Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Tax expenditures (TEs) in Colombia accounted for approximately 7.8% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2022, broken down as follows: the fiscal cost of this expenditure was 0.6% in terms of personal income tax and 1.5% in terms of corporate income tax. The remaining 5.6% corresponded to VAT. In total, this represents a four-percentage-point increase on the previous year.
This report stresses the need to review TEs. Such an evaluation was already crucial before the pandemic, but has now become all the more urgent in the wake of COVID-19 and its impact on inequality and state revenue.
Transparency: there is no comprehensive data available on TEs in Colombia and the data that does exist is not accessible to researchers or the general public. In several cases, information is patchy or aggregated, making it difficult to evaluate.
Complex fiscal landscape: the Colombian tax system is complex, due in part to the numerous special exemptions, exclusions and deductions inherent in the regulatory framework. This complicates matters in terms of tax compliance, oversight and auditing.
Evaluation challenges: Colombia had no defined benchmark for determining its TE. While initial work was undertaken in mid-2024 to define a benchmark for income tax and VAT, the disaggregated report is not available at the time of writing this analysis. Additionally, the absence of effective and ongoing assessment to determine the appropriateness of tax benefits has led to an accumulation of incentives, many of them unjustified, and an increase in the country’s TE.
Fiscal sustainability: limited tax collection is impinging on the ability of the Colombian state to maintain healthy public finances and comply with its fiscal rule. This is not only the result of a stagnating economy, but also stems from numerous tax benefits that drive up TE. These benefits already corresponded to 7.4% and 7.8% of GDP in 2021 and 2022 respectively.
Policy recommendations: there is a need to restructure the Colombian tax system to make it more efficient, sustainable and equitable. Tax benefits must be reviewed and, in some cases, progressively removed in order to help achieve tax justice and streamline the system.

 

En 2022, los gastos tributarios (GTs) en Colombia representaron aproximadamente el 7.8% del PIB, desglosándose de la siguiente manera: el costo fiscal de estos gastos en el impuesto sobre la renta fue del 0.6% para personas naturales y del 1.5% para personas jurídicas. El otro 5.6% corresponde al IVA. Este total representa un aumento de 4 puntos porcentuales en comparación con el año anterior.
Este informe destaca la necesidad de revisar los GTs, una evaluación que ya era crucial antes de la pandemia, pero que se ha vuelto aún más urgente en el contexto post-COVID-19, dado su impacto en la desigualdad y en los ingresos estatales.
Transparencia: La información sobre GTs en Colombia no es detallada ni accesible para los ciudadanos o los investigadores. En algunos casos está dispersa o solo se dispone de información agregada, lo que dificulta su evaluación.
Escenario fiscal complejo: El sistema tributario colombiano es complejo, en parte, debido a las numerosas exenciones, exclusiones y deducciones especiales presentes en la regulación, lo que complejiza el cumplimiento tributario y el proceso de fiscalización y control.
Desafíos en la evaluación: Colombia no tenía definido su sistema de referencia (Benchmark) para la determinación del gasto tributario (GT). A mediados de 2024 se realizó el primer acercamiento a dicha definición para el impuesto sobre la renta y para el IVA, pero, al momento de este análisis no está disponible el informe desagregado. Sumado a ello, los beneficios tributarios no son objeto de una evaluación permanente y efectiva que permita determinar su pertinencia, lo que ha generado una acumulación de incentivos, muchas veces injustificados y que implican un elevado GT para el país.
Sostenibilidad fiscal: La capacidad del Estado colombiano para mantener unas finanzas saludables y cumplir con la regla fiscal se está viendo afectada por el escaso recaudo tributario. Esto se debe no solo al estancamiento de la economía sino, a la existencia de numerosos beneficios impositivos que conducen a un elevado GT que, solo en 2021 y 2022 representó 7.4% y 7.8% del PIB respectivamente.
Recomendaciones de política: en Colombia se requiere una reestructuración del sistema tributario para hacerlo más eficiente, sostenible y equitativo. Los beneficios tributarios se deben evaluar y, en ciertos casos, desmontar gradualmente con el fin de contribuir a la justicia tributaria y a la simplicidad del sistema.

En 2022, los gastos tributarios (GTs) en Colombia representaron aproximadamente el 7.8% del PIB, desglosándose de la siguiente manera: el costo fiscal de estos gastos en el impuesto sobre la renta fue del 0.6% para personas naturales y del 1.5% para personas jurídicas. El otro 5.6% corresponde al IVA. Este total representa un aumento de 4 puntos porcentuales en comparación con el año anterior.
Este informe destaca la necesidad de revisar los GTs, una evaluación que ya era crucial antes de la pandemia, pero que se ha vuelto aún más urgente en el contexto post-COVID-19, dado su impacto en la desigualdad y en los ingresos estatales.
Transparencia: La información sobre GTs en Colombia no es detallada ni accesible para los ciudadanos o los investigadores. En algunos casos está dispersa o solo se dispone de información agregada, lo que dificulta su evaluación.
Escenario fiscal complejo: El sistema tributario colombiano es complejo, en parte, debido a las numerosas exenciones, exclusiones y deducciones especiales presentes en la regulación, lo que complejiza el cumplimiento tributario y el proceso de fiscalización y control.
Desafíos en la evaluación: Colombia no tenía definido su sistema de referencia (Benchmark) para la determinación del gasto tributario (GT). A mediados de 2024 se realizó el primer acercamiento a dicha definición para el impuesto sobre la renta y para el IVA, pero, al momento de este análisis no está disponible el informe desagregado. Sumado a ello, los beneficios tributarios no son objeto de una evaluación permanente y efectiva que permita determinar su pertinencia, lo que ha generado una acumulación de incentivos, muchas veces injustificados y que implican un elevado GT para el país.
Sostenibilidad fiscal: La capacidad del Estado colombiano para mantener unas finanzas saludables y cumplir con la regla fiscal se está viendo afectada por el escaso recaudo tributario. Esto se debe no solo al estancamiento de la economía sino, a la existencia de numerosos beneficios impositivos que conducen a un elevado GT que, solo en 2021 y 2022 representó 7.4% y 7.8% del PIB respectivamente.
Recomendaciones de política: en Colombia se requiere una reestructuración del sistema tributario para hacerlo más eficiente, sostenible y equitativo. Los beneficios tributarios se deben evaluar y, en ciertos casos, desmontar gradualmente con el fin de contribuir a la justicia tributaria y a la simplicidad del sistema.

En 2022, los gastos tributarios (GTs) en Colombia representaron aproximadamente el 7.8% del PIB, desglosándose de la siguiente manera: el costo fiscal de estos gastos en el impuesto sobre la renta fue del 0.6% para personas naturales y del 1.5% para personas jurídicas. El otro 5.6% corresponde al IVA. Este total representa un aumento de 4 puntos porcentuales en comparación con el año anterior.
Este informe destaca la necesidad de revisar los GTs, una evaluación que ya era crucial antes de la pandemia, pero que se ha vuelto aún más urgente en el contexto post-COVID-19, dado su impacto en la desigualdad y en los ingresos estatales.
Transparencia: La información sobre GTs en Colombia no es detallada ni accesible para los ciudadanos o los investigadores. En algunos casos está dispersa o solo se dispone de información agregada, lo que dificulta su evaluación.
Escenario fiscal complejo: El sistema tributario colombiano es complejo, en parte, debido a las numerosas exenciones, exclusiones y deducciones especiales presentes en la regulación, lo que complejiza el cumplimiento tributario y el proceso de fiscalización y control.
Desafíos en la evaluación: Colombia no tenía definido su sistema de referencia (Benchmark) para la determinación del gasto tributario (GT). A mediados de 2024 se realizó el primer acercamiento a dicha definición para el impuesto sobre la renta y para el IVA, pero, al momento de este análisis no está disponible el informe desagregado. Sumado a ello, los beneficios tributarios no son objeto de una evaluación permanente y efectiva que permita determinar su pertinencia, lo que ha generado una acumulación de incentivos, muchas veces injustificados y que implican un elevado GT para el país.
Sostenibilidad fiscal: La capacidad del Estado colombiano para mantener unas finanzas saludables y cumplir con la regla fiscal se está viendo afectada por el escaso recaudo tributario. Esto se debe no solo al estancamiento de la economía sino, a la existencia de numerosos beneficios impositivos que conducen a un elevado GT que, solo en 2021 y 2022 representó 7.4% y 7.8% del PIB respectivamente.
Recomendaciones de política: en Colombia se requiere una reestructuración del sistema tributario para hacerlo más eficiente, sostenible y equitativo. Los beneficios tributarios se deben evaluar y, en ciertos casos, desmontar gradualmente con el fin de contribuir a la justicia tributaria y a la simplicidad del sistema.

Photos

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

In partnership with the government of South Africa, the African Union, and the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation, IPI co-hosted the inaugural forum on “Africa and the Global Order” under the theme Reform of the Global Financial Architecture: G20 Imperatives for Sustainable Debt and Inclusive Growth. This year’s G20 carries both substantive and symbolic weight, as it is the first ever hosted by an African country. Taking place at the end of South Africa’s presidency and ahead of the November summit, the event reflected on South Africa’s progress in advancing its stated priorities, particularly on debt sustainability and inclusivity in the global financial architecture.

The event was chaired by IPI President Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and co-hosted by the governments of South Africa and the African Union, represented respectively by Ronald Ozzy Lamola, Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa, and Téte António, Minister of External Relations of the Republic of Angola and Chair of the Executive Council of the African Union. 

Participants had a frank discussion on regional issues held under the Chatham House Rule.

Atendees included Gesa Bräutigam, Director for Sub-Saharan Africa and the Sahel at the Federal Foreign Office, Germany; Márcio Burity, Political Advisor to the Minister of External Relations of Angola; Işıl Cemali Doğan, Deputy Directorate General for Multilateral Economic Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Türkiye; Berris Ekinci, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Türkiye; Philip Fox-Drummond Gough, Secretary for Economic and Financial Affairs in the Ministry of External Relations of the Federative Republic of Brazil; Shambhu Hakki, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs of the Republic of India; Freya Jackson, Director of Multilateral and Human Rights at the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Mathu Joyini, Permanent Representative of the Republic of South Africa to the United Nations; Thani Mohamed-Soilihi, Minister Delegate for Francophonie and International Partnerships of the French Republic; Masotsha Mnguni, Director of Economic Development at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) and G20 Project Coordinator, South Africa; Stephen Del Rosso, Vice President, International Program at the Carnegie Corporation of New York; Hedda Samson, Deputy Head of the Delegation of the European Union to the United Nations; and Thomas Schnöll, Permanent Observer for the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development to the United Nations (OECD).

The post Inaugural Forum on Africa and the Global Order: A Focus on the G20 appeared first on International Peace Institute.

Event Video 
Photos

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

Strategic philanthropy holds immense potential to drive large-scale social change, yet its impact is often constrained by a lack of data, research, and leadership. Addressing the world’s most intractable problems requires collaboration between philanthropy, government, and business.

On September 24th, IPI hosted a Global Leaders Series event featuring H.E. Badr Jafar, author of the book The Business of Philanthropy: Perspectives and Insights from Global Thought Leaders on How to Change the World.

The book, The Business of Philanthropy, features diverse insights into the power of strategic philanthropy to inform, inspire, and mobilize the next generation of social innovators in their pursuit of positive social and environmental impact.

Speakers:
H.E. Badr Jafar, Special Envoy for Business and Philanthropy, United Arab Emirates, and author of The Business of Philanthropy
Tsitsi Masiyiwa, Chair of Higherlife Foundation, Chair and Co-Founder of Delta Philanthropies, Chair of Co-Impact, Chair of END Fund, and a founding board member of the African Philanthropy Forum
Jacqueline Novogratz, Founder and CEO of Acumen

Moderator:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO, International Peace Institute

The post Global Leaders Series: Insights from The Business of Philanthropy appeared first on International Peace Institute.

Event Video 
Photos

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

IPI together with the Permanent Mission of Ireland to the United Nations, and the Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico, in partnership with Our Secure Future and the Nobel Women’s Initiative, cohosted the annual “Women, Peace, and Leadership Symposium on Women’s Leadership for International Peace and Security” on September 24th. Now in its eighth year, this symposium aims to ensure that WPS is not only discussed within the UN Security Council during “WPS week” in October but is also integrated into broader high-level discussions at the UN.

This year, the Women, Peace, and Leadership Symposium returns to the foundation of the series and focuses on women’s leadership in international peace and security. The discussion examined women’s leadership in formal political spaces, within conflict settings, at the community level, and in areas that are crucial to international peace and security, including technology. While this event highlighted innovations and successes in women’s leadership, the conversation encouraged people of all genders to fight these barriers and be accountable to international obligations to increase women’s participation.

Opening Remarks:
Hiroyuki Saruhashi, Director, Gender Mainstreaming Division at Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan

Speakers:
H.E. Fergal Mythen, Permanent Representative of Ireland to the United Nations
Sahana Dharmapuri, Vice President of Our Secure Future and Vice President of the PAX sapiens Foundation
Pablo Arrocha, Legal Advisor, Mexico Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Tawakkol Karman, Nobel Peace Prize laureate
Sarah Hendriks, Director of Policy, Programme, and Intergovernmental Support Division (PPID), UN Women

Moderator:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO, International Peace Institute

Closing Remarks:
Phoebe Donnelly, IPI Senior Fellow and Head of Women, Peace, and Security

The post Women, Peace, and Leadership Symposium on Women’s Leadership for International Peace and Security appeared first on International Peace Institute.

This book has come up with the most up-to-date, comprehensive and objective analysis of China’s investments in Pakistan under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative. It covers the broad range of Sino-Pakistan relations in the backdrop of Pakistan’s complex political, governance, security, socio-environmental and technological challenges that hinder implementation of CPEC projects.

This book has come up with the most up-to-date, comprehensive and objective analysis of China’s investments in Pakistan under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative. It covers the broad range of Sino-Pakistan relations in the backdrop of Pakistan’s complex political, governance, security, socio-environmental and technological challenges that hinder implementation of CPEC projects.

This book has come up with the most up-to-date, comprehensive and objective analysis of China’s investments in Pakistan under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative. It covers the broad range of Sino-Pakistan relations in the backdrop of Pakistan’s complex political, governance, security, socio-environmental and technological challenges that hinder implementation of CPEC projects.

Bestimmte Narrative über Einkommen, Unternehmen und Wirtschaft beeinflussen Einstellungen zur Klimapolitik – Einkommensnarrativ senkt zusätzlich die Zufriedenheit mit der Demokratie – Sozial ausgewogene und transparent kommunizierte Klimapolitik kann Polarisierung vorbeugen Populistische Parteien ...

This study takes a critical look at Franco-German relations in the field of international cooperation along the entire humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) spectrum to better gauge the usefulness of bilateral collaborative action in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Both the corresponding potential – for example in the current Syrian transition – as well as existing coordination formats are of interest to the inquiry. The latter are examined in more detail against the background of German and French activities in Libya and Iraq. In this context, the analysis also considers the HDP nexus as an instrument of cooperation, which offers ideal conditions for application in fragile, conflict-prone (Libya) or war-torn countries (Iraq) due to their complex needs. The paper concludes with a series of recommendations for initiating or strengthening Franco-German cooperation in fragile states of the MENA region in the fields of humanitarian aid, development policy, and peacebuilding measures.
The study is divided into three thematic sections, the first of which examines bilateral relations between Paris and Berlin, with a focus on the phase following the signing of the Aachen Agreement in 2019. The analysis of national and international framework conditions for and against international cooperation is also part of this section, taking into account the effects of the Trump 2.0 administration. In the second part, the foreign and development policy approaches of both countries are analysed with a focus on their Middle East policies. Here, convergences and divergent approaches are of special interest, allowing conclusions to be drawn about the ability and willingness to cooperate. The third section is devoted to a synthesis of the operationalisation of activities within the HDP spectrum, with Libya and Iraq as country examples, as well as additional considerations relating to Syria.
On the one hand, this approach enables one to identify structural factors that either hinder or promote bilateral Franco-German cooperation in the international context. On the other hand, sufficient space is also given to current developments in order to be able to categorise trends and contextual factors which have a reinforcing or weakening effect on cooperation drivers. The Discussion Paper concludes with a recapitulation of the findings, and derives actionable recommendations for strengthening cooperation between Paris and Berlin in the crisis-ridden MENA region on the basis of HDP coordination.

This study takes a critical look at Franco-German relations in the field of international cooperation along the entire humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) spectrum to better gauge the usefulness of bilateral collaborative action in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Both the corresponding potential – for example in the current Syrian transition – as well as existing coordination formats are of interest to the inquiry. The latter are examined in more detail against the background of German and French activities in Libya and Iraq. In this context, the analysis also considers the HDP nexus as an instrument of cooperation, which offers ideal conditions for application in fragile, conflict-prone (Libya) or war-torn countries (Iraq) due to their complex needs. The paper concludes with a series of recommendations for initiating or strengthening Franco-German cooperation in fragile states of the MENA region in the fields of humanitarian aid, development policy, and peacebuilding measures.
The study is divided into three thematic sections, the first of which examines bilateral relations between Paris and Berlin, with a focus on the phase following the signing of the Aachen Agreement in 2019. The analysis of national and international framework conditions for and against international cooperation is also part of this section, taking into account the effects of the Trump 2.0 administration. In the second part, the foreign and development policy approaches of both countries are analysed with a focus on their Middle East policies. Here, convergences and divergent approaches are of special interest, allowing conclusions to be drawn about the ability and willingness to cooperate. The third section is devoted to a synthesis of the operationalisation of activities within the HDP spectrum, with Libya and Iraq as country examples, as well as additional considerations relating to Syria.
On the one hand, this approach enables one to identify structural factors that either hinder or promote bilateral Franco-German cooperation in the international context. On the other hand, sufficient space is also given to current developments in order to be able to categorise trends and contextual factors which have a reinforcing or weakening effect on cooperation drivers. The Discussion Paper concludes with a recapitulation of the findings, and derives actionable recommendations for strengthening cooperation between Paris and Berlin in the crisis-ridden MENA region on the basis of HDP coordination.

This study takes a critical look at Franco-German relations in the field of international cooperation along the entire humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) spectrum to better gauge the usefulness of bilateral collaborative action in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Both the corresponding potential – for example in the current Syrian transition – as well as existing coordination formats are of interest to the inquiry. The latter are examined in more detail against the background of German and French activities in Libya and Iraq. In this context, the analysis also considers the HDP nexus as an instrument of cooperation, which offers ideal conditions for application in fragile, conflict-prone (Libya) or war-torn countries (Iraq) due to their complex needs. The paper concludes with a series of recommendations for initiating or strengthening Franco-German cooperation in fragile states of the MENA region in the fields of humanitarian aid, development policy, and peacebuilding measures.
The study is divided into three thematic sections, the first of which examines bilateral relations between Paris and Berlin, with a focus on the phase following the signing of the Aachen Agreement in 2019. The analysis of national and international framework conditions for and against international cooperation is also part of this section, taking into account the effects of the Trump 2.0 administration. In the second part, the foreign and development policy approaches of both countries are analysed with a focus on their Middle East policies. Here, convergences and divergent approaches are of special interest, allowing conclusions to be drawn about the ability and willingness to cooperate. The third section is devoted to a synthesis of the operationalisation of activities within the HDP spectrum, with Libya and Iraq as country examples, as well as additional considerations relating to Syria.
On the one hand, this approach enables one to identify structural factors that either hinder or promote bilateral Franco-German cooperation in the international context. On the other hand, sufficient space is also given to current developments in order to be able to categorise trends and contextual factors which have a reinforcing or weakening effect on cooperation drivers. The Discussion Paper concludes with a recapitulation of the findings, and derives actionable recommendations for strengthening cooperation between Paris and Berlin in the crisis-ridden MENA region on the basis of HDP coordination.

Promoting female employment remains a pressing challenge in many low- and middle-income countries. Despite ongoing efforts, too few women participate in the labour force – particularly in regions such as the Middle East and South Asia – and too many remain locked out of more decent wage employment – especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Promoting women’s employment is not just about fairness; it is essential for inclusive and sustainable development. Women’s economic participation matters for four reasons: it fosters growth and reduces poverty by increasing household income, it enhances women’s autonomy in the household, it promotes equity and cohesion in societies, and it strengthens the resilience of households to shocks by diversifying income sources. Recent research has deepened under­standing of both the barriers and enablers of gender equality in labour markets, offering useful guidance for development cooperation.

Building on empirical research by IDOS, this policy brief highlights that development cooperation can take three key approaches to promote female employment:

• Address foundational barriers: Development cooperation can work with local partners to remove the root barriers holding women back. This includes addressing restrictive gender norms in ways that respect cultural contexts, e.g. by investing in community-based care solutions (as successfully practised in several African cases) or better access to services and mobility. Projects should not only target women individually but also address constraints within households and communities and engage broader society. They must also challenge gendered labour market structures that limit women’s paths into wage work.
• Strengthen gender equality on the opera­tional level: The green and digital transitions offer new employ­ment opportunities – but women risk being left behind. Development cooperation can help to ensure that women benefit from these shifts. In cooperation with national governments, it can embed gender targets into economic reforms, incentivise companies to adopt inclusive hiring practices and to implement flexible work time arrangements (such as in Jordan), and fund training for women to reskill and motivate them for these fields.
• Create an enabling policy mix: Employment-focused reforms succeed when they connect with broader policy frameworks. Aligning employment initiatives with social policies – such as childcare support or public works – can boost women’s ability to work. At the same time, gender-sensitive approaches in areas like transport, finance and infrastructure can help overcome structural disadvantages that affect women at different stages of life.

In recent years, development cooperation has shifted from measures to support gender mainstreaming towards gender-transformative approaches that aim to reduce structural barriers. Recent funding cuts and public opinion that is becoming more critical of diversity and equity measures, mean that development cooperation must build on its experience to enable women to grasp economic opportunities and live a dignified life.

 

Promoting female employment remains a pressing challenge in many low- and middle-income countries. Despite ongoing efforts, too few women participate in the labour force – particularly in regions such as the Middle East and South Asia – and too many remain locked out of more decent wage employment – especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Promoting women’s employment is not just about fairness; it is essential for inclusive and sustainable development. Women’s economic participation matters for four reasons: it fosters growth and reduces poverty by increasing household income, it enhances women’s autonomy in the household, it promotes equity and cohesion in societies, and it strengthens the resilience of households to shocks by diversifying income sources. Recent research has deepened under­standing of both the barriers and enablers of gender equality in labour markets, offering useful guidance for development cooperation.

Building on empirical research by IDOS, this policy brief highlights that development cooperation can take three key approaches to promote female employment:

• Address foundational barriers: Development cooperation can work with local partners to remove the root barriers holding women back. This includes addressing restrictive gender norms in ways that respect cultural contexts, e.g. by investing in community-based care solutions (as successfully practised in several African cases) or better access to services and mobility. Projects should not only target women individually but also address constraints within households and communities and engage broader society. They must also challenge gendered labour market structures that limit women’s paths into wage work.
• Strengthen gender equality on the opera­tional level: The green and digital transitions offer new employ­ment opportunities – but women risk being left behind. Development cooperation can help to ensure that women benefit from these shifts. In cooperation with national governments, it can embed gender targets into economic reforms, incentivise companies to adopt inclusive hiring practices and to implement flexible work time arrangements (such as in Jordan), and fund training for women to reskill and motivate them for these fields.
• Create an enabling policy mix: Employment-focused reforms succeed when they connect with broader policy frameworks. Aligning employment initiatives with social policies – such as childcare support or public works – can boost women’s ability to work. At the same time, gender-sensitive approaches in areas like transport, finance and infrastructure can help overcome structural disadvantages that affect women at different stages of life.

In recent years, development cooperation has shifted from measures to support gender mainstreaming towards gender-transformative approaches that aim to reduce structural barriers. Recent funding cuts and public opinion that is becoming more critical of diversity and equity measures, mean that development cooperation must build on its experience to enable women to grasp economic opportunities and live a dignified life.

 

Promoting female employment remains a pressing challenge in many low- and middle-income countries. Despite ongoing efforts, too few women participate in the labour force – particularly in regions such as the Middle East and South Asia – and too many remain locked out of more decent wage employment – especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Promoting women’s employment is not just about fairness; it is essential for inclusive and sustainable development. Women’s economic participation matters for four reasons: it fosters growth and reduces poverty by increasing household income, it enhances women’s autonomy in the household, it promotes equity and cohesion in societies, and it strengthens the resilience of households to shocks by diversifying income sources. Recent research has deepened under­standing of both the barriers and enablers of gender equality in labour markets, offering useful guidance for development cooperation.

Building on empirical research by IDOS, this policy brief highlights that development cooperation can take three key approaches to promote female employment:

• Address foundational barriers: Development cooperation can work with local partners to remove the root barriers holding women back. This includes addressing restrictive gender norms in ways that respect cultural contexts, e.g. by investing in community-based care solutions (as successfully practised in several African cases) or better access to services and mobility. Projects should not only target women individually but also address constraints within households and communities and engage broader society. They must also challenge gendered labour market structures that limit women’s paths into wage work.
• Strengthen gender equality on the opera­tional level: The green and digital transitions offer new employ­ment opportunities – but women risk being left behind. Development cooperation can help to ensure that women benefit from these shifts. In cooperation with national governments, it can embed gender targets into economic reforms, incentivise companies to adopt inclusive hiring practices and to implement flexible work time arrangements (such as in Jordan), and fund training for women to reskill and motivate them for these fields.
• Create an enabling policy mix: Employment-focused reforms succeed when they connect with broader policy frameworks. Aligning employment initiatives with social policies – such as childcare support or public works – can boost women’s ability to work. At the same time, gender-sensitive approaches in areas like transport, finance and infrastructure can help overcome structural disadvantages that affect women at different stages of life.

In recent years, development cooperation has shifted from measures to support gender mainstreaming towards gender-transformative approaches that aim to reduce structural barriers. Recent funding cuts and public opinion that is becoming more critical of diversity and equity measures, mean that development cooperation must build on its experience to enable women to grasp economic opportunities and live a dignified life.

 

Event Video 
Photos

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

On September 23rd, IPI and the Government of Estonia, in partnership with the 1 for 8 Billion, the United Nations Association of the UK (UNA-UK), and CIVICUS, cohosted a public policy forum at the United Nations on the process of selecting the next UN secretary-general: the global diplomat and civil servant for the world’s peoples.

The event focused on recommendations to create a more transparent, inclusive, and equitable selection process for the position of UN secretary-general and ideas for how different sectors can work collaboratively to encourage and ensure the realization of this goal. The discussion also explored the increasing role of the General Assembly in the secretary-general’s election process. The event highlighted how this critical appointment can be a transformative and reinvigorating opportunity for the UN and for multilateralism as the world faces intersecting and accelerating global challenges.

Speakers:
H.E. Arnoldo André Tinoco, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica
H.E. Jeppe Tranholm-Mikkelsen, Permanent Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Denmark
H.E. Oana-Silvia Țoiu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania
H.E. Gro Harlem Brundtland, Member of The Elders; former Prime Minister of Norway and Director-General of the WHO
Maria Noel Leoni, Representative of the 1 for 8 Billion Campaign; Co-founder and Campaign Director of GQUAL; and Deputy Executive Director for the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL)
Thant Myint-U, Visiting Fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge; the Chairman of U Thant House; Founder and Chairman of the Yangon Heritage Trust; and author of the book, Peacemaker: U Thant and the Forgotten Quest for a Just World

Closing Remarks:
H.E. Alar Karis, President of Estonia

Moderator:
Jeffrey Feltman, Non-Resident Adviser, International Peace Institute

The post A New Vision for Global Leadership: Selecting the Next UN Secretary-General appeared first on International Peace Institute.

The Security Action for Europe (SAFE) Programme is the new EU financial instrument designed to allow EU Member States to speed up their defence readiness by enabling urgent and significant investments in support of the European defence industry, with a focus on filling critical gaps in capabilities and equipment. It is the first pillar of the ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030 strategic plan that aims to unlock €800 billion in defence spending across the EU.[1]

SAFE will provide up to €150 billion in competitive long-maturity loans to Member States that request financial assistance for investments in defence capabilities. These loans will finance urgent and large-scale procurement processes, ensuring that Europe’s defence industry can deliver the requisite equipment.

The features expected of the submitted proposals

The proposals should be:

• Relevant to the defence capabilities of Member States and the EU (e.g. border protection, countering hybrid threats, protecting critical infrastructure, countering cyber warfare, etc.)
• For urgent, large-scale procurement efforts, not small projects
• Involve at least two Member States in a common procurement procedure
• However, requests from individual Member States can also be approved, but only if they are linked to an urgent need and broader geopolitical realities; the proposal must also be submitted on the basis of the timely procurement and delivery of critical assets[2] (for example, the need to procure drones to counter migration movements along routes experiencing a significant increase in traffic, or systems to protect critical infrastructure from potential terrorist threats linked to the situation in the Middle East, could be supported). This is a temporary exception with an initial duration of one year.
• In addition, no more than 35% of the cost of the products’ manufacturing components can originate from outside the EU, EEA-EFTA, or Ukraine, while the countries of origin must meet the conditions set out in the Programme Regulations.

What will SAFE fund?

Category 1:

• Ammunition and missiles
• Artillery systems, including deep-precision strike capabilities
• Ground combat capabilities and their support systems, including soldier equipment and infantry weapons
• Small drones (NATO 1 class[3]) and related anti-drone systems
• Systems and equipment for critical infrastructure protection
• Cyber defence and cyber security systems
• Military mobility, including counter-mobility

Category 2:

• Air and missile defence systems
• Maritime surface and underwater capabilities
• Drones other than small drones (NATO-2 and NATO-3 class) and related anti-drone systems
• Strategic enablers such as, but not limited to, strategic airlift, air-to-air refuelling, C4ISTAR systems (Command, Communications, Information, Control, etc.), as well as space assets and services
• Space asset protection systems
• Artificial intelligence and electronic warfare systems

Countries that have expressed an interest in participating in SAFE and a Timeline for the Next Steps

By 29 July 2025, when the Programme’s first key deadline expired, 19 Member States had expressed an interest in accessing loans through the SAFE mechanism, with potential defence purchases of at least €127 billion.

The Member States in question are Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Spain.

The following resources have been tentatively allocated to the Member States as follows:

Member-State Allocation of Resources (€) Belgium 8,340,027,698 Bulgaria 3,261,700,000 Croatia 1,700,000,000 Cyprus 1,181,503,924 Czech Republic 2,060,000,000 Denmark 46,796,822 Estonia 2,660,932,171 Finland 1,000,000,000 France 16,216,720,524 Greece 787,669,283 Hungary 16,216,720,524 Italy 14,900,000,000 Latvia 5,680,431,322 Lithuania 6,375,487,840 Poland 43,734,100,805 Portugal 5,841,179,332 Romania 16,680,055,394 Slovakia 2,316,674,361 Spain 1,000,000,000

 

30 November 2025 Submission of National Defence Investment Plans

January 2026 Adoption of Council Implementing Decisions

February 2026: Negotiation of loan agreements and operational arrangements, triggering pre-financing.

In search of a European strategic culture and interoperability: Behind the Lines

1. The Programme is part of the EU’s overall strategy on the indivisibility of external and internal security—a strategy which informs every strategic and institutional document it produces in relation to internal and foreign policy. SAFE follows in the wake of the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, but also the intensification of hybrid threats. It is therefore to be expected that it bears the imprint of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as well Moscow’s hybrid attacks against Ukraine and its hybrid operations against EU Member States. Apart from blurring the lines between war and peace—which is a key characteristic of hybrid threats in general—, the specific threat posed by Russia highlights the extent to which internal security is now significantly threatened by a malicious external actor, which can also be a state. This constitutes a further significant change in the recognition and assessment of threats.
2. The main threats that can be addressed through projects submitted to SAFE for funding extend beyond military attack by a hostile nation to include hybrid threats, cyber-attacks, the weaponization of migration and mass border breaches, terrorist attacks, malicious acts, and the sabotaging of critical infrastructure. Which is to say, precisely those threats that are stressed in the broader strategic and political philosophy underpinning the new EU defence policy, mainly via the White Paper on European Defence Preparedness 2030.
3. This works in tandem with the EU Preparedness Union Strategy, which sets out an integrated approach to every threat to the Union’s preparedness for conflict, anthropogenic and natural disasters and crises, the White Paper on European Defence Preparedness 2030, and the Internal Security Strategy: Protecting the EU.
4. SAFE emphasizes investment in the protection and resilience of critical infrastructure/entities, cyberspace, borders, transport, supply chains, information and communication technologies, as well as space investments, technologies and facilities. It is worth noting that most Member States are in the process of transposing the Directive on the Resilience of Critical Entities into national law and developing related strategies.
5. SAFE is a Programme that can further enhance interoperability between the armed and security forces, as well as dual use in the defence / security / civil protection sectors in line with the framework put in place by the EU Preparedness Union Strategy to prevent and react to emerging threats and crises—in particular those in the areas of hybrid threats, border protection, the resilience of critical infrastructure, and cyber security.
6. It can act as a bottom-up catalyst for the emergence of a European strategic culture in both threat identification and investment planning; for the creation of collaborative economies of scale; and for the increased interoperability of assets and systems on the basis of a common European defence capability. This procedure has been followed in other cases where there were difficulties reaching an agreement at the Council level—for example, in the prevention of radicalization. However, there is always the risk that the absence of a statutory coordinating body could lead to fragmented proposals that simply reproduce the various strategic cultures and assessments of risk. Let’s hope that this time, the glass is half-full.

 

[1] For details on SAFE, see the relevant EXPLAINER by S. Blavoukas and P. Politis-Lamprou at https://www.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/EXPLAINER-4-EL.pdf. More generally, on the European Defence Fund and the EU Defence Industrial Ecosystem, see S. Blavoukos; P. Politis-Lamprou and G. Matsoukas at https://www.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Policy-paper-182-Blavoukos-Politis-Matsoukas-FINAL-EL.pdf

[2] https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/eu-defence-industry/safe-security-action-europe_en

[3] The classification is based on their weight and the altitude they can reach under normal conditions. Specifically, they are:
Class I: small>20 kg; mini 2-20 kg, micro<2kg
Class II: 150-600 kg (regular)
Class III: >600 kg with three subcategories (strike, HALE, MALE).
On the categories, and more generally on NATO’s approach to unmanned aerial vehicles, see Joint Air Power Competence Centre https://www.japcc.org/

The Transatlantic Periscope is an interactive, multimedia tool that brings together expert commentary, high-quality media coverage, official policy documents, quantitative data, social media posts, and gray literature. It will provide on a monthly basis a summary of the most important news concerning the Greek-US relations, as reflected in the media. Below you will find an overview for August 2025.

On August 4, 2025, the Greek Minister of Environment and Energy, Stavros Papastavrou, met with the new Chargé d’Affaires at the US Embassy in Athens, Josh Huck, to discuss energy cooperation between Greece and the US and electricity interconnection projects in the Eastern Mediterranean. Papastavrou said that the discussion focused on energy cooperation, the South-North Vertical Gas Corridor, the utilization of infrastructure for American LNG in Revithoussa and Alexandroupolis, and the keen interest in electricity interconnection projects in the Eastern Mediterranean.

On the same day, a statement released by the American Hellenic Chamber of Commerce on the recent EU-US Trade Deal noted that the deal may present important opportunities for Greece. As it is specifically noted in the statement: “As a member of both the EU and NATO, and as a growing logistics, energy, and digital hub in Southeastern Europe, Greece stands to benefit significantly from the strengthening of transatlantic trade ties. In fact, improved market access, increased regulatory coordination, and the prospect of expanded zero-for-zero tariff arrangements can translate into tangible results for Greek exporters, investors, and technology-driven sectors”.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio held a call with Prime Minister of Greece Kyriakos Mitsotakis on August 8 regarding the strategic importance of US–Greece energy cooperation in the Eastern Mediterranean. During the call, Secretary Rubio reaffirmed the continued strength of the United States’ bilateral relationship with Greece and its role as a key NATO Ally.

At the same time, Greece and the United States are in talks to revise their Mutual Defense Cooperation Agreement (MDCA), a move that could see the establishment of two new bases for US forces in mainland Greece and a significant expansion of the American military footprint in the country. The ongoing negotiations are also focused on upgrading existing facilities. The US will remain in the strategic northeastern port of Alexandroupoli and is set to spend $42 million to upgrade its naval base at Souda Bay in Crete. According to officials, the two new locations being considered for US forces are the Petrochori firing range in the western Peloponnese and the Dalipis Army Base near Thessaloniki.

More at: https://transatlanticperiscope.org/relationship/GR#