Feed aggregator

Rapporteur Axel Voss will brief journalists on Tuesday 10 March at 15.00 on Parliament’s proposals to protect EU creative production in the age of artificial intelligence.
Committee on Legal Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Faute de quorum et de majorité pour élire un nouveau chef de l'État avant l'échéance constitutionnelle, la présidente du Kosovo Vjosa Osmani a signé un décret dissolvant l'Assemblée. Le pays se dirige désormais vers de nouvelles élections législatives anticipées.

- Le fil de l'Info / Une - Diaporama, Kosovo Vetëvendosje, Une - Diaporama - En premier, Courrier des Balkans, Kosovo, Politique

Faute de quorum et de majorité pour élire un nouveau chef de l'État avant l'échéance constitutionnelle, la présidente du Kosovo Vjosa Osmani a signé un décret dissolvant l'Assemblée. Le pays se dirige désormais vers de nouvelles élections législatives anticipées.

- Le fil de l'Info / Kosovo Vetëvendosje, Une - Diaporama, Courrier des Balkans, Kosovo, Politique

Cette nouvelle pourrait expliquer la réticence de Kiev à autoriser les inspections de l'oléoduc Druzhba.

The post L’Ukraine peut survivre financièrement jusqu’après les élections en Hongrie, estime Bruxelles appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Après plusieurs jours de suspension en raison de la situation sécuritaire au Moyen-Orient, l’ambassade d’Algérie au Qatar amorce un retour progressif à la normale. La […]

L’article L’ambassade d’Algérie au Qatar met en garde contre les rumeurs et précise la situation est apparu en premier sur .

Les cosmétiques ont fait l'objet de près de 4 700 alertes de sécurité des produits dans l'UE en 2025.

The post L’UE enregistre le plus grand nombre d’alertes relatives à la sécurité des produits depuis plus de 20 ans appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Depuis la prise de position espagnole contre la guerre au Moyen-Orient et le refus de laisser les États-Unis utiliser ses bases en Andalousie, les Turcs multiplient les déclarations d'amour à Madrid.

- Le fil de l'Info / Une - Diaporama - En premier, Courrier des Balkans, Turquie, Une - Diaporama, Relations internationales

Le contrôleur européen de la protection des données souligne la nécessité de fixer des limites claires qui doivent être respectées en matière de flux de données spécifiques aux frontières.

The post L’UE doit fixer des limites claires à l’accès des États-Unis aux données des Européens, selon le contrôleur européen de la protection des données appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Discussion circles at the Dalton Junior High School, Japan. Credit: Miko Nakano

By Miko Nakano
TOKYO, Japan, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)

Around the world, conflicts often begin not with violence, but with assumptions. When people judge others before understanding them, labels replace dialogue—and division replaces trust. For young people growing up in an increasingly polarized world, learning to listen may be one of the most powerful tools for peace.

“We unilaterally assume that people we have never met are demons—and repeat the same mistakes.”

This line from the anime Attack on Titan made me stop and think. In the story, enemies who were taught to hate each other finally meet and realize they are human beings with fears, families, and dreams.

But this pattern is not fiction. Throughout history, societies have judged others before understanding them. During the Crusades, opposing sides saw each other only as threats. In modern times, media narratives and online discussions sometimes simplify complex issues into “good” versus “evil.” Once labels are applied, empathy becomes difficult.

Conversation time with children who live in the slum areas in Ghaziabad, India. Credit: Miko Nakano

Even justice systems are not immune to bias. The Hakamata case in Japan, widely reported by BBC News, raised serious concerns about how media pressure and unreliable evidence can influence judicial decisions. The case showed how justice can be compromised when assumptions take priority over careful examination of facts and individual voices. Around the world, wrongful convictions and discrimination continue to demonstrate how easily fairness can be undermined when judgment replaces understanding.

This is why SDG 16—peace, justice, and strong institutions—matters. Peace is not only about ending wars. It is about building societies where people are heard before they are judged.

Conversation about education with Yoshimasa Hayashi, Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications of Japan, at the National High School Future Conference, House of Councilors Members’ Office Building, Tokyo, Japan. Credit: Miko Nakano

My awareness of this issue began in elementary school. A classmate was widely labeled as “strange,” and many students avoided her. One day, she spoke openly about the pain of being ignored. Listening to her changed my perspective. I realized how easily we can judge someone without ever asking why.

Instead of keeping this reflection to myself, I decided to take action.

In junior high school, I helped organize small discussion circles during class activities where students could share experiences of being misunderstood or judged. We created simple rules: listen without interrupting, ask questions before assuming, and respect differences. At first, conversations were awkward. But over time, students began speaking more openly. Some admitted they had judged others too quickly. Others shared experiences of feeling excluded.

These small conversations changed the atmosphere in our classroom. They did not solve every problem, but they created space for listening.

I later learned that young people around the world are doing similar work. Programs like Seeds of Peace and Generation Global bring together youth from different backgrounds to engage in dialogue across conflict lines. Their work shows that listening is not passive—it is an active form of peacebuilding.

As young people, we may not control institutions or governments yet. But we shape the culture around us every day—in classrooms, online spaces, and communities. If we normalize quick labeling and division, conflict grows. If we normalize listening, trust grows.

Building peaceful societies begins long before political negotiations. It begins when we ask “why” instead of assuming. It begins when we recognize that every person has a story that deserves to be heard.

In a world facing rising polarization and mistrust, choosing to listen may seem small. But it is not weak. It is foundational.

Peace does not start in courtrooms or parliaments alone.
It starts in conversations.

And young people are ready to lead them.

Edited by Dr Hanna Yoon

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');  

Excerpt:

Youth voice on SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Accelerating net-zero transitions requires deliberate governance. We examine the deliberate acceleration of net-zero transitions through a case study of California’s governance of private vehicle electrification. Our analysis integrates the literatures on policy mixes and political institutions to offer a novel explanation for how California has effectively expedited its net-zero transition to electric cars. We base our inductive analysis on evidence from 47 expert interviews conducted in 2022–23. We argue that California’s systemic acceleration capacity has two core components: first, an effective policy mix that harnesses the accelerating forces of creative destruction, and second, specific path-dependent political institutions that have enabled this respective policy mix. Together, these two components have contributed to California’s state capacity to accelerate its technology substitution pathway away from internal combustion engines. California’s climate technocracy offers critical lessons for other jurisdictions seeking to speed up similar net-zero transitions.

Accelerating net-zero transitions requires deliberate governance. We examine the deliberate acceleration of net-zero transitions through a case study of California’s governance of private vehicle electrification. Our analysis integrates the literatures on policy mixes and political institutions to offer a novel explanation for how California has effectively expedited its net-zero transition to electric cars. We base our inductive analysis on evidence from 47 expert interviews conducted in 2022–23. We argue that California’s systemic acceleration capacity has two core components: first, an effective policy mix that harnesses the accelerating forces of creative destruction, and second, specific path-dependent political institutions that have enabled this respective policy mix. Together, these two components have contributed to California’s state capacity to accelerate its technology substitution pathway away from internal combustion engines. California’s climate technocracy offers critical lessons for other jurisdictions seeking to speed up similar net-zero transitions.

Accelerating net-zero transitions requires deliberate governance. We examine the deliberate acceleration of net-zero transitions through a case study of California’s governance of private vehicle electrification. Our analysis integrates the literatures on policy mixes and political institutions to offer a novel explanation for how California has effectively expedited its net-zero transition to electric cars. We base our inductive analysis on evidence from 47 expert interviews conducted in 2022–23. We argue that California’s systemic acceleration capacity has two core components: first, an effective policy mix that harnesses the accelerating forces of creative destruction, and second, specific path-dependent political institutions that have enabled this respective policy mix. Together, these two components have contributed to California’s state capacity to accelerate its technology substitution pathway away from internal combustion engines. California’s climate technocracy offers critical lessons for other jurisdictions seeking to speed up similar net-zero transitions.

Credit: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

By Azza Karam
NEW YORK, Mar 6 2026 (IPS)

In recent months, the language surrounding the escalating confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran has taken on a tone that should trouble anyone concerned with global peace.

Across television studios, online sermons, and political commentary, some American preachers and commentators have begun describing the conflict not merely as geopolitics or national security, but as a “holy war.”

Reporting in outlets such as The Guardian, along with coverage in other international media, has noted the growing number of Christian nationalist and Evangelical voices framing the Middle Eastern conflict in explicitly theological terms.

Certain Evangelical preachers in the United States have long interpreted tensions involving Israel through apocalyptic or biblical narratives. In these interpretations, the confrontation with Iran is sometimes presented as part of a divinely ordained struggle between good and evil.

In sermons broadcast online and amplified through social media, the war is described as a moment in which believers must stand with Israel in a battle perceived as spiritually consequential – even leading to ‘the rapture’.

The rhetoric is not limited to pulpits. Some former military figures and commentators have echoed similar themes, invoking civilizational language that portrays the confrontation with Iran as part of a broader clash between Judeo-Christian civilization and an Islamic adversary.

When such language enters strategic discourse, it transforms political conflict into something far more dangerous: a war imbued with sacred meaning.

History shows that once wars are framed as sacred struggles, compromise becomes nearly impossible. Political conflicts can, at least in theory, be negotiated. Holy wars, by contrast, are perceived as battles for divine truth. In that framing, negotiation is betrayal.

This phenomenon is not unique to the current Middle Eastern crisis. Religious legitimization of war has surfaced repeatedly in contemporary conflicts. At the outbreak of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, for example, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, framed the war in spiritual terms.

In sermons and public statements, he suggested the conflict represented a metaphysical struggle over the moral future of the Russian world. The language of spiritual warfare, cultural purification, and civilizational defence became intertwined with political justification for military action.

Such rhetoric matters. When religious authority sanctifies violence, it grants moral legitimacy to warfare and discourages dissent among believers. Faith communities that might otherwise advocate peace can become mobilized behind nationalistic or militaristic agendas.

We are therefore witnessing something deeply unsettling: the return of explicitly religious language to modern warfare. For decades after the Second World War, global diplomacy attempted—imperfectly but deliberately—to frame conflicts primarily in political and legal terms.

International institutions, treaties, and multilateral frameworks were designed to prevent precisely the kind of civilizational framing that once fueled centuries of bloodshed.

Yet the present moment suggests that these restraints are weakening. Wars are again being narrated as existential struggles between belief systems. Political leaders, clergy, and media personalities increasingly draw upon religious symbolism to rally support.

The danger is not simply rhetorical. When wars are sacralized, they risk becoming limitless conflicts, unconstrained by borders or diplomacy.

The Collapse of Multilateralism and the Silence of Faith Institutions

For years, I have written and spoken about the uneasy relationship between religion, global governance, and peacebuilding. In articles as well as in interviews and public lectures, I have repeatedly warned that governments and intergovernmental entities have failed to develop a coherent framework for engaging religions constructively in international affairs.

Faith-based organizations today are everywhere. They participate in humanitarian work, development programs, diplomacy initiatives, and interfaith dialogues. International institutions increasingly acknowledge the importance of religious actors in peacebuilding and development. Conferences, seminars, department programmes, global initiatives on “religion and …” or “faith and …” are not only commonplace, but proliferating.

Yet despite this apparent proliferation of engagement, the deeper structural problem remains unresolved: religious actors themselves remain profoundly fragmented, as are the political protagonists dealing with them.

Rather than forming robust alliances capable of confronting violence carried out in the name of religion, many faith organizations continue to operate within narrow institutional or theological boundaries. Interfaith initiatives exist, but they often remain symbolic—highly visible yet limited in their capacity to challenge political power or mobilize believers at scale.

I have argued that religious organizations too often underestimate their responsibility in shaping public narratives around conflict, and doing so together. When religion is invoked to legitimize violence, silence from religious leaders becomes complicity.

At the same time, the broader international system that might once have moderated such dynamics is itself under strain. The erosion of multilateralism has been one of the defining features of the past decade. International institutions that once served as mediators of global crises increasingly appear weakened or sidelined.

The United Nations Security Council remains gridlocked. International law is invoked selectively – if at all. Great-power competition has returned with renewed intensity. In such an environment, appeals to universal norms carry less weight.

Alongside this institutional weakening has come a worrying rise in authoritarianism worldwide. Governments across regions have adopted increasingly illiberal practices—restricting civil liberties, marginalizing minorities, and suppressing dissent. In many cases, religion is instrumentalized to reinforce nationalist narratives or legitimize political authority.

This combination—the decline of multilateral governance and the rise of politicized religion—creates a volatile global environment. Without strong international frameworks to mediate disputes, imperialist narratives and actions gain traction – as in Trump’s and Netanyahu’s war against Iran. Religion, ethnicity, and culture become tools through which political conflicts are interpreted and mobilized.

Faith-based organizations, despite their potential influence, have struggled to counter this trend effectively. Some remain focused on humanitarian services rather than confronting the ideological narratives that legitimize violence. Most hesitate to challenge political authorities with whom they maintain close relationships, and seek financial and/or political backing.

As a result, the global religious landscape today is marked by a paradox: religion is increasingly present in global discourse, yet its potential as a force for peace remains under-realized.

Islamophobia and the Seeds of a Wider Religious Conflict

Perhaps the most troubling dimension of the present moment is the resurgence of Islamophobia as a powerful political force in international discourse.

For more than two decades following the attacks of September 11, 2001, narratives portraying Islam as inherently linked to extremism became deeply embedded in political rhetoric and media representation across many Western societies.

Despite sustained efforts by scholars, religious leaders, and civil society actors to challenge these narratives, they continue to shape public perceptions.

In the context of the current confrontation with Iran, such narratives risk reinforcing the perception that the conflict is not merely geopolitical but civilizational. When Iran is framed not simply as a state actor but as a representative of a threatening Islamic force, the conflict becomes symbolically larger than any single nation.

The danger is clear: political wars are becoming interpreted as religious wars.

If such framing takes hold, the implications extend far beyond the Middle East. Conflicts that are perceived as religious struggles can mobilize believers across borders. They can radicalize communities, fuel sectarian polarization, and undermine the fragile coexistence of diverse religious populations.

History provides sobering examples. The European wars of religion in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries devastated entire regions, entangling political power struggles with theological disputes. Once religious identity became intertwined with warfare, violence spread across kingdoms and empires.

Today’s globalized world is even more interconnected. Diaspora communities, digital media, and transnational networks allow narratives of conflict to circulate instantly across continents. A war perceived as targeting Islam could ignite tensions in communities thousands of miles away from the battlefield.

Similarly, religious nationalism in multiple regions—whether Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, or Muslim—has been gaining strength in recent years. When one religiously framed conflict emerges, it can reinforce others. Narratives of civilizational struggle feed upon each other.

As the confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran becomes widely interpreted through a religious lens, the consequences may be profound. Christian–Muslim tensions, already strained in many contexts, could escalate dramatically. Such conflicts would not respect national borders. They would unfold within societies, across communities, and through global networks of believers.

Ironically, this escalation occurs at a time when religious leaders frequently emphasize the peace-promoting teachings of their traditions. Interfaith initiatives celebrate dialogue, coexistence, and shared values. Religious texts across traditions contain powerful injunctions toward compassion, justice, and reconciliation.

Yet these ideals remain fragile when confronted with political realities.

If religious institutions fail to challenge narratives that sanctify violence, they risk becoming spectators to a new era of religious conflict. Worse still, they may be drawn into it.

Are “Religions” Truly for Peace?

We may therefore be standing at the threshold of a profoundly dangerous historical moment.

Religious language is once again being used to justify war. Political conflicts are increasingly framed as civilizational struggles. Multilateral institutions that once mediated global disputes appear weakened. And faith communities—despite their moral authority—have yet to mount a unified challenge to the narratives that sacralize violence.

None of this means that religion inevitably leads to war. On the contrary, religious traditions contain some of humanity’s most powerful ethical teachings about peace, justice, and compassion. Faith communities have played vital roles in reconciliation processes, humanitarian action, and social movements for justice.

But these possibilities are not automatic. They depend on conscious choices by religious leaders, institutions, and believers.

If religious actors allow their traditions to be mobilized in support of political violence, then religion will become part of the problem rather than the solution.

The question confronting us today is therefore both urgent and uncomfortable.

At a moment when wars are increasingly described as sacred struggles, when geopolitical conflicts are interpreted through religious narratives, and when Islamophobia and other forms of religious prejudice continue to spread, we must ask ourselves: How are religions truly forces for peace?

Prof. Azza Karam, PhD. is President, Lead Integrity

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');  

Le prix des barres chocolatées a beau avoir explosé, les producteurs de cacao d'Afrique de l'Ouest sont confrontés à la ruine économique.

BERICHT über die Empfehlung des Europäischen Parlaments an den Rat, die Kommission und die Vizepräsidentin der Kommission / Hohe Vertreterin der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik zu einer verstärkten Zusammenarbeit zwischen der EU und Kanada vor dem Hintergrund der aktuellen geopolitischen Lage, einschließlich der Bedrohung der wirtschaftlichen Stabilität und der Souveränität Kanadas
Ausschuss für auswärtige Angelegenheiten
Tobias Cremer

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

BERICHT über das Thema „Europäische Vorzeigeprojekte von gemeinsamem Interesse im Verteidigungsbereich“
Ausschuss für Sicherheit und Verteidigung
Lucia Annunziata

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

Selon Europol, le risque de cyberattaques visant les infrastructures et les entreprises occidentales pourrait encore augmenter si le conflit persiste.

The post EXCLUSIF : Selon Europol, la menace terroriste dans l’UE s’est accrue en raison de la guerre au Moyen-Orient appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Une mesure conduite par Ipsos bva confirme le succès et la notoriété de la première saison de l'émission Les Nouveaux Boss en Afrique francophone. Un programme jugé « moderne et dans l'air du temps » par 89% des téléspectateurs.

L'émission Les Nouveaux Boss a franchi les 95 millions de vues sur les écosystèmes numériques de TV5MONDE, une mesure conduite par Ipsos bva dans les trois pays les plus peuplés d'Afrique francophone, et démontre l'impact à grande échelle de ce programme.

34% des personnes interrogées déclarent avoir regardé Les Nouveaux Boss et 54% en ont entendu parler, avec un pic de téléspectateurs en Côte d'Ivoire (38%) et de notoriété en République démocratique du Congo (64%). Ils sont près de 9 téléspectateurs sur 10 à avoir été conquis par le programme.

Des traits positifs associés à l'émission

Les Nouveaux Boss est particulièrement apprécié pour sa capacité à « répondre aux attentes des gens » (87% d'approbation) et à « promouvoir l'Afrique et ses talents dans le monde » (88%). Plus de 9 personnes sur 10 soulignent aussi avoir « découvert et appris des choses sur l'entrepreneuriat ».

Les téléspectateurs africains associent trois traits principaux à l'émission : elle est « utile » (89%), « innovante » (87%) et « différente de ce que l'on voit habituellement » (79%). Son format est par ailleurs jugé « moderne et dans l'air du temps » (89%).

Une émission qui attire de nouveaux publics

Les Nouveaux Boss a aussi permis à TV5MONDE d'avoir de l'impact au-delà de son public habituel : le programme est connu par 42% des personnes qui ne regardent pas encore TV5MONDE. 86% d'entre elles disent avoir désormais envie de découvrir le média francophone – un taux qui atteint 89% chez les 15-24 ans.

Forts de ce succès, TV5MONDE et WeMake Productions prévoient d'ouvrir les candidatures pour la saison 2 dans les toutes prochaines semaines.

Échantillon représentatif de 1574 personnes interrogées du 13 au 26 janvier 2026 en Côte d'Ivoire, au Cameroun et en République démocratique du Congo.

À propos de TV5MONDE 

TV5MONDE est le 1er réseau mondial de télévision généraliste francophone. Il compte dix chaînes distribuées dans plus de 400 millions de foyers à travers le monde et sous-titrées en 12 langues, auxquelles s'ajoutent la plateforme de streaming TV5MONDE+ disponible dans 200 pays et territoires, des chaînes « fast », des applications mobiles et une présence sur les messageries instantanées et les réseaux sociaux. TV5MONDE, c'est aussi l'offre TV5MONDE EDU avec ses programmes éducatifs et ses milliers de fiches pédagogiques d'apprentissage et d'enseignement du français fondées sur les contenus audiovisuels.

La Directrice de Cabinet du Président de la HAAC, Katia Kérékou Laourou, a clôturé, jeudi 5 mars 2026, la formation itinérante sur la couverture médiatique de l'élection présidentielle organisée au profit des professionnels des médias de la zone sud avec le soutien de l'Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.

Des journalistes ont pris part, du 2 au 5 mars, à une formation sur la couverture médiatique de l'élection présidentielle de 2026. Avec des experts, ils ont échangé sur plusieurs thèmes : les médias en période électorale ; la feuille de route du reporter en période électorale ; les défis de la logistique électorale. Les discussions ont également porté sur la centralisation des résultats électoraux dans le cadre de la présidentielle ; le contentieux électoral de la présidentielle devant la Cour constitutionnelle du Bénin ; le contentieux répressif et les infractions électorales ; la gestion des réseaux sociaux, le traitement des sources et les exigences déontologiques.

« La formation s'achève, mais la mission continue. Les prochaines échéances électorales seront le véritable terrain d'évaluation de nos acquis. Puisse chacun repartir avec la ferme conviction d'exercer son métier avec encore plus de rigueur, d'éthique et de professionnalisme », a déclaré le Secrétaire général de la HAAC, François Awoudo.
Selon la Directrice de Cabinet du Président de la HAAC, Katia Kérékou Laourou, ce séminaire ne doit pas rester un simple rendez-vous académique. « Il doit être un point de départ, un engagement renouvelé à faire des médias béninois des références en matière de responsabilité, d'éthique et de crédibilité durant les échéances électorales à venir », a-t-elle indiqué.

Fidèle à sa mission de régulation et d'accompagnement, poursuit la Directrice de Cabinet, la HAAC continuera d'œuvrer aux côtés des professionnels des médias pour garantir un environnement médiatique libre, pluraliste et responsable. « Je formule le vœu que chacun de vous reparte enrichi, déterminé et conscient du rôle stratégique qui est le sien dans la consolidation de notre démocratie », a-t-elle déclaré.

Les professionnels des médias ont salué l'initiative de la HAAC. « La formation me prépare à mieux couvrir la présidentielle du 12 avril prochain. J'apprécie énormément la qualité des formateurs et le contenu de leurs communications. Je retiens de cette formation que les règles déontologiques et éthiques du journalisme doivent être de mise en cette période électorale, très sensible pour la stabilité du pays », a déclaré Judicaël Kpehoun, journaliste à Banouto et fact-checker à Badona.

Pour Paterne Hounhouenou, journaliste à Tribune de la Capitale, cette formation lui a permis de mieux comprendre le rôle des médias en période électorale. « Cette formation a été enrichissante et m'a donné des clés pour exercer avec plus de professionnalisme et de responsabilité dans un contexte électoral sensible », a-t-il confié.

À l'approche de l'élection présidentielle du 12 avril 2026, cette formation apparaît comme une étape importante pour préparer les journalistes à assurer une couverture médiatique responsable, respectueuse des règles déontologiques et favorable à un climat électoral apaisé.