Biztonságpolitika

Az idén százéves Delta Airlines történetét röviden áttekintő sorozatban többször szóba került az 1978-as légitársasági deregulációs törvény, amely átalakította az amerikai légiközlekedési iparágat. Véget vetett a légitársaságok kormányzati szabályozásának és hatására olyanok is „levegőhöz jutottak”, akik korábban nem. Éles piaci verseny alakult ki, és az amerikai társadalom szélesebb rétegei számára is elérhetővé vált a repülés. A Delta sorozat negyedik, befejező része előtt erről a törvényről lesz szó.

A légitársaságok deregulációjáról szóló törvényt megelőzően az 1939-ben alapított Polgári Légiközlekedési Tanács (CAB – Civil Aeronautics Board) felügyelte és szabályozta az Egyesült Államok egyes államai közötti légiközlekedést. Az államokon belül zajló repülések felett a CAB nem rendelkezett, azok az adott állam kormányzatának hatáskörébe tartoztak. A légitársaságok működésének szabályozása szigorú, bürokratikus keretek között zajlott. Amikor egy társaság új útvonalon szeretett volna repülni, engedélyt kellett benyújtania a CAB-hez, amely sokszor évekig húzódó eljárás keretében vizsgálta a kérelmet. Gyakorlatilag mindenbe beleszólhattak, még a díjszabásba is, meghatározva a viteldíj árának alsó és felső határát. Ellenőrzést gyakoroltak a légitársaságok összeolvadása felett is, ami egyfajta kiskapu volt, amelyen át a felvásárló légitársaság hozzájutott a felvásárolt fuvarozó útvonalhálózatához és repülőgépeihez. Ez a szabályrendszer megakadályozta, hogy a légitársaságok az útvonalkínálat, a jegyárak és a fedélzeti szolgáltatás színvonala alapján versenyezzenek egymással. Mivel valamennyien nagyjából azonos szolgáltatást nyújtottak, az utasok nem ragaszkodtak egy adott társasághoz, ha a másik menetrendje kedvezőbb volt a számukra. Ennek eredményeként a járatsűrűség lett a piaci részesedés legfontosabb meghatározója, amibe meglepő módon a CAB általában nem szólt bele. Ez a négy évtizeden át alkalmazott eljárásrend a CAB bürokratáinak biztos munkahelyet és hatalmat biztosított, de a hetvenes évek végére eljött az idő, amikor ki kellett mondani, hogy éppen ideje a változásnak.

[...] Bővebben!

The Council approved conclusions on Sudan, expressing serious concern on the ongoing conflict, alleged violations and abuses of human rights, and increasing fragmentation.

Le Maroc a écrit une nouvelle page de son histoire sportive. Les jeunes Lions de l'Atlas ont remporté, dimanche 19 octobre 2025, au Chili, la Coupe du monde U20, un premier sacre mondial salué dans tout le royaume.

Dès le coup de sifflet final de la rencontre Maroc#Argentine (2-0) joué, dimache au Chili, des scènes de liesse ont éclaté dans les villes marocaines telles que Rabat, Casablanca, Fès, Marrakech, Laâyoune ou encore Tanger.

Des milliers de supporters, drapeaux en main, ont envahi les rues pour chanter, danser et célébrer leurs héros. L'atmosphère était électrique, empreinte de fierté et d'unité nationale.

Lors de la cérémonie officielle, en présence d'officiels de la FIFA et de nombreuses personnalités, SM le roi Mohammed VI a salué une victoire « d'excellence », fruit de la « persévérance, du talent et de la discipline » de cette jeunesse marocaine.

Ce succès fait du Maroc l'une des rares nations africaines à avoir remporté cette compétition, après le Ghana en 2009.
Pour le souverain, il s'agit d'un exploit « qui honore tout le continent africain et consacre le travail accompli pour le développement du sport national ».

Avec ce sacre, le football marocain confirme son essor continu sur la scène internationale, porté par une génération ambitieuse et inspirante.

La Colombie termine troisième et la France quatrième de cette édition 2025.

M. M.

Der 71-jährige Costantino Tomamichel wird vermisst. Die Polizei veröffentlicht am Sonntagabend eine entsprechende Meldung.

Wer hat wie abgeschnitten? Hier findest du die Noten zum 2:2 Lausanne gegen Luzern.

Wer hat wie abgeschnitten? Hier findest du die Noten zum 2:2 von Luzern gegen Lausanne.

Gerald Scheiblehner kritisiert den Penalty-Entscheid gegen sein Team. Und nimmt seine fehlerhaften Routiniers nach dem 0:1 gegen den FC Sion in Schutz.

Der Flugbetrieb am Flughafen Palma de Mallorca wurde der Flugverkehr vorübergehend eingestellt. Grund dafür ist die Sichtung einer Drohne.

Die Schweizer Handballerinnen setzen ihren Siegeszug in der EM-Qualifikation fort. Nach dem 35:10 gegen Bosnien folgte ein überzeugender 37:25-Auswärtssieg gegen Italien.

A nyolcvanas évekre a Delta Airlines öt évtizedes működést tudhatott maga mögött és a mezőgazdasági repülőgépektől eljutott a szélestörzsű óriásokig. Olyan repülőgépek üzemeltetése kezdődött ebben az évtizedben, amelyek közül néhány ma is forgalomban áll. A nyolcvanas évek azonban nem indultak könnyen. A gazdasági helyzet, az üzemanyag ára és az 1978-as deregulációs törvény miatt kialakult verseny nehéz helyzetbe hozta a légitársaságot, amely további beszerzésekkel igyekezett előrelépni. Ezek középpontjában a Boeing volt.

A Delta Airlines nem volt egyedül a problémáival, számos más iparági szereplő küzdött hasonló gondokkal, és ahogy az lenni szokott, létszám csökkentéssel igyekezett túlélni. A Deltánál másképp gondolkodtak, a dolgozók közel tíz százalékos fizetésemelést kaptak, továbbá olyan repülőgépek beszerzését célozták meg, amellyel leválthatták az öregedő és kevésbé gazdaságos típusokat.

[...] Bővebben!

A female merchant was crossing a bustling street in Hanoi, Vietnam. Despite economic development over five decades, development gaps in Asia and the Pacific remained. Credit: Unsplash/Jeremy Stewardson

By Sudip Ranjan Basu
BANGKOK Thailand, Oct 17 2025 (IPS)

The Asia-Pacific region has long served as a springboard for transforming socio-economic implementation gaps into development opportunities. With the 2030 deadline for the Sustainable Development Goals fast approaching, policymakers are stepping up efforts to translate policy announcements into tangible impacts.

Looking back since 1970s, the region’s development trajectory has been shaped by a series of crises that triggered transformative policy responses. By engaging strategic partnerships, countries in the region are well-positioned to promote shared prosperity for both people and the planet.

Anchoring crisis-driven policy shifts
In the 1970s, technological advances—particularly in agriculture—ushered in a new era. The introduction of high-yield crop varieties, known as the Green Revolution, boosted food production and rural incomes, laying the foundation for the emergence of a middle class. However, the decade also exposed vulnerabilities, as volatility in global commodity and energy prices exposed the risks of external shocks.

The 1980s brought further challenges. Rising oil prices and global interest rates strained national budgets across developing countries. The cost of servicing external debt crowded out investments in productive sectors, highlighting the risks of over-reliance on foreign aid.

The 1997 Asian financial crisis marked a watershed moment. Currency collapses, triggered capital flight and trade disruptions, leaving deep scars and prompting shifts in political governance and economic policy across the region.

By the early 2000s, optimism returned. Trade and investment surged, regional value chains expanded, and ICT-driven growth integrated economies more deeply into the global economy. Globalization was widely seen as a pathway to long-term prosperity.

Yet the 2008 global financial crisis shattered this euphoria. Inflation soared, investor confidence plummeted, and trade contracted.

Fast forward to the COVID-19 pandemic, which once again exposed lingering vulnerabilities: socio-economic inequality was deepened, jobs prospects dimmed, overdependence on supply chain became more pronounced, technological monopolies were revealed, and environmental fragility was clearly manifested. The pandemic reinforced the urgent need for adaptive policy frameworks.

These crisis episodes underscored the importance of coordinated policy action in an interconnected landscape, reinforcing the lesson that growth without adequate and shared outcomes is unsustainable.

Adjusting to changing socio-economic realities
The development journey has been marked by complexity and diversity. A comparative analysis over recent decades reveals recurring patterns: energy and food price volatility and tightening financial conditions have consistently tested policymakers. Rising interest rates in advanced economies have reignited debt concerns in developing countries, threatening economic stability and undermining progress.

Simultaneously, intensifying geopolitical competition is reshaping trade relationships, investment flows and technology transfers. Policymakers must navigate these shifts while advancing national development priorities and adapting to evolving dynamics.

These pressures have prompted to diversify its sources of economic growth and strategic engagements. Despite impressive achievements in social development, long-term stability and impact-driven outcomes hinge on governments’ ability to manage external shocks, anticipate risks, and promote cross-border economic cooperation and accelerate climate action.

Recent policy shifts signal a move toward structural transformation. Governments are spearheading industrialization, accelerating green energy transitions and pioneering sustainable financing mechanisms. This marks a shift from short-term crisis management to building medium- and long-term socio-economic progress.

The pandemic years further emphasised the need for adaptive policies—ones that can absorb unexpected shocks while maintaining progress toward stability.

Adapting through policy lessons
The development experience, particularly the least developed countries, the landlocked developing countries and small island developing States, offers valuable insights into building institutional capabilities and preventing future crises. Four strategic policy insights emerge:

Price stability matters: Volatile prices have repeatedly undermined development gains. Strategic foresight and balanced economic policy planning are essential to safeguard progress.
Fiscal buoyancy is critical: Excessive external borrowing has triggered past crises.

Creating fiscal space, mobilizing domestic resources, scaling blended finance and implementing coordinated debt management frameworks are vital for development.

Crisis preparedness requires coordination: The 1997 and 2008 crises showed that no country can respond effectively in isolation. Strengthening institutions is crucial for early warning systems, policy dialogue and coordinated action.

Sustainability is key to people-centred development: Climate change, socio-economic disparities and institutional inefficiencies pose long-term risks. Integrating sustainability into strategies and promoting technological transformation are no longer optional; they are imperative.

Turning points
The Asia-Pacific region’s development story is one of transition, and transformation. Connecting these turning points reveals a region that has consistently learned from its challenges and leveraged them to advance policy solutions.

The path ahead is promising, but policies must adapt to address shifting socio-economic dynamics, structural and climate change vulnerabilities, and emerging geopolitical realignments. These efforts must be anchored in regional cooperation, inclusive dialogue, and coordinated action, particularly through platforms such as ESCAP.

While governments play a central role, long-term progress will depend on the collective engagement of the private sector, academia, civil society and regional institutions. With strategic convergence, the Asia-Pacific region is well-positioned to overcome today’s uncertainty and shape a better future for all.

Sudip Ranjan Basu is Secretary of the Commission, ESCAP

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');  

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 17 2025 (IPS)

The US hostility towards the UN is threatening to escalate, as a cash-starved world body is struggling for economic survival.

Addressing the UN’s Administrative and Budgetary Committee last week. Ambassador Jeff Bartos, U.S. Representative for U.N. Management and Reform said: “President Trump is absolutely right – the United Nations can be an important institution for solving international challenges, but it has strayed far from its original purpose”.

“Over 80 years, the UN has grown bloated, unfocused, too often ineffective, and sometimes even part of the problem. The UN’s failure to deliver on its core mandates is alarming and undeniable. “

The United States has been, by far, the largest funder of the UN since its founding. Based on the most recent scales of assessment, the United States provides more funding to the UN than 180 other nations combined, he pointed out.

“For the United States, the era of business as usual is over. During the Main Session, we will work with this Committee to achieve deeper cuts to wasteful spending and stronger accountability, with a relentless focus on results”.

The reductions already proposed in special political missions, the closure of unnecessary field offices, and the consolidation of executive offices, are the kind of decisions that must become the rule, not the exception.

Addressing the General Assembly last month, President Trump remarked: “What is the purpose of the United Nations? It’s not even coming close to living up to [its] potential.”

Dismissing the U.N. as an outdated, ineffective organization, he boasted: “I ended seven wars, dealt with the leaders of each and every one of these countries, and never a phone call from the United Nations offering to help in finalizing the deal.”

But UN’s political ineffectiveness is due primarily to the role played by the five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council—the US, UK, France, China and Russia–who are quick to protect their allies accused of human rights violations, war crimes or genocide.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has officially withdrawn or is in the process of withdrawing from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), and has ceased funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and from the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

Which triggers the question: what’s the fate and economic survival of the UN against an aggressive Trump administration?

Dr Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS there is no other way to describe how the Trump administration is treating the UN other than self-defeating and detrimental to the US’s national interests, while substantially eroding America’s influence worldwide.

“It is hard to fathom how on earth Trump, who wants to ‘Make America Great Again,’ demonstrates such blatant hostility towards the only global organization in which the United States has, over the years, played such a pivotal and leading role that surpassed any other country since the UN’s creation in 1945.”

The statement by US Ambassador Bartos, he argued, is at best inaccurate and at worst totally wrong. It has never been a secret that the UN is overdue for significant reforms, beginning with the United Nations Security Council and many other UN agencies.

Dismissing the UN’s vital work on many fronts in one brush, however, and cutting humanitarian assistance on which millions in poor countries depend, or withdrawing from vital UN agencies, is unconscionable and highly damaging to the US’ leadership and national interests, he said.

“By what logic does the Trump administration justify its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO), whose primary function is coordinating global health responses to crises such as pandemics, and setting international health standards?”

“One would think that the Trump administration would strongly support such an organization that serves US interests from a global health perspective and would only bolster the US influence by playing a significant role in improving its functions”.

How can the Trump administration explain its withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), which promotes and protects human rights worldwide through international cooperation?

By withdrawing from this organization, Trump forsakes any role that the US could play in preventing human rights abuses, which leads to fewer global checks on human rights abuses and weaker international standards.

Trump may care less about human rights violations, but how does withdrawing from such an organization serve the US’ overall national and global interests? he asked.

James E. Jennings, PhD, President, Conscience International, told IPS support for the United Nations organization is vital to global health and stability.,

“Those who have worked on the front lines of UN agencies’ responses to wars, natural disasters, and famines throughout the world cannot imagine the degree of inhumanity involved in taking food out of the mouths of babies, refusing to educate children, and letting disease and epidemics rage. This is not politics, it is bullying, and the world should see it for what it is”.

He said there is a pattern in Mr. Trump’s behavior that is easily exposed, Every one of his perceived enemies, as for example in the majority Democratic states of California and Illinois, he describes in the most terrible terms as crime-ridden and out of control.

“Within three days after he sends in ICE storm troopers to places like Washington DC who do nothing except display their muscle, suddenly that city or state is peaceable and under control.“

Trump brags that things are fine now in Portland, Chicago, and other such places, when no real change can be detected except that some normal citizens have been roughed up. Theatrics may win voters but does not in any way solve problems, said Dr Jennings.

The same technique can be observed on the international scene. After deprecating and sidelining UN peacemaking efforts, which go deeply into the issues, he makes phone calls to leaders of countries on the verge of hostilities and claims that he has ended seven wars, which is nonsense.

“By sidelining the UN, he simply wants to dominate it. With the US the biggest donor supporting the organization, there is a fair chance that he can succeed in bending it to his will unless national leaders, US citizens, and people everywhere are resolute in opposing his plans”, declared Dr 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');  

Thousands of mourners fill the streets of Nairobi from the airport to the Kasarani Stadium to pay their respects.

Die Kassen der Gemeindeverwaltung Birsfelden BL klingeln nach wie vor. Das steht schon länger in der Kritik und wird zunehmend auch rechtlich infrage gestellt. Auch die meisten Leser äussern sich verärgert. Manche befürchten gar Nachfolgegemeinden.

FDP-Nationalrat Simon Michel prangerte auf Linkedin den eigenen alt Bundesrat Johann Schneider-Ammann an und brachte seinen Gesundheitszustand ins Spiel. Nun entschuldigt er sich für den Kommentar.