Search - covid 19

Collaboration between academia and government is essential for driving innovation in Qatar, according to Dr Georgios Dimitropoulos, professor and associate dean for Research at the College of Law, Hamad Bin Khalifa University (HBKU). “Very little can happen without the nexus between academia and government,” Dimitropoulos said during the Ibtechar Majlis panel discussion, where he explained that universities provide the research depth and methodological rigour, while government offers the scale, resources, and policy frameworks needed to translate ideas into practice. Dimitropoulos pointed out that the nexus between research institutions and public authorities “is the foundation for credibility, adoption, and long-term success in innovation.” Citing historical examples to illustrate the power of this partnership, Dimitropoulos said: “Think of the Manhattan Project, the development of Covid vaccines, or even the Internet. None of these breakthroughs would have been possible without academia and government working hand in hand.” Dimitropoulos added that Qatar’s own Artificial Intelligence (AI) strategy reflects this model. “Qatar’s AI strategy is a product of this nexus. It combines academic expertise with government vision, ensuring that innovation is both credible and implementable,” he said. He stressed that credibility is a critical factor in adoption: “When government collaborates with academia, it signals to society that solutions are not only innovative but also trustworthy. This builds confidence and accelerates uptake.”  During the panel discussion, moderated by Ibtechar co-founder and CEO Nayef al Ibrahim, Dimitropoulos was joined by Hissa al-Tamimi, director of the Government Innovation Department at the Civil Service and Government Development Bureau (CGB); Eman al-Kuwari, director of Digital Innovation at the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT); and Nejoud M al-Jehani, executive director of Strategy & Programmes at the Qatar Research, Development and Innovation (QRDI) Council.  Providing further insight during the discussion, al-Kuwari described how the Tasmu Innovation Lab helps government entities test emerging technologies before rollout, while al-Jehani described government as both adopter and enabler, shaping the innovation ecosystem by acting as a first customer. Al-Tamimi, meanwhile, highlighted the role of government accelerators in embedding an innovation culture and improving Qatar’s global innovation ranking.

Twice in the last century, the foundations of global finance shifted, because the burden placed on the machinery of money became unsustainable. Today, we are witnessing another shift, driven by the rise of stablecoins, tokenized deposits, and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). But, this time, change is not unfolding through treaties or exchange-rate policies. The question is no longer which central bank issues the global monetary system’s “anchor” asset, but on whose infrastructure value circulates.When Allied countries agreed in 1944 to establish a post-World War II global monetary architecture based on US economic might and a gold-backed dollar, governments accepted limits on their monetary sovereignty in exchange for stable exchange rates and a reliable supply of global liquidity, provided by the United States.As capital markets deepened, however, the Bretton Woods system became untenable. In 1971, the US abandoned dollar convertibility to gold, and the world shifted to a dollar-based floating exchange-rate regime, which was flexible enough for an increasingly integrated global economy and complex financial system, but also fragile and prone to recurrent crises. Nonetheless, the US dollar retained its dominance in international transactions and reserves, thanks to the depth and safety of US Treasury markets, the global reach of US finance, and the credibility of US institutions.Today, the structure of the global economy has changed: China is now the world’s largest trader; the eurozone is a major capital exporter; and emerging economies, such as India and the Asean countries, are central to supply chains and key sources of energy demand. But while the economy has shifted toward multipolarity, the monetary system remains largely unipolar. The dollar still accounts for roughly half of cross-border loans, some 60% of global foreign-exchange reserves, and over 50% of trade invoicing. It is also the currency against which nearly all stablecoins now in circulation are pegged.The resulting structural mismatch has far-reaching consequences, as countries worldwide – even those that have established themselves as global production hubs – remain exposed to US monetary cycles, periodic dollar shortages, and asymmetric shocks.These vulnerabilities are systemic, not episodic, reflected in the global funding gaps that occurred in 2008 with the onset of the global financial crisis, in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic, and in 2022 when the US Federal Reserve began raising interest rates to combat inflation. Imbalances were managed, but never resolved.The rise of digital money may now break this stalemate. The critical innovation here is not the currencies themselves, but rather the underlying settlement layers. Tokenized assets, programmable payments, and upgraded messaging frameworks enable states and private actors to build alternative infrastructure capable of circumventing legacy intermediaries. Properly designed, these monetary rails can underpin a stable open system, expanding access, reducing friction, and modernizing the world’s aging financial infrastructure.But there is another, less desirable possibility: this new monetary architecture can entrench a bipolar system, comprising competing geopolitical blocs with incompatible standards. This explains why digital-currency projects have become instruments of geopolitics. China’s cross-border CBDC pilots are as much about shaping governance norms as they are about improving efficiency. Europe’s pursuit of “digital sovereignty” is rooted in security concerns, stemming from America’s apparent unreliability as a partner. Emerging economies are building new clearing arrangements outside traditional dollar channels. Meanwhile, privately issued stablecoins are forcing governments to rethink how influence is exerted.Technology is thus achieving what politics has not: a bottom-up realignment of monetary power. The US still has the potential to lead, because its institutions remain the most trusted, its capital markets the deepest, and its reserve-asset ecosystem the strongest. But fulfilling this potential will depend as much on architecture as on assets. The threat to the dollar’s primacy is not a rival currency, but the possibility that the global financial infrastructure will evolve in ways that dilute the advantages of openness, including the network effects that make holding and settling in dollars attractive.To retain its position at the centre of the global monetary system, the US must help build the rails that will convey global liquidity in the digital era. This means upgrading domestic and cross-border payment infrastructure for interoperability, thereby avoiding digital Balkanization. It also means providing regulatory clarity on dollar-denominated stablecoins and tokenized bank liabilities, so that private actors are not conducting quasi-central-bank functions without safeguards. And it means advancing a multilateral governance framework that ensures that cross-border digital rails reflect the principles that made the post-1970s system resilient: openness, transparency, and trustworthy governance.Such a system is in everyone’s interest. For Europe and China, modernized digital-payment rails would enable greater monetary autonomy without the disadvantages of fragmentation. For emerging economies, they would provide a credible path to reducing exposure to external shocks.And for the US, they would strengthen supply-chain resilience, forestall reliance on rival digital ecosystems, and enhance investment competitiveness by making dollar assets programmable and attractive as collateral.Moreover, embedding trusted digital-identity and compliance standards into the global financial plumbing would extend US influence in commercial diplomacy and economic statecraft.An open, interoperable, standards-based monetary order could finally deliver what neither the Bretton Woods system nor the floating exchange-rate regime could simultaneously: liquidity, stability, and sovereignty. -- Project SyndicateSilvia Sgherri is a visiting scholar and adjunct professor at the George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs. 

Twice in the last century, the foundations of global finance shifted, because the burden placed on the machinery of money became unsustainable. Today, we are witnessing another shift, driven by the rise of stablecoins, tokenised deposits, and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). But, this time, change is not unfolding through treaties or exchange-rate policies. The question is no longer which central bank issues the global monetary system’s “anchor” asset, but on whose infrastructure value circulates.When Allied countries agreed in 1944 to establish a post-World War II global monetary architecture based on US economic might and a gold-backed dollar, governments accepted limits on their monetary sovereignty in exchange for stable exchange rates and a reliable supply of global liquidity, provided by the United States.As capital markets deepened, however, the Bretton Woods system became untenable. In 1971, the US abandoned dollar convertibility to gold, and the world shifted to a dollar-based floating exchange-rate regime, which was flexible enough for an increasingly integrated global economy and complex financial system, but also fragile and prone to recurrent crises. Nonetheless, the US dollar retained its dominance in international transactions and reserves, thanks to the depth and safety of US Treasury markets, the global reach of US finance, and the credibility of US institutions.Today, the structure of the global economy has changed: China is now the world’s largest trader; the eurozone is a major capital exporter; and emerging economies, such as India and the Asean countries, are central to supply chains and key sources of energy demand. But while the economy has shifted toward multipolarity, the monetary system remains largely unipolar. The dollar still accounts for roughly half of cross-border loans, some 60% of global foreign-exchange reserves, and over 50% of trade invoicing. It is also the currency against which nearly all stablecoins now in circulation are pegged.The resulting structural mismatch has far-reaching consequences, as countries worldwide – even those that have established themselves as global production hubs – remain exposed to US monetary cycles, periodic dollar shortages, and asymmetric shocks.These vulnerabilities are systemic, not episodic, reflected in the global funding gaps that occurred in 2008 with the onset of the global financial crisis, in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic, and in 2022 when the US Federal Reserve began raising interest rates to combat inflation. Imbalances were managed, but never resolved.The rise of digital money may now break this stalemate. The critical innovation here is not the currencies themselves, but rather the underlying settlement layers. Tokenised assets, programmable payments, and upgraded messaging frameworks enable states and private actors to build alternative infrastructure capable of circumventing legacy intermediaries. Properly designed, these monetary rails can underpin a stable open system, expanding access, reducing friction, and modernising the world’s aging financial infrastructure.But there is another, less desirable possibility: this new monetary architecture can entrench a bipolar system, comprising competing geopolitical blocs with incompatible standards. This explains why digital-currency projects have become instruments of geopolitics. China’s cross-border CBDC pilots are as much about shaping governance norms as they are about improving efficiency. Europe’s pursuit of “digital sovereignty” is rooted in security concerns, stemming from America’s apparent unreliability as a partner. Emerging economies are building new clearing arrangements outside traditional dollar channels. Meanwhile, privately issued stablecoins are forcing governments to rethink how influence is exerted.Technology is thus achieving what politics has not: a bottom-up realignment of monetary power. The US still has the potential to lead, because its institutions remain the most trusted, its capital markets the deepest, and its reserve-asset ecosystem the strongest. But fulfilling this potential will depend as much on architecture as on assets. The threat to the dollar’s primacy is not a rival currency, but the possibility that the global financial infrastructure will evolve in ways that dilute the advantages of openness, including the network effects that make holding and settling in dollars attractive.To retain its position at the centre of the global monetary system, the US must help build the rails that will convey global liquidity in the digital era. This means upgrading domestic and cross-border payment infrastructure for interoperability, thereby avoiding digital Balkanisation. It also means providing regulatory clarity on dollar-denominated stablecoins and tokenised bank liabilities, so that private actors are not conducting quasi-central-bank functions without safeguards. And it means advancing a multilateral governance framework that ensures that cross-border digital rails reflect the principles that made the post-1970s system resilient: openness, transparency, and trustworthy governance.Such a system is in everyone’s interest. For Europe and China, modernised digital-payment rails would enable greater monetary autonomy without the disadvantages of fragmentation. For emerging economies, they would provide a credible path to reducing exposure to external shocks.And for the US, they would strengthen supply-chain resilience, forestall reliance on rival digital ecosystems, and enhance investment competitiveness by making dollar assets programmable and attractive as collateral.Moreover, embedding trusted digital-identity and compliance standards into the global financial plumbing would extend US influence in commercial diplomacy and economic statecraft.An open, interoperable, standards-based monetary order could finally deliver what neither the Bretton Woods system nor the floating exchange-rate regime could simultaneously: liquidity, stability, and sovereignty. - Project Syndicatel Silvia Sgherri is a visiting scholar and adjunct professor at the George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs.

Under the shadow of civil war ‌and questions over the poll's credibility, the initial round of Myanmar's phased general election closed Sunday, with signs of low ‌voter turnout for the first polls since a ‍military coup in 2021.The junta, having crushed pro-democracy protests after the coup and sparked a nationwide rebellion, said the vote would bring political stability to the impoverished Southeast Asian nation, despite ⁠international condemnation of the exercise.The United Nations, some Western countries ⁠and human rights groups have said the vote is not free, fair or credible, given that anti-junta political parties are out of the ‍running and it is illegal to criticise the polls.**media[398690]**Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, deposed by the military months after her National League for Democracy won a general election landslide in 2020, remains in detention and the party she led to power has been dissolved.The military-aligned Union Solidarity and Development Party, led by retired generals and fielding one-fifth of all candidates against severely diminished competition, is set to return to power, said Lalita Hanwong, a lecturer and Myanmar expert at Thailand's Kasetsart University."The junta's election is designed to prolong the military's power of slavery over people," she said. "And USDP and other allied parties with the military will join forces ‌to form the next government."**media[398693]**In the lacklustre canvassing ahead of the polls, the USDP was the most visible. Founded in 2010, the year it won an election boycotted by the opposition, the party ran the country in concert with its military backers until 2015, when it was swept away by Suu Kyi's NLD.Voter turnout in Sunday's polls appeared ⁠much lower than in the 2020 ‌election, 10 residents of cities spread across Myanmar said.Further rounds of voting will be held on January 11 and January 25, covering 265 of Myanmar's 330 townships, although the junta does not have complete control of all those areas.Armed groups formed in the wake of the coup and long-established ethnic armies are fighting the military across swathes of the country, displacing some 3.6mn people and creating one of Asia's worst humanitarian crises.**media[398691]**A date for the final election result has not been declared.Dressed in civilian clothes, junta chief Min Aung Hlaing voted in the heavily guarded capital city of Naypyitaw, then held up an ink-soaked little finger, smiling widely, footage on state media MRTV showed. Voters must dip a finger into indelible ink after casting a ballot to ensure they do not vote more than once.Asked by reporters if he would like to become the country's president, an office that analysts say he has ambitions for, the general said he was not the leader of any political party."When the parliament convenes, there is a process for electing ​the president," he said.The junta's attempt to establish a stable administration in the midst of war is fraught with risk, and broad foreign recognition is unlikely for any military-controlled government with a civilian veneer, according to ⁠analysts.Tom Andrews, the UN special envoy for human rights ‍in Myanmar, said Sunday the election was not a pathway out of the country's crisis and must be strongly rejected.Zaw Min Tun, a junta spokesperson, acknowledged international criticism of the vote."However, from this election, there will be political stability," he told reporters after voting in Naypyitaw. "We believe there will be a better future."Nevertheless, Myanmar's voters did not come out in numbers close to the previous election conducted under Covid-19 restrictions, including in the commercial capital of Yangon and the central city of Mandalay, residents said.The junta's legal framework for the election has no minimum voter turnout requirement, said the ​Asian Network for Free Elections poll monitoring group.Turnout was about 70% in Myanmar's 2020 and 2015 general elections, according to the US-based nonprofit International Foundation for Electoral Systems.There has been none of the energy and excitement of previous election campaigns, although several residents in Myanmar's largest cities who spoke to Reuters did not report any coercion by the military administration to push people to vote.A handful of polling booths in Yangon, some of them near areas housing military families, had dozens of voters queued up around midday, but others were largely empty, according to two residents of the sprawling metropolis."It isn't as loud and enthusiastic as it was back in 2020," said a Mandalay resident, asking not to be named because of security concerns.The streets of Hakha, capital of the northern state of Chin, where fighting rages on, were empty after a local ⁠rebel group told residents to boycott the vote, two residents said."People from my quarter, none of us went to vote," said one of them, a 63-year-old man. "We are not interested in the election." 

Last December, while visiting Nairobi for a global health workshop, I met a group of community health workers, the frontline professionals who play a vital role in providing HIV, tuberculosis, and maternal health services across Africa. They talked about navigating informal settlements to reach patients who missed appointments; building trust one conversation at a time; and knowing the ins and outs of their catchment area, including which children are orphaned, which traditional healers collaborate on referrals, and which patients struggle with adherence. Their expertise was largely developed in programmes funded by the President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (PEPFAR), which US President George W Bush launched in 2003. By training and supporting community health workers, the programme has helped strengthen the continent’s healthcare systems. But these workers do more than deliver healthcare: they also function as an early-warning system for the next pandemic – a crucial role that directly benefits the US. But US policymakers seem to have overlooked this, at least judging by the America First Global Health Strategy that the US Department of State released in September. It sets the ambitious goal of achieving the 95-95-95 targets (whereby 95% of HIV-infected people know their status, 95% of those who know are in treatment, and 95% of those being treated are virally suppressed). The strategy also aims to reduce both tuberculosis mortality and malaria mortality by 90% by 2030, and to detect epidemic outbreaks within seven days and mobilise a response within 72 hours of detection. At the same time, to end the system’s “inefficiencies, waste, and dependency” (a major theme in the current US administration, which has already eliminated billions of dollars in foreign aid), the strategy calls for shifting 270,000 frontline health-care workers from US-funded NGO programmes to recipient government payrolls starting in 2027. The problem is that PEPFAR-funded healthcare workers typically earn significantly more than their government counterparts, often requiring salary harmonisation when transitioning to government employment. In Malawi, nurses with international NGOs that are supported by PEPFAR have long earned a notably higher median salary than nurses with local NGOs. In South Africa, absorbing 24,264 PEPFAR-funded workers would cost the government R2.82bn ($167mn) – and even that represents only 63% of what PEPFAR currently spends on salaries, illustrating the compensation gap workers face during transition. When faced with deep salary cuts, workers are likely to flee rural public health for better-paying jobs in urban clinics or other NGOs. This reveals a fundamental tension in the strategy: it seeks to maintain robust disease surveillance while effectively dismantling the workforce responsible for it. The section on pandemic preparedness, correctly identified as a core national interest, is telling. It touts the US government’s proactive efforts to stop significant outbreaks of Ebola in Uganda and Marburg in Tanzania, celebrating that “zero cases reached American shores.” But there is no discussion of how this system works, particularly its dependence on the health workers now at risk. PEPFAR infrastructure was essential to the rapid containment of Uganda’s Ebola outbreak in 2022-23: the programme’s transport system for HIV samples was repurposed for haemorrhagic fever samples, while local partners leveraged their relationships with clinics to educate more people about infection prevention and control. Likewise, during the Covid-19 pandemic, PEPFAR-supported laboratory sites across Africa performed testing, and community health workers applied their strategies for HIV contact tracing to surveillance of the outbreak. The 208,800 community health workers who are the PEPFAR programme’s eyes and ears are the first to notice unusual disease patterns, report unexplained illness clusters, and relay community signals to national surveillance teams. Lose them and America’s early-warning capacity collapses. Responding to outbreaks where they originate is cheaper and safer than waiting until they reach America. Covid-19, after all, cost the US economy trillions of dollars and killed more than 1mn Americans. In view of this, PEPFAR’s annual budget of around $6bn is hardly excessive; rather, it is a high-return investment in national security. The US strategy aims to complete bilateral agreements by Dec 31 and begin implementation by April, giving policymakers a three-month window. But government employment processes typically require two years to navigate budget approvals, create positions, recruit competitive candidates, and set salaries. Uganda’s successful health-worker transition followed a similar timeline. Rushing the handover risks triggering a mass exodus. The US government has promised to employ dedicated staff members in each country to focus on validating and auditing surveillance data. But without community health workers to conduct contact tracing during disease outbreaks and maintain the community trust required for rapid case identification, there will be no data to process. To be sure, the strategy identifies a major problem: less than 40% of PEPFAR funding goes to frontline supplies and healthcare workers. Reforms are clearly needed. But there is a difference between a thoughtful transition and a rapid dismantling. Continuity of institutional knowledge is crucial, and Congress should require the State Department to set realistic timelines that match administrative realities and develop comprehensive workforce transition plans that include terms for retention bonuses and severance packages. Bilateral agreements should include binding commitments from recipient governments to maintain pandemic-surveillance capacity regardless of domestic political pressures. Most importantly, policymakers must understand that 270,000 healthcare workers are more than a line item; they are the backbone of the disease-surveillance system protecting American lives. The same community health workers testing for HIV today will test for tomorrow’s novel pathogen. The trust they build with marginalised populations now will be essential for vaccine uptake during the next outbreak. Funding the people who help keep Americans safe should not be seen as charity, but rather as spending that serves Americans’ own interest in staying healthy. — Project Syndicate Junaid Nabi, a physician and scientist, is a senior fellow at the Aspen Institute and a Millennium Fellow at the Atlantic Council.  

China’s central bank reaffirmed its supportive monetary policy stance while signalling continued caution toward aggressive stimulus, reinforcing a shift toward securing long-term stability over immediate fixes.The People’s Bank of China (PBoC) vowed to guide borrowing costs to continue hovering at a low level, according to a Wednesday statement following its fourth-quarter monetary policy committee meeting. The bank repeated a pledge to step up “cross-cyclical” policies, a phrase suggesting it aims to look beyond short-term volatility and avoid excessive stimulus that could create structural imbalances.The statement didn’t mention a reduction in interest rates or to the reserve requirement ratio, which determines how much cash banks must keep in reserves, while the PBoC pledged to make use of multiple policy tools. That suggests the central bank is cautious about taking those big easing steps, even after a readout following a key annual economic work conference included a reference to those measures earlier this month.The language suggests “a preference toward a reactive rather than proactive approach to easing,” Goldman Sachs Group Inc economist Xinquan Chen said in a note Thursday. Changes in the language “point to a more cautious and flexible approach to monetary policy easing”, he said.This measured approach comes despite deepening weakness in domestic demand, with retail sales last month expanding at the lowest pace since the crash caused by Covid. Fixed-asset investment is also on track for its first annual decline in data going back to 1998, after a crash made worse by a drought in funding for infrastructure projects.The committee said it will “grasp the strength, pace and timing” of policy implementation based on evolving domestic and overseas conditions. The PBoC also reiterated its commitment to maintaining the yuan’s basic stability at a reasonable and balanced level to guard against overshooting risks.The PBoC has adopted a cautious approach this year, frequently disappointing economists who had anticipated more aggressive interest rate cuts. This restraint reflects the central bank’s deeper concerns over protecting shrinking bank margins and preserving policy space for future downturns.While the meeting readout mentioned maintaining “ample” liquidity, the focus on “quality and efficiency” over raw volume suggests that any further easing will be mostly targeted.The PBoC will likely cut the RRR by 50 basis points in the first quarter to maintain ample liquidity and ensure government borrowing costs stay low, economists at China Galaxy Securities Co wrote in a report on Thursday.While it may cut the policy interest rate by 10 to 20 basis points in 2026, any reduction may only be triggered by an increase in economic pressure, such as a deterioration in the US-China relationship or worsening unemployment, they said.

Few would deny that there has been a shift away from multilateral co-operation in recent years. As the world becomes more multipolar, geopolitical tensions are hampering efforts to devise common solutions to shared problems, and rising nationalism and fiscal crises within many traditional donor countries are threatening the institutions on which multilateralism depends.As a realist, I recognize that today’s world is more dangerous than the one we inhabited not so long ago. But I am also confident that possibilities for long-term global collaboration remain. I have seen firsthand that multilateral co-operation often delivers results that otherwise would not be attained. My confidence stems from my experience as the chair of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. As my five-year tenure draws to a close, I find myself reflecting on what has underpinned Gavi’s success over the past 25 years and what this experience can teach us about adapting multilateralism for a rapidly changing world.The first lesson may sound simple, but it is too often forgotten: Always be mission-driven. Gavi exists to save lives and protect health by expanding access to vaccines in lower-income countries. It is this clarity of purpose that has helped halve child mortality in 78 countries and protect every one of us against the threat of infectious diseases. Nor is there any secret to our success. We have done it by uniting a multitude of public and private stakeholders, many with divergent interests, behind a common purpose.Gavi has always been a coalition of the willing, bringing together national governments, United Nations agencies, philanthropies, vaccine manufacturers, innovators, development banks, research institutions, and civil society. With its diverse skill set, expertise, and political clout, it has protected over half the world’s children against preventable diseases in any given year, as well as providing the world with core competencies during crises like the Covid-19 pandemic, when we led the global vaccine response.In a more multipolar world, similar approaches will be needed to drive progress in other areas where the provision of public goods (conflict resolution, education, health security, equitable access to AI) is too important to be held hostage by adversarial politics and sectional interests.That leads me to the second key lesson: Be mission-driven, but country-led. Gavi was founded in the spirit of partnership, not paternalism. Promoting national self-reliance has always been at the heart of its mission. Countries pay more toward the cost of their vaccine programs as their national incomes rise, up to the point where they can fully sustain their own immunization services. Some countries have even transitioned from recipients to donors.This responsiveness to country needs has made us relentlessly focused on innovation. In 2024, Gavi embraced the historic introduction of malaria vaccines because we recognized how unjust it was that so many countries, particularly in Africa, had to wait so long for such a breakthrough. The same year, Gavi also launched a financial innovation, the First Response Fund, to provide surge financing for the procurement of mpox vaccines, saving precious time that otherwise would have been lost raising additional funding.Today, Gavi is directing the same innovative zeal toward the future rollout of vaccines against tuberculosis, the world’s deadliest infectious disease. It is also advancing a new initiative, the African Vaccine Manufacturing Accelerator, with strong backing from the European Union and other donors, to support the African Union’s ambitions for regional high-value manufacturing. I predict we will see a far greater role for, and collaboration between, regional economic and political blocs as the key drivers of multilateralism in the years ahead.Every coalition needs strong governance and leadership. That is why Nelson Mandela was chosen as Gavi’s first chair. But ensuring that the interests of every stakeholder remain aligned is no simple task, and this insight was not lost on me when I was approached for the role in 2020. I was honoured, and I could not help noticing that the Gavi board had 28 seats, the same number of member states whose interests I sought to align when I was president of the European Commission.Throughout my tenure at Gavi, I have been guided by the enduring wisdom of Jean Monnet, a leading postwar advocate of European unity: “Nothing is possible without people, but nothing lasts without institutions.” Gavi is truly a unique institution. Not only is it a broad, inclusive alliance of national and international, as well as public and private, entities; it is also an international organization that has managed to avoid paralysis and inertia, unlike some major intergovernmental bodies. It has done so by maintaining a laser focus on protecting children – even in war zones where the only respite from fighting came from the need to vaccinate populations.Countries will always have reasons to disagree, but if anything can elevate the cause of peace above extreme national interest or ideology, it is the protection of children. Throughout my life, I have been at the heart of many seismic changes, from the Carnation Revolution in my native Portugal in the 1970s to the effort to advance peace, reconciliation, and democracy in Europe (for which I had the great honour of receiving the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the EU). In each case, historic changes needed a catalyst, which is exactly the role that Gavi has played in promoting public health.As we enter a more multipolar world, I would urge everyone to recognize the need for more mission-driven public-private partnerships like Gavi. There simply is no better way to address the challenges of our age.Jose Manuel Barroso, a former president of the European Commission and former prime minister of Portugal, is Chair of the Board of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. 

Grim as the final month of 2025 has been – with headlines dominated by mass shootings, crises, and polarisation – one positive development offers a glimmer of hope for the coming year. Across the developing world, younger people are demanding jobs, affordable food and fuel, economic opportunity, and action to slow climate change. From South Asia to Latin America, they are presenting political leaders with a stark choice: listen and respond, or step aside and be replaced.Nepal is a prime example. In September, the government banned 26 major social-media platforms that had been used to expose the lavish lifestyles of politicians’ children, triggering protests over corruption, nepotism, and the lack of opportunities for young people. The 73-year-old prime minister, K P Sharma Oli, then inflamed tensions further by mocking the thousands of teenagers who took to the streets. When security forces fired on crowds, killing at least 19 people and injuring hundreds more, demonstrators set fire to parliament and ransacked Oli’s private residence. He resigned the following day.Some trace the current wave of unrest to Sri Lanka in 2022, when economic collapse and severe fuel and electricity shortages sparked a youth-led protest movement. Activists set up a camp outside the office of then-72-year-old President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, whose family had governed the country for 15 of the previous 18 years, accusing him of corruption and nepotism. Protesters eventually overran the president’s residence, forcing Gotabaya to flee the country.Two years later, the Bangladeshi government responded to students protesting discriminatory job quotas with a telecommunications blackout and a brutal police crackdown that killed hundreds of civilians. Rather than suppressing dissent, the violence spurred thousands to join the movement. Protesters in Dhaka soon marched on the office and residence of Sheikh Hasina, the then-76-year-old prime minister, who fled to India shortly thereafter.Around the same time, Kenyan President William Ruto’s proposed tax hikes sparked a country-wide wave of Gen Z protests. Tensions escalated after security forces killed dozens of protesters, injured hundreds, and arbitrarily detained many more. After demonstrators stormed the parliament and set part of the complex on fire, Ruto withdrew his tax increases and fired most of his cabinet. Protests erupted again in June of this year, underscoring the depth and persistence of public anger.Meanwhile, in Peru, protests over pension reforms exploded into broader demands to address rising economic insecurity and widespread corruption. Deadly crackdowns fuelled the unrest until President Dina Boluarte, who had already been under investigation over bribery allegations, was removed from office. Gen Z-led rallyIn country after country, Gen Z-led demonstrations quickly gained broad public support. Protesters used social media to share information, organise, and build networks, and when governments shut down these platforms, activists migrated to encrypted servers and even gaming communities. When authorities resorted to violence, the protesters responded by escalating rather than submitting.Far from being confined to a single generation or region, these youth movements reflect concerns shared by working people in rich and poor countries alike. Wages, job security, and purchasing power have been steadily eroded by a series of global shocks – the 2008 financial crisis, the Covid-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and intensifying migration pressures – making incumbent governments appear increasingly out of step.Yet Gen Z protesters are not seeking to tear down political systems. Instead, they are demanding governments that provide jobs, fight corruption, and invest in climate action. These are practical demands, and there are clear ways to meet them.Youth unemployment is a case in point. A decade ago, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain – the so-called PIIGS countries – were grappling with a severe sovereign-debt crisis. Since then, four of the five have dramatically reduced youth unemployment. In Portugal, joblessness among 15-24-year-olds fell from 34.7% in 2014 to 18.3% by October 2025, while Ireland’s rate declined from 24.2% in 2014 to 13.4% in October 2025. Greece cut youth unemployment from 52.8% in 2014 to 22.4% in 2024, and Spain lowered it from 53.2% to 26.5% over the same period.This success can be largely attributed to the European Union’s post-crisis Youth Guarantee program, through which governments commit to offering young people a quality job, apprenticeship, training opportunities, or continued education within four months of leaving school or becoming unemployed. While the program did not solve every problem, it showed what sustained political will and targeted policies can achieve. Battling corruptionAs the recent experiences of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, and Ukraine show, fighting corruption can be much harder. Still, meaningful progress is possible, though it requires professional, adequately paid civil servants, robust monitoring and audit systems, and real political accountability. E-governance can also help: Rwanda’s digitised public procurement system reduced opportunities for corruption, while Georgia’s move to a fully electronic tender system produced measurable improvements, at least in its early years.Transparency is essential. When corruption is tolerated and normalised, it spreads; when it is exposed, reputational costs and social norms can discourage misconduct and reinforce accountability. This is why whistleblower protections and accessible anti-corruption databases matter, and why businesses must be part of the solution.Climate change also weighs heavily on younger generations. Governments have often undermined public support for climate action by placing disproportionate costs on those least able to pay, but the economics of sustainability are shifting rapidly. The cost of electricity from utility-scale solar photovoltaics fell by 85% between 2010 and 2020 and continues to decline, while battery storage costs have dropped by more than 90% over the same period.To be sure, scaling these systems still requires significant investment, including grid upgrades and reliable storage. But renewables also reduce exposure to fossil-fuel price shocks, sanctions, and trade disruptions that drive up household outlays. That said, for young people struggling with high living costs and narrowing opportunities, the clean-energy transition is about more than cheaper electricity. It is about governments offering them a future that is not defined by permanent insecurity. - Project SyndicateNgaire Woods is Dean of the Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford. 

Retail inflows into US stocks are set to hit a record in 2025, as individual investors become a major force behind ‌a rally that is likely to extend into the next year on hopes of interest rate cuts, analysts ‌said. The amount of cash retail investors poured ‍into US stocks so far in 2025 is up 53% from $197bn a year earlier and 14% higher than the $270bn hit at the height of the retail trading frenzy in 2021, according to JP Morgan analysts.Retail trading, meanwhile, accounted for 20-25% of total activity this year, touching a record high of about 35% in April, according to separate ‍trading data from JP Morgan. Individual investors snapped up high-quality stocks at discounts during selloffs, most notably after US President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffstriggered a global meltdown in April , helping push the S&P 500 to fresh records. The benchmark index is up about 16% this year.“Retail investors are here to stay, especially for 2026. They made money this year, they like to trade stocks, they have the applications to do so. We will continue to see them being a good presence,” said Steven DeSanctis, small- and mid-cap strategist at Jefferies.Retail participation in the stock market has grown steadily over the years as the rise of low-cost, ‌no-commission brokerages such as Robinhood and Interactive Brokers has made it easier and cheaper for average Americans to access the market. The trend got wider notice in 2021 as many Americans who were homebound during the Covid-19 pandemic and were flush with cash used mobile trading platforms to bet ‍on everything from GameStop to Big Tech.AI plays such as Nvidia and Palantir ‌Technologies were top favourites this year, according to retail brokerage data and executives, with the latter more than doubling in value as small-time traders bought the dip when institutional investors stepped back on valuation concerns.Tesla shares, another top retail favourite, touched a record high on December 17, their first since the end of 2024. “The two most active stocks on our platform are typically Nvidia and Tesla. Those are just two examples of individual investors seizing the narrative and in many cases forcing institutional investors to play along,” said Steve Sosnick, chief strategist at Interactive Brokers. Quantum computing firms, uranium miners, metal miners and rare earth companies also saw substantial retail interest, as investors became more “thematic” in their approach.A key feature of retail trading in 2025 was the increasing preference for exchange-traded funds (ETFs) tracking equity indexes, cryptocurrencies and commodities, according to executives at major trading platforms. “16 continue to be attracted to the ETF technology. It trades throughout the day - it’s ​tax efficient, it’s transparent,” said Bryon Lake, global co-head ‌of Third-Party Wealth at Goldman Sachs Asset Management.Direxion’s Daily Semiconductor 3X Bull and 3X Bear ranked among the top five ETFs by dollar volume on eToro, said Bret Kenwell, US investment analyst with the trading platform.Potential rate cuts by the Fed are expected to continue to boost markets next year, keeping up the retail momentum in 2026, according to analysts and brokerages.Elevated stock market volatility may trigger dips that could also pull in individuals willing to wager on a bounce back, ​although recent evidence points to less enthusiasm about such opportunities than they have been in the past.Reuters last week reported that Nasdaq is planning to submit paperwork with the US Securities and Exchange Commission to roll out round-the-clock stock trading, a move analysts believe can further accelerate retail momentum. “We’re in a kind of golden age of retail investing with better access to knowledge, to the markets themselves and advanced trading platforms,” said David Russell, global head of market strategy at TradeStation.Still, with doubts continuing to linger around the AI names that have dominated the market this year, analysts said they did not expect the coming year to top 2025’s record as investors may consider broadening their portfolios. Financials, communications, discretionary, energy, miners and gold mining ETFs could do well, eToro’s Kenwell said. “But ultimately, retail loves tech so that is an area they will continue to come back to in 2026, particularly if we do see any sort of volatility.”  

Few would deny that there has been a shift away from multilateral co-operation in recent years. As the world becomes more multipolar, geopolitical tensions are hampering efforts to devise common solutions to shared problems, and rising nationalism and fiscal crises within many traditional donor countries are threatening the institutions on which multilateralism depends.As a realist, I recognise that today’s world is more dangerous than the one we inhabited not so long ago. But I am also confident that possibilities for long-term global collaboration remain. I have seen firsthand that multilateral co-operation often delivers results that otherwise would not be attained. My confidence stems from my experience as the chair of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. As my five-year tenure draws to a close, I find myself reflecting on what has underpinned Gavi’s success over the past 25 years and what this experience can teach us about adapting multilateralism for a rapidly changing world.The first lesson may sound simple, but it is too often forgotten: Always be mission-driven. Gavi exists to save lives and protect health by expanding access to vaccines in lower-income countries. It is this clarity of purpose that has helped halve child mortality in 78 countries and protect every one of us against the threat of infectious diseases. Nor is there any secret to our success. We have done it by uniting a multitude of public and private stakeholders, many with divergent interests, behind a common purpose.Gavi has always been a coalition of the willing, bringing together national governments, United Nations agencies, philanthropies, vaccine manufacturers, innovators, development banks, research institutions, and civil society. With its diverse skill set, expertise, and political clout, it has protected over half the world’s children against preventable diseases in any given year, as well as providing the world with core competencies during crises like the Covid-19 pandemic, when we led the global vaccine response.In a more multipolar world, similar approaches will be needed to drive progress in other areas where the provision of public goods (conflict resolution, education, health security, equitable access to AI) is too important to be held hostage by adversarial politics and sectional interests.That leads me to the second key lesson: Be mission-driven, but country-led. Gavi was founded in the spirit of partnership, not paternalism. Promoting national self-reliance has always been at the heart of its mission. Countries pay more toward the cost of their vaccine programs as their national incomes rise, up to the point where they can fully sustain their own immunisation services. Some countries have even transitioned from recipients to donors.This responsiveness to country needs has made us relentlessly focused on innovation. In 2024, Gavi embraced the historic introduction of malaria vaccines because we recognised how unjust it was that so many countries, particularly in Africa, had to wait so long for such a breakthrough. The same year, Gavi also launched a financial innovation, the First Response Fund, to provide surge financing for the procurement of mpox vaccines, saving precious time that otherwise would have been lost raising additional funding.Today, Gavi is directing the same innovative zeal toward the future rollout of vaccines against tuberculosis, the world’s deadliest infectious disease. It is also advancing a new initiative, the African Vaccine Manufacturing Accelerator, with strong backing from the European Union and other donors, to support the African Union’s ambitions for regional high-value manufacturing. I predict we will see a far greater role for, and collaboration between, regional economic and political blocs as the key drivers of multilateralism in the years ahead.Every coalition needs strong governance and leadership. That is why Nelson Mandela was chosen as Gavi’s first chair. But ensuring that the interests of every stakeholder remain aligned is no simple task, and this insight was not lost on me when I was approached for the role in 2020. I was honoured, and I could not help noticing that the Gavi board had 28 seats, the same number of member states whose interests I sought to align when I was president of the European Commission.Throughout my tenure at Gavi, I have been guided by the enduring wisdom of Jean Monnet, a leading postwar advocate of European unity: “Nothing is possible without people, but nothing lasts without institutions.” Gavi is truly a unique institution. Not only is it a broad, inclusive alliance of national and international, as well as public and private, entities; it is also an international organisation that has managed to avoid paralysis and inertia, unlike some major intergovernmental bodies. It has done so by maintaining a laser focus on protecting children – even in war zones where the only respite from fighting came from the need to vaccinate populations.Countries will always have reasons to disagree, but if anything can elevate the cause of peace above extreme national interest or ideology, it is the protection of children. Throughout my life, I have been at the heart of many seismic changes, from the Carnation Revolution in my native Portugal in the 1970s to the effort to advance peace, reconciliation, and democracy in Europe (for which I had the great honour of receiving the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the EU). In each case, historic changes needed a catalyst, which is exactly the role that Gavi has played in promoting public health.As we enter a more multipolar world, I would urge everyone to recognise the need for more mission-driven public-private partnerships like Gavi. There simply is no better way to address the challenges of our age. — Project Syndicate • Jose Manuel Barroso, a former president of the European Commission and former prime minister of Portugal, is Chair of the Board of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. 

Egypt began a public live restoration of King Khufu’s ancient solar boat at the newly-opened Grand Egyptian Museum Tuesday, more than 4,000 years after the vessel was first built. Egyptian conservators used a small crane to carefully lift a fragile, decayed plank into the Solar Boats Museum hall — the first of 1,650 wooden pieces that make up the ceremonial boat of the Old Kingdom pharaoh. The 4,600-year-old boat was built during the reign of King Khufu, the pharaoh who also commissioned the Great Pyramid of Giza. The vessel was discovered in 1954 in a sealed pit near the pyramids, but its excavation did not begin until 2011 due to the fragile condition of the wood. “You are witnessing today one of the most important restoration projects in the 21st century,” Egyptian Tourism Minister Sherif Fathy told reporters. “It is important for the museum, and it is important for humanity and the history and the heritage.” The restoration will take place in full view of visitors to the Grand Egyptian Museum over the coming four years. The project is funded by a $3.5mn grant from the Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA), with Japanese archaeologists working alongside Egyptian specialists.Eissa Zidan, head of conservation projects at the museum, said the wooden planks were “thermally degraded and in a very weak condition”. “For this reason, archaeological missions had long avoided working on this project,” he told AFP. Egyptian and Japanese archeologists have been treating the boat’s planks and oars using organic materials, including nano-cellulose and Klucel E, that Zidan said met international restoration standards. The museum also houses a second solar boat from the same era, discovered in significantly better archaeological condition and previously exhibited next to the pyramids of Giza. Visitors have been flocking to the Grand Egyptian Museum since it opened in early November. Fathy said the museum receives an average of 15,000 daily visitors, and on some days even draws as many as 27,000 people. The government hopes the museum will help revive the tourism sector, which accounts for around 9% of Egypt’s gross domestic product and employs nearly 2mn people. After years of struggle due to political instability and the Covid-19 pandemic, Egypt hopes to increase tourist numbers by about 7% in 2026, from 19mn visitors this year, according to Fathy. 

In a year of restrained economic optimism in Europe, investors flocked to a no-frills airline known for its cost control and focus.Ryanair Holdings Plc’s stock climbed 55% this year, making it the best European performer in the Bloomberg World Airlines Index after Norwegian Air Shuttle AS. The Irish carrier has flown past peers due to its operational efficiency and earnings growth, underpinned by a €750mn ($881mn) share buyback.The sector index has jumped 22% this year, on track for its best performance since 2017. Europe’s long-haul specialists Air France-KLM, Deutsche Lufthansa AG and British Airways parent IAG SA all advanced, while the continent’s other leading budget carriers, such as EasyJet Plc, Wizz Air Holdings Plc and Jet2 Plc, declined.Even with Ryanair’s shares trading near record highs, analysts remain optimistic, with 17 buy ratings on the stock, compared with just five holds and a single sell recommendation.“It’s got a singular focus and execution of its business model with a long established management team, and driven by having the lowest cost base, and possibly the strongest balance sheet as well,” said Stephen Furlong, an analyst at Davy.Weak comparisons with the previous year helped boost its stock performance. Delayed aircraft deliveries from Boeing Co strained capacity growth throughout 2024 while a battle with third-party online travel agencies forced the carrier to cut prices, hitting revenues during the busy summer season.As for 2025, a revival in travel demand led Ryanair to more than double its net income in the first quarter. The airline has since lifted its passenger growth for the year ending in March off the back of early Boeing deliveries.Ryanair has been able to allocate aircraft to favourable markets when needed, both as a protest to environmental taxes and fees and as a way to maximise efficiency.Technical factors, including a change to ownership and control rules, were also constructive. In March, the company allowed non-EU nationals to own shares. Investors who had previously been holding American depositary receipts were incentivised to buy the ordinary share, boosting liquidity and more efficient buying, according to Barclays Plc analyst Andrew Lobbenberg.These tailwinds came as EasyJet struggled to keep costs down, Jet2 warned of uncertain consumer demand and Wizz Air grappled with Pratt & Whitney engine maintenance issues that led to the company ceasing its Abu Dhabi operations. On the other hand, Norwegian Air recovered from Covid-era restructuring with strong profits and issued its first ever dividend, boosting its shares.Ryanair’s biggest challenges include rising unit costs and the threat of increased levies on flying in Europe versus other forms of transport, such as rail, which could dampen demand from the airline’s cost-conscious customers.On the upside, Ryanair is expected to receive delivery of the remaining six Max 8 aircraft it ordered before summer, allowing the airline to grow its network ahead of the peak travel period.“We have a much better unit cost discipline and I think our fares will trend up,” Ryanair Chief Executive Officer Michael O’Leary said on November 3. He warned that European peers including EasyJet, Lufthansa and Air France-KLM “have no future unless they constrain capacity and get airfares up for the next year or two.”