Representatives from the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Rwandan-backed M23 rebel group have signed a peace agreement deal in Qatar to end years of fighting. The agreed framework aims to re-establish calm in the DRC.
Published On 16 Nov 202516 Nov 2025
Share
The agreement is not expected to immediately change things on the ground, but to move forward a larger peace process.
Published On 15 Nov 202515 Nov 2025
Share
Representatives from the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Rwandan-backed M23 rebel group have signed a peace deal in Qatar with the ultimate goal of putting an end to years of fighting.
Qatar and the United States announced the “comprehensive” deal in Doha on Saturday, setting it up as a roadmap to stop the deadly fighting and improve the dire humanitarian situation in the Central African nation.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The two sides have been holding mediated talks for months, and signed a truce deal in July that must still be subjected to more negotiations over exactly how it will be implemented.
Addressing a press conference in Doha on Saturday, Qatar’s Minister of State Mohammed bin Abdulaziz Al-Khulaifi said the latest agreement enhances the process in order to “find peaceful solutions through dialogue and understanding” to re-establish calm in the DRC.
He said the different sides achieved progress on several substantial topics in order to build on previous agreements discussed and signed over the past several months.
The agreement includes eight implementation protocols, two of which have already been signed, including one on ceasefire monitoring and another on prisoner exchange.
The rest of the protocols are expected to be discussed and finalised over the coming weeks. They will include a timeline as well as details on how different processes will work, how humanitarian aid will be allowed to reach the ailing population, and how to enable the return of refugees and internally displaced people.
Restoring state authority, implementing economic reforms, reintegration of armed groups into the government and the elimination of foreign groups are among other protocols that will need to be finalised.
Both sides have agreed to establish an independent committee to implement the peace process, and also to provide recommendations for recompensation within the framework of national reconciliation, which will be in line with the constitution of the republic, Qatar’s Al-Khulaifi said.
Massad Boulos, a senior advisor and envoy for US President Donald Trump who represented Washington in the talks, thanked the state of Qatar and other stakeholders who assisted the process, including the African Union and the state of Togo.
He told the conference in Doha that the agreement comes amid joint efforts with Qatar that have also yielded results in other areas, including the ceasefire deal reached between Israel and Hamas.
“Today is a historic occasion in many ways,” he said, referring to the framework deal on DRC as a “launching pad” for an eventual peace deal that will be built based on previous and ongoing negotiations.
“People were expecting some immediate results on the ground, but this is a process, this is not a light switch that you can turn on and off, and there are many angles to it,” Boulos said.
Reporting from Goma, Al Jazeera’s Alain Uakyani said the peace agreement has inspired hope among the population in the DRC, but not for any immediate and tangible changes on the ground.
He pointed out that the M23 said its forces were bombarded by the government on Saturday morning, but managed to take more ground from DRC soldiers.
HumAngle’s CEO/Editor-in-Chief, Ahmad Salkida, has been announced as a 2026 Yale Peace Fellow. One of 14 leaders selected from thousands of applications, Ahmad will be undergoing extensive training across Yale University in the United States, the UAE, and virtual long-term sessions with his cohort and faculty.
The Yale Peace Fellowship is a yearly programme hosted by the International Leadership Centre (ILC) at the prestigious Yale University. According to its website, the fellowship “brings together 16 rising leaders each year who are working on the frontlines of conflict prevention, peacebuilding, and post-conflict reconciliation. Fellows come from a range of professional backgrounds—including civil society, diplomacy, politics, religion, and social enterprise—and are selected for their demonstrated impact and commitment to reach their full potential as peace leaders.”
Ahmad has worked in the peace and conflict field in Nigeria for decades, and is most known for his role in documenting the Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria since it first broke out. It was he who dispatched the first newspaper article on Muhammad Yusuf, the founder of Boko Haram, on July 23 2006. He was often the first and sometimes only journalist to break major news regarding the war in its early days, sounding the alarm on various emerging threats. He was eventually exiled in March 2013 as a result of his journalism. A few years later, despite having tried to work closely with the government in addressing threats like the Chibok abduction, he was declared wanted by the Nigerian army and forced to return to the country with his family. Though it quickly became clear that there was no evidence of wrongdoing by him, leading the army to clear him of the allegations after he turned himself in, significant damage had already been done to his life and career, as he has documented.
In 2020, he founded the conflict reporting platform, HumAngle Media, and three years later, the peacebuilding advocacy arm, HumAngle Foundation. During the past five years, both organisations have worked to advance transitional justice in Nigeria, conducting in-depth investigations, reporting, and advocacy on conflict, humanitarian, and development issues. He has led HumAngle to global recognition, including the Michael Elliot Award, the Sigma awards, the West Africa Media Excellence Award (twice), the CJID awards, the Livingston awards, and many others.
Ahmad is joined by 13 other leaders from all over the world working to advance peace in their individual countries. Commenting on his selection, he said he was pleased to have been selected for the highly competitive opportunity and looked forward to taking some time away to interact with the world-class experts that Yale University is known for when it comes to global affairs and conflict studies.
“Being selected for this fellowship validates the work I am doing with HumAngle, and I look forward to gaining more insight to improve our processes after the fellowship,” he said. “Peace is achievable in our lifetime. And fellowships like this ensure that that belief is not only a feeling, but a destination that can be reached through small incremental steps.”
Ahmad Salkida, CEO and Editor-in-Chief of HumAngle, has been selected as a 2026 Yale Peace Fellow. This prestigious fellowship program, orchestrated by Yale University’s International Leadership Centre, brings together 16 emerging leaders annually, focusing on conflict prevention, peacebuilding, and reconciliation.
Salkida’s selection reflects his significant contributions to peace and conflict work, notably his coverage of the Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria.
Salkida founded HumAngle Media and its advocacy arm, HumAngle Foundation, to promote transitional justice and provide insights into conflict-related issues in Nigeria. His leadership has garnered widespread recognition, including numerous journalism awards.
Salkida noted that the fellowship validates HumAngle’s efforts and expressed enthusiasm for leveraging the opportunity to enhance their peacebuilding initiatives.
These days, when politicians toss around the word “peace” like it’s going out of style, its real meaning has gotten pretty murky. Sometimes, peace isn’t about freeing people—it’s more like slapping a new kind of control on societies that are already hurting. Take the latest U.S. draft resolution to send an international stabilization force into Gaza, which they pitched to the UN Security Council. It sounds all nice with talk of stability, rebuilding, and keeping civilians safe, but if you dig a little deeper, you see the sneaky play of power and the drive to stay in charge. After all these years of fighting, blockades, and total destruction, the same folks who helped cause the mess are now stepping up like they’re the heroes here to fix it and watch over the peace. So, the big question pops up: Can a peace that’s forced by those in power really count as peace, or is it just a fancy label for keeping things the way they’ve always been—a calm on the outside, but underneath, it’s all about hanging onto inequality and the rules of who dominates whom?
The U.S. draft seems like it’s trying to fill the security hole after a ceasefire and deal with the broken-down government setups in Gaza. But right from the start, in its opening parts, it’s obvious that the whole thing leans more on outside management of the crisis than on actual justice or letting Palestinians decide their own fate. Suggesting a two-year “International Stabilization Force” basically sets up something that feels a lot like an occupation, where the key choices get yanked away from the people on the ground. This kind of top-down approach, what experts in international relations call “peace from above,” has bombed time and again because it doesn’t build up the local ability to bounce back—instead, it locks in a reliance on foreign powers for politics and security.
Another big problem is how this force is set up to be more about taking charge than just keeping an eye on things. Regular UN peacekeeping gigs are all about staying neutral and observing, but this U.S. version gives the green light to use force to “get the job done.” That change in wording—from peacekeeping to straight-up enforcement—shows how Washington wants to bend international groups to fit its own foreign policy goals. When a force like that can throw its weight around with coercion, it stops being about mediating and starts turning into
actual governing, making peace more about who has the muscle than about talking things out.
The third sticking point is around political legitimacy and who gets to represent folks. Sure, the draft throws in mentions of a “transitional authority” or “peace council” to run Gaza for a bit, but it doesn’t lay out any real democratic way to pick who’s on it. In reality, this group would just be the paperwork side for the international troops, and at most, it’d represent Palestinians in name only. Looking at it through the lens of international law, this setup is dicey because it could stomp all over the idea of people ruling themselves, swapping it out for some kind of condescending oversight—kind of like what happened with those international setups in Kosovo and Bosnia after their wars.
On the economic side, the rebuilding plan tucked into this thing doesn’t have much of a focus on fairness. The resolution hammers home how urgent it is to rebuild, but the ways to hand out the money and resources stay firmly in the grip of international committees that are tied financially and politically to Western governments. Instead of giving power back to Palestinian communities, this could just repeat the old “strings-attached aid” routine, where fixing things up becomes a way to pull political strings. In that setup, help with the economy isn’t really about growing or developing—it’s more like a tool for keeping society in line, turning the whole recovery process into something that controls people rather than mending what’s broken.
Politically speaking, sidelining the nearby countries is another major flaw. Arab nations, who are right there geographically and share a lot culturally with the Gaza situation, only get a nod as backup players. This built-in shutout creates a bigger divide between what’s actually happening on the ground and where the decisions are being made, which hurts both how legitimate the mission looks and how well it might work. We’ve seen from history that when international efforts don’t have buy-in from the region, they usually flop because they miss the local nuances and push cookie-cutter policies instead of real back-and-forth conversations.
From a humanitarian angle, the draft has drawn a ton of heat. Groups that watch out for human rights are sounding alarms that putting a force with wide military reach into such a shaky spot could ramp up the chances of abuses against regular people. The plan doesn’t spell out any solid way for independent checks or holding folks accountable if things go wrong. We’ve got examples from past UN operations in Africa and the Balkans showing that without those protections, you can end up with some serious ethical and human disasters. So, ironically, a plan that’s supposed to shield civilians might wind up putting them in more danger.
In terms of how it’s worded, the U.S. draft keeps pushing this old-school idea of “security as something good for the whole world,” where the big powers paint themselves as the keepers of order and peace. In this way of talking, peace isn’t born from fair deals—it’s the result of managing everything from the top and wiping out any say from the locals. The draft’s full of gentle phrases like “stability,” “reconstruction,” and “humanitarian aid,” but they hide a whole web of uneven relationships and power structures. Even though it’s smoothed out for diplomacy, the text is a classic case of what critical thinkers in international relations dub “interventionist neoliberalism”: keeping domination going while pretending it’s all about a stable global setup.
On a symbolic level, the draft says a lot too. By floating this plan, the United States is trying to come off as the fair broker for peace, despite everyone knowing its track record of backing the occupation and keeping inequalities alive in Palestinian areas. This split personality chips away at the plan’s credibility right from the heart. When the folks writing the resolution are also key players in the conflict, any talk of being neutral just doesn’t hold water. A peace that comes from that kind of mess isn’t built on trust—it’s hanging on a shaky power balance that’s way too fragile to last.
We shouldn’t just see the recent U.S. draft resolution on Gaza as some routine diplomatic paper. It points to a bigger pattern in world politics: using peace as a way to control things. On the face of it, it stresses security, rebuilding, and keeping things steady, but underneath, it’s based on this unequal split between the “bosses” and the “ones being bossed.” Rather than handing back control to the people in Gaza, it keeps them stuck in the loop of outsiders calling the shots and trades away their local say-so for the sake of some international system. From that angle, the peace they’re proposing isn’t stopping the violence—it’s just reshaping it.
The way the plan structures politics and security is more about enforcing rules and holding things in than about delivering justice or letting people stand on their own. No real ways to check accountability, wiping out Palestinian input, the heavy-handed military vibe in the writing, and leaning so much on institutions run by the West—all of that screams that this resolution isn’t fixing anything; it’s adding to the mess. Even if it dials down the fighting for a while, it could spawn a fresh kind of reliance that links Gaza’s comeback to giving in politically.
In our world right now, you can’t have lasting peace without justice at its core. When you ditch justice for meddling politics, peace turns into just a break before the next round of fighting. What Gaza really needs isn’t some bossy international force—it’s a real promise to respect their right to decide their own path. Any idea that skips over that basic truth, no matter how nicely it’s dressed up in caring words, is bound to keep the violence spinning. The U.S. draft, with its fake peaceful front, definitely walks right into that pitfall: a peace lurking in the shadow of power, not shining with justice.
The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)’s armed forces have accused the M23/AFC rebels of undermining recent peace efforts, warning that renewed clashes threaten to derail fragile negotiations underway in Doha, Qatar, claiming it has taken the necessary steps to respond to these provocations.
The M23 movement, largely composed of Congolese Tutsis, re-emerged in 2021 after years of inactivity, arguing they defend their communities against ethnic persecution. Kinshasa, however, accuses them of being backed by Rwanda — an allegation Kigali denies.
The Doha process, led by Qatar, focuses on securing a lasting ceasefire and prisoner exchanges between the Congolese government and the M23/AFC.
Sylvain Ekenge, the spokesperson for the DRC army, condemned serious violations of commitments made during the ongoing peace processes.
“Several positions of the armed forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo were the targets of this coalition of terrorists in South Kivu. It is notably positioned in Bulambula and Kibanda Mangobo on the Walungu-Shabunda highway, the bridge over the Mudugwe River on the Walungu-Mwenga highway, as well as Tuwetuwe, which was attacked by the Twirwaneho militia on the Fizi-Minembwe highway,” Ekenge declared.
“In North Kivu, the attacks are concentrated in Kasopo and Kajinga within the Nyamaboko 1, Osso-Banyungu sector in Masisi territory, not forgetting the attempt to occupy Mount Irimwi towards Bunyatenge, in Lubero territory.”
Several media reports say that renewed clashes have displaced hundreds of civilians in Masisi and Walungu territories, with aid groups warning of worsening humanitarian conditions. More than seven million people have been displaced across eastern DRC due to persistent fighting, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
The army spokesperson stated that both the international community and American and Qatari negotiators have witnessed these events.
While expressing its commitment to the peace process, the armed forces emphasised that they are fully prepared to combat the rebels, who are clearly unwilling to adhere to the terms of the peace accords they voluntarily signed.
The Congolese army made these claims in a statement released during the fourth meeting of the mixed committee responsible for monitoring the Washington Accord. The committee acknowledged the slow pace of progress so far and urged the parties involved to intensify their efforts to effectively implement the peace accord.
The M23/AFC has not yet responded to the latest accusations. However, the group has previously denied violating ceasefire terms, blaming government forces for renewed clashes.
During the recent deal, the participants agreed on several short-term actions, particularly the neutralisation of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda and its allies, the acceleration of the disengagement of forces, and the gradual lifting of defensive measures by Rwanda. They reviewed the preparations for joint operations in a specified area of interest and agreed on an implementation plan.
They also acknowledged the efforts made by both parties to turn their commitments into concrete actions on the ground. The parties reiterated their commitment to refrain from any hostile actions or rhetoric, including in international forums, to maintain the peace dynamic established by the Washington Accord.
Qatar, acting as a mediator, provided an update on the status of negotiations currently underway in Doha between the DRC and the M23/AFC. The report showed significant progress in certain areas, particularly in the exchange of prisoners and the establishment of mechanisms to monitor the ceasefire, which was initially agreed upon on November 5, 2025.
The committee appreciated the progress made and reaffirmed its support for the Doha process, which is considered the essential pillar for implementing the Washington Accord and the progressive return of peace in the eastern DRC.
The Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) army accuses the M23/AFC rebels of disrupting peace efforts, with clashes endangering ongoing negotiations in Doha, Qatar.
The M23, composed mainly of Congolese Tutsis, claims to protect their community, but faces allegations of receiving Rwandan support, which Rwanda denies. The Doha-led talks aim for a ceasefire and prisoner exchanges.
DRC army spokesperson Sylvain Ekenge highlighted violations by rebels, with attacks in regions like South Kivu and Masisi, displacing civilians and worsening humanitarian conditions. Despite progress in negotiations, the rebels are seen as unwilling to honor agreements, with the DRC army prepared for conflicts. Recent talks resulted in agreements on actions like neutralizing the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda and disengaging forces, with efforts ongoing to maintain peace.
Qatar continues to mediate, indicating progress in prisoner exchanges and ceasefire monitoring, pivotal to the Doha process for peace in eastern DRC.
Thailand says ‘hostility … has not decreased’ and deal on hold until Cambodia meets unspecified demands.
Published On 10 Nov 202510 Nov 2025
Share
Thailand has suspended the implementation of a United States-brokered peace agreement with neighbouring Cambodia after a landmine blast near their border injured two of its soldiers.
Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul said after Monday’s incident that all action set to be carried out under the truce will be halted until Thailand’s demands, which remain unspecified, are met.
“The hostility towards our national security has not decreased as we thought it would,” Anutin asserted. He did not elaborate on what Thailand’s demands were.
There was no immediate response from the Cambodian government.
Thailand and Cambodia signed a ceasefire on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Malaysia last month after territorial disputes between the two Southeast Asian countries led to five days of border clashes in July.
Those hostilities killed at least 43 people and displaced more than 300,000 civilians living along the border.
The Thai army said in a statement that Monday’s mine explosion in Sisaket province injured two soldiers.
Thai Defence Minister Natthaphon Narkphanit said the army is still investigating whether the mine was newly laid.
Thailand has previously accused Cambodia of laying new mines in violation of the truce, a charge that the Cambodian government denies.
Similar landmine explosions have occurred both before and since the deal, and tension has simmered.
Under the terms of the ceasefire, Thailand should release 18 Cambodian soldiers, and both sides must begin removing heavy weapons and land mines from the border.
Natthaphon said Thailand will postpone the release of the Cambodian soldiers, initially scheduled for this week.
The two sides have reported some progress on arms removal, but Thailand has accused Cambodia of obstructing mine clearance.
Cambodia said it’s committed to all terms of the truce and urged Thailand to release its soldiers as soon as possible.
Thailand and Cambodia agreed to a truce mediated by Malaysia in July after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose tariffs.
The dispute is among eight conflicts that Trump has taken credit for resolving, although critics have noted that the peace deals he has helped to initiate often implant swift and simplistic ceasefires, leaving complex issues behind the conflicts unresolved and likely to reignite hostilities.
While the Thai-Cambodian truce has generally held since July 29, both countries have traded allegations of ceasefire breaches.
Analysts said a more comprehensive peace pact adjudicating the century-long territorial dispute at the core of the conflict is needed.
CIF SOCAL REGIONALS
(Matches at 6 p.m. unless noted)
TUESDAY’S SCHEDULE
First Round
DIVISION I
#16 Santa Barbara San Marcos at #1 Harvard-Westlake
#9 Long Beach Poly at #8 San Luis Obispo
#12 Bishop Montgomery at #5 La Jolla Country Day
#13 Redlands at #4 West Ranch
#14 San Diego San Marcos at #3 Santa Margarita
#11 JSerra at #6 Coronado
#10 Bakersfield Centennial at #7 Bishop’s
#15 Orange Lutheran at #2 Temecula Valley
DIVISION II
#16 Oak Park at #1 Liberty
#9 Arroyo Grande at #8 Flintridge Prep
#12 La Canada at #5 Christian
#13 Ventura at #4 Santa Ana Foothill
#14 Venice at #3 Cypress
#11 St. Margaret’s at #6 Scripps Ranch
#10 Palisades at #7 Carlsbad
#15 Dana Hills at #2 Westview
DIVISION III
#16 Arrowhead Christian at #1 Academy of Our Lady of Peace
#9 Garces Memorial at #9 Royal
#12 Cleveland at #5 Patrick Henry
#13 El Camino Real at #4 Santa Fe Christian
#14 Taft at #3 Mission Vista
#11 Santa Barbara at #6 Ontario Christian
#10 Eagle Rock at #7 Chadwick
#15 Wiseburn Da Vinci at #2 Frontier
DIVISION IV
#1 Nipomo, bye
#8 Grant at #9 Oceanside El Camino
#12 Capistrano Valley Christian at #5 Chatsworth
#13 West Valley at #4 Olympian
#14 Cate at #3 Granada Hills
#11 Garden Grove Pacifica at #5 LA University
#10 Rock Academy at #7 Granada Hills Kennedy
#15 California Academy of Math & Science at #2 Mammoth
DIVISION V
#1 East Valley, bye
#9 Loma Linda Academy at #8 Panorama
#12 South East at #5 Artesia
#13 Legacy at #4 Elsinore
#14 Moreno Valley at #3 O’Farrell Charter
#11 Nogales at #6 Schurr
#10 South El Monte at #7 Foothill Tech
#15 Anaheim at #2 Morro Bay
WEDNESDAY’S SCHEDULE
First Round
OPEN DIVISION
#8 Mira Costa at #1 Sierra Canyon
#5 Marymount at #4 San Diego Cathedral
#6 San Juan Hills at #3 Torrey Pines
#7 Redondo Union at #2 Mater Dei
Note: Quarterfinals (Divisions I-V) Nov. 13 at higher seeds; Semifinals (all divisions) Nov. 15 at higher seeds; Finals (all divisions) Nov. 18 at higher seeds.
Obviously, the devasting Pol Pot regime plunged Cambodia into genocide, armed conflict, destruction and isolation during the dark period between 1970s to 1990s. This tragic history left Cambodia in social, economic and political ruins. As a war-torn country, despite these historical scars of the catastrophic decades, the government has implemented various policies and initiatives to reach national reconciliation and unity as well as to build peace and political stability, leading to economic growth and enhancement of living standards for its people. Prior to the pandemic, from 1998 to 2019, Cambodia’s economic growth remarkably flourished leading to the attainment of lower middle-income status in 2015, with the impressive average annual increase rate of 7.7 percent, making Cambodia one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.
Having seen the immense importance of regional integration and cooperation as the pivotal catalysts for national security, peace and sustainable development, Cambodia has actively engaged in the regional and international organizations such as the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), the United Nations (UN) and other not mentioned international organizations and blocs. Noticeably, Cambodian foreign policy puts strong emphasis on the crucial role of ASEAN. Phnom Penh recognizes the key role of this regional bloc in safeguarding stability and peace in Southeast Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region. Since its accession to ASEAN in 1999, Cambodia has assumed the role of ASEAN chair on three occasions—2002, 2012, and 2022, fostering regional cooperation, integration and solidarity for the sake of regional peace, stability and development.
Additionally, since its membership in 2004, Cambodia has played a vital role in ASEM through its active participation in various discussions and initiatives, promoting cooperation and understanding between Asia and Europe. Noticeably, in spite of the pandemic, Cambodia successfully hosted the virtual 13th Asia-Europe Meeting Summit in 2021, offering the platform for leaders from over 50 countries to have fruitful dialogues in order to explore ways and means to tackle regional and global issues for collective interest.
More importantly, one of the main aspirations of Cambodia’s foreign policy is to establish international peace on the basis of the principles of equality and rights for all people. In this sense, since 2006, notwithstanding the limited resources, Cambodia has emerged as an active participant in peacekeeping missions under the UN’s umbrella by transforming itself from being a host country of UNTAC (United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia) to a country that has contributed blue berets to 12 missions involving nine countries. These missions have involved 9,205 personnel, including 726 female peacekeepers. In fact, sending Cambodian peacekeeping forces to join the peace-keeping endeavors under the UN framework is also one of the priorities stipulated in Cambodia’s defence white paper 2022 for strengthening Cambodian armed forces’ capacities in the areas of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
Furthermore, to promote the gender equality and women empowerment, Cambodia has acknowledged the women’s ability of performing tasks as capable as men. This acknowledgement has been concretely evidenced by their constant accomplishments. In this regard, Cambodia has enlarged the number of its female troops dispatched to all levels of UN peacekeeping operations. Consequently, for its participation in UN peacekeeping operations, the UN rated Cambodia third in ASEAN (after Indonesia and Malaysia) and 28th out of 122 countries in the globe. In terms of deploying female peacekeepers overseas, Cambodia was placed 13th in the world and second among ASEAN nations, behind Indonesia. This gender equality promotion is also in line with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
More essentially, Cambodia’s essential role in the UN peace keeping mission was also highly praised by the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres during his discussion with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet on the sidelines of the 78th UN General Assembly (UNGA). Additionally, while receiving the courtesy visit from the UN representative in Cambodia last year, Cambodian Foreign Minister Sok Chenda Sophea ensured the Cambodia’s resolute commitment to its continued support to the UN peacekeeping missions by stressing the country’s firm dedication to global peace and security. The top diplomat also revealed the Kingdom’s ambitious plan to expand its peacekeeping operations to other UN frameworks.
Noticeably, the world’s political and socio-economic landscapes is uncertain and unpredictable due to its rapid evolution. On top of this, the ongoing Russian-Ukraine war, the escalated crisis in the Middle-East, geopolitical rivalry among the superpowers just to name a few has considerably affected the regional and global cooperation, security, and stability. Bitterly experienced falling victim of the geopolitical competition during the Cold War, Cambodia intends to maintain its current course of “independent and neutral foreign policy, grounded in the rule of law, equal mutual respect and adherence to the principles of the UN Charter” in order to further foster its domestic interests, nourish current friendships, and build more harmonious relationships.
Like other small states, Cambodia places utmost significance on peace and security for its survival. Hence, Cambodia vehemently opposed an aggression against other sovereign states, meddling in their domestic affairs, and the threat or use of force in international relations. Through bilateral, regional, and international frameworks, Cambodia will proactively pursue the possibility of strengthening and broadening close cooperation with other countries in order to support global peace, security, stability, sustainable development, and prosperity that can be shared and cherished by all.
As such, Cambodia is firmly dedicated to promoting peacekeeping operations and partaking in this righteous endeavor. Undoubtedly, as one of the regional outstanding contributors to the UN peacekeeping missions, Cambodia has chosen to run for membership in the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission for the years 2025–2026 aimed at further contributing to this noble humanitarian task, eventually benefiting the humanity as a whole.
Obviously, this membership will enable Cambodia to play more roles and responsibilities in advocating the global peace, security, and stability, all of which are the essential prerequisites for sustainable development. Most significantly, being part of this body will also provide Cambodia with a platform to share its experiences, best practices and lessons learned in the process of peacebuilding, national reconciliation, and socio-economic development to other warring nations which are eager to taste the blissful flavors of peace and development like the rest of the world.
The secretary-general of the United Nations has described the latest wave of atrocities reportedly committed by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces in Sudan’s city of el-Fasher as “a nightmare of violence and a horrifying crisis”.
Thousands of people are believed to have been killed, and many more displaced, after the paramilitary group took over the army headquarters and other key installations in el-Fasher last month.
list of 3 itemsend of list
The United States says that Sudan’s warring sides have agreed, in principle, to work towards a three-month humanitarian truce.
But with violence spreading to other areas beyond North Darfur, can Washington’s plan succeed?
Presenter:
Adrian Finighan
Guests:
Amgad Fareid – executive director, Fikra for Studies and Development
Mathilde Vu – advocacy manager for Sudan, Norwegian Refugee Council
Susan Page – former assistant of the US special envoy for Sudan
Published On 4 Nov 20254 Nov 2025
Share
Catatumbo, Colombia – The Catatumbo region, which stretches along the border with Venezuela in the department of Norte de Santander, is Colombia’s most volatile frontier.
Endowed with oil reserves and coca crops but impoverished and neglected, this border area has historically been a site of violent competition between armed groups fighting for territorial control.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The National Liberation Army (ELN), Colombia’s largest remaining guerrilla force, maintains a strong and organised presence, operating across the porous border with Venezuela.
It is there that some of their fighters pick up an Al Jazeera reporting team and drive us to meet their commanders.
Tensions remain high in this region. In January, thousands of people were displaced because of the fighting between the ELN and a dissident faction from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) that continues to operate in some parts of the country in spite of peace agreements brokered in 2016.
The fight is over control of the territory and access to the border with Venezuela, which is a crucial way to move drugs out of the country.
Entering the area, it’s immediately apparent that the ELN is in total control here. There is no evidence of the country’s military. ELN flags decorate the sideroads, and the signs give a clear message of the way the group’s members see Colombia right now.
“Total peace is a failure,” they say.
There is also no mobile phone signal. People tell the Al Jazeera team that telephone companies do not want to pay a tax to the armed groups controlling the territory.
When President Gustavo Petro took office, he promised to implement a total peace plan with Colombia’s armed groups. But the negotiations have not been easy, especially with the ELN.
Government offcials suspended the peace talks because of the fighting in Catatumbo, but now say they are ready to reinitiate talks.
Al Jazeera meets with Commander Ricardo and Commander Silvana in a small house in the middle of the mountains. The interview has to be fast, they say, as they are concerned about a potential attack and reconnaissance drones that have been circulating in the area.
The commanders are accompanied by some of their fighters. Asked how many they have in the area, they respond, “We are thousands, and not everyone is wearing their uniforms. Some are urban guerrillas.”
The government estimates the ELN has around 3,000 fighters. But the figure could be much higher.
Commander Ricardo, who is in charge of the region, says he believes there could be a chance for peace.
“The ELN has been battling for a political solution for 30 years with various difficulties,” he says. “We believed that with Petro, we would advance in the process. But that did not happen. There’s never been peace in Colombia. What we have is the peace of the graves.”
The group and the government had been meeting in Mexico prior to the suspension of the talks. “If the accords we had in Mexico are still there, I believe our central command would agree [it] could open up the way for a political solution to this conflict”, Commander Ricardo tells Al Jazeera.
But it’s not just the fight with the Colombian state that has armed groups here on alert. The United States military campaign against alleged drug vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific – and the US’s aggressive posture towards the government of neighbouring Venezuela – have brought an international dimension to what was once an internal Colombian conflict.
The administration of US President Donald Trump refers to these people not as guerrillas but “narco-terrorists”, and has not ruled out the possibility of attacking them on Colombian soil.
The US operation, which began in early September, has killed more than 62 people, including nationals from Venezuela and Colombia, and destroyed 14 boats and a semi-submersible.
Some of the commanders have an extradition request from the US, and the government says they are wanted criminals.
The US strikes against boats allegedly carrying drugs in the Caribbean and the military build-up in the region to ramp up pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro are seen by the ELN as another act of US imperialism.
The US government claims one of those boats belonged to the ELN. “Why don’t they capture them and show the world what they captured and what they are they trafficking?” Commander Ricardo asks. “But no, they erase them with a bomb.”
He also warns about the possibility of the ELN joining in the fight against the US. “In the hypothesis that Trump attacks Venezuela, we will have to see how we respond, but it’s not just us,” he says. “[It’s] all of Latin America because I am sure there are going to be many, many people who will grab a weapon and fight because it’s too much. The fact that the United States can step over people without respecting their self-determination has to end.”
The ELN was inspired by the Cuban revolution. But over the years, it has been involved in kidnappings, killings, extortion, and drug trafficking.
Commander Silvana, who joined the group when she was a teen, says the ELN is not like other armed groups in the country.
“Our principles indicate that we are not involved in drug trafficking,” she says. “We have told this to the international community. What we have is taxes in the territories we have been controlling for over 60 years. And if there is coca, of course, we tax it, too.”
Colombia has been a crucial US ally in the region over the decades in the fight against drug trafficking. But Petro has increasingly questioned the US policy in the Caribbean, arguing that Washington’s approach to security and migration reflects out-of-date Cold War logic rather than the region’s current realities.
He has criticised the US military presence and naval operations near Venezuela, warning that such tactics risk increasing tensions instead of promoting cooperation.
Trump has accused Petro, who is a former guerrilla, of being a drug trafficker himself.
Petro responded angrily, writing on X, “Colombia has never been rude to the United States. To the contrary, it has loved its culture very much. But you are rude and ignorant about Colombia.”
Colombia’s Foreign Ministry also condemned Trump’s remarks as offensive and a direct threat to the country’s sovereignty, and vowed to seek international support in defence of Petro and Colombian autonomy.
The belligerent US approach to Venezuela and Colombia, both led by leftist presidents – and the heightened possibility of a US military intervention – risk turning a local Colombia conflict into a broader regional one.
Everyone on the ground is now assessing how they will respond if the US government gives its military the green light to attack Venezuela.