Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

This paper reports on insights gathered from the recent workshop, “The future of the EU as a global development actor: Building alliances with the Global South in a polycrisis world,” organized on May 10-11 in Berlin. The workshop served as a platform for experts and thought leaders from various backgrounds to come together and delve into the challenges and opportunities presented by the evolving landscape of global development. Building upon the findings of this engaging event, the report encapsulates the collective wisdom and innovative ideas generated during the two-day session. As we navigate the complexities of polycrisis and its impact on EU development policy, this report sheds light on pathways to address pressing issues while fostering sustainable growth and cooperation. We invite you to explore the invaluable insights shared by our diverse panel of speakers, enabling us to pave the way for a more resilient and inclusive future in the realm of global development.

This paper reports on insights gathered from the recent workshop, “The future of the EU as a global development actor: Building alliances with the Global South in a polycrisis world,” organized on May 10-11 in Berlin. The workshop served as a platform for experts and thought leaders from various backgrounds to come together and delve into the challenges and opportunities presented by the evolving landscape of global development. Building upon the findings of this engaging event, the report encapsulates the collective wisdom and innovative ideas generated during the two-day session. As we navigate the complexities of polycrisis and its impact on EU development policy, this report sheds light on pathways to address pressing issues while fostering sustainable growth and cooperation. We invite you to explore the invaluable insights shared by our diverse panel of speakers, enabling us to pave the way for a more resilient and inclusive future in the realm of global development.

In Nairobi tagte im Juni zum zweiten Mal die Generalversammlung von UN-Habitat, die zurzeit wichtigste Politikkonferenz für nachhaltige Stadt- und Siedlungsentwicklung. Neben thematischen Schwerpunkten vom Recht auf Wohnen über die Klimakrise bis hin zur sozialen Stadtgestaltung war auch die multilaterale Zusammenarbeit Gegenstand der Debatten, schreiben Eva Dick und Kai Klause von Misereor.

In Nairobi tagte im Juni zum zweiten Mal die Generalversammlung von UN-Habitat, die zurzeit wichtigste Politikkonferenz für nachhaltige Stadt- und Siedlungsentwicklung. Neben thematischen Schwerpunkten vom Recht auf Wohnen über die Klimakrise bis hin zur sozialen Stadtgestaltung war auch die multilaterale Zusammenarbeit Gegenstand der Debatten, schreiben Eva Dick und Kai Klause von Misereor.

In Nairobi tagte im Juni zum zweiten Mal die Generalversammlung von UN-Habitat, die zurzeit wichtigste Politikkonferenz für nachhaltige Stadt- und Siedlungsentwicklung. Neben thematischen Schwerpunkten vom Recht auf Wohnen über die Klimakrise bis hin zur sozialen Stadtgestaltung war auch die multilaterale Zusammenarbeit Gegenstand der Debatten, schreiben Eva Dick und Kai Klause von Misereor.

Chinese engagement with the UN development pillar reflects a notion of multilateralism that differs from established (Western) concepts. These concepts frame UN entities as actors in their own right, nurtured by core resources and drawing legitimacy from their neutrality. China seems to see the UN more as a platform for facilitating bilateral exchanges, thriving on individual member state contributions. The Chinese approach could help adjust the UN to changing political realities, but brings risks for its commitment to individual and human rightsChina’s approach receives low scores on conventional global governance indices. But it might well offer a mechanism for adjusting the UN to changing political realities. Beyond Chinese power and expertise, a stronger – and more explicit – focus on bilateral stakes might strengthen the UN’s relevance among an increasingly divided membership. It might also open avenues for drawing on development solutions from across the board, and overcoming outdated North-South assistance models. However, China’s approach also comes with a major risk. A UN built more directly around states’ discrete and immediate priorities will find it difficult to maintain its commitment to individual and human rights and a long-term focus on global public goods. In line with the UN Charter, it is in the interest of all member states to ensure that the global organisation provides a stable normative foundation for multilateral cooperation.

Chinese engagement with the UN development pillar reflects a notion of multilateralism that differs from established (Western) concepts. These concepts frame UN entities as actors in their own right, nurtured by core resources and drawing legitimacy from their neutrality. China seems to see the UN more as a platform for facilitating bilateral exchanges, thriving on individual member state contributions. The Chinese approach could help adjust the UN to changing political realities, but brings risks for its commitment to individual and human rightsChina’s approach receives low scores on conventional global governance indices. But it might well offer a mechanism for adjusting the UN to changing political realities. Beyond Chinese power and expertise, a stronger – and more explicit – focus on bilateral stakes might strengthen the UN’s relevance among an increasingly divided membership. It might also open avenues for drawing on development solutions from across the board, and overcoming outdated North-South assistance models. However, China’s approach also comes with a major risk. A UN built more directly around states’ discrete and immediate priorities will find it difficult to maintain its commitment to individual and human rights and a long-term focus on global public goods. In line with the UN Charter, it is in the interest of all member states to ensure that the global organisation provides a stable normative foundation for multilateral cooperation.

Chinese engagement with the UN development pillar reflects a notion of multilateralism that differs from established (Western) concepts. These concepts frame UN entities as actors in their own right, nurtured by core resources and drawing legitimacy from their neutrality. China seems to see the UN more as a platform for facilitating bilateral exchanges, thriving on individual member state contributions. The Chinese approach could help adjust the UN to changing political realities, but brings risks for its commitment to individual and human rightsChina’s approach receives low scores on conventional global governance indices. But it might well offer a mechanism for adjusting the UN to changing political realities. Beyond Chinese power and expertise, a stronger – and more explicit – focus on bilateral stakes might strengthen the UN’s relevance among an increasingly divided membership. It might also open avenues for drawing on development solutions from across the board, and overcoming outdated North-South assistance models. However, China’s approach also comes with a major risk. A UN built more directly around states’ discrete and immediate priorities will find it difficult to maintain its commitment to individual and human rights and a long-term focus on global public goods. In line with the UN Charter, it is in the interest of all member states to ensure that the global organisation provides a stable normative foundation for multilateral cooperation.

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

During an event cohosted by IPI and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences on July 20th, panelists discussed the challenging global context for delivering humanitarian health responses, as well as specific issues such as the need to address gender-based violence in humanitarian health responses, the imperative to localize humanitarian action, and the opportunities and risks at the intersection of health, development, and peace.

The Secretary General’s New Agenda for Peace notes “conflict and disease can intersect in multiple ways and the risk posed are currently not addressed holistically and in a coordinated manner.” The discussion, which featured participants from a range of backgrounds, contributed to an enhanced systematic understanding of these constraints.

In May 2023, in partnership with MIT Press, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences released a special issue of the journal Daedalus, “Delivering Humanitarian Health Services in Violent Conflicts,” as part of the Academy’s project on Rethinking the Humanitarian Health Response to Violent Conflict. As the launch of this special issue, the policy forum brought together academics, scholars, policymakers, and practitioners to discuss the contemporary challenges and opportunities in humanitarian health delivery.

President of the International Rescue Committee, David Miliband set the scene by highlighting two major trends in global politics. The first trend is the “growing global risks in a hyper-connected world,” and secondly, political/geopolitical fragmentation, a trend which exacerbates those risks.

Addressing the health needs of people on the move requires rethinking the fluidity of health systems and the importance to expand the paradigm of the current health system and framework. Fouad Fouad, Associate Professor of Public Health Practice at the American University of Beirut suggested a potential “health system beyond borders,” which could foster a more integrated response. International health NGOs could be uniquely well positioned to operationalize commitments to localize humanitarian health delivery and better support actors in leadership roles, noted Jennifer Welsh, Canada 150 Research Chair in Global Governance and Security at McGill University. However, there is a lack of data to assess how localization could work in the humanitarian health sector and a need for more public opinion research on local populations. Welsh reminded participants that there are preexisting tools that could be enhanced.

IPI non-resident fellow Dirk Druet expressed that “given the realities of where health emergencies are likely to take place in the future, adopting emergency humanitarian responses to operating in conflict situations is absolutely critical to helping the most vulnerable.” In the realm of emergency health situations, the international community lacks clarity on the practical implications of adopting a conflict-informed approach.

Daedalus is the Academy’s open-access quarterly journal, featuring multidisciplinary, authoritative essays centered on a theme or subject and drawing on the intellectual capacity of Academy members and outside experts. Please visit here to see the May 2023 issue.

Welcoming/Opening Remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, International Peace Institute
David Oxtoby, President, American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Panelists:
David Miliband, President, International Rescue Committee
Jennifer Welsh, Canada 150 Research Chair in Global Governance and Security, McGill University; Project Cochair, Rethinking the Humanitarian Health Response to Violent Conflict
Fouad Fouad, Associate Professor of Public Health Practice, American University of Beirut (virtual)
Dirk Druet, Affiliate Researcher, McGill University; Non-Resident Fellow, International Peace Institute (virtual)

Moderator:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute

Closing Remarks:
Paul Wise, Richard E. Behrman Professor of Child Health and Society, Stanford University; Project Cochair, Rethinking the Humanitarian Health Response to Violent Conflict

As part of MONUSCO’s mandate renewal in December 2022, the UN Security Council called for the secretary-general to outline pathways for the mission’s transition and withdrawal from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), along with possible options for the future reconfiguration of the UN’s presence in the country, by July 2023. This past year, the rise of the M23 and other non-state armed groups in eastern DRC has led to the deployment of regional and bilateral forces, while rising anti-MONUSCO sentiment has further restricted the UN’s operating space. Following widespread and lethal civilian demonstrations against the mission’s perceived ineffectiveness throughout 2022, the government of the DRC notified the UN Security Council of its intention to reassess the agreed timetable for the mission’s departure, citing the deep displeasure of the Congolese people.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), Security Council Report, and the Stimson Center cohosted a roundtable on June 16, 2023, to discuss the UN’s presence in the DRC in the short and longer term. Convened under the Chatham House rule of non-attribution, this workshop brought together member states, UN officials, independent experts, and civil society stakeholders. The discussion sought to inform the UN Secretariat’s planning and discussions among UN member states on the prioritization and sequencing of MONUSCO’s transition and prompt creative thinking on the UN’s civilian, police, and military reconfiguration in the country, taking into account the deployment of regional and bilateral forces.

Participants raised several key considerations for MONUSCO’s transition and the UN’s reconfiguration:

• Prioritize a gradual, responsible, and conditions-based transition that addresses benchmarks 1–4 and 15 in the joint DRC-UN transition plan, emphasizing the protection of civilians as a priority task;
• Develop tailored transition strategies for each of the eastern provinces in collaboration with the UN country team (UNCT), the host government, and local civil society that reflect the unique conflict drivers and dynamics in each region;
• Call upon member states in the region to uphold their political commitment to the Luanda and Nairobi peace processes, ensuring the DRC’s and the region’s long-term stability;
• Urge member states to provide innovative, robust funding that enables the transfer of programmatic work from the mission to the UNCT, where appropriate;
• Continue to support the delivery of humanitarian aid and DDR processes where possible;
• Provide technical expertise in the lead-up to national elections slated for December 2023; and
• Adopt a “right fit,” tailored approach for the UN’s longer-term reconfiguration that embraces creative thinking, goes beyond a military approach, and addresses the drivers of conflict.

Download

As world leaders are packing their bags to travel to Washington for the Spring meetings of the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund, these discussions will offer the first opportunity of the year to collectively deliver on some of the propositions to reform the WB and the international financial architecture for sustainable development to make them fit for the poly-crises of the 21st century. The May G7 Summit in Japan, the June Summit for A New Financial Pact in Paris, the September Finance in Common Summit in Colombia, the SDG Summit in New York, the G20 Summit in India, the October World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) annual meetings, and the COP28 in Dubai at the end of the year, are other opportunities to move the reform agenda forward. Building a possible shared European vision on main priorities on the international development financial architecture is key for the European Union (EU) and its member states, given their political and economic weight in the international financial institutions (IFIs) and fora, and their responsibilities as key implementing actors in countries of operations.

As world leaders are packing their bags to travel to Washington for the Spring meetings of the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund, these discussions will offer the first opportunity of the year to collectively deliver on some of the propositions to reform the WB and the international financial architecture for sustainable development to make them fit for the poly-crises of the 21st century. The May G7 Summit in Japan, the June Summit for A New Financial Pact in Paris, the September Finance in Common Summit in Colombia, the SDG Summit in New York, the G20 Summit in India, the October World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) annual meetings, and the COP28 in Dubai at the end of the year, are other opportunities to move the reform agenda forward. Building a possible shared European vision on main priorities on the international development financial architecture is key for the European Union (EU) and its member states, given their political and economic weight in the international financial institutions (IFIs) and fora, and their responsibilities as key implementing actors in countries of operations.

As world leaders are packing their bags to travel to Washington for the Spring meetings of the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund, these discussions will offer the first opportunity of the year to collectively deliver on some of the propositions to reform the WB and the international financial architecture for sustainable development to make them fit for the poly-crises of the 21st century. The May G7 Summit in Japan, the June Summit for A New Financial Pact in Paris, the September Finance in Common Summit in Colombia, the SDG Summit in New York, the G20 Summit in India, the October World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) annual meetings, and the COP28 in Dubai at the end of the year, are other opportunities to move the reform agenda forward. Building a possible shared European vision on main priorities on the international development financial architecture is key for the European Union (EU) and its member states, given their political and economic weight in the international financial institutions (IFIs) and fora, and their responsibilities as key implementing actors in countries of operations.

Although the EU has now concluded numerous bilateral and regional trade agreements, the framework with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries is now to be signed after bumpy negotiations.

Although the EU has now concluded numerous bilateral and regional trade agreements, the framework with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries is now to be signed after bumpy negotiations.