Agrégateur de flux

Seit ihrer Gründung verweist die BRICS-Gruppe immer wieder auf die Vereinten Nationen als zentralen Rahmen der internationalen Ordnung. Trotz des Gewichts einzelner BRICS-Mitglieder gelingt es BRICS als Gruppe aufgrund interner Diskrepanzen aber bisher nicht, etablierte Ordnungselemente zu unterminieren oder alternative Ordnungsvorschläge zu lancieren.

Seit ihrer Gründung verweist die BRICS-Gruppe immer wieder auf die Vereinten Nationen als zentralen Rahmen der internationalen Ordnung. Trotz des Gewichts einzelner BRICS-Mitglieder gelingt es BRICS als Gruppe aufgrund interner Diskrepanzen aber bisher nicht, etablierte Ordnungselemente zu unterminieren oder alternative Ordnungsvorschläge zu lancieren.

The selection offers a snapshot of the names politicians across the EU deem credible to take power in Tehran

« Tout est grâce »
• Les grandes familles YAOGO, NIKIEMA, KABORE, KAFANDO à Koankin/Nédogo, commune de Boudry, province du Ganzourgou, ainsi qu'à Zorgho, Ouagadougou, Pouytenga, Bobo Dioulasso, en Côte d'Ivoire et en France,
• La grande famille OUOBA à Kantchari et à Ouagadougou,

• Son Excellence Naaba Tanga 2 de Nédogo,
• Monsieur YAOGO Bila Francis et son épouse Awa Chantal OUOBA à Nioko1, Commune de Saaba, Kadiogo,
• Les frères du défunt : Evariste et Sylvère,
• Les familles alliées et amies,

très touchés par les nombreuses marques de sympathie et de soutiens multiformes dont ils ont bénéficié lors de la maladie suivie du décès et de l'enterrement de leur fils, frère et cousin, YAOGO Bonaventure Van Brice, agent en service à la Société nationale Burkinabè des Hydrocarbures (SONABHY), le lundi 16 février 2026 au CHU de TENGANDOGO,
expriment leur profonde reconnaissance et leurs sincères remerciements à toutes et à tous pour votre présence, votre compassion et votre solidarité.

Les familles remercient particulièrement :
 Son Excellence Monsieur Roch Marc Christian KABORE et son épouse ;
 Monsieur Adama Luc SORGHO et épouse à Ouagadougou ;
 Monsieur Eric BOUGMA, Directeur Général Adjoint de la Banque Sahélo-Saharienne pour l'Investissement et le Commerce (BSIC) ;
 Monsieur le Directeur Général de la SONABHY et son personnel ;
 Docteur Yentèma Fulbert LOMPO, Responsable de la pharmacie YENTEMA et son personnel ;

 Les médecins et personnels soignants des Services d'Urgence et de Chirurgie des hôpitaux YALGADO OUEDRAOGO, SCHIPHRA et TENGANDOGO,
 Monsieur le Curé de la Paroisse Saint André de Saaba et l'ensemble des prêtres, les sœurs, les diacres et les catéchistes de ladite Paroisse ;
 Les différentes CCB et groupes de prière, la Chorale ainsi que toute la communauté catholique de la Paroisse Saint André de Saaba ;
 La Coordination, les CCB et toute la communauté catholique de la Paroisse Saint Charles LWANGA de Wayalguin ;

 Les voisins et voisines de Nioko1 ;
 Les délégations venues des différentes localités du Burkina Faso ;
 Toutes les nombreuses bonnes volontés ;
 Ainsi que toutes les personnes dont les noms n'ont pas pu être cités.
Que le Tout Puissant rende à chacun le centuple de ses bienfaits.
Dans la vie comme dans la mort nous appartenons au Seigneur.
ROMAIN14.8

Après l'attaque américano-israélienne contre l'Iran, des canaux Telegram prorusses appellent au bombardement de la base américaine de Bondsteel au Kosovo.

- Le fil de l'Info / Radio Slobodna Evropa, Kosovo, Relations internationales

Après l'attaque américano-israélienne contre l'Iran, des canaux Telegram prorusses appellent au bombardement de la base américaine de Bondsteel au Kosovo.

- Le fil de l'Info / Radio Slobodna Evropa, Kosovo, Relations internationales

In today's edition: Five routes to EU Inc, telco's satellite dreams, privacy lense turned on Meta's AI glasses

Iran, Ukraine, Spain

In today's edition: Medtech rapporteur, conversion therapy, Novo in Ireland

At a time when Pakistan is grappling with a volatile situation along its Afghan border, instability on the Iran-Pakistan border will add to its problems.

As the world approaches global warming tipping points, local climate engagement aims at climate actions that are equitable, effective and aligned with local needs. Strengthening and scaling up these initiatives can amplify impact, though efforts are often fragmented and require strengthened coordination. This policy brief identifies barriers and enablers of local climate action, how it is best scaled up, and how international actors – donors, policymakers, city and research networks, businesses and others – can support this process. 
Building on these insights, the following points outline key conditions for strengthening, scaling up and sustaining locally led climate action:
•    community-centred co-creation – investing in participatory, culturally grounded processes that map local needs, integrate diverse knowledge, and establish a common language;
•    predictable, flexible funding – providing long-term resources for locally led climate action, and planning additional finance to scale up solutions, including those involving knowledge sharing platforms and coordi-nation capacity;
•    private-sector engagement – creating incentives aligned with climate and community priorities, such as collaboration in the development of green products, in facilitating their market access and assisting with certification and value-chain regulations.
•    multilevel coordination and data sharing – establishing clear institutional pathways, monitoring mechanisms and interoperable data platforms to connect local action with national and international policies, leveraging synergies, and increasing accountability; and
•    just international partnerships – supporting local and Southern priorities through green development opportunities, ensuring fairness and co-benefits for the partners involved.

 

As the world approaches global warming tipping points, local climate engagement aims at climate actions that are equitable, effective and aligned with local needs. Strengthening and scaling up these initiatives can amplify impact, though efforts are often fragmented and require strengthened coordination. This policy brief identifies barriers and enablers of local climate action, how it is best scaled up, and how international actors – donors, policymakers, city and research networks, businesses and others – can support this process. 
Building on these insights, the following points outline key conditions for strengthening, scaling up and sustaining locally led climate action:
•    community-centred co-creation – investing in participatory, culturally grounded processes that map local needs, integrate diverse knowledge, and establish a common language;
•    predictable, flexible funding – providing long-term resources for locally led climate action, and planning additional finance to scale up solutions, including those involving knowledge sharing platforms and coordi-nation capacity;
•    private-sector engagement – creating incentives aligned with climate and community priorities, such as collaboration in the development of green products, in facilitating their market access and assisting with certification and value-chain regulations.
•    multilevel coordination and data sharing – establishing clear institutional pathways, monitoring mechanisms and interoperable data platforms to connect local action with national and international policies, leveraging synergies, and increasing accountability; and
•    just international partnerships – supporting local and Southern priorities through green development opportunities, ensuring fairness and co-benefits for the partners involved.

 

As the world approaches global warming tipping points, local climate engagement aims at climate actions that are equitable, effective and aligned with local needs. Strengthening and scaling up these initiatives can amplify impact, though efforts are often fragmented and require strengthened coordination. This policy brief identifies barriers and enablers of local climate action, how it is best scaled up, and how international actors – donors, policymakers, city and research networks, businesses and others – can support this process. 
Building on these insights, the following points outline key conditions for strengthening, scaling up and sustaining locally led climate action:
•    community-centred co-creation – investing in participatory, culturally grounded processes that map local needs, integrate diverse knowledge, and establish a common language;
•    predictable, flexible funding – providing long-term resources for locally led climate action, and planning additional finance to scale up solutions, including those involving knowledge sharing platforms and coordi-nation capacity;
•    private-sector engagement – creating incentives aligned with climate and community priorities, such as collaboration in the development of green products, in facilitating their market access and assisting with certification and value-chain regulations.
•    multilevel coordination and data sharing – establishing clear institutional pathways, monitoring mechanisms and interoperable data platforms to connect local action with national and international policies, leveraging synergies, and increasing accountability; and
•    just international partnerships – supporting local and Southern priorities through green development opportunities, ensuring fairness and co-benefits for the partners involved.

 

In today's edition: War in the Middle East, gas prices, and Italian meddling in the EU carbon market

Just Transitions (JT) toward sustainable, equitable, and low-carbon futures have become a central focus of global climate policy, exemplified by initiatives such as Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JET-Ps) and the UNFCCC Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP). For some actors, JT is understood in sectoral terms, focusing on energy transitions. Others emphasise more transformative approaches grounded in global structural reform and climate justice. Although existing scholarship has mapped JT framings in the literature, across national climate policy and non-academic frameworks, no study has yet examined how individuals shaping global climate policy themselves understand and prioritise JT. Approximately 130 Blue Zone-accredited attendees (i.e. those with access to the formal negotiations) were surveyed at COP28 in Dubai, including party delegates, policy-makers, civil society representatives and others. The survey was structured around five JT typologies – from least to most transformative – drawn from existing literature, as well two novel typologies: one centered on energy, another on sustainable development. Results indicate a strong preference for approaches extending beyond energy to encompass broader sustainable development concerns, with policy coherence identified as a crucial governance principle. Respondents also favour more transformative policies around global structural reform and climate finance for lower-income countries, while the most prioritized justice dimension is accountability and responsibility for climate change. The results also show differences in preferences between participants from high- and lower-income countries, with the latter favouring more transformative notions of JT. However, overall, JT preferences straddle multiple typologies, suggesting that policy mixes delivering broader sustainable development outcomes could provide an effective and politically viable way to reconcile competing views. By exploring the perspectives of those shaping global climate policy, the paper enriches scholarly discussions on JT framings, while offering guidance and directions for the ongoing JTWP negotiations amidst the latest COP30 decision to establish a global just transition mechanism.

Just Transitions (JT) toward sustainable, equitable, and low-carbon futures have become a central focus of global climate policy, exemplified by initiatives such as Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JET-Ps) and the UNFCCC Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP). For some actors, JT is understood in sectoral terms, focusing on energy transitions. Others emphasise more transformative approaches grounded in global structural reform and climate justice. Although existing scholarship has mapped JT framings in the literature, across national climate policy and non-academic frameworks, no study has yet examined how individuals shaping global climate policy themselves understand and prioritise JT. Approximately 130 Blue Zone-accredited attendees (i.e. those with access to the formal negotiations) were surveyed at COP28 in Dubai, including party delegates, policy-makers, civil society representatives and others. The survey was structured around five JT typologies – from least to most transformative – drawn from existing literature, as well two novel typologies: one centered on energy, another on sustainable development. Results indicate a strong preference for approaches extending beyond energy to encompass broader sustainable development concerns, with policy coherence identified as a crucial governance principle. Respondents also favour more transformative policies around global structural reform and climate finance for lower-income countries, while the most prioritized justice dimension is accountability and responsibility for climate change. The results also show differences in preferences between participants from high- and lower-income countries, with the latter favouring more transformative notions of JT. However, overall, JT preferences straddle multiple typologies, suggesting that policy mixes delivering broader sustainable development outcomes could provide an effective and politically viable way to reconcile competing views. By exploring the perspectives of those shaping global climate policy, the paper enriches scholarly discussions on JT framings, while offering guidance and directions for the ongoing JTWP negotiations amidst the latest COP30 decision to establish a global just transition mechanism.

Just Transitions (JT) toward sustainable, equitable, and low-carbon futures have become a central focus of global climate policy, exemplified by initiatives such as Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JET-Ps) and the UNFCCC Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP). For some actors, JT is understood in sectoral terms, focusing on energy transitions. Others emphasise more transformative approaches grounded in global structural reform and climate justice. Although existing scholarship has mapped JT framings in the literature, across national climate policy and non-academic frameworks, no study has yet examined how individuals shaping global climate policy themselves understand and prioritise JT. Approximately 130 Blue Zone-accredited attendees (i.e. those with access to the formal negotiations) were surveyed at COP28 in Dubai, including party delegates, policy-makers, civil society representatives and others. The survey was structured around five JT typologies – from least to most transformative – drawn from existing literature, as well two novel typologies: one centered on energy, another on sustainable development. Results indicate a strong preference for approaches extending beyond energy to encompass broader sustainable development concerns, with policy coherence identified as a crucial governance principle. Respondents also favour more transformative policies around global structural reform and climate finance for lower-income countries, while the most prioritized justice dimension is accountability and responsibility for climate change. The results also show differences in preferences between participants from high- and lower-income countries, with the latter favouring more transformative notions of JT. However, overall, JT preferences straddle multiple typologies, suggesting that policy mixes delivering broader sustainable development outcomes could provide an effective and politically viable way to reconcile competing views. By exploring the perspectives of those shaping global climate policy, the paper enriches scholarly discussions on JT framings, while offering guidance and directions for the ongoing JTWP negotiations amidst the latest COP30 decision to establish a global just transition mechanism.

In today's edition: Potatoes, fertilisers, EU-Switzerland

Credit: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 3 2026 (IPS)

As the build-up for a proposed “new world order” continues, a lingering question remains: will the country with the most powerful military reign supreme?

The United Nations remains politically impotent. The UN charter is in tatters. The sovereignty of nation states and their territorial integrity have been reduced to political mockery. And the law of the jungle prevails—be it Palestine, Ukraine, Venezuela or Iran.

What’s next: Colombia? Cuba? Greenland? North Korea?

The widespread condemnation of the ongoing conflicts – including charges of war crimes and genocide— has continue to fall on deaf ears.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council that under Article 2 of the UN Charter, all member states shall “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.”

But is anybody out there listening?

Norman Solomon, executive director, Institute for Public Accuracy and national director, RootsAction.org, told IPS killing from the sky has long offered the sort of detachment that warfare on the ground can’t match. Far from its victims, air power remains the height of modernity

Reliance on overwhelming air power is key to what the U.S. is doing in tandem with Israel. Bombing from the skies while not attacking with ground forces is the ultimate way of killing without suffering many casualties.

This reduces political blowback at home in a political and media culture that values American lives but sees the lives of “others” as readily expendable, he pointed out.

“This flagrant war of shameless aggression, launched by the United States and Israel, cannot be contained — much less rolled back — by the typical diplomatic euphemisms and caution.”

The U.S. and Israeli governments, said Solomon, are too completely run by psychopathic leaders who adhere only to the “principle” that might makes right. If ever there were a time that the vaunted “international community” should step up and confront an alliance of reckless outlaw governments, this is it.

The European allies of the United States, he said, should stop their cowardly vagueness and finally step up to demand a halt to this aggression that is setting the Middle East tinderbox on fire. The EU should be threatening huge countermeasures against the United States and Israel unless that pair of sociopathic governments immediately halts their assault on Iran.

“Playing evasive games with Washington makes the leaders in London, Paris, Berlin and elsewhere accomplices to methodical ongoing war crimes”, declared Solomon, author of “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine”

According to the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, the US-Israeli act of aggression against Iran was undertaken in violation of international law and the UN Charter, as they exercised use of force without authorization from the UN Security Council (UNSC) or without a demonstrated threat to their security that would trigger the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

“The attack came amid ongoing nuclear talks between the US and Iran and just hours after Oman’s Foreign Minister – a key mediator in the negotiations – shared details on progress achieved and announced that a breakthrough was near. The attack also mirrors the recent unlawful actions undertaken by the US in Venezuela on 3 January, culminating in the kidnapping of the head of state and setting in motion profound uncertainty for the region and the global order.”

Meanwhile, the Geneva-based UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, said it is deeply concerned about the escalation of conflict in the Middle East and its impact on civilians and further displacement in the region.

“Many affected countries already host millions of refugees and internally displaced people. Further violence risks overwhelming humanitarian capacities and placing additional pressure on host communities”.

“We echo the UN Secretary-General’s urgent call for dialogue and de-escalation, respect for human rights, the protection of civilians and full adherence to international law”.

James Jennings, President of Conscience International, told IPS the joint US-Israeli attack on Iran was misguided, illegal, and based on lies. It will retard, not advance, any future nuclear agreement, perhaps for decades.

It was illegal, he pointed out, because it violates both the US constitution and international law as enshrined in the UN Charter. It was based on lies because the nuclear watchdog groups have clearly indicated in essence that “There’s nothing to see here.”

“Trump regularly claims that June’s joint “Operation Midnight Hammer” obliterated Iran’s nuclear capability, yet his weak case for the current “Operation Epic Fury” war rests on the idea that perhaps someday in the future Iran might get a bomb. Several US administrations have worked diplomatically to prevent that, yet Trump tore the agreement up”.

Trump claims to be limited by no law, constitution, or the UN Charter. Guided only by his own morality, as he said recently, he followed Israel obediently in launching a massive war against a sleeping country of 92 million people, said Jennings.

“All the while, his amateur diplomats were negotiating deceptively for a compromise like Imperial Japan did in the run-up to the WW II Pearl Harbor attack. Ask the parents of the more than l00 schoolgirls killed on the first horrifying day of joint US-Israel bomb attacks at Minaj, Iran, and they will probably not see Mr. Trump as particularly moral”.

George W. Bush called himself “The Decider, so he foolishly decided to take the US into two unwinnable wars that most politicians in Washington, and even Trump himself, now consider monumental mistakes. Trump campaigned vigorously on keeping the US out of mistaken Middle East wars that became “Forever Wars,” said Jennings.

“Yet here he is being pulled around by the nose by Mr. Netanyahu. According to a classic rule when launching a war, one must recognize that two things cannot be changed: one is history and the other is geography. It is stunning that the leader of the United States is cavalier about going to war without understanding that or clearly stating the mission’s purpose or end game.”

Pundits and TV reporters are calling the attack on Iran “a war of choice,” said Jennings.

“Why not call it what it really is–a war of naked aggression? Nobody knows when will it end. Trump’s claim that the war will be over in a few days is a cruel joke. The other side gets a vote. Iran celebrated its 2,500th anniversary in 1971. Maybe people who have been around so long know a few things about survival,” declared Jennings.

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');  

D'après une étude sur la diaspora roumaine en Europe de l'Ouest, l'hégémonie de l'Alliance pour l'unité des Roumains, formation d'extrême droite plébiscitée par les Roumains de l'étranger, pourrait, à terme, être contrecarrée par l'émergence d'un véritable parti de gauche.

- Articles / Roumanie, Courrier des Balkans, Politique