Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

The global system of development cooperation is in a state of flux. In a new policy brief we discuss how and why the very foundations of international aid and development are being shaken by geopolitical shifts, contested norms, and institutional upheaval. The brief argues that the crisis is not a mere cyclical downturn, or nor is it only about money, but a fundamental reordering of the global development landscape. In short, a “tipping point” in the sense of a dramatic moment when incremental changes coalesce into a transformative shift, for better or worse, is in the offing. We ask what might come next.

The global system of development cooperation is in a state of flux. In a new policy brief we discuss how and why the very foundations of international aid and development are being shaken by geopolitical shifts, contested norms, and institutional upheaval. The brief argues that the crisis is not a mere cyclical downturn, or nor is it only about money, but a fundamental reordering of the global development landscape. In short, a “tipping point” in the sense of a dramatic moment when incremental changes coalesce into a transformative shift, for better or worse, is in the offing. We ask what might come next.

The global system of development cooperation is in a state of flux. In a new policy brief we discuss how and why the very foundations of international aid and development are being shaken by geopolitical shifts, contested norms, and institutional upheaval. The brief argues that the crisis is not a mere cyclical downturn, or nor is it only about money, but a fundamental reordering of the global development landscape. In short, a “tipping point” in the sense of a dramatic moment when incremental changes coalesce into a transformative shift, for better or worse, is in the offing. We ask what might come next.

Ziel der jüngsten israelischen Luftangriffe gegen Iran war die Zerstörung von dessen Atomprogramm, das zur Vernichtung des jüdischen Staates hätte führen können. Die Gefahr weiter bannen könnte ein Regimewechsel in Teheran, doch ist ein solcher realistisch?

“Sustainability” is a diverse and contested concept that cannot be reduced to a single definition or practice. We propose the concept of “plural sustainabilities” to raise awareness of how different worldviews, knowledge systems, and values shape understandings of sustainability, recognizing the context-specific and culturally rooted approaches to sustainability found across the globe. Thereby, we use the concept of sustainability as a “boundary object”—a flexible term that connects different perspectives—and illustrates a plurality of sustainability concepts and practices through examples from various countries, including Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, Indonesia, Ghana, Germany, Tanzania, and China. These examples highlight how local knowledge, cultural philosophies, national narratives, grassroots initiatives, and international policy frameworks contribute to sustainability. Through our discussions, we advocate for a “scientific multilingualism”— a more inclusive and pluralistic approach to sustainability research that values diverse way of living, interacting with, and making sense of the world. “Plural sustainabilities” calls on researchers to critically assess the development models advanced in the name of sustainability, particularly those influenced by national governments and international organizations. These models often, whether intentionally or not, perpetuate the same extractive practices and socio-environmental injustices they aim to resolve. A truly critical approach must go beyond surface-level commitments and explore how political decisions and institutional practices—both public and private—shape sustainability efforts in ways that may reinforce existing power structures. Recognizing and challenging this political use of sustainability is essential to support alternative, context-based responses grounded in plural worldviews, local knowledge, and transformative action.

“Sustainability” is a diverse and contested concept that cannot be reduced to a single definition or practice. We propose the concept of “plural sustainabilities” to raise awareness of how different worldviews, knowledge systems, and values shape understandings of sustainability, recognizing the context-specific and culturally rooted approaches to sustainability found across the globe. Thereby, we use the concept of sustainability as a “boundary object”—a flexible term that connects different perspectives—and illustrates a plurality of sustainability concepts and practices through examples from various countries, including Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, Indonesia, Ghana, Germany, Tanzania, and China. These examples highlight how local knowledge, cultural philosophies, national narratives, grassroots initiatives, and international policy frameworks contribute to sustainability. Through our discussions, we advocate for a “scientific multilingualism”— a more inclusive and pluralistic approach to sustainability research that values diverse way of living, interacting with, and making sense of the world. “Plural sustainabilities” calls on researchers to critically assess the development models advanced in the name of sustainability, particularly those influenced by national governments and international organizations. These models often, whether intentionally or not, perpetuate the same extractive practices and socio-environmental injustices they aim to resolve. A truly critical approach must go beyond surface-level commitments and explore how political decisions and institutional practices—both public and private—shape sustainability efforts in ways that may reinforce existing power structures. Recognizing and challenging this political use of sustainability is essential to support alternative, context-based responses grounded in plural worldviews, local knowledge, and transformative action.

“Sustainability” is a diverse and contested concept that cannot be reduced to a single definition or practice. We propose the concept of “plural sustainabilities” to raise awareness of how different worldviews, knowledge systems, and values shape understandings of sustainability, recognizing the context-specific and culturally rooted approaches to sustainability found across the globe. Thereby, we use the concept of sustainability as a “boundary object”—a flexible term that connects different perspectives—and illustrates a plurality of sustainability concepts and practices through examples from various countries, including Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, Indonesia, Ghana, Germany, Tanzania, and China. These examples highlight how local knowledge, cultural philosophies, national narratives, grassroots initiatives, and international policy frameworks contribute to sustainability. Through our discussions, we advocate for a “scientific multilingualism”— a more inclusive and pluralistic approach to sustainability research that values diverse way of living, interacting with, and making sense of the world. “Plural sustainabilities” calls on researchers to critically assess the development models advanced in the name of sustainability, particularly those influenced by national governments and international organizations. These models often, whether intentionally or not, perpetuate the same extractive practices and socio-environmental injustices they aim to resolve. A truly critical approach must go beyond surface-level commitments and explore how political decisions and institutional practices—both public and private—shape sustainability efforts in ways that may reinforce existing power structures. Recognizing and challenging this political use of sustainability is essential to support alternative, context-based responses grounded in plural worldviews, local knowledge, and transformative action.

Energiekosten, Bürokratie, grüne Transformation: Die falschen Themen stehen im Mittelpunkt der Debatte über die Industrie. Denn die größte Gefahr wird übersehen., Die Debatte über die Zukunft der deutschen Industrie kreist derzeit vor allem um hohe Energiekosten, überbordende Bürokratie und die Herausforderungen der grünen Transformation. Dabei wird eine weit gravierendere Bedrohung übersehen: der Klimawandel. Nicht die Energiewende gefährdet die ...

Der Nato-Gipfel in Den Haag ist glimpflich verlaufen. Generalsekretär Mark Rutte und die europäischen Bündnispartner konnten einen Eklat mit US-Präsident Donald Trump vermeiden. Die Mitgliedstaaten haben sich für die kommende Dekade auf das Ziel geeinigt, 5 Prozent ihrer jeweiligen Wirtschaftsleistung für Verteidigung aus­zugeben, und den neuen Fähigkeitsanforderungen der Nato ihren Segen gegeben. Der Ukraine wurde nicht mehr ausdrücklich die Beitrittsperspektive zugesichert. In der Abschlusserklärung des Gipfels ist nur noch vage vom Recht der Mitglieder die Rede, dem Land beizustehen. Beiträge zur militärischen Unterstützung Kyjiws lassen sich aber auf das Nato-Ausgabenziel anrechnen, und Russland wird immerhin noch als langfristige Bedrohung der Allianz benannt. Die gelungene Schadensbegrenzung kann indes nicht darüber hinwegtäuschen, wie fragil die transatlantischen Beziehungen sind. Bruchlinien zeigen sich auch zwischen den Europäern. Um das US-Engage­ment in Europa aufrechtzuerhalten, müssen Deutschland und seine europäischen Partner nicht nur ihre Ausgaben erhöhen, sondern die Zukunft der Allianz politisch und militärisch gestalten.

In recent months, there has been an intensifying debate over whether Europe can still rely on US extended nuclear deterrence or should begin to consider alternatives that are independent of Washington. A binary approach – trust or no trust – is of limited analytical value here; the subject matter demands greater differentiation. Accordingly, this paper presents three scenarios to allow for a better understanding of the key challenges and possible responses. The first scenario is a transatlantic crisis of trust that might be possible to address with moderate effort. The second is a breach of trust requiring increased conventional strength and the appropriate tools for escala­tion control in order to force the US to become involved if necessary. And the third scenario is one in which the Europeans conclude that the US has withdrawn its support completely – a development that would have far-reaching and unpredictable consequences.

Sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by UN peacekeepers continues to undermine the organization’s legitimacy and effectiveness. While training on SEA is required for all UN personnel deploying to UN peace operations, there is little data available on how effective these trainings are. This paper presents the first quantitative analysis of SEA training’s effectiveness, using original survey data from more than 4,000 uniformed personnel in ten countries.

The analysis reveals that SEA training has a significant positive impact on attitudes and knowledge about SEA. Personnel who completed pre-deployment SEA training were substantially more likely to recognize that SEA would violate their national policy, to consider SEA to be serious, and to express willingness to report SEA. The analysis also found that UN deployment increases the likelihood that personnel will receive various gender-related trainings beyond SEA. However, despite pre-deployment SEA training being mandatory, a significant proportion of deployed peacekeepers reported never receiving this training.

Although the quantitative analysis shows positive links between SEA training and views on SEA and reporting, the paper also explores limitations in current approaches to SEA training. Interviews and workshops with training experts underscored the need for SEA trainings to contextualize and apply the material rather than focus on prescriptive instruction. SEA training also needs to focus on behavioral and cultural change rather than mere policy compliance. The paper concludes that while current SEA training shows measurable positive effects on attitudes and knowledge, improvements in delivery methods and enforcement of training requirements are necessary to maximize this training’s effectiveness and create lasting institutional change.

The post Training on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse for Uniformed Peacekeepers: Effectiveness and Limitations appeared first on International Peace Institute.

Polen kontrolliert seit Montag an 52 Punkten Einreisende aus Deutschland. Was bringen die Grenzkontrollen? Und: Viele Tote durch rechte Gewalt fehlen in den Statistiken.