Meeting in Bangkok, the bishops said only “sincere, responsible, and sustained dialogue” can open a path to lasting peace.

In a separate statement, the Asia-Pacific chapter of the International Catholic Movement for Intellectual and Cultural Affairs ( ICMICA ) condemned actions that “escalate violence, inflame regional tensions, and endanger global peace,” and warned against the normalization of “preventive strikes” and unilateral military action.

Together, the statements mark one of the most coordinated regional faith-based responses in Asia since the latest surge in Middle East hostilities.

The FABC — whose leadership includes Cardinal Filipe Neri Ferrao, Cardinal Pablo Virgilio David and Cardinal Isao Kikuchi — stressed that war disproportionately harms the poor, displaced communities, children and future generations. 

The bishops urged governments to restore diplomacy as the primary instrument of conflict resolution and called on religious leaders to demonstrate interfaith solidarity in defense of human life.

The ICMICA coalition, composed of Catholic professional and theological groups from South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, India, Sri Lanka and Australia, took a more pointed stance on geopolitics. 

While acknowledging the “complexity of security concerns faced by all parties,” the network argued that durable security cannot be achieved through military escalation but must rest on negotiated solutions consistent with international law and the United Nations Charter.

The coalition also expressed solidarity with civilians across Iran and the broader region, particularly vulnerable groups such as women, migrant workers and religious minorities. It said any political transformation in Iran must arise from “the agency and collective will of the people themselves — not from external military intervention.”

Both groups grounded their appeals in Asia’s historical memory of war, colonialism and geopolitical rivalry.

 “War is a defeat for humanity,” the ICMICA statement said.

Thus far, the U.N.’s actions have largely centered on convening diplomacy and calling for de-escalation.

It convened an emergency meeting

The United Nations Security Council, the U.N.’s most powerful body responsible for maintaining international peace and security, held an emergency meeting after U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory attacks across the region.

The session, requested by Bahrain, France, Russia, China and Colombia , quickly exposed sharp divisions among major powers over the legality and justification of the strikes.

The United States and Israel defended the military action as necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

At the meeting, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said: “Everything must be done to prevent a further escalation in the Middle East. I call on all sides to strictly uphold their obligations under international law, including the United Nations Charter, protect civilians and ensure nuclear safety.”

U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz told the council that stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon was a matter of global security, adding that Washington’s actions were lawful.

Israel’s envoy, Danny Danon, similarly described the strikes as a preemptive move to neutralize what he called an existential threat.

Iran, however, strongly condemned the attacks.

Iranian Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani told the council that the airstrikes had killed and injured hundreds of civilians, calling them war crimes and urging the council to take action.

The meeting also saw other global powers weigh in. Russia demanded that the United States and Israel immediately halt their operations, while China expressed concern over the sudden escalation and called for renewed diplomatic negotiations.

It condemned the attacks

When hostilities broke out on February 28, Guterres was quick to condemn the escalation, warning that the exchange of attacks risks igniting a broader conflict in an already volatile region.

He said the use of force by the United States and Israel against Iran, as well as Iran’s retaliatory strikes across the region, undermines international peace and security.

“I call for an immediate cessation of hostilities and de-escalation,” Guterres said. “Failing to do so risks a wider regional conflict with grave consequences for civilians and regional stability.” 

He stressed that all countries must adhere to international law and the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

For now, the United Nations’ role remains focused on diplomacy and calls for restraint — even as the conflict threatens to move beyond words.

“For over 20 years, Brazil, India, Japan and Germany have defended the increase of the UN Security Council,” Lula said, referring to the G4 bloc. “The UN needs more representation.”

The G4 proposal calls for expanding the 15-member Council to 25 seats, adding six permanent and four non-permanent members to better reflect contemporary geopolitical realities.

Lula argued that expanding both permanent and non-permanent categories of membership is necessary for a more credible multilateral system, adding that Brazil and India should be part of any reconfigured Council. 

Framing the bilateral meeting as more than routine diplomacy, Lula described India and Brazil as the two largest democracies in the Global South and as emerging superpowers in their respective domains.

“This is a meeting of superlatives,” Lula said. “We are both mega diverse countries and hubs of the cultural industry and we both defend multilateralism and peace.”

He said closer coordination between New Delhi and Brasília would not only strengthen bilateral ties but also amplify the voice of developing nations in global forums, including the UN, the World Trade Organization and the G20.

Lula also emphasized a shared commitment to multilateralism, dialogue and peace, warning that sustainable development cannot be achieved in a conflict-ridden world.

By elevating their partnership and pressing for Security Council reform, Lula signaled efforts to consolidate India and Brazil’s roles as leading voices for a more assertive Global South.

"India and Brazil's partnership on the global stage has been strong and influential,” he said. “As democratic nations, we will continue to advance the priorities and aspirations of the Global South.” 

“When India and Brazil work together, the voice of the Global South becomes stronger and more confident,” he added. 

Delegates are expected to commit thousands of personnel to international stabilization and policing efforts in the territory, aimed at maintaining order as humanitarian aid flows in.

Still, the Board of Peace , an initiative led by Trump, faces scrutiny over whether it can rival established multilateral organizations such as the United Nations in credibility and influence.

Dozens of world leaders gathered in Washington for the discussions, which also aim to coordinate humanitarian relief and long-term rebuilding strategies.

WATCH IT LIVE HERE:

Who’s in so far:

Why it matters:

How it works:

The catch:

Who runs day-to-day decisions:

Russia factor:

Together, these crisis zones will shape migration flows, global security , trade routes, and diplomatic alignments well beyond their borders.

Sudan

Sudan remains the most severe humanitarian emergency globally. The civil war that erupted in April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces has devastated the country, displacing millions and pushing large populations toward famine. In the last year, the conflict showed little sign of resolution, with fighting increasingly fragmented and spilling into neighbouring states such as Chad, South Sudan, and Ethiopia. This year, the country could risk sliding further toward de facto partition, a scenario that would entrench instability across the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea corridor.

Yemen

In Yemen, the conflict is evolving rather than ending. While large-scale fighting has reduced in some areas, the country is increasingly divided between Houthi-controlled territories in the north and rival factions in the south backed by regional powers. This fragmentation weakens prospects for national reconciliation and carries global implications due to Yemen’s proximity to vital Red Sea shipping lanes. As maritime security concerns grow, Yemen’s instability in 2026 will remain tightly linked to regional geopolitics and global trade.

Myanmar

Myanmar enters 2026 locked in a protracted civil war following the 2021 military coup. Armed resistance groups now control significant territory, while the junta struggles to govern beyond major urban centres. Planned or proposed elections under these conditions risk deepening Myanmar’s legitimacy crisis rather than resolving it. The humanitarian toll continues to rise, with millions displaced and neighbouring countries such as Thailand, China, and Bangladesh absorbing the spillover effects.

DR Congo

In eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, violence persists despite diplomatic efforts to stabilise the region. Armed groups, including M23, continue to challenge state authority, exploiting ethnic tensions, especially in Goma and competition over mineral resources. Peace agreements reached last year still face serious implementation challenges , and failure to consolidate them in 2026 could destabilise the wider Great Lakes region, where conflict has long crossed borders and drawn in neighbouring states.

Nigeria

Nigeria’s crisis heading into 2026 is defined by overlapping insurgency, criminal violence, and worsening economic pressure, with jihadist groups such as Boko Haram and ISWAP continuing attacks across the northeast and northwest. In the Middle Belt and parts of the north, violence has increasingly targeted Christian communities, with deadly attacks in late 2025 killing dozens of civilians in Benue and Plateau states, particularly around the Christmas period.

The situation escalated internationally when the United States carried out airstrikes on December 24–25, 2025, hitting ISIS-linked camps in northwest Nigeria at the request of the Nigerian government. While the strikes disrupted militant operations, analysts warn that without addressing governance failures, poverty, and local grievances, Nigeria’s insecurity is likely to persist and deepen in 2026.

Taiwan vs. China

Beyond active war zones, strategic flashpoints are also reshaping risk in the Global South. Rising tensions between China and Taiwan, while centred in East Asia, carry global consequences that will be felt acutely across developing economies. Any escalation would disrupt trade , shipping routes, and semiconductor supply chains, forcing many Global South countries, deeply tied to both Chinese and Western economic systems, to navigate difficult diplomatic and economic choices.

These two countries join a host of others, like Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali and Gabon, among others.

Madagascar

After weeks of violent and deadly protests powered by Madagascan Gen Z over alleged corruption, the country's Army Personnel Administration Centre (CAPSAT) seized the sovereign power led by Colonel Michael Randrianirina . The Gen Z demonstrations grew beyond service issues into a broader rejection of the leadership of then-President Andry Rajoelina, who became the world's youngest head of state at 34 through a coup in 2009. The situation reached a tipping point when an elite military unit defected and joined the protesters, refusing orders to fire on civilians, effectively cutting Rajoelina off from core state security support.

This shift in military allegiance significantly undermined his ability to remain in power. Facing explicit threats to his life amid the rebellion and the loss of military backing, Rajoelina left Madagascar for a “safe location,” later confirmed to be outside the country, while claiming an attempted illegal power grab was underway. Colonel Michael Randrianirina has been in power since declaring a two-year transition exercise.

Guinea-Bissau

Army officers in Guinea-Bissau announced on Wednesday, November 26, that they had deposed President Umaro Sissoco Embaló , accusing him of mismanaging the political crisis and undermining democratic stability. The officers declared that the existing government had been dissolved and pledged to restore order and constitutional governance, though details about a transition timeline were not immediately clear. The announcement came amid heightened tensions following contested elections on the 23rd and reflected longstanding military influence over the country’s political landscape.

On the same day, sustained gunfire erupted near the national election commission headquarters amidst tensions over a tightly contested presidential election, with residents fleeing the area as shots were heard near multiple government buildings. The outbreak of gunfire occurred just as provisional results were expected. However, protesters took to the streets in Guinea-Bissau on Friday, December 12, to denounce the military coup and demand the restoration of democratic governance , highlighting deep public frustration with the political instability that has plagued the country.

Benin could have become the third country, but for the swift intervention of Nigeria and the country's loyalist forces that protected President Patrice Talon's sovereignty. Armed soldiers went on national television on December 7 to declare they had taken power in a coup , but by evening, the situation had calmed, and everywhere was clear.

Since August 2020, Africa has experienced ten coups.

And around much of the world, that framing feels oddly narrow. After all, this was a meeting between the leaders of the world’s sixth- and ninth-largest economies, two pivotal actors in the dramatic transformation of global power over the past two decades. Arguably, only China’s Xi Jinping has played a larger role in reshaping the geopolitical landscape.

Yes, Ukraine is a defining issue for Putin. But for Modi, it is not. India is likely the only major power in the global top ten that genuinely refuses to choose sides between the United States and China. That alone makes this summit significant.

The operative word is multipolar .

The oil story

Let’s begin with the topic Western news outlets tend to foreground: Russia's oil exports.

India, which is now the world’s third-largest oil consumer, once imported just 2% of its crude from Russia. Today that figure sits at roughly one-third. This shift is not primarily an act of solidarity with Moscow. It is the product of market logic: Russian oil has become deeply discounted as Western states attempt to restrict it.

With the world’s largest population and enormous developmental demands, Modi cannot ignore cheap energy. But there is also a political message: India rejects the idea that any other power can dictate who it trades with.

That stance has hardened in recent years. When U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a 25% tariff on certain Indian imports, the move was received in Delhi not as pressure but as a challenge and an opportunity to demonstrate strategic independence, even if the tariff did sting economically and has changed trade patterns.

India has long maintained a strong partnership with the United States, in large part because its principal rivals - Pakistan and China - traditionally aligned with one another. But that relationship is loosening for several reasons.

Four-dimensional chess

First, India no longer feels compelled to pick sides. It can share leadership with China in forums such as BRICS and the G20, institutions where member states have little appetite for lecturing one another on domestic politics or economic management.

Second, India has developed formidable domestic industries while cultivating global partnerships, including a durable relationship with Russia.

Third, the U.S.–India relationship has become strained by immigration tensions. Indians account for more than two-thirds of America’s H-1B visas for highly skilled workers. Recent U.S. proposals to raise visa processing fees dramatically—into the tens of thousands of dollars—have caused anxiety in India’s tech sector and frustration in Delhi.

The local spin

While Europe and the U.S. interpret the summit primarily through the lens of Ukraine, the leaders themselves clearly want to project a different message.

Putin’s travel options are severely limited by an International Criminal Court warrant, yet he remains a welcome guest in Beijing and Delhi. At his joint appearance with Modi, he emphasized Russia’s role in supporting the growth of its partners: not only with discounted oil but also through cooperation in nuclear energy, a sector crucial to sustaining India’s expanding and increasingly digital economy.

Modi, ever attuned to domestic priorities, focused on economic outcomes. For him, economic strength is both policy and political strategy—and it continues to deliver at the ballot box.

But the real significance of the meeting lies deeper.

Russia’s repositioning

Russia’s pivot toward Asia is no longer a temporary response to Western sanctions . It marks a structural shift.

For centuries, Russia oriented itself toward Europe because Europe oriented much of the world toward itself. Yet Europe is now preoccupied with internal technological, social, and environmental challenges. In the meantime, a fundamental change in global order has accelerated with too little recognition.

In 1990, the G7 accounted for nearly 70% of the world economy. Today, it is closer to 40%. The numbers are well known; the implications remain underappreciated.

When European policymakers reduce a Modi–Putin meeting to a referendum on Ukraine, what they are really saying is: “Our priorities still define the global agenda.”

But for much of the world, they no longer do.

What Multipolarity Really Means

Debates on multipolarity often revolve around a single question: When will China surpass the U.S.? Perhaps it already has by some measures; surely it soon will. But this is not a simple handover from one hegemon to another.

India, notably, is the only top-ten power that refuses to align fully with either Washington or Beijing. And many emerging powers - Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia-have no desire to replace American dominance with Chinese dominance.

They want a different system altogether.

Their priorities are clear:

Growth. Energy. Security.

These are the pillars that deliver domestic prosperity and secure a meaningful place on the global stage.

Beyond the handshakes

Here are three takeaways that frame the meeting in a global—not Euro-Atlantic—context:

A multipolar world is messier. It is less predictable. It is more transactional.

But it is also more representative of how the world truly operates in the 21st century.

Click here to watch our previous episodes

World Reframed is produced in London by  Global South  World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

According to Japanese media reports, the Philippines has signalled interest in buying the system as part of efforts to strengthen its military defences.

China’s irritation stems partly from the symbolic importance of the Type 03 system. Japan plans to deploy the same missiles to the island of Yonaguni, situated only 110km from Taiwan . Beijing condemned that deployment last month as “extremely dangerous,” accusing Tokyo of fuelling regional confrontation.

The talks with Manila come as Japan’s government moves to rewrite its Three Principles on Transfer of Defence Equipment and Technology, rules that for decades restricted weapons exports to avoid becoming involved in international conflict. 

The proposed revision, which could be approved next year, would allow Tokyo to export a broader range of military hardware beyond the current non-combat categories such as rescue and surveillance equipment.

Strategically, the Philippines occupies a key position along the so-called First Island Chain, which stretches down the western Pacific, close to Taiwan and bordering the contested South China Sea, where China and the Philippines frequently clash. 

Any increase in Philippine air-defence capability is therefore closely watched in Beijing, which sees such strengthening as part of a broader containment effort led by the United States and its allies.

Japan and the Philippines have rapidly deepened their defence cooperation in recent months. The two US treaty allies signed a new defence pact in September allowing Japanese troops to deploy to Philippine territory for the first time since the Second World War. 

Additionally, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has pledged to raise defence spending to 2% of GDP by March next year — faster than earlier plans — and Japan has already exported domestically made Patriot missile interceptors to the US, a move that Chinese commentators have called another “dangerous signal.”

Beijing has long accused Japan’s political right of seeking to rewrite its pacifist constitution and normalise the military. For Japan and the Philippines, however, supporters argue that growing cooperation is a defensive response to China’s increasingly assertive behaviour in surrounding seas.

"To protest against violence , to take action against violence, and also obviously to protest so that right-wing groups, opportunistic parties, and scavengers do not use the rightful anger of the protest," said one participant.

Organisers, mostly young demonstrators, voiced frustration that political groups had adopted the Straw Hat Pirates’ Jolly Roger symbol for their own purposes. 

"Many times right-wing groups, fascist groups, are the first to criminalise protest , the first to take rights away from the LGBT community, to ignore structural or systemic problems, etc. So it is even incongruent for them to take a symbol that has nothing to do with them," said another protester.

Participants also denounced U.S. anti-drug operations in the Caribbean, likening them to past interventions in Latin America . 

"This narco narrative of 'they are narcos, let's kill them,' which is the same one the United States has used for interventions in Venezuela ," said one protester. 

Police monitored the demonstration, which briefly disrupted traffic along Paseo de la Reforma, but no major incidents were reported.

“China is committed to peaceful development, follows a policy of 'no first use' of nuclear weapons and a nuclear strategy that focuses on self-defence, and adheres to its nuclear testing moratorium,” Mao said.

Trump had claimed China, Russia , North Korea and Pakistan were all secretly testing nuclear weapons underground. 

He used this claim to preface the resumption of the US’ own tests — the first conducted in more than 30 years. 

“It's hoped that the US will earnestly abide by its obligations under the Treaty and its commitment to a moratorium on nuclear testing, and take concrete actions to uphold the international nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime, as well as global strategic balance and stability,” Mao said.

“Conflicts are multiplying. Threats are evolving. And everywhere, the multilateral mechanisms on which much of international security once relied are weakening,” he said.

Gnassingbé noted the rise of complex threats such as terrorism, transnational crime , cyberattacks, disinformation, and climate insecurity, insisting that no individual African nation can confront these challenges alone.

“No army, no border, no state can face them alone. We must move from reaction to prevention … Security has a cost, and that cost must be borne. Depending on unstable, conditional external funding is not an option.”

Liberian President Joseph Boakai reflected on his country’s history of civil war, stressing that sustainable peace must be rooted in justice and reconciliation. “Liberia established a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. As president, I’ve sought to implement its recommendations, because there can be no lasting peace without justice,” Boakai said. “The peace we seek must be homegrown, created by Africans, borne by Africans, and sustained by Africans,” he added.

Angolan Foreign Minister Tete António echoed the need for continental unity, particularly in regions like the Great Lakes.

The 2nd edition of the LPSF, held under the theme 'Africa facing complex security challenges: how to build and consolidate peace and stability in a changing world ?', was held in Togo's capital from October 11-12.

As in the recently concluded UN General Assembly, the Gaza conflict will likely dominate any encounter with the US president. Trump has positioned himself as a broker pushing Israel toward a ceasefire, but his close ties to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu complicate regional perceptions.

Malaysia’s Communications Minister, Fahmi Fadzil, said the summit provides ASEAN with a rare chance to directly confront Washington on the issue.

"Some have asked why a clearer message (of support for Palestine) wasn't sent by not inviting (Trump),” he said. "Actually, it would be easy for us to 'boycott' (the US), but the Prime Minister's (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) approach in many matters is that we need dialogue.”

"This is the most appropriate time to invite the US President. In addition to Malaysia stating its position, it gives other (summit) member countries the space to interact with and express their views to the US President," he continued.

Earlier this month, all ASEAN states backed a UN resolution reaffirming a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, while Washington was among just 10 countries voting against.

Trade, US tariffs

Malaysia’s decision to extend an invitation to Trump may be rooted in trade realities: the United States is now Malaysia’s largest export market, overtaking China. Bilateral trade has nearly doubled over the past decade, reaching $78.3 billion in 2022.

Across the region, however, China remains ASEAN’s dominant partner , holding that position for 16 consecutive years. In the first seven months of 2025 alone, trade between China and ASEAN climbed to $597 billion, an 8.2% increase from the previous year.

In terms of overall strategic partnership, the US still holds an edge over China . A recent survey found 52.3% of Southeast Asian respondents favouring Washington as a long-term partner, compared with 47.7% for Beijing. These findings, however, came before Trump announced sweeping new tariffs, which have weighed heavily on ASEAN economies:

Regional defence

If and when Trump attends the October summit, regional defence will also be one of the main points expected to be raised with him. According to a Lowy Institute study, the US is Southeast Asia’s preferred military partner , specifically for joint exercises. 

Trump has already drawn himself directly into ASEAN disputes. In July, when border clashes flared between Cambodia and Thailand , the self-styled anti-war leader stepped in to mediate.

A 26 July phone call from Trump to the leaders of both countries helped break a deadlock in negotiations. Two days later, a ceasefire was signed in Malaysia, ending some of the heaviest fighting between the neighbours in years.

Cambodia has since nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, citing his “historic contributions in advancing world peace.”

But the truce remains fragile. Thailand is still under a transitional government led by Anutin Charnvirakul, after former premier Paetongtarn Shinawatra was ousted on ethics charges linked in part to the border dispute.

Bangkok is now weighing the possibility of a referendum on whether to revoke two long-standing border agreements with Cambodia as a way to defuse tensions.

“Today, no one but ourselves can guarantee security. Only strong alliances, only strong partners, and only our own weapons,” Zelensky said. He called the reality “sick,” but insisted it was unavoidable.

The Ukrainian leader argued that international law was powerless without enforcement by states willing to act. He added that even those willing partners could not offer guarantees without military strength of their own. “There are no security guarantees except friends and weapons,” he said.

Zelensky acknowledged the contradiction between Ukraine’s traditionally peaceful outlook and its present need to invest heavily in defence. Ukrainians, he said, would have chosen another path if possible, but were left with no alternative in the face of Russian aggression.

The president also cast doubt on the ability of global institutions to address conflicts elsewhere. He pointed to Sudan, Somalia, Palestine and Syria as examples of peoples left waiting for international support while wars and sanctions continued to devastate them.

“For decades, just statements and statements,” Zelensky said, adding that Syria, despite years of upheaval, still had to appeal to the world for relief from sanctions.

Turning back to the Middle East , Zelensky cited the ongoing violence in Gaza as another example of the UN’s weakness. He said the conflict remained unresolved, with “no way out” offered by international mechanisms.

Zelensky stressed that Ukraine’s war showed the costs of those failings. He said people were still dying every week because Moscow refused a ceasefire and the international community lacked the means to compel one.

“Ukrainians are peaceful people, but they are people who want to live freely in their own independent country,” he said. “That’s why we invest in defence. For many nations, there is simply no other way left.”

The message was delivered on one of the world’s biggest diplomatic stages, where many world leaders expressed support for Ukraine and other territories facing unrest, such as Palestine and Syria.

He added that Indonesia would “take our share of the burden, not only with our sons and daughters, we are also willing to contribute financially to support the great mission to achieve peace by the United Nations.”

“Without the United Nations, we cannot be safe. No country can feel secure. We need the United Nations, and Indonesia will continue to support the United Nations, even though we still struggle, but we know the world needs a strong United Nations,” Prabowo said.