Economic arrangements favour elites while leaving ordinary citizens behind by International IDEA, GCSPF, Lancet, Earth4All   Sep. 2026   Global Democracy Report 2026: Rule of Law weakens as the United States hits 50-Year Lows. (International IDEA)   Global deterioration in the Rule of Law and record declines in the United States are worsening prospects for democracy around the world, according to a report by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA).   Major indicators of US democracy from press freedom to judicial independence hit their lowest levels in 50 years, and this is reverberating worldwide. Washington’s retreat from the rules-based international order has weakened confidence in multilateralism and emboldened authoritarian leaders and populists.   The report, “The Global State of Democracy 2026: Democracy in an Age of Conflict,” warns that democratic regression is expanding the conditions for domestic and international conflict. Politically fragile countries that face further declines are especially vulnerable to this risk.   “For decades, the rule of law both domestically and in the international order has underpinned the resilience of democracies,” International IDEA’s Secretary-General Kevin Casas-Zamora said. “Now, the rapid decline of democracy in the USA is weakening judicial independence and fragmenting the international system—threatening democracy around the world.”   Stagnating democratic performance was the most common trend in 2025. When change occurred, it was mostly negative. Around 57 percent of countries declined in at least one key indicator of democratic performance between 2020 and 2025. Rule of Law, Representation, and Rights all suffered broad deterioration.   This global democratic decline was concentrated in many fundamental building blocks of democracy: Judicial independence hit a 36-year low. Credible elections fell to a 30-year low. Freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and access to justice were also at their worst in over three decades.   The year 2025 was the 11th consecutive year with more countries showing a net decline rather than improvement in overall democratic performance, the longest consecutive fall since International IDEA’s records began in 1975, according to the report.   Nearly half of the 30 indicators International IDEA uses to measure US democracy fell to their lowest levels since the Global State of Democracy (GSoD) dataset began in 1975, including Access to Justice, Economic Equality, Effective Parliament, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of the Press, and Judicial Independence.   The report warns that this erosion—driven partly by concentration of executive power—is weakening checks and balances in the US while damaging confidence in multilateralism and international rule of law globally.   In a special section on violent conflict, the report finds that a recent decline in the number and quality of democracies threatens the “democratic peace” produced by decades of democratization. Weakening democratic performance has increased the number of countries that have some democratic procedures but lack real political competition or enforceable rights, and the data show that these countries are at especially high risk of conflict.   The report says governments should treat democracy support abroad as a national security priority because stronger democratic systems can help reduce conditions leading to conflict. Even small investments in democracy support can deliver significant peace and governance gains, at a lower cost than military responses.   “Democracy’s decline is no longer just about our national political rights; it is reshaping the conditions for peace and security around the world,” Casas-Zamora said. “Investing in democracy is also investing in peace.”   The report also highlights positive developments, especially in countries in political transitions, such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Poland, Sri Lanka, and Syria. Although improvements remain fragile, public mobilization and civil society have helped democratic renewal.   In Syria, which saw improvements in Rights, Rule of Law and Participation, gains in indicators for civil society were especially large. While there are still serious challenges regarding security, rights, and centralization of power, stronger respect for freedoms of association and expression helped widen space for these groups to operate.   Among the Key findings:   Rule of Law was the weakest-performing category overall, with 71 countries, or 41 percent of those assessed (out of a total of 173), in the low-performance band. It also recorded more declines than any other democratic performance category, with 29 countries, or 17 percent, registering downturns. Judicial independence was among the worst hit.   Under the category of Rights, Freedom of Expression saw the most widespread decline, falling in 42 countries, or 24 percent of all countries assessed. Freedom of the Press also deteriorated sharply, declining in 23 percent of countries. Access to Justice fell in 18 percent of countries, underscoring pressure on core democratic rights and protections.   Representation remains democracy’s strongest-performing category globally, but its overall trend is still negative, recording 17 declines and only four advances between 2020 and 2025—reflecting deterioration in both electoral integrity and legislative oversight.   Credible Elections deteriorated in nearly one in five countries worldwide (32 countries or 18 percent), while Effective Parliament deteriorated in 33 countries (19 percent).   African and European countries accounted for the largest shares of deterioration (33 and 27 percent of all declines respectively), while Asia and the Pacific led on improvements.   # The GSoD 2026 Report ranks countries in four major categories of democratic performance rather than one overall classification. These four categories are:   Representation—such as credible elections and effective parliamentary oversight. Rule of Law—such as judicial independence and the degree to which people are free from political violence. Rights—such as freedom of expression, freedom of press, and freedom of assembly. Participation—such as how involved citizens are in democratic expression during and between elections. These four categories are divided into 17 factors, such as credible elections or judicial independence.   http://www.idea.int/publications/catalogue/html/global-state-democracy-2026-democracy-age-conflict http://www.idea.int/news/global-democracy-report-rule-law-weakens-united-states-hits-50-year-lows http://www.idea.int/blog/cracks-bedrock-lessons-2026-global-state-democracy   Sep. 2026   "Across different political systems, cultures, and income levels, large majorities share the belief that current economic arrangements favour elites while leaving ordinary citizens behind". (Earth4All, IPS UN Bureau)   An international survey released by Earth4All has found a growing crisis of trust in governments, widespread anger over inequality, and strong public support for major economic reforms, suggesting that many people across the world believe current political and economic systems are failing to serve ordinary citizens.   The report, Rebuild Trust: Rigged Economies, Fractured Societies and the Case for Change, surveyed people in 17 countries representing 58 percent of global GDP, 38 percent of the world’s population, and 37 percent of global carbon emissions. Its findings paint a picture of societies that feel increasingly divided, economically insecure, and disconnected from political institutions.   Nearly two-thirds of respondents said they believe their country’s economic system is “rigged” to benefit the rich and powerful. Seven in ten said there is too much economic inequality in their country, while 69 percent called for major changes to economic systems to improve life for most people.   “The survey results show a mismatch between public support for economic change and what mainstream political parties are willing to offer,” the report’s authors, Owen Gaffney and Kate Pickett, write.   They argue that the findings reveal an opportunity for governments to build new social contracts based on fairness, economic security, and long-term wellbeing.   The survey comes at a time when many countries are grappling with rising living costs, political polarisation, climate pressures, and growing public frustration with institutions.   One of the report’s most striking conclusions is that many people feel their societies are becoming more fractured.   Across the 17 countries surveyed, 67 percent said their country is more divided today than it was a decade ago. More than seven in ten respondents reported serious tensions between supporters of different political parties. Nearly two-thirds saw conflict between rich and poor, while similar numbers perceived tensions between immigrant and native-born populations.   The authors argue that these divisions are linked not only to economic conditions but also to a broader erosion of trust.   “Societies feel themselves coming apart. There is a trust deficit at the heart of societies,” reads the report.   Only 31 percent of respondents said they trust their governments to make decisions that will benefit the majority of people 20 or 30 years into the future. This was one of the lowest-rated measures in the survey.   The report also highlights a less visible issue. Many people feel they are not treated with respect and dignity. Across all surveyed countries, only 41 percent agreed that people like them are treated with respect and dignity. The authors note that feelings of disrespect and humiliation can fuel political alienation and social resentment.   “A society in which one in four people feel they do not receive respect contains significant combustible material,” the report states. “Many people feel unseen, believe the system is rigged and do not experience their society as a collective enterprise.”   Despite widespread frustration with governments and economic systems, the survey found continued support for democracy. Overall, 68 percent of respondents said democracy remains the best way to govern their country.   However, support was not universal. Forty percent also agreed that their country would be better off with a strong leader who does not have to worry about parliament or elections.   The authors describe this as a warning sign rather than a rejection of democracy itself.   The report warns that declining trust in institutions can create openings for anti-democratic movements if governments fail to address public concerns about fairness and economic opportunity.   Despite growing economic anxieties, the survey found continued support for climate action. More than half of respondents said governments should take strong action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions even if it leads to higher prices.   Support was strongest in middle-income countries and weaker among lower-income households and politically conservative respondents. The authors argue that climate policies are more likely to succeed when paired with measures that address economic inequality and social insecurity.   Public resistance to climate action often grows when people believe they are being asked to bear unfair costs while wealthier groups benefit from the existing system, the report suggests.   Kate Pickett, one of the report’s authors and a well-known researcher on inequality and social wellbeing, has long argued that unequal societies tend to experience weaker social cohesion and lower levels of trust. The findings of the new survey appear to reinforce that argument.   Beyond questions of trust and politics, the survey highlights persistent worries about basic economic security. Across the countries surveyed, 41 percent of respondents said they were concerned about having enough money to cover their basic needs during the coming year.   Economic anxiety was particularly high in countries facing inflation and financial instability. Even in wealthier countries, concerns about inequality remained widespread.   The authors argue that economic growth alone is no longer enough to reassure citizens. Instead, people increasingly judge systems based on fairness, opportunity, and whether prosperity is shared.   * The Earth4All initiative was launched by organisations including the Club of Rome, the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, the Stockholm Resilience Centre, and the Norwegian Business School. It seeks to identify pathways toward sustainable prosperity and social wellbeing.   The report’s authors say the findings should serve as a wake-up call for political leaders. Rather than viewing public frustration as a temporary reaction to economic shocks, they argue that governments should recognize it as evidence of deeper structural problems.   The survey reveals what the authors call a “near-universal diagnosis”. Across different political systems, cultures, and income levels, large majorities share the belief that current economic arrangements favour elites while leaving ordinary citizens behind.   http://earth4all.life/news/people-want-economic-system-change/ http://www.ipsnews.net/2026/09/global-survey-finds-deep-crisis-of-trust-as-majority-say-economic-system-favours-the-rich/   Sep. 2026   UN Global Risk Report: Geopolitical tensions, war and a weakening of the rule of law headline risks. (UN News)   Drawing on responses from more than 1,300 people across government, business, and the United Nations system, the second edition of the United Nations Global Risk Survey presents a viewpoint of today’s global risk landscape and the forces reshaping it.   The findings are sobering. Political risks have moved centre stage. The prospect of large-scale war is seen as far more important and far more immediate than it was two years ago. At the same time, the institutions expected to respond are seen as less able to act, especially in areas like artificial intelligence, where innovation is outpacing the capacity to govern it.   Yet one conviction holds firm: respondents still see joint action between governments as by far the most effective means of prevention.   Large-scale war and geopolitical tension now rank among the top 10 threats in every one of the seven regions the survey covers, and in the top five in six of them. Two years ago, these same risks made the top five in just one region.   Weapons of mass destruction also broke into the top 10 in Central and Southern Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and Oceania. In Eastern and South-Eastern Asia, worries grew over a possible global financial crisis, the downsides of artificial intelligence, and the growing power of technology companies. AI-related risks also entered the top 10 in Europe and North America.   No risk exists on its own, the report argues. Of the 705 connections between risks that the survey identified, the link between geopolitical tension and war was the strongest.   Concerns about Artificial intelligence, other frontier technologies and the concentration of power they enable have grown sharply in two years – even as respondents say the multilateral system is the least prepared to handle technological threats.   Climate change, meanwhile, has not gone away: inaction on it remains the single risk rated most important overall, and it ranks high in every region.   The report’s authors caution that other environmental risks slipping down the list does not mean they have become less dangerous – only less visible. And visibility matters: issues that draw less attention often lose funding.   The UN frames the report as a snapshot of perceptions rather than a prediction.   http://www.un.org/en/global-risk-report http://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statements/2026-09-22/secretary-generals-address-the-opening-of-the-general-debate-of-the-81st-session-of-the-general-assembly http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/09/1168392 http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/09/1168395 http://www.government.nl/documents/2026/09/22/a-call-for-control-of-frontier-ai-models http://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/sep/22/un-chief-climate-crisis-capitalism-reasons-hopeful-antonio-guterres http://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/86026/enough-2-million-petition-signatures-unga-make-polluters-pay/   Sep. 2026   Wealth redistribution policies to mitigate the impact of development assistance defunding: a retrospective evaluation and forecasting analysis up to 2030. (The Lancet Medical Journal)   The ongoing decline in funding for humanitarian and development assistance stands in stark contrast to the global rise in wealth concentration and widening socioeconomic inequalities.   This study aimed to assess whether the implementation of wealth redistribution policies—proposed in recent high-level international agreements to support development—could mitigate the health impact of the current official development assistance (ODA) defunding crisis.   The world is experiencing extreme levels of inequality, which is manifested across multiple dimensions and has worsened in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.   Today, the top 10% of the global population owns approximately 75% of global wealth, while the bottom 50% holds only 2%, with absolute income inequality steadily increasing over the past three decades.   Moreover, the wealthiest 0·002% of the global population—corresponding to 92,140 centi-millionaires—controls an estimated US$37·1 trillion in global wealth, surpassing the gross domestic product (GDP) of the world's largest economy—the USA ($31·1 trillion).   In parallel, the world's 3028 billionaires collectively hold $16·1 trillion in wealth, and this extreme concentration of wealth is continuing to accelerate.   In stark contrast, the world's poorest populations are facing one of the most challenging periods in recent decades. Poverty rates have increased after the COVID-19 pandemic, with an estimated 808 million people living in extreme poverty (below $3 per day) and 3·5 billion people living in poverty (below $6·85 per day) in 2025.   Recent estimates show that a quarter of low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) still have per-capita incomes below 2019 levels, with the worst stagnation in low-income countries, where the COVID-19 pandemic erased all previous development gains..   Our study provides evidence that implementing wealth redistribution policies proposed in recent high-level international agreements to support development could save up to 30 million lives by 2030.   In a world marked by extreme and widening inequalities and an unprecedented concentration of wealth, our results show the potential of wealth redistribution policies to mitigate the negative impacts of ODA defunding. Such policies could save millions of lives and substantially advance progress towards the health-related UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.   http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2826%2900975-X/fulltext   Sep. 2026   Strengthening Social Protection Financing through Tax Justice - Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors   Tax systems and policies are not merely technical fiscal tools for generating revenue. They are foundational to the core objectives of social protection itself: for the management of risks over the life course, preventing poverty, and reducing inequality.   Tax revenue in many low-income countries (LICs) remains persistently low — often below 15% of GDP. Tax avoidance and evasion by multinational corporations and high-net-worth individuals (HNWI) cause serious harm to jurisdictions seeking to build progressive fiscal systems.   Transfer pricing and profit shifting fuel a “race to the bottom” in tax competition and erode tax sovereignty. It is estimated that the global revenue loss for 2024 reached US$492 billion: US$347 billion lost to corporate tax abuse and US$145 billion to offshore wealth in tax havens (Tax Justice Network 2024).   The consequences for social protection are severe: tax abuse by global multinational corporations causes revenue losses equivalent to 45% of health expenditure in Latin America and 53% in Africa (Tax Justice Network 2025). In South Africa alone, the annual tax loss could fund direct cash transfers sufficient to lift over 3 million people out of poverty.   These dynamics deprive states of the resources needed to realize human rights — including the right to social security — and systematically undermine national social protection floors.   The Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors emphasizes the importance of progressive tax-transfer systems. Regressive tax systems that rely heavily on indirect taxes undermine poverty reduction by placing a disproportionate burden for financing the common good on those with the least resources. They also disproportionately burden women, who tend to have lower incomes and have to spend a higher share of their earnings on consumption.   Well-founded proposals for structural reform towards tax justice are already on the table. The negotiations on the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation represent a critical window of opportunity to create a supportive environment to securing the domestic resources necessary to realize the right to social security everywhere, particularly in the Global South.   Adequate social protection cannot be financed without sufficient and fairly collected public revenue. This requires appropriate tax rates, progressive taxation, effective collection and action to prevent revenue losses caused by tax evasion and avoidance.   National Governments should shift the tax burden towards progressive income tax, direct taxes on corporate profits and dividends, inheritance taxes and wealth taxes, and ensure that tax-transfer systems reduce poverty and inequality.   The international community needs to ensure the UN Framework Convention includes a guiding principle that commits governments to mobilize public funds, reduce fiscal inequalities and advance access to human rights — including health, education, housing, social protection and care. Social protection must be treated not as a discretionary expense but as a core state function supported by the tax system..   http://www.socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org/2026/09/statement-strengthening-social-protection-financing-through-tax-justice/
	We all risk becoming bystanders as parents, children, and babies starve by Carl Skau Acting Executive Director of the World Food Programme   25 Aug. 2026   Remarks by Carl Skau, Acting Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP), during the United Nations Security Council open debate: Food Under Fire: The United Nations Security Council’s Role in Mitigating Global and Local Food Crises:   "In the last 10 years, the number of acutely food insecure has increased threefold while funding for our joint operations has plummeted. And as the Secretary General has pointed out, it's more dangerous than ever for our colleagues in the field.   In my role at WFP, I have the privilege to frequently visit frontline teams in the most complex of environments. Today, I will draw from that first hand experience, sharing with you what the conflict hunger cycle really looks like in practice, and of course, point to how the Security Council, in our view, can and should respond.   I spent last week in Somalia, I saw camps full of families who had their lives and their homes and their lands taken away when non-state armed groups arrived.   One family with four children that I sat down to speak with had left a multi-generation farm where they had farmed, fed themselves, and made an income. Armed groups had rolled in, demanding taxes to keep farming. So they had decided it was safer to flee to a displacement camp some 100 kilometers by foot.   They had lost everything, including one child on that journey. The other three kids were now growing up in a camp and without a school to go to. These sudden insurgencies keep erupting across Somalia.   Like in Baidoa last week, fighting prevented my planned visit there. But much worse, it prevented our operations. Some 5,000 kids did not get WFP nutritious food in Baidoa that day.   In addition to insecurity, hunger in Somalia is also driven by two consecutive droughts. And the Super El Nino is expected to bring heavy flooding in November. This all adds to a catastrophic malnutrition and food crisis.   Nearly two million children suffering from acute and severe malnutrition. A third of the population, six million people, face acute hunger or worse. And Somalis are facing this perfect storm at the very moment that global engagement is at its lowest.   Support from humanitarian action is shrinking. One key donor no longer provides any funding, and no others are stepping in. In 2022, facing a similar situation, WFP and partners prevented famine. Thanks to donor support we scaled up assistance to nearly 10 million people. Today, WFP is only assisting some 600,000, one in 10 in acute need. And millions are left out. Many could die. Famine is getting closer.   This should be a wake-up call for everyone. It's not only an issue for Somalia, because when families can't put food on their table, they are left with three choices - starve, move, or rebel. These are perfect conditions for armed groups, criminal gangs, exploitative businesses, to recruit vulnerable young people.   So in Somalia, but also in places like Guatemala and the Democratic Republic of the Congo over the past few weeks, I've spoken to parents terrified that their children will soon be in military camps, street corners, or mines instead of in schools.   Beyond this vicious cycle that we have been warning you for years now, there is a new dimension that needs your attention and your action. Consequences of conflict are now also being transmitted thousands of miles through interconnected economies and trading systems, across borders and seas.   Some have spoken about a double choke point crisis, the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea. But yesterday, the Secretary General rightly came with warnings about a triple choke point crisis, adding the recent escalation in the Black Sea. These serious disruptions to maritime trade now threatens to push tens of millions more people into food insecurity.   Starting with the conflict in the Gulf, an oil tanker anchored in the Strait of Hormuz can mean one less meal a day for a child in Sudan, where basic food costs are up almost 40% since February this year. And food systems rely on fuel, irrigation, transport, milling. So when oil prices go up, so does the price of flour, rice and vegetables.   And the suffocation of fertilizer exports has also hit this planting season hard across Africa and Asia. We are deeply worried about the lag effects this will have on upcoming harvests.   At WFP, we have also been exposed to 20% higher shipping costs, 35% more on fuel for our airdrops and our humanitarian flights, meaning less assistance for the people we serve.   In Yemen, the de facto Houthi authority strikes on commercial vessels in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. This has led to a further reduction of trade in the Red Sea and is compromising another export route, regional transit to the Suez Canal.   It means further rising prices for people across the globe, but it is also hitting Yemen itself particularly hard, a country that imports 90 percent of its food.   And third, escalating Russian and Ukrainian attacks in the Black Sea. Russian and Ukrainian exports equal one third of global wheat supply. Grain shipments through the Bosphorus Strait are now down 40% year on year.   Import dependent countries like Somalia, who buys 90% of its cereal, are highly exposed. Also, there are longer term risks if the Black Sea ports and shipping lanes stay shut. Farmers will simply have less income and incentives to plant crops for 2027.   The world simply cannot afford these layers of crisis. How many choking points before we are completely suffocated? There is just no time to lose.   Building on the Secretary General's call today, WFP looks to the Security Council for urgent and concrete action. To break the conflict-hunger cycle and building on the Secretary General's call, I'm coming to you with five circuit breakers.   First, instigate measures to stop conflict in one region creating hunger in another.   Initiatives that ensure free flow of humanitarian aid, commercial food exports, agricultural via maritime or land corridors are urgently needed.   Second, Act on warning signs.   Take action before famine is declared and before agricultural seasons are lost. Just look at Sudan. With decisive early action, we may have prevented famine last year in the world's worst hunger crisis.   We all saw the atrocities in El-Fasher coming, but the international community, including this council, failed to act on those warnings. It's hard to do justice to the scale of suffering in Sudan, but it really hit me in April when I visited the Tawila camp in Darfur, where survivors of El-Fasher have gathered. I have never seen anything like it.   700,000 people in a super city of grass huts. They arrived from El-Fasher with absolutely nothing, traumatized, and they now depend on a trickle of aid to survive. The people I met there felt completely abandoned.   I can't say this strongly enough. Waiting for famine to be declared is a total failure of duty. In the last Somalia famine in 2010 to 12, nearly 260,000 people died, half of them children.   We avoided this in 2017 and in 2022 because we acted early on warnings and scaled up assistance.   Third, stronger protection for civilians, civilian infrastructure and food systems. The principles of distinction and proportionality must be respected.   I was in Lebanon in March, just a few days after the war started, meeting people whose lives had again been snatched away by strikes and evacuation orders. Overnight, they went from the daily commute to a life in shelter.   Like the family I met in the dingy abandoned hotel in Beirut, in the south of Beirut, as missiles ran down, Their world had shrunk to the size of that small hotel room. They told me that the only time they went outside was to collect the daily WFP hot meals.   Fourth, protect humanitarian personnel.   In northern Yemen, there is a growing acute hunger. But the UN is unable to intervene at this moment of extreme fragility. We have been forced to pause humanitarian work because the operating environment is simply non-existent with the targeting of our staff.   Currently, 73 UN staff, including 38 from WFP, are detained by the de facto Houthi authorities. Not a day goes by without thinking of them and of their families.   Fifth, and finally, more solidarity with the world's most vulnerable. For every story I've told you here today, there are millions untold.   I'm thinking about the women and girls I met in Afghanistan back in May. I will never forget my visit to a rural clinic outside Jalalabad. The exhausted cries of babies, the panic in the voices of their mothers.   Some had walked for hours with skeletal babies in their arms. But at this clinic, normally supported by WFP and UNICEF, we had nothing to give them. Afghanistan is today's the world's worst malnutrition crisis, but there is an appalling lack of funds.   We're currently turning away six in seven malnourished women and children. WFP hotlines are flooded with calls from parents considering suicide as their children waste away. I used to talk about taking from the hungry to feed the starving, but in the very worst hunger crisis, We are now on the verge of having nothing to give at all. We all risk becoming bystanders as parents, children, and babies starve.   Let me reassure you that at WFP and with our partners, we are doing everything possible to adapt to a new funding landscape. We are seizing the Secretary General's UN80 Reform Agenda and the humanitarian reset in full and with ambition.   We are doing our absolute best to do better with less. But we need member states to step up too, to correct course, fund humanitarian action, seek political solutions to conflicts, and reverse the normalization of hunger. We know this is possible.   A year ago, I visited Gaza around the time that famine was declared. It was like a dystopian film set. Everywhere we drove, obliterated rubble, every street filled with desperate children looking for food.   I returned in January this year, after the October ceasefire and adoption of Resolution 2803 in November. Still far from a rosy picture, that's for sure. But the ceasefire had improved somewhat food security and reversed famine.   And some people that I met had even started to have hope again. I spent time with one displaced family who had returned to their destroyed house in the southern parts of Gaza City. And they were busy trying to re-cultivate a vineyard amid the rubble to rebuild a family livelihood and tradition.   I spoke with bright teenage girls getting WFP food in a UNICEF-run makeshift school. They told me they hope to grow up as doctors, pilots and business owners. But as the Secretary General said, these are fragile gains, only a glimmer of hope.   Recovery and reconstruction are still far, far away. But it shows what is possible if there is political will. We simply can't fail the people of Gaza again, just when conditions are starting to marginally improve.   We can't pull back in Sudan just as we secure access for scaling up. And we can't disengage in Somalia and wait for famine to unfold. This Council has shown before that it can be part of breaking the vicious cycle of hunger and conflict.   Let today's meeting be the starting point for new, bold action to give hundreds of millions of people a path away from hunger and violence, back to peace and stability".   * UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres's remarks to the UN Security Council:   "I thank the Government of Denmark for chairing this urgent discussion on conflict and food security. This is an opportunity for the Council to address a dangerous and evolving reality.   Critical food systems — and the lives and livelihoods they sustain — are under attack.   Getting enough to eat is a basic human need — a need that is clearly reflected in Sustainable Development Goal 2: ending hunger. Zero hunger is achievable. But it requires tackling hunger’s many root causes — including conflict.   In Resolution 2417, this Council highlighted the link between conflict-induced food insecurity and the threat of famine, and armed conflict and violence. And it provided clear guidance to ensure the proper functioning of food systems and markets in the midst of conflict.   Today is about strengthening the implementation of that important Resolution. There is no time to lose.   Across the Sahel, farmers are driven from their fields as conflict disrupts farming, trade and livelihoods, and food insecurity worsens across the region. In Sudan, markets have been hit by drone strikes and missiles. In Haiti, gang violence has cut off entire communities.   And humanitarian workers have been denied access to assist people in desperate need — from Gaza to Mali, Myanmar and Sudan. Some have come under direct attack — and even been killed.   It is no coincidence that 2025 saw not only the highest number of armed conflicts since World War II — but also among the highest levels of global acute hunger on record, with at least 266 million people facing acute food insecurity. 2025 also marked the first time this century that two famines were confirmed simultaneously, in Sudan and Gaza. A shameful milestone.   The UN’s latest Hunger Hotspots report shows that conflict and violence are the primary drivers in 12 out of 13 hunger hotspots of greatest concern.   The link between armed conflict, violence and hunger is undeniable. We know that rising hunger can fuel displacement, fragility, instability and competition for scarce resources.   And the effects are borderless, with conflicts and violence triggering shockwaves of hunger across borders and regions.   The war in Ukraine is affecting grain and energy exports in the Black Sea, both from Ukraine and Russia. The crisis in the Middle East is another example.   The Strait of Hormuz carries around a fifth of global oil supplies, and a third of global fertilizer trade. Restrictions and closures have driven up commodity prices, and made availability plummet.   And attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea are further threatening supply chains for food and other commodities. For import-dependent countries, many struggling with high debt, this directly increases the cost of farming and imperils future harvests..   Resolution 2417 recognizes the need to “break the vicious cycle between armed conflict and food insecurity.” Yet the vicious cycle rolls on. So today, I call on this Council to consider measures to strengthen — and build on — this landmark Resolution.   First — Resolution 2417 must be implemented consistently and in full. For parties to conflict, this means not depriving civilians of objects indispensable to their survival — including food, crops, livestock, and drinking water supplies — and refraining from attacking, destroying, removing or rendering them useless.   It also means taking constant care to spare civilian objects necessary for food production and distribution — including farms, mills, water systems, food processing and storage sites, and transportation hubs. And it means providing humanitarian personnel with safe and unimpeded access to civilians in armed conflicts.   Too many parties to armed conflict disregard their obligations under international humanitarian law with impunity. This is unacceptable.   States must do their part to uphold and ensure respect for international humanitarian law, and use their influence to secure compliance.   And throughout, reporting on conflict-induced hunger, new famine risks, and emerging risks to food systems and humanitarian operations must be acted upon. We cannot wait for famine or catastrophic conditions to be formally confirmed. I call on this Council to act when the warning lights are flashing.   Second — food systems must be protected in their entirety. Conflicts or violence must not keep farmers from their fields, keep crops trapped in or on the ground, or keep food supplies stuck in storage.   I call on this Council to renew its support for protections for infrastructure essential to food security. That must include safeguards for farms, water systems, markets, storage facilities, ports, and supply routes. It should also reinforce safeguards for the supply of food exports, agricultural inputs and humanitarian aid — including passage across borders and seas.   Third, humanitarians must be protected. All parties to conflict have clear obligations under international humanitarian law. That includes allowing practical arrangements that enable humanitarian operations and protecting humanitarian workers as they carry out their life-saving work.   In Resolution 2417, this Council expressed its willingness to consider information on the unlawful denial of humanitarian access and take appropriate steps, including sanction measures.   I call on this Council to make every effort to ensure accountability, to keep vital humanitarian aid flowing, and to protect those delivering it.   The best protection against food insecurity is peace, and the safest conditions for peace are a world without hunger. I urge this Council to use all tools at its disposal to help prevent and end conflicts and to stop emerging risks from becoming wider crises of instability, and in particular, of food insecurity".   * Statement to the Security Council by Perrine Benoist, Co-CEO of Action Against Hunger:   "I speak to you today on behalf of the Coalition Against Conflict and Hunger, a group of global organizations working to prevent and limit the impact of conflict on food security and nutrition, and to protect civilians from conflict-induced hunger.   Resolution 2417 was unanimously adopted by this Council in 2018. It was supposed to avert famine, and it was supposed to end the vicious circle between conflict and hunger.   Yet, time and again, its provisions have been violated by parties to conflict, while implementation by the members of this Council has fallen far short from what the resolution demands.   We have recorded more than 9,300 incidents in which in over 45 countries in which conflict-related violence impacted civilian infrastructures vital to food systems, including more than 3,200 bombings of markets, agricultural lands, and water systems. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.   In Sudan, over 900 attacks on food systems have been recorded since April 2023, including livestock looting, attacks on markets, and violence against people accessing said markets. Famine has been confirmed in multiple areas of the country, while alert persists in many parts. Yet we have failed to see urgent action to bring about a meaningful resolution to the conflict.   At the same time, new conflicts have led to global macroeconomic shocks, disrupting supply chains and critical infrastructures, driving up food and fuel prices, and increasing the cost of key agricultural inputs and humanitarian aid, threatening efforts to realize the right to food everywhere.   These global disruptions have a spiraling effect. The conflict in the Gulf has impacted the agricultural production of over 80% of households: higher fuel costs, constrained agricultural inputs, fertilizer shortages are now the new normals, and we know that vulnerabilities compound.   In Sudan, simply being a woman today has become a statistically significant predictor of starvation. This is a vicious circle that we must break.   Conflict drives hunger, while hunger and the destruction of livelihoods, in turn, deeply undermine the protection of civilians, drive displacement, and fuel instability.   Sudan is now the world's largest hunger and displacement crisis, as my colleague was saying, and it's a stark reminder that hunger is not simply a consequence of conflict but part of its dynamics.   Humanitarian organizations have also had to cope with global disruptions and witness their daily impacts.   I'd like to talk about Yemen, where more than half of the children under 5—about 2.2 million— are expected to be acutely malnourished in 2026, alongside 1.3 million pregnant or breastfeeding women.   Ahmed is a 4-year-old from a remote village, and a few months ago he was diagnosed with critical severe acute malnutrition. His mother feared for his life, but thanks to life-saving therapeutic nutrition programs and treatments, he recovered and is healthy today.   But for years, procuring the supplies needed to treat acute malnutrition in Yemen has been an incredible challenge. It has now become even more difficult. The cost of sea transport for humanitarian organizations has risen by over 300%. And even more concerning, shipments face major delays.   We have to understand that the timeline for a child experiencing malnutrition is brutally short. Within 2 weeks of losing access to sufficient food, clinical signs of acute malnutrition begin to appear. Within 3 weeks, children become susceptible to common illnesses that can now kill them.   They experience severe wasting, struggle to move, and their organs begin to shut down.   Without treatment, the risk of death rises significantly. When stocks run out, this will determine our ability to save children like Ahmed.   For them, global trends are absolutely not abstract. They determine whether life-saving treatment reaches them in time or not.   As humanitarian actors, we are doing the best we can in our power to respond to support communities. We remain present, operational, and ready to scale up humanitarian responses despite facing increasingly severe constraints.   These constraints include restricted access, but also bureaucratic hurdles, criminalization, disinformation, and growing threats.   Direct attacks. More than 1,000 humanitarian workers have been killed in the last 3 years, and during the same period we recorded over 700 attacks on humanitarian food aid activities.   For decades, the humanitarian system has built the expertise to support local and national food systems and markets.   But today, massive funding cuts, shrinking access, global disruptions, and threats to food security surveillance systems are putting the quality and effectiveness of humanitarian responses at increasing risk.   The recent decision to end FEWSNET monitoring in Yemen, among other countries, is a clear example of this. As food insecurity rises, tracking systems are being lost. We are at risk of losing our capacity for early warning.   We need the access, protection, and support necessary to put that expertise into practice and invest in anticipatory actions and local solutions at scale. To do so, the coalition has 3 main asks to this council.   First, use UNHCR 2417 as an early warning and prevention tool, grounded in the perspectives of communities affected. We know what happens when food systems are destroyed. The consequences are foreseeable.   We have the warning signs: attacks on food systems, logistical and supply chain disruptions, food prices shocks; they all signal emerging risks for food security and peace.   And we have the policy frameworks. What is missing is the political will and early action to address the drivers of conflict-induced hunger at both micro and macro scales. To do so, this council must protect civil society voices, particularly those of affected communities.   As the distance grows between this hall of power and those most affected by your decisions, the council and UN member states must close that gap, reverse shrinking civil space, and invest in the information systems that underpin early action.   When reports on attacks on food systems and emerging food security risks are shared, the council must promptly and systematically respond to driving investigation, acting on recommendations set out in briefing notes, and calling for council-level action.   This matters because conflict and hunger reinforce one another in a virtual circle. Conflict drives hunger, while severe food insecurity, disrupted livelihoods, and rising food prices can deepen tensions, fuel instability, and contribute to conflict dynamics.   Ultimately, the security council must move beyond documenting hunger and act on the information on attacks on food systems before today's shocks become tomorrow's famines and security crises.   Second, we asked that you take urgent and decisive diplomatic actions to uphold international law. Condemnation rings hollow when there are not much by action.   This council must ensure that no party to a conflict uses starvation as a weapon of war, or acts in ways that exacerbate conflict-induced hunger by either attacking, destroying, removing, or rendering useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.   And it must hold all perpetrators accountable. The use of siege tactics against civilians is prohibited and must never be accepted.   We call on this council to protect the humanitarian actors and infrastructures, safeguard humanitarian access, thus ensuring safe, rapid, sustained, and unimpeded actions throughout affected areas.   When food systems are disrupted, people's reliance on humanitarian assistance increases. If access is blocked, hunger deepens.   Member states should support access negotiations as well as practical solutions that guarantee safe, rapid, and predictable humanitarian access, including in context under international or national sanctions, through humanitarian exemption and diplomacy, in line with existing resolutions.   Third, we all need to invest in local food systems.   Disruptions to the global food systems are amplifying the impact of conflict on already fragile food systems. These pressures can deepen tensions, drive displacement, and further compound existing conflict dynamics.   We must therefore strive to make food systems more local, sustainable, and resilient, and pivot from a state of perpetual crisis management to one of investment in resilience.   That means prioritizing local solutions and investing in local production and resilient supply chain.   It also means reinstating quality humanitarian funding, supporting first and foremost local and national NGOs, including women-led organizations.   This council has the responsibility to prevent and manage conflict, to protect civilians, and to support accountability.   Breaking the cycle of conflict and hunger requires political action, and political action is a choice, but so is inaction. The world is watching, and it cannot wait any longer".   http://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-acting-executive-directors-briefing-un-security-council-conflict-and-hunger-remarks http://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1w/k1w3vqjyjr http://www.icrc.org/en/statement/early-action-and-respect-for-IHL-can-prevent-acute-food-insecurity-in-armed-conflict http://coalitionagainstconflictandhunger.org/resources/ http://www.fightfoodcrises.net/hunger-hotspots http://www.ipcinfo.org/ipc-country-analysis/en/ Visit the related web page
	View more stories