpundu, a Technology Skills participant at HER Lab Kajiado, told me how displacement and the cost of education had paused her ambitions. Monica Abul, a Fashion Design participant at HER Lab West Pokot, captured the point powerfully: “I am learning to focus not on what I have lost, but on what I can still build.”

Their stories point to what migration debates often miss: displacement is not only about movement, but also about whether people can rebuild their lives in safety and dignity. If work and opportunity do not exist locally, the question is not only how to manage migration. It is how to create opportunity in their host country.

Kevine and Monica’s experiences reflected a wider reality. UNHCR recorded 117.8 million people forcibly displaced worldwide in 2025. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre reported 83.4 million people living in internal displacement across 117 countries and territories in 2024.

This is where Africa’s local experience matters, not as a continent people are simply leaving, but as one already hosting many of its own displaced people. African migration remains predominantly regional. The African Union and the International Organisation for Migration reported that 20.8 million people had moved between African countries. They also found that 86% of refugees and asylum seekers from African countries were hosted within Africa, compared with 9.6% in Europe.

This should reset the debate. Most African refugees and displaced people are already hosted within the continent. The challenge is not simply whether Europe or the United States should receive more people, but whether African host countries have the systems, resources and investment to help refugees rebuild locally. When opportunity exists, onward migration becomes less about desperation and more about choice.

This is not an argument against migration or the right to seek asylum. Migration can benefit individuals, communities and economies. But forced movement should not be the only route to dignity. Refugees need recognised skills, training, routes into work and confidence that their futures are not on hold. That means investing in education, accredited training, entrepreneurship, financial inclusion and community acceptance, so refugees can contribute to host economies.

The kind of local capacity needed is not abstract. In Kenya, Global Give Back Circle’s HER Lab, delivered in partnership with the Mastercard Foundation, shows what this can look like in practice. Across Kajiado and West Pokot counties, HER Lab supports 32 young refugee women: 19 in Kajiado from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and 13 in West Pokot from South Sudan, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. They are receiving training in fields ranging from coding and electrical installation to fashion, food production, cosmetology and agriculture. The HER Lab model combines market-aligned skills, mentorship, confidence-building, financial inclusion and pathways into employment or enterprise.

HER Lab reflects a broader shift. Through its $300 million partnership with UNHCR, the Mastercard Foundation is supporting half a million young refugees and displaced people across Africa to complete their education and enter dignified work.

In Dadaab, Dadaab Refugee Voices is applying the ILO’s Rural Employment Services model to connect refugees and host communities with job registration, guidance, matching, skills support and digital training. Already, 6,189 jobseekers have registered and received support, showing how local systems can move people towards work and self-reliance.

During and after the 12-month HER Lab programme, young women are building businesses in poultry, beauty, beadwork, retail and regenerative farming, while others are gaining skills in plumbing, agribusiness, digital literacy and electrical work. Through the HER Financial Freedom Programme, hundreds of previously unbanked rural women have gained access to savings and credit in addition to membership in a women-operated tea production cooperative. These are local routes to dignity, income and self-reliance.

That is why local capacity is central to the future of migration policy. Without the resources to educate, train and economically include refugees, displacement will continue to drive onward migration. With support for local initiatives and building inclusive systems, host countries can address some of the pressures that force people to move.

The policy response is clear. Governments, donors, development finance institutions, philanthropies and the private sector should back efforts that are locally rooted, measurable and designed for scale. Western governments, in particular, have a role beyond deterrence or crisis response. Investing in African countries and locally led initiatives can expand education, skills, livelihoods and financial inclusion for refugees and host populations alike. It can also turn migration partnerships into a shared effort to reduce forced movement.

The strongest migration policy is not one that pretends movement can simply be stopped. It is one that gives people real choices before movement becomes unavoidable. Africa is showing what inclusion can look like when opportunity is built locally.

The world should not look away. It should invest in helping that approach scale.

Linda Latsko Lockhart is the Founder and CEO of Global Give Back Circle, a serial social entrepreneur focused on the empowerment of women and girls in Africa and beyond. Named to Forbes “50 Over 50: Impact List”, she brings over 25 years of global leadership designing scalable, gender-based financial independence models. Through her organisation, Lockhart helps marginalised women and girls gain education, financial tools, and lasting economic resilience.

IPS UN Bureau

 

 

 

 

Excerpt:

Without the resources to educate, train and economically include refugees, displacement will continue to drive onward migration

Walid Abukhaled, who was recently appointed chairman of the board of the Saudi biscuit and confectionery manufacturer and exporter United Food Industries Corp (also known as Deemah), is better acquainted with weaponry than with sweet treats. He was already a [...]

Havas Paris shows no sign of letting up in its drive to break new ground. Yannick Bolloré's communications agency, led [...]

The tender selection process for a new batch of around 30 vessels under the Philippine Navy's Fast Attack Interdiction Craft [...]

There's a joke within the intelligence community that you need a CIA badge to get into the McLean Family Restaurant, [...]

A French court has ruled in favour of a more flexible use of complementary notes to the unsigned memos or notes blanches used by the French administration, and therefore the intelligence services.

A new Russian embassy is set to officially open in Comoros in the coming months, but its ambassador was appointed by presidential decree in early September.

Congo’s warning for the global health system.

The U.S. military needs to build up its endurance.

The physical state of the 81-year-old raised questions about his fitness to participate in what is likely to be a protracted trial.

Many Nigerians buy their first ever shares - in the oil refinery owned by Africa's richest man, Aliko Dangote.

It’s the relationships, stupid. 

It happened in 1920. At the Grand Trianon Palace at Versailles, the Allies drew a new map of Hungary that sliced away two-thirds of its territory. Such a cartographic mutilation went down in history as the Treaty of Trianon. No country lost more territory after the First World War. Overnight, more than three million Hungarians […]

Heia Safari. Général von Lettow-Vorbeck, du Kilimanjaro aux combats de Berlin (1914-1920).
30 euros au lieu de 36 euros

En 1913, le lieutenant-colonel (Oberst-Leutnant) Paul-Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck reçut le commandement de la Schutztruppe (troupe de protection) de l’immense DOA (Deutsche Ost-Afrika), l’est africain allemand, qui comprenait alors les actuels Rwanda, Burundi et Tanzanie moins Zanzibar. Après mobilisation des colons ses effectifs étaient de 2600 Allemands et de 6000 askaris.  Face à eux, les Britanniques, les Sud-africains, les Belges et les Portugais alignèrent plusieurs centaines de milliers d’hommes.
Les Allemands remportèrent victoire sur victoire, mais, engagement après engagement, leur petite troupe fondait comme neige au soleil, or, totalement coupés de l’Europe, il leur était impossible de combler leurs pertes en hommes et en matériel.
Durant le conflit, Alliés et Allemands menèrent deux guerres différentes. Forts de leur inépuisable supériorité humaine et matérielle, les premiers progressèrent collés à leurs axes de ravitaillement, compensant leur lenteur par la saturation du terrain. Tout au contraire, utilisant au maximum les réalités topographiques, les forces de von Lettow-Vorbeck effectuèrent des déplacements rapides opérant de brusques et inattendus changements de direction, surprenant ainsi leurs adversaires comme l’a reconnu le commandant en chef britannique : « Il y a toujours trois routes ouvertes à l’ennemi, et von Lettow-Vorbeck prend d’ordinaire la quatrième ».
Le 13 novembre 1918, Il restait à ce dernier 155 Allemands et 1156 askaris en état de combattre, quand, par la capture d’une estafette anglaise, il apprit qu’un armistice venait d’être signé en Europe. Refusant de se rendre car il refusait toute idée de capitulation, von Lettow-Vorbeck obtint que les honneurs soient rendus à sa troupe, que les officiers conservent leurs armes, que les Allemands soient rapatriés et non internés. La partie africaine de l’épopée prit fin le 25 novembre 1918 dans l’actuelle Zambie, alors que l'armistice avait été signé en Europe depuis 14 jours.
En mars 1919, derrière leur chef, les Allemands survivants de l’épopée africaine firent une entrée triomphale à Berlin dans un terrible contexte de révolution bolchévique. Von Lettow-Vorbeck reçut alors le commandement des trois brigades de marine allemandes (infanterie de marine), dont la fameuse brigade ‘‘Ehrhardt’’, qui constituèrent la Marine-Division von Lettow-Vorbeck, également connue sous le nom de Division de volontaires von Lettow-Vorbeck, qui brisa les soulèvements des communistes à Hambourg et à Munich.
Au mois de mai 1920, après l’échec du putsch Kapp-Luttwitz, von Lettow Vorbeck fut mis à la retraite avec le grade de Generalleutnant honoraire. Quant à la Marine-Division von Lettow-Vorbeck, elle fut dissoute et ses hommes plongèrent dans l’aventure du Baltikum.
C’est cette histoire-épopée qui est racontée dans ce livre d’une grande qualité d’impression Heia Safari. Général von Lettow-Vorbeck, du Kilimanjaro aux combats de Berlin (1914-1920,) composé de 294 pages, d’une iconographie exceptionnelle de très nombreuses photographies et documents d’époque, ainsi que de cartes.
 
Pour commander le livre deux possibilités :
1) Un chèque de 30 euros à : L’Afrique Réelle, BP 32, 03160 Bourbon l’Archambault (une adresse courriel est utile pour le suivi de la commande). Pour l’UE et la Suisse, le prix est de 35 euros port compris et de 50 euros pour le reste du monde.

2) Un paiement Paypal 

cartPaypal.AddToCart({ id: "9ZNGPTHVZHLNC" })

CONTRE-POINT - Donner acte au premier ministre de ses intentions n’empêche cependant pas d’être lucide sur le contenu et la pérennité de sa copie.

Beijing’s real vulnerability is not international action. It’s rising awareness within the Chinese population. 

Um schneller auf Bedrohungen zu reagieren, schlägt EU-Kommissionspräsidentin von der Leyen einen Alarmechanismus und einen Europäischen Sicherheitsrat vor. Das Format soll auch Partner wie Großbritannien oder Kanada einbinden.

/ Iran, Conflit, Pétrole, Géopolitique, Transports, Énergie - Proche-Orient / Iran, Conflit, Pétrole, Géopolitique, Transports, Énergie

Nous voici à sept semaines du 3 novembre. Et jamais, dans l’histoire récente des États-Unis, des élections législatives n’avaient revêtu une telle importance — ni un président sortant fait preuve d’une telle agressivité pour tenter d’en infléchir le cours.

La convention républicaine de Dallas des 9 et 10 septembre aura donné le ton. Surnommée “Trumpapalooza” par une presse médusée, cette grand-messe inédite — les républicains n’avaient jamais organisé de convention à mi-mandat — a été imposée par Donald Trump lui-même. Lorsque le speaker de la Chambre Mike Johnson lui a objecté que “ça ne se fait pas”, Trump aurait répondu : « Make it a thing. » On ne saurait mieux résumer sa conception des institutions.  

Le président américain a donc transformé ce scrutin en référendum sur sa propre personne, interpellant les électeurs depuis la scène de l’American Airlines Center : « Faites comme si j’étais sur le bulletin de vote. » Pour s’assurer que le message passe, il a promis un chèque de 5 000 dollars à chaque citoyen états-unien adulte si les républicains conservent le Congrès. Rien de moins.

Le hic, c’est que tous les indicateurs lui sont défavorables. Sa cote d’approbation est au plus bas — même au Texas, État hôte de la convention. La guerre en Iran, vécue aux États-Unis comme un véritable fiasco, a fracturé sa base MAGA. Le pouvoir d’achat s’érode chaque jour davantage. Et les sondages donnent aux démocrates une nette avance pour reprendre la majorité à la Chambre des représentants avec le Sénat en ligne de mire.

Mais Trump n’est pas homme à accepter une défaite. Et la contestation des résultats a déjà commencé — bien avant que les bureaux de vote n’aient ouvert.

Elle a débuté le 3 juillet au pied du mont Rushmore, la veille du 250e anniversaire des États-Unis, lorsque le milliardaire new-yorkais a prononcé un discours proprement lunaire dans lequel il agitait le spectre d’un « danger communiste » prêt à « submerger l’Amérique de l’intérieur. » Puis est venue, quelques jours plus tard, une allocution à la nation dans laquelle il affirmait, preuves à l’appui selon lui, que la Chine avait massivement truqué en faveur des démocrates les données électorales américaines depuis 2020. On se demandera naturellement comment, si tel était le cas, il a pu être brillamment réélu en 2024. Mais Donald Trump n’a jamais été embarrassé par ses propres contradictions.

L’objectif de ces déclarations est transparent : préparer le terrain et légitimer une contestation des résultats de novembre. Le scénario se dessine depuis des mois. Si les républicains perdent la Chambre, Trump n’acceptera pas le verdict. Il invoquera des fraudes, des ingérences étrangères, un complot « radical-gauchiste. » Il a déjà pratiqué l’exercice en 2020. Il recommencera.

Mais cette fois, il pourrait aller plus loin. Des rumeurs persistantes circulent à Washington selon lesquelles il envisagerait de proclamer l’état d’urgence en octobre — avant même la tenue du scrutin — pour en retarder l’organisation. 

Constitutionnellement, un président ne peut interférer sur le processus électoral : la date des élections est fixée par la loi, pas par décret. Mais plus de vingt gouverneurs républicains — qui contrôlent l’organisation des élections dans leurs États — ont d’ores et déjà fait savoir qu’ils suivraient les directives de Trump, y compris inconstitutionnelles. Ce seul fait devrait faire froid dans le dos.

Proclamation d’état d’urgence avant les élections, ou contestation après — dans les deux cas, le pays plongerait dans une crise institutionnelle sans précédent. Et même si Donald Trump décidait, in fine, de s’asseoir sur des résultats défavorables et de gouverner par décrets en ignorant une nouvelle majorité démocrate à la Chambre, voire au Sénat, le bras de fer institutionnel qui s’ensuivrait serait d’une violence que les États-Unis n’ont jamais connue. Des procédures d’impeachment en cascade. Des blocages budgétaires. Des batailles judiciaires portées devant une Cour suprême trumpisée. Le tout se concluant potentiellement par un remake du 6 janvier 2021, version XXL, qui cette fois-ci pourrait même inclure les parlements locaux. Bref, une Amérique en état de guerre civile plus tout à fait froide.

Tout pointe donc, d’une manière ou d’une autre, vers une nouvelle fuite en avant autoritaire. Quelle que soit l’issue du scrutin.

Celles et ceux qui affirment avec certitude que tout se passera bien, que les institutions feront digue, que les Américains voteront sereinement le 3 novembre et que la droite crypto fasciste au pouvoir acceptera sagement le résultat, sont les mêmes qui juraient en 2015 que Trump ne serait jamais élu. Les mêmes qui, après l’assaut sur le Capitole, nous assuraient qu’il finirait ses jours en prison. Les mêmes, encore, qui, en 2024, criaient à qui voulait les entendre qu’il ne pourrait jamais revenir au pouvoir —les électeurs ayant soi-disant compris la leçon.

Dans quelques semaines, l’Amérique votera —ou du moins devrait voter. Ce qui se passera ensuite, personne ne le sait vraiment. Et c’est précisément ce qui doit nous inquiéter.

Romuald Sciora, essayiste franco-américain, est directeur de l’Observatoire politique et géostratégique des États-Unis de l’IRIS. Dernières publications: « America 250, une histoire graphique des États-Unis, vol. 1, Né dans le sang » et « Lettre ouverte à Trump d’un Américain de papier » (éditions Point Nemo).

L’article Midterms 2026 : entre état d’urgence et contestation est apparu en premier sur IRIS.