By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Sep 4 2025 – It is becoming increasingly apparent that planet Earth is evolving into the planet of the aged. In nearly every country around the world, the numbers and percentages of the aged, commonly defined as individuals aged 65 years or older, have increased rapidly.

Consequently, the aged have infiltrated offices and institutions and advanced their demands and aspirations. As a result of these developments, they have formed gerontocracies that dictate policies, programs and expenditures, often without truly representing their populations.

In 1950, the aged accounted for only 5% of the world’s population, totaling 128 million. Today, the proportion of the elderly has doubled. The aged now account for 10% of the world’s population, totaling 854 million people. Since 1950, the aged population has nearly septupled!

In 2000, only three countries – Italy, Japan, and Monaco – had more aged individuals than children under 18. However, by 2025, this historic reversal had spread to approximately 45 countries and territories. For instance, in Italy, the percentage of aged individuals compared to children under 18 was 25% versus 15%. Japan shows an even larger demographic reversal, with 30% being aged and 14% being children under 18.

It is projected that by 2050, the aged will make up 17% of the world’s population. By 2080, individuals aged 65 and older are expected to outnumber children under 18, reflecting the evolving rise of the planet of the aged.

Furthermore, by the end of the 21st century, nearly one out of every four human beings living on the planet, close to 2.5 billion people, is expected to be a member of the aged population.

In many countries, including the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, the aged proportions are even higher by the close of the century. For example, the proportion of the elderly in 2100 is expected to be about 34% in France and Great Britain, and 41% in China (Figure 1).

Source: United Nations.

In 2025, countries like Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, and Portugal are expected to have approximately one-quarter of their populations made up of aged individuals. This proportion is projected to grow to about one-third by 2050.

With the rise of the aged, many countries across the planet are being transformed into gerontocracies.

Gerontocracies often have policies that are out of touch with the needs of younger generations. Such societies can lead to legislative stagnation and entrenchment of a political system disconnected from the changing needs of its population.

The aged have infiltrated offices and institutions and advanced their demands and aspirations. As a result of these developments, they have formed gerontocracies that dictate policies, programs and expenditures, often without truly representing their populations

Aged leaders tend to focus on issues primarily affecting their age group, resulting in a political system that overlooks the needs of the majority. For instance, aged leaders spend less on welfare for children and more on benefits for seniors, marginalizing the interests of young people.

These political systems are less likely to address long-term issues, like climate change, food insecurity, environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and pollution. Gerontocracies can also stifle innovation, reduce scientific research, and create barriers for young researchers to advance in their careers.

In addition to their increasing numbers and proportions of populations, the aged are now living longer than at any time in human history. In 1950, global life expectancies at age 65 for men and women were 11 and 12 years, respectively.

By 2025, these figures had increased to 16 years for men and 19 years for women. Moreover, the global life expectancies of the aged are projected to continue increasing, reaching 21 years for men and 23 years by the end of the 21st century.

Despite the rising aged population, the vast majority of the world’s population, around 90% or 7.4 billion people, are not members of the aged. The median age of the global population in 2025 is 31 years, with about four billion men, women, and children.

In contrast to the majority of the world’s population, the leaders of many countries are aged. Many of these leaders are more than twice the age of their population’s median age and decades older than majority of their citizens (Table 1).

In addition, there is a growing number of government leaders who are aged men, many of whom are well over the age of 70.

As of 2025, women held the position of Heads of State and/or Government in 27 countries, accounting for approximately 14% of the world’s countries. Men also dominated parliament and cabinet minister positions, making up 73% and 77%, respectively.

Potential problems with having aged state leaders include the risks of cognitive decline, reduced mental flexibility, ineffective strategic planning, resistance to new ideas, increased health problems (often concealed), lower energy and stamina levels, and a focus on policies that primarily benefit the aged members of their population.

A particularly worrisome consideration among the aged, especially for the world’s state leaders, is dementia.

The risk of developing dementia among the elderly is significant, believed to double approximately every five years after the age of 65. In some countries, such as the United States, researchers estimate that 42% of the population over the age of 55 years will eventually develop dementia.

Aged state leaders likely have an elevated risk of dementia compared to others in their populations because of their advanced ages, highly stressful roles, and intense and sustained pressures. Studies on aging and political leadership suggest that a significant proportion of leaders over 65 may have impaired executive function. These impairments affect complex decision-making, flexible thinking, and impulse control.

In addition, aged country leaders often strive to leave a lasting legacy. As they near the end of their tenure and lives, these leaders aim to establish systems, capabilities, and strategies that will have a lasting impact reflecting their tenure long after they are gone.

One powerful tool at the disposal of the aged is voting. While the elderly, regardless of age, are eligible to vote in elections, young people, usually below the age of 18, are not eligible to vote.

The elderly are also consistently more likely to vote in elections than younger voters who are busy working and have other time-consuming activities. Aged voters tend to be more conservative, favor the status quo, and have a greater stake in economic issues related to retirement and old-age healthcare.

As a result of the growth of the aged populations, many countries are facing financial challenges when it comes to funding national retirement programs. Several solutions have been suggested to address these issues, such as increasing taxes, raising the retirement age, and limiting retirement benefits.

Despite living longer lives, the aged are opposed to raising official retirement ages, reducing retirement benefits, or raising taxes on the elderly. They are increasingly protesting, resisting, and demanding that retirement ages stay the same and benefits remain intact.

The elderly are concerned about the declining number of workers in the labor force who support retirement and health benefits for them. In response to this issue, the aged have embraced pro-natalist policies, promoted traditional family values, and emphasized patriotism to boost fertility rates that have fallen below replacement levels in more than half of all countries and areas globally. However, these efforts have not yet succeeded in raising fertility rates back to replacement levels.

In conclusion, with their increasing numbers, growing proportions, and a rise in aged world leaders, as well as the establishment of gerontocracies that influence government policies, programs, and spending, Earth is witnessing the rise of the planet of the aged.

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of many publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR & KISTIWAR, India, Sep 4 2025 – The relentless rain that battered the mountains and valleys of Jammu and Kashmir this August shattered lives and records.

In the span of just 31 days, more than 100 lives were lost, scores of families were displaced, and entire communities devastated, not just by the sheer force of nature but by the uncertainty and chaos that followed.

August 2025 will be remembered for the sheer scale and frequency of the natural disasters it experienced. According to the India Meteorological Department (IMD), Jammu and Kashmir saw its sixth wettest August in 125 years, with 319.3 mm of rainfall; this was 73 percent above the norm.

“We recorded over 30 extreme weather events this month, including flash floods, cloudbursts, landslides, gusty winds, and thunderstorms. At least 14 of these led to fatalities,” confirmed Dr. Mukhtar Ahmad, Director of the Meteorological Department, to Inter Press Service.

The destruction was widespread. Among the most devastating incidents was the Kishtwar cloudburst on August 26, which buried Chesoti village beneath a torrent of mud and boulders, killing at least 65 people, with several still missing. Just days later, a landslide along the Vaishno Devi route in the Jammu division claimed 35 more lives, many of them Hindu pilgrims.

Inside a makeshift shelter near Chesoti, 45-year-old Ghulam Nabi recounted the horror of that night.

“We heard a roar like a thousand waterfalls. There wasn’t even time to scream. The earth shook, and then everything was dark and wet.”

He lost his wife and two children—their bodies found days later by rescue teams sifting through the debris.

“I never thought the mountain would come for us. We always feared the river, but it was the hillside that swallowed my family,” Nabi told IPS News.

In Reasi, 13-year-old Manisha Devi stands at the edge of her ruined home, clutching a photograph of her elder brother, who had traveled to the Vaishno Devi shrine to work as a porter.

“He sent me money so I could buy books. Now, he is gone, and so is our house,” she said.

Experts say the frequency and intensity of these disasters cannot be dismissed as mere chance.

“There is clear evidence that climate change is making rainfall events more erratic and intense, especially in mountainous terrain,” explained Faizan Arif Keng, an independent weather forecaster. “Doda received 290 percent more rainfall than normal. Udhampur, Ramban, and Samba were also hit with more than double their usual rain.”

“The weather patterns are changing. We’re seeing more cloudbursts, intense rainfall in a very short time, triggering flash floods and landslides. These are not isolated events but symptoms of a larger problem,” said Ahmed.

In Ladakh, the story was even more dramatic. “Kargil recorded a 1,530 percent surplus, and Leh almost 900 percent above average. These numbers are unprecedented and should be a wake-up call,” said Keng.

If the rain brought tragedy for some, it spelled economic ruin for others. The closure of the Srinagar–Jammu National Highway, the only road link connecting the landlocked Kashmir valley with the outer world, left thousands of trucks loaded with apples, pears, and plums stranded for days. The result: rotting fruit and plummeting prices.

At north Kashmir’s Sopore Fruit market [Mandi], Asia’s second-largest trading hub, the atmosphere was grim.

“We are staring at losses of around Rs 200 crore (about USD 22 million). If the trucks can’t reach the markets on time, growers lose everything. Last year, we survived a similar crisis, but how many more can we take?” Fayaz Ahmed Malik, president of the Mandi, told IPS.

Grower Abdul Rashid, standing beside his damaged Gala apple boxes, shared his frustration. “I spent all year in the orchard. Now, the apples are ruined. The buyers pay half the rate, sometimes less. How do I feed my family or pay my debts?”

The Kashmir region has endured its deadliest month in living memory. In 31 days, more than 100 lives were lost, scores of families were displaced, and entire communities were left shattered due to rain and landslides. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

The mandi chairman, Bashir Ahmad Basheer, called for urgent government intervention: “Partial traffic movement is not enough. We need priority passage for all fruit trucks. The growers’ livelihoods depend on timely delivery. Every day’s delay is a disaster.”

With the crisis mounting, India’s Ministry of Home Affairs announced the formation of Inter-Ministerial Central Teams (IMCTs) to assess the damage not just in Jammu and Kashmir but across the northern states battered by extreme weather. Teams, comprising senior officials from various ministries, are expected to tour affected districts, evaluate relief efforts, and recommend further aid.

An official from the administration, who asked not to be named, told IPS that the process is now faster than before. The center releases funds quickly after the assessment, without waiting for lengthy paperwork from the states. But the ground reality is that search and rescue operations are still ongoing in several districts.

Official figures show that, in the current financial year alone, Rs 2,090 million (about USD 11.9 million) was released to Jammu and Kashmir under the State Disaster Response Fund, with more sanctioned under the National Disaster Relief Fund.

Despite these efforts, experts warn that more must be done. “We have to move beyond just relief and compensation. There needs to be investment in community-level disaster preparedness, early warning systems, and stricter regulation of construction in vulnerable zones. The people living in these mountains are tough, but they need help adapting to new realities,” says Mudasir Ahmad Mir, a researcher from the University of Kashmir who is working on his thesis on Kashmir’s natural disasters and their impact on livelihoods in the region.

In Chesoti, Ghulam Nabi’s voice carries a plea: “We are simple people. We don’t ask for much. But we want to live without fear every time it rains. Can someone tell us when the next storm will come?”

Not all is lost. Community solidarity has served as a source of hope. Volunteers from neighboring villages, religious organizations, and NGOs have distributed food, clothes, and medicines.

“It’s the people who save each other when the government is stretched thin,” said Manzoor Ahmad, a teacher from Ramban who has been helping coordinate aid efforts.

But the scars run deep. For children like Manisha, every thunderstorm brings back memories of loss. For farmers like Abdul Rashid, the fear of financial collapse shadows the joy of harvest.

“August will end,” said Fayaz Malik at Sopore mandi, “but its wounds will take much longer to heal. We need help, yes, but also understanding and empathy from those in power.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 4 2025 – 2025 has been marked by a significant escalation of the climate crisis and its effects on vulnerable populations, as the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) warn that average global temperatures could exceed the 1.5°C threshold within the next five years. In Latin America and the Caribbean, rising temperatures and emissions continue to strain access to essential services and deepen poverty, particularly among children.

“Children and adolescents bear the greatest burden of climate change,” said Roberto Benes, the Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean for the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). “Not only because their developing bodies are more vulnerable to extreme phenomena such as cyclones or heatwaves, but also because these events disrupt their families’ livelihoods and their education. If children and young people don’t have the resources to meet their basic needs and develop their potential, and if adequate social protection systems are not in place, the region’s inequalities will only be perpetuated.”

On August 28, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and UNICEF published a joint report: The Impact of Climate Change on Child and Youth Poverty in Latin America, which details the impact of climate change on youth poverty in the region as well as current government and humanitarian initiatives aimed at climate adaptation and loss mitigation.

According to the report, poverty rates in Latin America have risen sharply since the COVID-19 pandemic, pushing an additional 22 million people into poverty. It is estimated that roughly 94 million children and adolescents are living in poverty, making up 52 percent of the region’s poor population. Despite youth making up only 39 percent of the total population, roughly 40 percent of all children under the age of 15 live in poverty.

The frequency of extreme weather events in Latin America has skyrocketed in recent years, reaching nearly 30 per year in the early 2020s. In the Caribbean, some countries are already experiencing monthly temperature increases that exceed the 1.5°C threshold. Meanwhile, Latin American countries such as Argentina and Chile do not exceed 1°C and face volatile precipitation patterns that increase flooding, particularly for low-lying coastal communities.

According to UNICEF’s Child Climate Risk Index, as a result of climate change, roughly 55 million children in Latin America and the Caribbean face water shortages, 60 million experience cyclones, and 45 million are exposed to extreme heat. Furthermore, there has been an increase in the frequency of floods and landslides from heavy torrential rains, which have damaged numerous critical infrastructures that children depend on, such as schools, healthcare centers, and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities. Floods and rising temperatures have also given way to a rise in waterborne and vector-borne diseases, such as diarrhea, malaria, zika, and dengue.

Additionally, agriculture and food production has been hindered by persistent droughts, particularly in northeastern Brazil, areas in the Southern Cone, and the Central American dry corridor. Poor children and adolescents in these regions face extended periods of nutritional deprivation, which heightens the risk of malnutrition. It is estimated that anywhere between 570,000 and over 1 million children under 5 could suffer from stunted growth by 2030 due to climate change.

Estimated economic losses from natural disasters have increased nearly tenfold since the 1960s.“These increasing impacts divert resources towards damage repair and adaptation instead of investing in infrastructure, education, or innovation. This creates an opportunity cost by limiting potential growth and perpetuates development gaps, hindering the reduction of inequalities in Latin America,” the report said.

Current climate adaptation policies and funding fail to adequately prioritize the needs of children, with critical services such as health, nutrition, education, water, and sanitation being limited, jeopardizing cognitive and physical development. It is projected that by 2030, at least 5.9 million additional children, adolescents, and youth could be pushed into poverty—a figure that could triple to nearly 17.9 million if funding and humanitarian action remain insufficient.

Although children and adolescents are the most climate-vulnerable populations in Latin America and the Caribbean, climate financing directed toward youth accounts for just 3.4 percent of the region’s multilateral climate funding, totaling at roughly USD 743 million. However, these funds are primarily reserved for education projects and do not cover investment needs for other basic sectors such as healthcare, which is urgent in the face of rising child morbidity in the region. Additionally, child-sensitive climate funds only reach children in six countries in Latin America and the Caribbean: Brazil, Cuba, Guatemala, Haiti, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay.

The report also highlights that climate change risks worsening existing wealth disparities and gender inequality in the region. Latin America and the Caribbean — described as the “most unequal region in the world” — are projected to see poorer families experience higher rates of poverty, hindered recovery, and greater challenges adapting to natural disasters. Women and girls are disproportionately affected, facing higher levels of unemployment, difficulty reentering the workforce, relative asset losses, and increased school dropout rates.

“Without investment in resilient services for children, and without sustained political will from countries and other sectors to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the children and youth of 2030 will continue to be deprived of their rights,” said UNICEF climate advisor Reis López. “This will only perpetuate inequality in one of the most unequal regions of the world.”

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Monica Hirst
RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, Sep 4 2025 – Since January 2025, Donald Trump’s second presidency has been focused on securing the global supremacy of the United States. It justifies a package of international coercive and intimidatory measures, accompanied by an aggressive, arrogant rhetoric. Right at the outset, the new administration announced a veritable tsunami of tariffs and immediately implemented them as a sign of its new independence.

This demonstrated Washington’s willingness to turn access to the US market into a challenge fraught with uncertainty and protracted bilateral negotiations. This massive blow to the global trading system affects all of the United States’ economic relations – including those with Brazil.

In addition to a general 10 per cent increase in all tariffs on US imports, a differential treatment policy for countries and regions was introduced based on varying and sometimes opaque criteria. The US President interprets the need to combat the American trade deficit as a national emergency that justifies the imposition of counter-tariffs.

By August, 94 countries were already affected by this contentious policy. Some, including Vietnam, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the European Union, managed to reach tariff agreements, but only at the cost of various concessions and often significant losses.

An ideology-driven policy

In the first few months of Trump’s term in office, Brazil kept a safe distance from Washington’s coercive measures. The Lula government managed to continue its active and self-confident foreign policy.

Brasília’s claim to influence, whose voice is heard on issues of global governance, was bolstered by its role as host of high-level multilateral meetings held this year, including the G20 summit, the meeting of BRICS heads of state and government, and, before long, the COP30 world climate conference.

Relations with China, Brazil’s most important trading partner, accounting for 28 per cent of Brazilian foreign trade, also gained new significance; both sides signed 36 agreements on a wide range of economic, technological and cultural issues.

While the Lula administration sought dialogue with the White House to address the consequences and potential damage of the new US tariff policy – as Brazil’s second-largest trading partner, the United States accounts for 12 per cent of the country’s exports – it was only a matter of time before the US administration’s aggressive stance on trade and tariffs would have an impact on Brazil’s economy.

On 18 July, the American government informed President Lula da Silva in a letter that tariffs of 50 per cent would henceforth be levied on imports from Brazil, marking the start of a heated exchange with the Planalto, the seat of the president’s government.

By executive order, Trump imposed an additional 40 per cent tariff on Brazilian imports, supplemented by a list of 700 exceptions.

The justification for increasing tariffs to offset the bilateral trade deficit proved unfounded, as the trade balance has consistently shown a surplus in favour of the United States for more than 15 years.

Additionally, the American president’s letter went beyond trade policy arguments and addressed political issues related to the court proceedings against former President Bolsonaro and the rulings of the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF), which affect the interests of US digital platform companies.

Lula’s government perceived the letter as ‘unacceptable blackmail,’ leading to growing tensions that were exacerbated by repeated public statements by the US president and his staff. Value judgements were made about Brazilian democracy and its institutions, and the priorities of Brazilian foreign policy were called into question, including the organisation of the BRICS, which Brazil currently chairs.

This was followed by an investigation by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) based on Section 301, which allows unilateral retaliatory measures to protect national interests. By executive order, Trump finally imposed an additional 40 per cent tariff on Brazilian imports, supplemented by a list of 700 exceptions.

The Trump administration also began to question the competitive conditions for North American companies in Brazil, attacking the PIX instant payment system and criticising environmental policy, anti-corruption policy, the handling of digital platforms and the effects of preferential trade agreements with third countries.

Right-wing circles seized the opportunity to blame Lula for the escalation with Washington.

A further boost to this ideologically motivated campaign came from the close ties between individual actors and political organisations on the American and Brazilian far right, particularly between Trumpism and Bolsonarism.

The influence of the United States in Latin America, especially in Brazil, is not a new phenomenon, but in this case it took on a new form: Digital media channels were mobilised in coordination with the ideological crusades of the local right against the institutions of the Brazilian republic — especially the judicial system.

Creating fault lines between Brazil’s political forces, exacerbated by the real economic costs that the tariff shock entailed for Brazilian industries. Right-wing circles seized the opportunity to blame Lula for the escalation with Washington.

The timing of Trump’s tariff shock, coinciding with the court ruling against former President Jair Bolsonaro – for his responsibility in the attempted coup in 2023 – further fuelled the fire. The Magnitsky Act was instrumentalised to sanction STF judges and stylise Bolsonaro as a victim of human rights violations in the eyes of Trumpists.

At the same time, Washington rejected the dispute settlement mechanisms of the World Trade Organisation, justifying this with security policy arguments that increasingly dominate Trump’s narrative.

Trump’s criticism of Brazil’s international policy is also becoming increasingly vocal in this context. The political steadfastness and keen sense of economic opportunity that have characterised Lula’s foreign policy to date will be powerless against the thorny and delicate prospects in the short to medium term.

The country’s right to determine its position in the world autonomously is being called into question. The Planalto’s response to the repeated political coercion of Trump’s tariffs is based on the inseparability of sovereignty, autonomy and the defence of democracy.

Alternative partnerships

The Brazilian government does not see this as a lonely crusade, but is increasingly seeking partners and allies in all directions. Opening the doors to Japan, Indonesia and Vietnam is intended to add further counterweights to the connection with China and better link the Brazilian economy with the dynamic Asian value chains.

At the same time, Brasília is focusing on dialogue with India – a key partner in the BRICS – on issues of global governance, investment, agribusiness and digital technologies. Within the region itself, the aim is to overcome the inertia that has long prevented greater progress in relations between Brazil and Mexico.

The Trump nightmare is a strong incentive to overcome the mutual indifference that has stood in the way of sustainable cooperation between Latin America’s two largest economies. As far as European countries are concerned, Brazil is keen to expand the agenda of common interests at the bilateral and multilateral levels.

The European Union is currently one of Brazil’s most important trading partners, with a trade volume of over nine billion dollars. Of particular note is the Brazilian government’s commitment to concluding the long-delayed EU-Mercosur agreement, driven by the need to expand common interests and opportunities in areas such as energy transition, technology and strengthening multilateralism.

Closer cooperation with the world’s democracies is taking on new significance – as a safeguard for the rule of law in Brazil itself.

So far, the European Union has treated the BRICS and the Global South with palpable scepticism and has avoided acknowledging their contributions to negotiations on international policy issues. Instead of taking note of the neutral and pragmatic positions and initiatives of many states, the EU is dominated by the interpretation – shared by Trump – that these are anti-Western groups.

It would be a mistake not to develop a dialogue with the emerging powers of the South to address issues such as the genocide in Gaza, an understanding with Iran or a just peace between Russia and Ukraine.

Even if this does not reduce the costly strategic dependence on the US in the short term, these steps would enable European governments to engage in inclusive and constructive projects on the changing world stage.

Undoubtedly, the Lula government would be the first to support moving the political game in this direction. Closer cooperation with the world’s democracies thus takes on new significance – as a safeguard for the rule of law in Brazil itself.

Monica Hirst is a research fellow at the National Institute for Science and Technology Studies in Brazil.

Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), Brussels

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);