Agrégateur de flux

Length of video : 120'

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Central Asia has emerged as a key region where the convergence of geopolitics and development cooperation is most visible. Major powers are redefining their approaches: Japan combines official development assistance (ODA) with commercial partnerships to advance connectivity and reform; the EU is emphasising a sustainable infrastructure and governance-oriented approach; the US is expected to catalyse private investment rather than direct aid; China deepens its regional presence through the Belt and Road Initiative; while Russia leverages historical and security ties to maintain influence. Meanwhile, middle powers – countries that do not wield vast influence like major powers but possess substantial capacity to shape international events – are exploring new opportunities for engagement. Türkiye positions itself as a bridge between advanced economies and the Global South, emphasising connectivity and energy cooperation through the Middle Corridor and the Organization of Turkic States.
South Korea’s 2025 ODA Strategy for Central Asia identifies the region as a strategic partner for shared growth, integrating pragmatic diplomacy with value-based cooperation. By leveraging their soft power and policy experience, these middle powers offer a distinctive model for development partnership. Central Asian governments are responding to a changing international environment by diversifying partnerships through regional integration and more strategic engagement with development  partners.

Hyeyoung Woo is a specialist at the Center for International Development (CID), Korea Development Institute (KDI). From July to October 2025, she served as a guest researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS). She holds a Ph.D. in Development Policy from the KDI School of Public Policy and Management, where her dissertation examined transition countries, including those in Central Asia. Over the past years, she has contributed to policy consultations through Korea’s Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) with Uzbekistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, particularly in fintech regulatory sandbox development and official development assistance (ODA) evaluation.

Central Asia has emerged as a key region where the convergence of geopolitics and development cooperation is most visible. Major powers are redefining their approaches: Japan combines official development assistance (ODA) with commercial partnerships to advance connectivity and reform; the EU is emphasising a sustainable infrastructure and governance-oriented approach; the US is expected to catalyse private investment rather than direct aid; China deepens its regional presence through the Belt and Road Initiative; while Russia leverages historical and security ties to maintain influence. Meanwhile, middle powers – countries that do not wield vast influence like major powers but possess substantial capacity to shape international events – are exploring new opportunities for engagement. Türkiye positions itself as a bridge between advanced economies and the Global South, emphasising connectivity and energy cooperation through the Middle Corridor and the Organization of Turkic States.
South Korea’s 2025 ODA Strategy for Central Asia identifies the region as a strategic partner for shared growth, integrating pragmatic diplomacy with value-based cooperation. By leveraging their soft power and policy experience, these middle powers offer a distinctive model for development partnership. Central Asian governments are responding to a changing international environment by diversifying partnerships through regional integration and more strategic engagement with development  partners.

Hyeyoung Woo is a specialist at the Center for International Development (CID), Korea Development Institute (KDI). From July to October 2025, she served as a guest researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS). She holds a Ph.D. in Development Policy from the KDI School of Public Policy and Management, where her dissertation examined transition countries, including those in Central Asia. Over the past years, she has contributed to policy consultations through Korea’s Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) with Uzbekistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, particularly in fintech regulatory sandbox development and official development assistance (ODA) evaluation.

Central Asia has emerged as a key region where the convergence of geopolitics and development cooperation is most visible. Major powers are redefining their approaches: Japan combines official development assistance (ODA) with commercial partnerships to advance connectivity and reform; the EU is emphasising a sustainable infrastructure and governance-oriented approach; the US is expected to catalyse private investment rather than direct aid; China deepens its regional presence through the Belt and Road Initiative; while Russia leverages historical and security ties to maintain influence. Meanwhile, middle powers – countries that do not wield vast influence like major powers but possess substantial capacity to shape international events – are exploring new opportunities for engagement. Türkiye positions itself as a bridge between advanced economies and the Global South, emphasising connectivity and energy cooperation through the Middle Corridor and the Organization of Turkic States.
South Korea’s 2025 ODA Strategy for Central Asia identifies the region as a strategic partner for shared growth, integrating pragmatic diplomacy with value-based cooperation. By leveraging their soft power and policy experience, these middle powers offer a distinctive model for development partnership. Central Asian governments are responding to a changing international environment by diversifying partnerships through regional integration and more strategic engagement with development  partners.

Hyeyoung Woo is a specialist at the Center for International Development (CID), Korea Development Institute (KDI). From July to October 2025, she served as a guest researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS). She holds a Ph.D. in Development Policy from the KDI School of Public Policy and Management, where her dissertation examined transition countries, including those in Central Asia. Over the past years, she has contributed to policy consultations through Korea’s Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) with Uzbekistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, particularly in fintech regulatory sandbox development and official development assistance (ODA) evaluation.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – the global framework establishing 17 universal and interconnected goals to guide sustainable development efforts – was adopted in 2015 following a uniquely participative and ambitious process. A decade on, it is increasingly evident that most of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are unlikely to be achieved by 2030 as originally envisioned. Discussions about a follow-up framework beyond 2030 are gaining momentum ahead of the SDG Summit in September 2027. This paper evaluates the process design, inclusiveness, negotiating strategies, fora and fault lines in 2015 and discusses to what extent the lessons learned can be applied to negotiations for a potential follow-up framework. We find that several process design elements and negotiation strategies, as well as actor composition, fostered trust and ownership, reduced polarisation and enabled agreements on ambitious targets. In particular, the process benefited from the inclusion of diverse, non-hierarchical actor communities, a long, science-based stocktaking phase, the breaking up of traditional negotiating blocks, transparency, and emphasis on common interests. We also identify several recurring fault lines that are overwhelmingly still relevant today. Apart from the above best practices of the process leading to the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, we identify several shortcomings that should be addressed in the beyond-2030 negotiations: inefficiencies due to competing tracks for the development of the goals; top-down agenda-setting processes leading to less ambitious outcomes; barriers to participation of and accountability towards some marginalised and informal actors; and the watering down of goals and indicators – including non-tangible targets and unresolved inconsistencies and trade-offs within the agenda. Finally, the paper argues that the beyond-2030 negotiations will take place in a context that is similar to the process that led to the SDGs but is nevertheless in many ways more challenging than in 2015, amidst intensifying crises, political shifts and loss of trust.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – the global framework establishing 17 universal and interconnected goals to guide sustainable development efforts – was adopted in 2015 following a uniquely participative and ambitious process. A decade on, it is increasingly evident that most of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are unlikely to be achieved by 2030 as originally envisioned. Discussions about a follow-up framework beyond 2030 are gaining momentum ahead of the SDG Summit in September 2027. This paper evaluates the process design, inclusiveness, negotiating strategies, fora and fault lines in 2015 and discusses to what extent the lessons learned can be applied to negotiations for a potential follow-up framework. We find that several process design elements and negotiation strategies, as well as actor composition, fostered trust and ownership, reduced polarisation and enabled agreements on ambitious targets. In particular, the process benefited from the inclusion of diverse, non-hierarchical actor communities, a long, science-based stocktaking phase, the breaking up of traditional negotiating blocks, transparency, and emphasis on common interests. We also identify several recurring fault lines that are overwhelmingly still relevant today. Apart from the above best practices of the process leading to the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, we identify several shortcomings that should be addressed in the beyond-2030 negotiations: inefficiencies due to competing tracks for the development of the goals; top-down agenda-setting processes leading to less ambitious outcomes; barriers to participation of and accountability towards some marginalised and informal actors; and the watering down of goals and indicators – including non-tangible targets and unresolved inconsistencies and trade-offs within the agenda. Finally, the paper argues that the beyond-2030 negotiations will take place in a context that is similar to the process that led to the SDGs but is nevertheless in many ways more challenging than in 2015, amidst intensifying crises, political shifts and loss of trust.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – the global framework establishing 17 universal and interconnected goals to guide sustainable development efforts – was adopted in 2015 following a uniquely participative and ambitious process. A decade on, it is increasingly evident that most of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are unlikely to be achieved by 2030 as originally envisioned. Discussions about a follow-up framework beyond 2030 are gaining momentum ahead of the SDG Summit in September 2027. This paper evaluates the process design, inclusiveness, negotiating strategies, fora and fault lines in 2015 and discusses to what extent the lessons learned can be applied to negotiations for a potential follow-up framework. We find that several process design elements and negotiation strategies, as well as actor composition, fostered trust and ownership, reduced polarisation and enabled agreements on ambitious targets. In particular, the process benefited from the inclusion of diverse, non-hierarchical actor communities, a long, science-based stocktaking phase, the breaking up of traditional negotiating blocks, transparency, and emphasis on common interests. We also identify several recurring fault lines that are overwhelmingly still relevant today. Apart from the above best practices of the process leading to the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, we identify several shortcomings that should be addressed in the beyond-2030 negotiations: inefficiencies due to competing tracks for the development of the goals; top-down agenda-setting processes leading to less ambitious outcomes; barriers to participation of and accountability towards some marginalised and informal actors; and the watering down of goals and indicators – including non-tangible targets and unresolved inconsistencies and trade-offs within the agenda. Finally, the paper argues that the beyond-2030 negotiations will take place in a context that is similar to the process that led to the SDGs but is nevertheless in many ways more challenging than in 2015, amidst intensifying crises, political shifts and loss of trust.

Das Konjunkturbarometer des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin) setzt seinen schrittweisen Aufwärtstrend fort und steigt im Januar auf 94,8 Punkte. Im Dezember lag der Wert noch bei 93,4 Punkten. Der Barometerwert ist somit noch einmal etwas näher an die neutrale 100-Punkte ...

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Hinduism gained ground in the region in the early centuries of the Common Era because it provided elites with a fully-fleshed metaphysical package along with literacy.

Bauvolumen dürfte 2026 erstmals seit fünf Jahren wieder zulegen – Öffentliche Investitionen treiben das Wachstum – Auch der Wohnungsneubau dürfte im laufenden Jahr wieder im Plus landen – Sorge bereitet schwache Produktivität im Bausektor Die deutsche Bauwirtschaft steht vor einer Trendwende: Nach ...

Après la reprise du contrôle du camp d'Al-Hol par l'armée syrienne, des dizaines de femmes et d'enfants originaires des Balkans, notamment de Bosnie-Herzégovine, vivent dans l'incertitude. Les espoirs de rapatriement s'éloignent, tandis que les ONG dénoncent les conditions de détention.

- Le fil de l'Info / Balkans Syrie, Relations internationales, Bosnie-Herzégovine, Populations, minorités et migrations, Radio Slobodna Evropa

A katonai hagyományőrző rendezvények evidens módon illeszkednek a podcastunk profiljába, amivel csapatunk is tisztában van, de igazság szerint néhány zsámbéki eseményt leszámítva nincs ilyenekről tapasztalatunk sajnos. Ami pedig kifejezetten a középkori/lovagkori tematikájú fesztiválokat illeti (tágabb értelemben a vikinges tematikát is ide sorolhatjuk), ahol persze a folklór is fókuszban lehet a pusztán katonai dolgok mellett, ezekről kb. annyit „tudunk”, hogy sok helyen léteznek, ill. hogy időnként a visegrádi és a nagyvázsonyi várakban is rendeznek (vagy most már csak rendeztek?) ilyesmit. Mindenesetre aztán az angliai Rózsák Háborújához kötődő adásaink előkészítése során rábukkantunk arra az információra, hogy a Lancester- és a York-házak közötti utolsó jelentős csata helyszínén, a délnyugat-angliai Tewkesbury egyébként csendes és nagyrészt azért érdektelen városkájában már négy évtizede rendeznek nyaranta egy efféle elég komoly programot, az emlékezetpolitika és a turizmus jegyében egyaránt.

[...] Bővebben!

It’s the state’s inability to create civilian capacity.

Marcus Tantau from Templeton Research sees maritime Southeast Asia faring well, but predicts mixed fortunes for the mainland nations.

Große Internetplattformen prägen Wirtschaft, Politik und Gesellschaft in der EU, stellen den Binnenmarkt vor neue Herausforderungen und sind wegen ihrer überwiegenden US-amerikanischen Herkunft auch zu­nehmend ein geopolitisches Konfliktthema. Online-Plattformen haben ambivalente Effekte: Sie fördern Integration, Innovation und Digitalisierung des Binnenmarkts, bergen aber zugleich Risiken wie Marktmachtmissbrauch, Desinformation und intransparente algorithmische Steuerung. Die EU hat ihren Regulierungsansatz deutlich verschärft, insbesondere mit den beiden Verordnungen DSA und DMA. Sie steht bei der Durch­setzung jedoch vor einer Reihe von Hürden: der nicht eindeutigen Rechtsklarheit, der asymmetrischen Ressourcenverteilung zwischen Regulierungsbehörden und großen digitalen Plattformen und der un­zureichenden Verpflichtung zu algorithmischer Transparenz. Zur Stärkung der digitalen Souveränität wird die Einrichtung einer unabhängigen europäischen Digitalaufsicht empfohlen. Sie könnte darauf hinwirken, dass nationale Vollzugsdefizite und regulatorische Fragmentierung überwunden und Vorschriften einheitlich durchgesetzt werden. Digitale Regulierung allein reicht nicht aus: Sie muss durch eine um­fassende industrie- und wettbewerbspolitische Strategie ergänzt werden, die das Wachstum europäischer Technologieunternehmen im globalen Wettbewerb fördert.

Photos

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

On January 27, 2026, the International Peace Institute (IPI) hosted its annual Peacekeeping Observatory workshop, in partnership with the French Ministry of the Armed Forces’ Directorate General for International Relations and Strategy (DGRIS). This year’s workshop focused on mission transitions. Participants included member state representatives, UN personnel, and independent experts.

The first session provided an opportunity to take stock of the UN Transitions Project, which concluded in 2025. Comprising the UN Development Coordination Office (DCO), the Department of Peace Operations (DPO), the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA), and the UN Development Program (UNDP), the project, which started in 2014, provided direct support to countries undergoing transitions and contributed to the development of UN Secretariat guidance on transitions. In addition to reflecting on the conclusions and practices that emerged from the project, participants considered how the political landscape on transitions has changed since the adoption of Security Council resolution 2594. The discussion emphasized the importance of ensuring flexibility and coherence in transition planning while sustaining political engagement with host governments. Experts discussed opportunities for sustaining efforts on critical tasks, such as the protection of civilians during and after transitions through integrated planning with UN country teams and leveraging financing mechanisms like the Peacebuilding Fund.

The second session focused on critical challenges from the field in current and recent transition settings. Much of the discussion centered on responses to accelerated withdrawals and transitions in crisis settings, drawing on the experience of MINUSMA. Participants discussed ways to address challenges related to financing gaps, knowledge and capacity transfer, and sustaining political engagement in volatile contexts. Experts also reflected on the importance of strategic communications in transition planning and in managing public information and awareness, especially around mandate renewals, transitions, and/or reconfigurations of the UN presence.

During a working lunch, participants were briefed by the co-facilitators of the recently concluded 2025 peacebuilding architecture review (PBAR), including reflections on the role that the UN Peacebuilding Commission and the Peacebuilding Fund can play in transition contexts. The ensuing discussion focused on funding challenges for peacebuilding, obstacles to the implementation of the PBAR, and the willingness of member states to engage with the peacebuilding architecture.

The final session considered potential future transitions and how they can be informed by key takeaways from the workshop. Participants discussed the need for missions to have exit strategies from the beginning while anticipating different scenarios, the importance of engaging host states authorities, civil society and local communities in transition processes, the relevance of transition benchmarks, and challenges and opportunities for developing networked approaches to multilateralism.

As part of its Peacekeeping Observatory series, IPI will also publish three issue briefs in 2026 on UN mission transitions, including:

• The role of strategic communications in mission transitions, by Albert Trithart
• Accelerated withdrawals and transitions in crisis settings, by Dirk Druet
• Women, peace, and security and transitions, by Lauren McGowan and Evyn Papworth

The post IPI Peacekeeping Observatory Series on Mission Transitions appeared first on International Peace Institute.

Photos

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

Le 27 Janvier 2026, l’International Peace Institute (IPI) a organisé le séminaire annuel de l’Observatoire sur Maintien de la Paix, en collaboration avec la Direction Générale des Relations Internationales et de la Stratégie (DGRIS) du Ministère Français des Armées. L’édition de cette année était consacrée aux transitions des missions. Le séminaire a réuni des représentants d’États Membres, du personnel des Nations Unies, ainsi que des experts indépendants.

La première session a permis de dresser un bilan  du UN Transition Project, conclu en 2025. Réunissant le Bureau de la Coordination du Développement des Nations Unies (DCO), le Département des Opérations de Paix (DPO), le Département des Affaires Politiques et de la Consolidation de la Paix (DPPA) et le Programme des Nations Unies pour le Développement (PNUD), ce projet débuté en 2014 a apporté un appui direct aux pays engagés dans des processus de transition et a contribué à l’élaboration de lignes directrices du Secrétariat de l’ONU sur les transitions. Au-delà d’un retour sur les conclusions et les bonnes pratiques issues du projet, les participants ont examiné l’évolution du contexte politique depuis l’adoption de la résolution 2594 du Conseil de Sécurité. Les échanges ont souligné l’importance de préserver à la fois la flexibilité et la cohérence dans la planification des transitions, tout en soutenant un engagement politique avec les gouvernements hôtes. Les experts ont également identifié des pistes pour pérenniser les efforts sur certains aspects particulièrement critiques, tels que la  protection des civils pendant et après les transitions, à travers une planification intégrée avec les équipes de pays des Nations Unies et le recours à des mécanismes de financement tels que le Fonds pour la Consolidation de la Paix.

La deuxième session a porté sur les retours d’expérience du terrain sur les défis identifiés des contextes de transition actuels ou récents. La majeure partie de la discussion s’est concentrée sur les retraits accélérés et aux transitions menées dans des situations de crise, en s’appuyant notamment sur l’expérience de la MINUSMA. Les participants ont échangé sur les moyens de faire face aux lacunes de financement, aux enjeux de transfert de connaissances et de capacités, ainsi qu’à la difficulté de maintenir un engagement politique dans des environnements instables. Les experts ont également insisté sur l’importance d’intégrer la communication stratégique dans la planification des transitions, ainsi que d’assurer une bonne gestion de l’information et la sensibilisation des populations, en particulier lors des renouvellements de mandat, des transitions ou des reconfigurations de la présence onusienne.

Lors d’un déjeuner travail, les participants ont été briefés par les co-facilitateurs de la Revue sur l’architecture de Consolidation de la Paix de 2025 (Peacebuilding Architecture Review – PBAR), conclue récemment, notamment sur le rôle que peuvent jouer la Commission de Consolidation de la Paix des Nations Unies et le Fonds pour la consolidation de la paix dans les contextes de transition. Les échanges qui ont suivi ont porté sur les défis liés au financement de la consolidation de la paix, les obstacles à la mise en œuvre des recommandations du PBAR et la volonté des États Membres de s’engager pleinement dans cette architecture.

La dernière session a été consacrée aux transitions potentielles à venir et à la manière dont elles pourraient s’appuyer sur les principaux enseignements du séminaire. Les participants ont souligné la nécessité pour les missions de disposer de stratégies de sortie dès leur conception tout en anticipant les différents scénarios, l’importance d’associer les autorités du pays hôte, la société civile et les communautés locales aux processus de transition, la pertinence des indicateurs pour évaluer les transitions, ainsi que les défis et opportunités liés au développement d’approches en réseau dans l’action multilatérale.

Dans le cadre de l’Observatoire du Maintien de la Paix, IPI publiera également en 2026 trois notes d’analyse consacrées aux transitions des missions des Nations unies, portant sur:

• Le rôle de la communication stratégique lors des transitions des missions, par Albert Trithart;
• Les retraits accélérés et les transitions dans des contextes de crise, par Dirk Druet;
• Les enjeux relatifs aux problématiques de Femmes, Paix et Sécurité lors des transitions, par Lauren McGowan et Evyn Papworth.

The post L’Observatoire sur le Maintien de la Paix – Série sur les Transitions des Missions appeared first on International Peace Institute.