The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
WASHINGTON DC, Feb 18 2026 (IPS) - When Brazil’s unemployment rate dropped to 5.2 percent in November 2025—the lowest in a quarter century—it punctuated an impressive turnaround from the pandemic. Yet, while men’s participation in the labor market has returned to its pre-COVID trend, women have fallen behind significantly.
Getting more people into jobs is especially important because, in Brazil as in many other countries, an aging population is expected to weigh on growth. Our estimates suggest that halving the gap in labor force participation rates between men and women from 20 to 10 percentage points by 2033 could raise Brazil’s growth by 0.5 percentage point per year in the process.
Household responsibilities
The need to look after household and family responsibilities is a major reason why many Brazilian women find it hard to join the labor force—a trend that our analysis, which is based on Brazil’s Continuous Household Sample Survey, investigates further.
This is especially relevant given the ongoing debate about whether Brazil’s flagship conditional cash transfer program, Bolsa Família, is also discouraging women from entering the labor market.
Bolsa Família, which has targeted extreme poverty since 2003, currently provides an average monthly stipend of around US$130 for families that keep children in school and comply with mandatory vaccinations and other health requirements. It benefits around 50 million people—or about a quarter of the population—and was expanded significantly in 2023.
We look at the data to see if Bolsa Família is indeed curtailing women’s labor force participation. We find that, while Bolsa Família does not appear to systemically reduce labor force participation, the transfers are associated with a lower participation for women in households with children 6 years old or younger.
However, it is also important to emphasize that a full assessment of how Bolsa Família relates to economic wellbeing would need to encompass considerations well beyond just participation in the labor force.
Wage disparities
Another factor that could be working against female participation is the pay gap between men and women. We find that, on average, the monthly wage for women tends to be about 22 percent lower relative to men—after controlling for education, age, race, industry, and position. This pay disparity may encourage some women, including those receiving Bolsa Família benefits, to stay at home and care for their younger children instead of joining the labor market.
Policy options
As we explain in the report for our annual economic review (the 2025 Article IV Consultation), several measures can help more women join the labor market and support economic growth in Brazil. These include:
• Expanding access to affordable, accessible, and quality childcare and eldercare services, along with adjustments to the design of parental leave policy• Adjusting the design of Bolsa Família—such as further tapering the exit from the Bolsa Família benefits upon employment to reduce any possible disincentives from paid work.
• Addressing pay disparities, including through effective implementation of the 2023 landmark Pay Equity Law.
Together, these measures can foster a more supportive environment for women to join the labor market and enhance Brazil’s economic potential.
Bunyada Laoprapassorn is an economist in the IMF’s Western Hemisphere Department.
IPS UN Bureau
KARACHI, Pakistan, Feb 18 2026 (IPS) - Fozia Shashani, 26, a member of the Baloch Yakjehti Committee, said it was “most painful” to hear reports that two Baloch women – Hawa Baloch, 20, and Asifa Mengal, 24 – had taken part in active combat as suicide bombers. The path, she said, was in complete contrast to her belief in peaceful resistance. Yet, she added, such extreme choices were the result of a state that had “failed its people.”
Her comments come in the aftermath of a series of coordinated gun and bomb attacks on January 31 across mineral-rich Balochistan—including Quetta, Mastung, Nushki, Dalbandin, Kharan, Panjgur, Tump, Gwadar, and Pasni – during which attackers stormed security installations, set government buildings ablaze, and looted banks.
The Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), a separatist group, claimed responsibility for the attacks, which killed 31 civilians – including five women – and 17 security personnel. The military’s media wing reported the killing of 145 militants in a 40-hour gun battle.
According to the Pakistan Security Report 2025 by the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies, militant violence surged nationwide with 699 attacks — a 34 percent increase from 2024.
Road leading to the Karachi Press Club, where the Aurat Foundation was holding a press conference on December 4, 2025 against the abduction of Nasreen and Mahjabeen Baloch, was blocked by the police. Credit: Zofeen T. Ebrahim/IPS
This escalation was most pronounced in Balochistan, which recorded 254 attacks, killing 419 people and injuring 607, up from 322 fatalities in 2024, in the province.
A video of Hawa, who joined the BLA’s Majeed Brigade (the suicide squad), shows her looking straight at the camera and laughingly saying, “Pakistan cannot face us,” “Today is a day of joy,” and “War is fun.” Taken before the attack, it signals a person who is defiant and fearless.
While previously rare, the recruitment of Baloch women by separatist groups is now more common, said security analyst Muhammad Amir Rana, director of PIPS. Already, a dozen women have died carrying out suicide bombings in the last four years.
He links it to the rise in enforced disappearances, a reality that he said “has pushed some women toward armed resistance.”
Despite thousands being disappeared or killed, more young people — women included — are drawn to the resistance.
Announcement poster circulated by the Aurat Foundation. Courtesy: Aurat Foundation
According to Amnesty International, enforced disappearances in Pakistan began in the 1980s but increased in the aftermath of 2001 followed by the US-led ‘war on terror’.
Since 2011, the Pakistan Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances has recorded over 10,000 cases, of which 3,485 occurred in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 2,752 in Balochistan. Figures from human rights organisations and the families of the disappeared suggest a much higher number.
However, not everyone has been pushed toward militancy due to personal tragedy.
Shari Baloch, 32, a mother of two and schoolteacher with no known history of repression, became the first Baloch woman to carry out a suicide attack in 2022 near the Confucius Institute at Karachi University, killing three Chinese nationals and their Pakistani driver. The BLA hailed her as a fidayee — a “martyr” of the Baloch nation.
The BLA claimed it would encourage other Baloch women to follow in Shari’s footsteps—a claim that has since proved true.
A chart produced by BYC gives a snapshot of enforced disappearances in 2025.
Although Baloch women may have been late entrants to armed struggle, women have long participated in conflicts worldwide —from Sri Lanka’s LTTE to El Salvador’s FMLN and India’s Naxalite-Maoist insurgency. However, Sanaullah Baloch, a politician from Balochistan, noted that it was Kurdish women fighting Daesh who inspired their Baloch counterparts to join men in the struggle.
This emerging visibility of women in militant roles, analysts say, reflects more than symbolic inspiration.
Iftikhar Firdous, founder and executive editor of The Khorasan Diary, said the role of female fighters in the recent attacks in Balochistan signals a “deeper strategic and ideological shift” which may require looking at resistance movements through a new and more gendered lens.
“Deploying women on the front lines signals the group’s attempt to personify the fight as all-inclusive considering the different age groups involved. It also creates an additional challenge, as traditional profiling no longer works and including women in security checks goes against norms of a tribal society,” he said.
It sends different messages to different stakeholders.
“For militant groups, women on the front lines send a strong message of sacrifice and resistance and for the security forces, they [women] pose a unique challenge during checkpoints, searches and intelligence operations, as until now they were considered less threatening,” he told IPS.
However, it is on the social and psychological front that militant organisations hope to make the most long-lasting impact to secure a steady supply of new recruits.
This step, said Sanaullah, a former senator, can be traced back through Baloch resistance history to 1948.
“Political awareness runs deep among the Baloch, including women; from an early age, it is shaped by a culture of discourse, poetry, music, and literature that reflects their historical grievances.”
To grasp the two-decade-old disillusionment, he said, “You must be a local to truly feel the humiliation and intimidation a Baloch faces daily on his own land – frequent roadblocks and security checkpoints where individuals are stopped, questioned, and asked to show identification, even verbally abused – by police and paramilitary forces. This causes an adverse psychological impact.”
Recalling his time as a young senator in 2009, he said he warned the state that if the Baloch continued to feel disenfranchised — shrouded in poverty and depression — the next generation would become a militant generation. “It was the perfect recipe, and this is exactly what has happened,” he said.
This view was echoed by Shashani.
“When you push a nation against the wall, when they live in constant fear, day in and day out, the psychological scars run deep,” she pointed out and added, “It used to be our fathers and brothers, but now mothers, sisters and daughters, sometimes minors, are being picked up without any documentation, and they return traumatised and violated.
“Although some were released, there was no official acknowledgement or a judicial process. Some were told they were picked up ‘by mistake’ without so much as an apology. It just feels we are a disposable nation, to be treated as they please.”
A fact-finding mission conducted between July 9 and 12, 2025, by the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, stated in its report “Balochistan’s Crisis of Trust” that there has been a shift in the pattern of enforced disappearances from “prolonged incommunicado detention” to the “kill-and-dump” approach. Prominent politicians, including former chief minister and National Party leader Dr Abdul Malik Baloch and Balochistan National Party (BNP-M) chief Sardar Akhtar Mengal, told the HRCP that individuals picked up — often without warrants — were held for months before being extrajudicially executed.
After the national gathering in Gwadar, in 2024, a large number of individuals were picked up.
The Annual Report 2025 by BYC on the Human Rights Situation in Balochistan stated 1,223 enforced disappearances, with Sammi Deen Baloch, a senior central committee member, stating in her Foreword: “The BYC Human Rights Department undertook this documentation with care, verification and persistence, despite the risks involved.”
The report noted that while 348 people were released soon, 832 remain missing. Some 43 were killed either in fake encounters or their tortured and mutilated bodies were found dumped on roadsides. The report pointed to the law enforcement agencies as well as the “state-backed” death squads for these atrocities.
Shashani pointed to 18 cases of enforced disappearances of Baloch women between 2025 and January 2026, recounting their stories one by one. “Mahjabeen, who has polio, was abducted from Quetta, the capital of Balochistan, and has been missing since May,” she said.
She went on to put a face to each name: Rahima, from Dalbandin; Hazra, taken from Hub Chowki (on the border with Karachi but in Balochistan) — along with her son, despite her husband pleading with the kidnappers to take him instead; Hair Nisa, also from Hub Chowki; and Hani, a mother of two who was eight months pregnant with her third child, picked up in December and released a month later in January 2026.
Others included Nasreen, a minor from Hub Chowki, abducted in November; Farzana from Khuzdar, taken in October; and Fatima from Panjgur, whose husband had already been abducted three times and who herself was taken in January 2026 while caring for a small baby.
She paused, her voice trembling. “If you like, I can go on and tell you the tragic backstory of each of these women,” she said.
The BYC in its report Enforced Disappearances of Baloch Women in 2025 terms these abductions a tool of “collective punishment” against families – with raids, intimidation, and restrictions on movement generating fear and inflicting psychological harm.
Another phenomenon, said Shashani, is that after every militant attack, the dumping of dead Baloch increases. “The world is told militants were killed in the attacks, when we know, from the condition of the corpses, these people had not seen daylight for years.”
While the exact number of women recruited remains unknown, Rana had information and said many Baloch women had signed up, but limited space has meant that some were turned away.
Senior journalist Zahid Hussain described the trend as “public alienation” from the state, arguing that political negotiation — not force — is needed to restore public confidence.
But lasting peace cannot be achieved through dialogue alone, said Rana. It called for looking at the Balochistan conflict through a political economy lens — one that confronts uncomfortable questions about who benefits from the unrest, who controls resources such as land, minerals and jobs, and how state power is connected with economic interests — and answers them honestly.
He also urged the dismantling of the so-called death squads, explaining them to be a colonial-era legacy widely perceived to be linked to law enforcement. Describing the move as difficult, he emphasised it was “an important step in the right direction”.
Against this backdrop, Rana argued that the state must act before alienation deepens further. “It must engage with those who are protesting peacefully so they do not get recruited,” he said.
Yet scepticism persists. “They want the unrest to continue; they want people like us to eventually turn violent as well,” said Shashani.
But Senator Sanaullah said there was still time for change. “If the state shows leadership — by shedding conflict-driven language and honouring its promises — things can improve, even if the past cannot be undone.” For now, his 2023 proposal to set up a truth and reconciliation commission remains unheeded.
IPS UN Bureau Report
GENEVA, Feb 17 2026 (IPS) - International humanitarian law is at a breaking point, as rampant impunity for serious violations is enabling even greater abuses against civilians and detainees.
Across today’s wars, violations are no longer concealed or exceptional. They are increasingly open, systematic, and unpunished, with catastrophic consequences for those whom the law is supposed to protect.
New analysis of 23 situations of armed conflict between July 2024 and the end of 2025 reveals a consistent pattern: civilians are being killed, abused and starved at scale, while accountability mechanisms either falter or are actively undermined. Genocidal violence in Gaza, a renewed risk of genocide in Sudan, and mass atrocities elsewhere are not isolated horrors. Taken together, they point to a deeper failure – the collapse of meaningful restraint in the conduct of hostilities.
Conflict-related sexual violence has reached epidemic levels. Rape, sexual slavery, and sexual violence used as punishment or as a tool of territorial control have been documented across multiple conflicts, including in Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar, and Sudan. Particularly alarming is the growing number of cases involving attacks children, including victims as young as one.
These are not by-products of war, but violations long prohibited under international humanitarian law, now committed with near-total impunity. This occurs with the complicity of many other States, which have a duty to respect and ensure respect international humanitarian law.
This erosion of civilian protection is not primarily the result of gaps in legal knowledge. The rules exist. The problem is political choice – and a persistent failure to enforce, clarify and update the law where it no longer offers meaningful restraint.
Nowhere is this clearer than in the global arms trade. The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty has been widely ratified, including by major exporters such as China, France, and the United Kingdom. In theory, it requires its member States to deny arms transfers where there is a clear risk that weapons will be used to commit serious violations of international law. In practice, legal risk assessments are all too often overridden by strategic and political considerations.
Continued arms exports to Israel, Russia, and others, despite overwhelming evidence of civilian harm, have had devastating consequences on the ground.
Closing this gap does not require a raft of new rules in the short term. It requires the consistent application of existing ones: enforceable, evidence-based export controls; independent scrutiny of licensing decisions; and real accountability where transfers are authorised despite a clear risk that the law will be breached by the recipient.
Certain categories of weapons are though incompatible with the protection of civilians, but do not necessarily violate the already permissive standards. Repeated firing into populated areas of gravity ordnance from the air and inaccurate long-range artillery from the ground has been a major driver of civilian casualties across multiple conflicts.
There is a fundamental lack of clarity on two key rules: first, how close an attack may be launched to a military target while still complying with the law; and second, how much incidental civilian harm is permissible when targeting a military objective.
On both issues, the law urgently requires clarification. Restricting air-delivered weapons to precision-guided munitions alone would already make a measurable difference to civilian survival. Achieving this, however, requires States to clarify and update the rules of international humanitarian law that were drafted in the 1970s.
In State-on-State conflicts such as in Kherson province in Ukraine, drones have been used by Russian forces – and others – to target civilians, sometimes with real-time video footage disseminated online by the perpetrators.
At the same time, armed drones are no longer the preserve of States. Their use by non-State armed groups is increasing rapidly, including by JNIM in the Sahel, Islamic State in Somalia, and the Arakan Army in Myanmar. There is an urgent need for stronger mechanisms to attribute, investigate, and prosecute unlawful drone and autonomous weapon attacks.
Impunity on this scale is not inevitable. It is the product of sustained political and financial neglect. Institutions designed to promote compliance with international humanitarian law – including domestic courts and international tribunals – are under severe strain, with some facing paralysis or closure due to lack of resources.
Judges at bodies such as the International Criminal Court have even been sanctioned simply for carrying out their mandates. If States are serious about protecting civilians, political and financial support for these institutions must be treated as a core obligation and a policy priority, not an optional gesture.
The current moment represents a critical test for international humanitarian law itself. The international lawyer Hersch Lauterpacht once warned that the law existed at the “vanishing point” of international law. That warning is no longer theoretical.
Whether humanitarian law continues to function as a real constraint on warfare, or recedes into symbolic rhetoric, will depend on the political choices states make now – and on whether civilian protection is treated as a legal duty rather than a discretionary one.
Stuart Casey-Maslen is an international lawyer and lead author of War Watch: International Humanitarian Law in Focus at the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights
IPS UN Bureau
PORTLAND, USA, Feb 17 2026 (IPS) - The global struggle for equality for women and girls has been ongoing for centuries, with no single country having achieved full equality. In many countries, women and girls continue to face discrimination, harassment, unequal treatment, injustice, domestic violence, and a lack of security and safety.
One of the primary goals of this struggle is to dismantle systemic discrimination and secure basic human rights for women and girls. These rights include economic freedom, social independence, voting power, and bodily autonomy.
Discrimination, harassment, lack of rights, limited healthcare, unequal access to resources, education and political power, high rates of violence, forced marriages, and cultural preferences for male children all contribute to the unequal treatment of girls and women
While some progress has been made, the current global situation regarding women’s equality remains concerning. Many women and girls still struggle for their lives, their rights and their dignity.
It wasn’t until the beginning of the 20th century that countries began passing legislation to ensure women the right to vote and stand for election. The first country to permit women to vote was New Zealand in 1893. Approximately a decade later, Australia, Finland, Denmark and Iceland followed suit.
By the middle of the 20th century, more than half of all countries had granted women the right to vote and today, none of the world’s nearly 200 countries bar women from voting. However, some countries effectively or practically deny women this right through the absence of elections or restrictive regimes.
National surveys across different regions of the world find large majorities of the public supporting women’s equality and saying it is very important for women in their country to have the same rights as men. The majority of the public supporting women’s equality varies from highs of 90 percent or more in countries such as Canada, Sweden and the United Kingdom to lows of approximately 55 percent in Kenya, Russia and South Korea.
In contrast, a minority of misogynists consider women inferior to men. This minority often treats women as their personal property, denying them control over their lives and bodies. They restrict women’s political, social and economic rights, and frequently ridicule, intimidate and physically abuse them.
Various indexes and metrics have been used to measure the extent and progress of women’s equality among countries. For example, the Women, Peace and Security Index, based on thirteen indicators of women’s status in 181 countries, focuses on inclusion, justice, rights, security, and safety.
The top five countries that rank high on the Women, Peace and Security Index are Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland. Together, these five countries account for approximately 0.3% of the world’s female population. European countries hold nine of the top ten rankings on the index, with the Nordic countries consistently ranking in the top ten for many years.
In contrast, the five bottom countries that rank low on this index are Afghanistan, Yemen, Central African Republic, Syria, and Sudan. Among the ten lowest ranked countries on the index, only one country, Haiti, is not in Africa or Asia (Table 1).
Source: Women, Peace and Security Index.
It is noteworthy that the ten countries with the largest economies are not among the top ranked countries on the index. Among these ten countries, Canada and Germany have the highest rankings of 16 and 21, respectively. In contrast, China and India, which each have about 17% of the world’s female population, are ranked significantly lower on this index, with scores of 89 and 131, respectively.
Another metric used to assess countries’ progress in achieving women’s equality is the United Nations Gender Inequality Index (GII). The GII is a composite metric that measures maternal mortality, teen births, secondary education attainment, share of parliamentary seats, and labor market participation.
No single country has achieved full equality, with women still facing the threat of discrimination, harassment, and gender-based violence. In many developing countries, women and girls continue to experience serious injustices, including forced marriage, and high levels of domestic and sexual violence.
According to the GII, the five countries with the highest ranking in terms of women’s equality are Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Conversely, the five countries with the lowest ranking on the GII are Yemen, Nigeria, Somalia, Chad and Afghanistan. Other rankings, such as the Gender Gap Index of the World Economic Forum and the Best Countries of U.S. News, also produced similar rankings of countries with the highest and lowest levels of women’s equality.
Various factors contribute to the lack of women’s equality and discrimination against women and girls. Notable among these factors are restrictive laws, discriminatory norms, cultural stereotypes, violence risks, and unequal education that value men and boys over women and girls. These misogynistic barriers are reinforced by unconscious bias, weak policy enforcement, economic disparities, and structural disadvantages (Table 2).
Source: Amnesty International.
Men and boys are often given more education, power, resources and opportunities than women and girls. Additionally, traditional or religious norms typically depict males as dominant and females as subordinate. While these norms generally affirm the spiritual equality of men and women, they often perpetuate social and institutional inequality on Earth due to traditional interpretations of sacred religious texts.
Discrimination, harassment, lack of rights, limited healthcare, unequal access to resources, education and political power, high rates of violence, forced marriages, and cultural preferences for male children all contribute to the unequal treatment of girls and women.
Moreover, women also perform a disproportionate amount of unpaid labor, hindering their ability to build assets or advance careers. They face lower pay for equal work and are often concentrated in lower-paying occupations. In many countries, women also have restricted access to land ownership, credit, financial services, and unequal legal protection.
Humanitarian crises, climate change, and pandemics have a tendency to disproportionately affect women, exacerbating existing inequalities. Fragile states and those experiencing conflict also tend to rank poorly in terms of women’s equality.
Women’s inequality also varies within countries. For example, while women make up 50% of the U.S. population, women ‘s inequality persists across social, economic, and political sectors. According to 17 various key indicators of women’s equality in the U.S., one study found that the top five states are Hawaii, Nevada, Maryland, Maine, and Oregon, while the bottom five states are Utah, Texas, Idaho, Arkansas, and Louisiana (Table 3).
Source: WalletHub.
There are only about five years left for the world to fulfill the promises made to girls and women for gender equality in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Realizing gender equality is not only the right thing to do, but it is vital for sustainable development.
Women’s equality is a fundamental human right and a foundation for a peaceful and sustainable world. Progress has been achieved over the last several decades. However, the world is not on track to achieve gender equality by 2030.
During the remaining years, eleven of the biggest challenges have been identified and need to be addressed in order to advance women’s equality. These challenges include discrimination, inequalities, inadequate access to education and healthcare, lack of women in political leadership, violence against women and girls, poverty, and lack of economic opportunities (Table 4).
Source: UN Women.
Women and girls face discrimination that hinders their access to education, employment, healthcare, and legal protections. Treating women unfairly and depriving them of their basic human rights leads to the creation of unjust societies.
Approximately 1 in 3 women – estimated at 840 million globally – have experienced partner or sexual violence in their lifetime. In the last 12 months alone, 316 million women –which is 11% of those aged 15 or older – were subjected to physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner.
Major factors contributing to the lack of women’s equality include restrictive laws, discriminatory norms, cultural stereotypes, violence and safety risks, weak enforcement policies, unequal education, economic disparities, inadequate healthcare, lack of political representation, employment segregation, pay gap, unpaid care burden, and unequal household responsibilities.
Achieving women’s equality requires a multi-faceted approach. This includes ensuring their basic human rights, enforcing legal protections against discrimination and violence, ensuring equal pay, education access, economic empowerment, and opportunities, promoting women in leadership roles, dismantling misogynistic stereotypes, advancing inclusive policies, supporting women-led institutions, and encouraging shared domestic responsibility.
Additionally, this multi-faceted approach involves promoting proactive efforts by governments, non-governmental institutions, businesses, schools, community organizations, families, and individuals to ensure equal opportunities, freedom from violence, and fundamental human rights for women and girls.
Joseph Chamie is an independent consulting demographer and former director of the United Nations Population Division.
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 17 2026 (IPS) - As the campaign for the next Secretary-General gathers momentum – at a relatively slow pace – there is widespread speculation that any candidate running for the post of UN chief will have to abide by the dictates of a politically hostile White House or face a veto in the Security Council.
So far, there are only two declared candidates: former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet and former Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Grossi from Argentina—with more candidates expected to join the race.
The winning candidate, who will take office in January 2027, will be elected by the 15-member Security Council and subsequently ratified by the 193-member General Assembly (UNGA).
Annalena Baerbock, the president of UNGA, said the selection process is already underway, and the interactive dialogues with candidates have been scheduled for the week of 20 April, where they will present their “vision statements”.
Meanwhile, the US has publicly declared its opposition to some of the basic goals in the UN’s socio-economic agenda, including gender empowerment and policies relating to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), while dismissing climate change as “a hoax” and a “giant scam.”
The Trump administration has also downplayed human rights and adherence to international laws—two concepts ingrained in the UN system.
In an interview with the New York Times last January, President Trump said he does not “need international law” to guide his actions, arguing that only his own “morality” and “mind” will constrain his global powers.
So, what would be the fate of any candidate— male or female—who advocates these UN goals? Will there be a battle of the vetoes – as it happened in a bygone era?
Richard Gowan, Program Director, Global Issues and Institutions, International Crisis Group (ICG), who oversees ICG’s work on geopolitics, global trends in conflict and multilateralism, told IPS nobody knows how this race will end.
Obviously UN-watchers will be tracking the initial candidates’ vision statements and public appearances over the coming months, he pointed out.
“But diplomats in New York have a suspicion that the veto powers in the Security Council may suddenly announce support for a new candidate at the last minute to circumvent the entire public process. There is a strong sense that the U.S., China and Russia don’t want to be boxed in by the General Assembly.”
There is also a scenario, he said, where the veto powers cannot agree on a candidate, and the Council ends up grinding out discussions of a candidate right through to December.
“UN officials have even done some contingency planning for what happens if there is not an agreed candidate on 1 January 2027. It is possible that the Security Council might ask Guterres to hang on for a few months, although I don’t think either diplomats or Guterres want that outcome.”
There are definitely a few senior UN officials and ambassadors in New York who wonder if the Council could call on them at the very last minute, said Gowan.
Thomas G. Weiss, Presidential Professor Emeritus, Political Science, and Director Emeritus, Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center, told IPS it is hard to imagine anyone running for UNSG who would not run into a veto from Washington in a candidacy necessarily addressing the values of cooperation (multilateralism of any shape) as well as honestly discussing such issues as climate, gender (male or female), nuclear proliferation, Palestine, and sovereignty—all “hoaxes” or “con jobs” according to DJT (President Trump) and his junta.
Both the 1996 and 1981 elections, he said, provide “models.”
“The Chinese vetoes probably are the most relevant precedent for Washington going to the mat indefinitely until an “acceptable” candidate emerges. Let’s hope that person is as competent as the compromise of 1996, Kofi Annan”, he declared.
In 1981, Salim Ahmed Salim of Tanzania, was backed by the Organization of African Unity, the Non-Aligned Movement and China. But his bid was blocked by a US veto.
In 1996, a second five-year term for Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt was vetoed by the US – even though he received the support of 14 of 15 members in the Security Council.
In 1981, China cast a record 16 vetoes against Kurt Waldheim to prevent a third term, leading to his withdrawal and the selection of Javier Pérez de Cuéllar.
Meanwhile, there has been an intense campaign for a female UN chief, the first in the 81-year history of the UN. But the US has remained tight-lipped on the widely supported proposal.
The last 9 secretaries-general, all males, include:
António Guterres (Portugal), who took office in January 2017;
Ban Ki-moon (Republic of Korea), from January 2007 to December 2016;
Kofi A. Annan (Ghana), January 1997 to December 2006;
Boutros Boutros-Ghali (Egypt), January 1992 to December 1996;
Javier Pérez de Cuéllar (Peru), January 1982 to December 1991;
Kurt Waldheim (Austria), January 1972 to December 1981;
U Thant (Burma, now Myanmar), who served from November 1961, when he was appointed acting Secretary-General (he was formally appointed Secretary-General in November 1962), to December 1971;
Dag Hammarskjöld (Sweden), from April 1953 until his death in a plane crash in Africa in September 1961; and
Trygve Lie (Norway), who held office from February 1946 to his resignation in November 1952.
As for the U.S., said Gowan, “I don’t believe that Washington has settled on a candidate yet. But the Trump administration is definitely conscious that they have the power to reshape the political culture of the organization if they find someone who aligns with their views”.
He said U.S. diplomats have told other veto powers that they will hold back on various reform proposals and cuts until they have their own candidate as Secretary-General.
A lot of UN members assume that the U.S. won’t accept a female Secretary-General but I think that Washington could back a woman if she was a strong social conservative and willing to make large cuts to the UN system, he argued.
“Right now, there is not an obvious female candidate meeting those criteria, though. I think some candidates who could never align with the U.S. on things like development and diversity are already stepping out of the race.”
Meanwhile, there is a reason that Mia Mottley has gone from being the putative front runner to refocusing on domestic politics.
“I also think that all candidates recognize that they are going to have to talk a lot more about how they will advance the UN’s work on peace and security, which is a priority not only for the U.S. but a lot of member states.”
“That said, one senior UN diplomat recently told me that they cannot see Global South countries accepting another Western candidate after Guterres, regardless of gender. The non-Western members of the Security Council could create a blocking minority in the Security Council to keep candidates from U.S. allies out,” declared Gowan.
IPS UN Bureau Report
ROME & DELHI, Feb 17 2026 (IPS) - Governments convened in Rome on Monday (February 16) for a critical round of UN biodiversity negotiations, launching the world’s first global review of how countries are acting to protect nature.
The sixth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI-6) of the Convention on Biological Diversity opened at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), drawing government negotiators, technical experts and civil society observers from around the world. It will continue until February 19.
Although considered a technical gathering, the four-day session is expected to play a decisive role in shaping how progress under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework will be assessed and whether political promises can be translated into measurable, on-the-ground action.
“This is a moment to move from commitments to delivery,” said Clarissa Souza Della Nina of Brazil, Chair of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation. “The task before us is to help countries accelerate action to halt and reverse biodiversity loss.”
Clarissa Souza Della Nina of Brazil, Chair of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation. Credit: Mike Muzurakis | IISD/ENB
A Global Stocktake for Nature
The Rome talks come two years after countries completed the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement, which confirmed the world remains far off track on climate goals.
Now, a parallel exercise begins for biodiversity.
Under the CBD, governments will undertake the first global review of progress in implementing the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), adopted in 2022. The framework includes 23 targets spanning conservation, finance, equity and economic transformation, with the overarching objective of halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030.
Biodiversity tracking is more complex than emissions accounting, but, according to CBD leadership, it is urgently needed.
“The time has come to make peace with nature… the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the Paris Agreement in a synergistic fashion will make peace with nature within reach,” said Astrid Schomaker, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Why Rome Matters
SBI-6 plays a central role in preparing for the upcoming global biodiversity review by examining implementation progress, highlighting gaps, and proposing ways to accelerate action. Negotiators will submit the outcomes directly to COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia, later this year.
“One year after COP16 concluded here in Rome, we must ensure these meetings deliver real progress. Submitting national reports on time is essential for a strong and credible global review in the race to 2030,” Schomaker said.
A major focus of SBI-6 is the Secretariat’s analysis of national biodiversity strategies and action plans submitted since 2022. But despite growing momentum, significant gaps persist. Many strategies still do not adequately integrate Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women, youth, or the private sector. Crucial targets relating to economic and social transformation — including sustainable consumption, equity and benefit sharing — remain underemphasised.
Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), underscored the stakes at the launch of the State of Finance for Nature 2026 report:
“Whether investments flow into nature’s destruction or into its protection will determine if we live in climate-vulnerable concrete jungles or in climate-resilient green cities,” she warned, stressing that financial and policy decisions made today will shape countries’ ability to meet biodiversity goals.
An indigenous woman and biodiversity defender from the Amazon is pictured holding a forest coconut. Women are asking for better implementation of article 23 of the KMGBF. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
Gender, Finance and Capacity Challenges
Delegates are also reviewing progress under the CBD Gender Plan of Action (2023–2030). Early assessments show that only a quarter of countries involved women’s groups in shaping biodiversity strategies, and just 12 percent plan to do so in the future.
“Ensuring the full, effective and meaningful participation of women and other rights holders is fundamental to accountability, inclusivity and the effectiveness of biodiversity action, and to achieving the full ambition of the global framework,” the CBD Women’s Caucus stated in its official submission.
Finance remains another major point of discussion. While major funding decisions are expected later this year, Rome’s deliberations draw heavily on new research on biodiversity finance, sovereign debt, and the connections between climate and nature funding.
“If we want to mobilise the finance and resources that nature critically needs, business, finance and governments must confront the reality that persistent gaps in reliable data, incentives and institutional capacity are holding back meaningful action — and unless these barriers are addressed, many countries and sectors will continue to struggle to turn agreed goals into results,” said Matt Jones, Co-Chair of the IPBES Business and Biodiversity Assessment 2026.
Countdown to National Reports
The Rome meeting comes just weeks before countries must submit their Seventh National Reports under the CBD, due on 28 February 2026.
These national publications will serve as a principal source of information for the global biodiversity review, alongside national strategies and targets.
However, many countries remain unprepared to submit on time. On day one, Brazil, one of the most influential players in global biodiversity policy, stressed the need for flexibility.
“Ensuring the quality, consistency and internal validation of data and indicators requires additional time. In this context, Brazil suggests that SBI recommendations prioritise technical guidance, operational flexibility and targeted capacity-building support to enable high-quality reporting, rather than focusing solely on reinforcing deadlines,” the country’s delegate said.
A Test of Accountability
While SBI-6 is unlikely to produce headline-grabbing announcements, it will shape how global biodiversity action is evaluated over the next decade.
For Indigenous Peoples and local communities—who steward a significant share of the world’s remaining biodiversity—the meeting represents a critical test of whether rights, participation and lived realities will be meaningfully reflected in the global assessment process.
“This process must lead to accountability, not just documentation,” emphasised Pirawan Wongnithisathaporn, the Environment Program Officer at the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP), calling for tangible action rather than reporting alone.
SBI-6 will conclude on Thursday, February 19. Negotiations will continue at SBI-7 in August 2026 as governments move steadily toward the first global biodiversity review at COP17.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Feb 16 2026 (IPS) -
CIVICUS discusses the recent protests in Iran with Sohrab Razaghi, executive director of Volunteer Activists, a Netherlands-based diaspora organisation empowering Iranian civil society.
Sohrab Razaghi
What sparked the protests, and in what ways were they different from previous ones?
Rising prices and the collapse of the national currency initially sparked the protests, but these quickly expanded beyond economic grievances. At least in part, this is because the economy is no longer seen as a purely technical issue but as a measure of the state’s ability to govern. A central question among social groups now is whether the government can manage crises and provide sustainable solutions.
Anger has built up, reflecting broken promises and lost futures. Over the past three decades, four major protest waves – in 2009, 2017, 2019 and 2022 – were met with repression, denial or superficial reforms. This pattern has produced a strong sense of humiliation and political voicelessness.
But perhaps the most decisive factor in the latest wave of protests has been the role of Generation Z, a generation that did not experience the 1979 revolution or the war with Iraq and does not have the ideological attachments of earlier generations. The dividing line is not just age but also expectations, lifestyles and values. While previous generations used to hope for gradual reform within the system, now many young people see no viable future within the current framework. For them, the most rational responses to what they perceive as a structural dead end are disengagement, migration or radical protest.
Recent protests, particularly those of 8 and 9 January, also reflected shifts in protest dynamics, with higher levels of violence visible in both rhetoric and practice. This escalation likely reflects accumulated frustration and political deadlock, but doesn’t necessarily indicate that the state has weakened. Security forces so far appear cohesive and operationally effective, and there are no clear signs of fragmentation inside the coercive apparatus.
But the rise in violence is troubling for democratic forces and civil society. When violent tactics become prominent, organised civic initiatives are marginalised and security-driven narratives prevail, weakening sustained civic action.
Additionally, Israeli and US statements expressing support for protesters and threatening military action had contradictory and largely negative effects.
While such rhetoric initially generated hope among some protesters, the lack of follow-up produced disillusionment and scepticism. Most importantly, statements by foreign governments, including Israel and the USA, strengthened the regime’s narrative. They enabled the authorities to frame protests as the products of foreign interference and protesters as instruments of external powers, including claims of involvement by Mossad agents. This narrative was very useful to justify securitisation and repression.
How have civil society and the media documented human rights violations amid internet shutdowns?
During near-total internet blackouts, local and community-based groups played crucial roles. They recorded the time and location of incidents, collected testimonies from multiple sources and preserved legal, medical and visual documentation while observing basic digital security principles.
When limited internet access became available, information was shared securely with international partners and diaspora networks. These networks helped archive data, liaise with human rights organisations and media and reduce pressure on activists operating inside Iran. International human rights organisations then cross-checked and verified reports before incorporating them into official documentation. Because communication shutdowns, security risks and restricted access to evidence prevented full documentation, they typically presented casualty figures and details of repression conservatively. At the same time, fake news and baseless casualty figures are also prevalent in diaspora and international media reports. It is essential to interrogate such reporting to preserve the credibility of fact-checked, evidence-based reports.
Under severe restrictions, independent and evidence-based documentation has been essential to preserve truth, counter denial and lay the groundwork for future accountability.
What’s limiting sustained pressure for change?
Recent protests have not expanded into broader forms of social organisation. Participation by labour unions, local networks and professional associations has been limited, restricting the potential for sustained institutionalised pressure. Without stronger organisational structures, documentation of abuses won’t necessarily translate into coordinated civic action. Social media-based coordination and mobilisation are effective for the start and first phase of protests, but on-the-ground leadership, networks and organising capacity are instrumental for sustaining protests and increasing pressure for change.
At the discursive level, significant attention has focused on appeals for foreign pressure rather than on building internal coalitions among social groups. In some cases, rhetoric has centred on state collapse rather than democratic transition, a framework that risks instability and further social fragmentation. The use of profanity and violent language – both inside Iran and among the diaspora community – has also alienated families and moderate groups, narrowing rather than broadening support.
Ultimately, for protests to evolve into movements capable of exerting sustained pressure for change, what’s needed is inclusive organisation, coalition-building and a unifying narrative.
What should the international community do to strengthen Iranian civil society?
Sustainable change will depend on domestic organisational capacity, leadership and representation, not external force. So international leaders should avoid war rhetoric and avoid engaging in any form of military intervention. Historical experience suggests that even limited foreign military intervention is unlikely to weaken domestic repression. Instead, it may well increase regime cohesion, at least in the short term, intensify nationalist sentiment and raise the costs faced by civil society activists, who can be easily portrayed as collaborators and traitors.
When supporting Iranian civil society, international allies should prioritise independent, nonviolent civil society organisations rather than opposition groups advocating violence. Narratives of ‘collapse at any cost’ marginalise civic initiatives and undermine the prospects of democratisation.
Long-term investment in capacity strengthening is essential. This includes supporting civic organising skills, digital security, democratic advocacy, nonviolent action and secure communication tools. Over recent decades, resources and repertoires for change within civil society have been weakened. Sustained engagement is required to rebuild these capacities, with up-to-date resources, techniques and tools.
Monitoring, documentation and evidence-based reporting grounded in credible local sources are among the most effective forms of support. Accurate reporting strengthens prospects for accountability and limits the space for propaganda.
Ultimately, sustainable democratic change in Iran will depend on civil society acting independently, rooted in domestic capacities and supported by context-aware, non-interventionist international engagement.
CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.
GET IN TOUCH
Website
LinkedIn
Sohrab Razzaghi/LinkedIn
SEE ALSO
‘The unprecedented level of violence points to a deep crisis of legitimacy’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Feminists for Freedom 09.Feb.2026
‘When international attention decreases, state violence often intensifies’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Hengaw Organization for Human Rights 27.Jan.2026
Israel vs Iran: new war begins while Gaza suffering continues CIVICUS Lens 19.Jun.2025