Search Results

Sanctions failed to make Saddam Hussein withdraw from Kuwait, unseat Fidel Castro, convince Haiti’s junta to honor democratic election results, or prevent India and Pakistan from testing nuclear weapons. Despite mounting sanctions against Iran, the violent suppression of protests has not abated — Iranian courts have begun to issue death sentences for those with links to the protests. < Back Are Iran Sanctions an Ethical Alternative to War? By Peyton Dashiell December 31, 2022 Since the rise of recent Iran protests after the killing of Mahsa Amini and subsequent violent crackdowns at the hands of Iranian officials, the international community has employed a range of responses. The United States stalled highly-anticipated nuclear negotiations, the United Nations Human Rights Council held a special session on the situation in Iran and new economic sanctions, travel bans, and asset freezes were applied to many individuals and companies with ties to the Iranian government. These actions are not new developments — since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the international community has applied various economic, trade and military sanctions against Iran with efforts spearheaded mainly by the United States. Reasons cited for sanctions include Iran’s nuclear program, the backing of the Houthis in the Yemeni Civil War and support for designated terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. As a result of sanctions, Iran has experienced a drastic reduction in oil revenue, billions of dollars of frozen foreign assets and almost complete exclusion from the global financial system due to sanctions on banks. Economic sanctions against Iran from the United States can be divided into two categories: primary sanctions, which prevent U.S. citizens and entities from engaging in economic activity with Iran, and secondary sanctions, which bar non-American entities from engaging in business with Iran if they want a presence in the United States. Due to secondary sanctions, multinational corporations do not operate in Iran due to the risk of being banned from the American market. The European Union and International Atomic Energy Agency have imposed their own sanctions on the Iranian regime due to unauthorized nuclear activity. In 2007, the European Union froze all assets of individuals with ties to Iran’s nuclear program, and in 2010, they joined the U.S. policy of banning all transactions with Iranian financial institutions. However, the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action lifted some sanctions against Iran in exchange for limits on its nuclear program. Initially a party to the deal, the United States withdrew in 2018, citing national security concerns. These sanctions have resulted in broad economic and humanitarian consequences. Since 2018, the Iranian currency has lost 50 percent of its value against the U.S. dollar, prompting inflation and higher living costs for citizens. And while American sanctions theoretically exempt humanitarian imports, many medical companies over-comply with these sanctions out of fear of retaliation and penalties from the U.S. government, resulting in severe shortages of medications and raw materials for medical production. According to Idriss Jazairy, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Effects of Sanctions on Human Rights, under economic sanctions, “people die but from lack of food and medicine, rather than from explosive devices.” Unfortunately, this has been true in practice. After the United Nations Security Council imposed economic sanctions and a complete trade embargo on Iraq in 1990 due to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, an estimated 1.2 million Iraqis were killed due to malnutrition and disease — 500,000 of whom were children. Jazairy also argued that sanctions deserve the same recognition and concern in the international community as any act of war. These negative humanitarian effects are not an unprecedented consequence. After new U.S. sanctions were imposed in 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo admitted that “things are much worse for the Iranian people, and we are convinced that will lead the Iranian people to rise up and change the behavior of the regime.” This lends credence to the idea that economic sanctions are a form of collective punishment — punishments imposed on a group for the actions of individuals. This practice is regarded as a violation of international human rights law and illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention. Secondary sanctions imposed by the United States have been exceptionally controversial in international law due to their extraterritorial jurisdiction, and other major global powers have tried to mitigate their economic effects. After the 2018 JCPOA withdrawal, the European Commission issued a Blocking Statute, declaring U.S. Iran sanctions illegal. Businesses based in Europe became explicitly prohibited from complying with the U.S. sanctions and could recover damages from U.S. restrictions on legitimate business with Iran. Finally, sanctions as a foreign policy tool evoke broader questions regarding the morality of international intervention. Since the end of World War II and the advent of a new, post-Westphalian world order, the international community has taken on the responsibility of monitoring and upholding human rights through military intervention, sanctions and prosecution in international courts. But to what degree should this responsibility be applied — and are sanctions that worsen civilian conditions in the name of human rights hypocritical? Despite their prominent role in modern foreign policy, there are few examples of sanctions eliciting their desired political response. Sanctions failed to make Saddam Hussein withdraw from Kuwait, unseat Fidel Castro, convince Haiti’s junta to honor democratic election results or prevent India and Pakistan from testing nuclear weapons. Despite mounting sanctions against Iran, the violent suppression of protests has not abated — Iranian courts have begun to issue death sentences for those with links to the protests. As history has demonstrated, economic sanctions are an ineffective political measure that comes at an extreme civilian cost. While carefully calculated sanctions against specific industries or government officials may be a useful foreign policy tool, utilizing sanctions in the fashion of the United States — as an economic blockade spanning decades and forcing civilians to bear the effects — is an undeniable human rights infringement. Sanctions are not a flippant, inconsequential measure to respond to issues seen as not important enough to justify military operations — in some cases, they are more impactful than any act of war.

The recent increase in the number of races held in the Arabian Peninsula comes from the rise in investment from the Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia, which is currently advocating for the addition of a second race in Qiddiya. < Back Formula 1: Are the Gulf Countries “Sportswashing”? By Selin Elif Köse March 30, 2024 It’s lights out and away we go : Formula 1 2024 season is officially off to a start with the much anticipated Bahrain Grand Prix. As the silly season comes to an end, the whole Formula 1 community is still in shock with seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton's announcement of transferring to Ferrari in 2025. The soon-to-be-empty Mercedes seat, on the other hand, has been associated with many names, from two-time world champion Fernando Alonso to Williams driver Alex Albon, but the most jaw-dropping one without question is Red Bull’s very own Max Verstappen. While there has been plenty of news going on off the grid, there hasn’t been a significant change in the team’s performances on the grid compared to last year, except for Alpine, as the formerly midfield team has fallen way back. Red Bull is still comfortably leading with Verstappen winning and Sergio Perez becoming runner-up in both the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grand Prix. The third place on the podium went to Ferrari drivers, Carlos Sainz and Charles Leclerc respectively, in the first two races of the season. Aston Martin and McLaren have also shown solid performance finishing in points while Mercedes has been facing obstacles with both the qualifying and race pace which left Hamilton ve Russell frustrated. However, this is not unexpected, as Mercedes started the last season on the wrong foot. Nonetheless, with the upgrades brought midseason, Mercedes quickly moved to the front of the grid again. With the end of the two-header in the Arabian Peninsula, the teams are now headed to Australia, returning to the Gulf for the last two races of the year. The recent increase in the number of races held in the Arabian Peninsula comes from the rise in investment from the Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia, which is currently advocating for the addition of a second race in Qiddiya. With their increasing stakes in Formula 1, Gulf countries have been accused of sportwashing. The Guardian journalist David Conn defines sportwashing as “the exploitation of sporting events to cleanse tarnished reputations." But why are the Gulf countries suddenly more interested in investing in Formula 1 and are they actually “sportwashing”? The term gained significant traction after Qatar hosted the 2022 World Cup, but “sportwashing” has been long used for other Gulf countries as well with their huge investments in football and Formula 1 in recent years to cover up their political wrongdoings. Evidently, Abu Dhabi's investments in sports, such as ownership of English Premier League club Manchester City and hosting the final race in the Formula 1 calendar, serve as a diversionary tactic to deflect attention from its violation of human rights, which include unfair trials, limited freedom of expression, failure to investigate torture allegations, gender discrimination, and mistreatment of migrant workers, as condemned by Amnesty International. Perceptions surrounding Saudi Arabia and sportswashing are similar. The country is commonly known as an authoritarian state responsible for the execution of almost 200 people in the last year , fueling the humanitarian crisis in Yemen with a military intervention, linked to the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, as well as the persecution of women's rights protestors. Yet, Saudi investors succeeded in securing a spot in the F1 calendar for Jeddah in 2021. This was received poorly, as Formula 1 had just launched their “We Race as One” campaign a year prior in 2020 to condemn inequality & racism and promote inclusivity for everyone regardless of their gender, race, and sexuality. Even though some argue that the Gulf states’ investment in sports is a means to improve their reputations on the international stage, it is also arguably fueled by desires for rapid economic growth. In 2016, Saudi Arabia’s Prince Mohammed bin Salman introduced Vision 2030, a long-term development plan to diversify the Saudi economy and reduce its dependency on oil revenue by developing other sectors such as tourism, entertainment, and technology while promoting private sector growth. Parallel to these efforts, Saudi Arabia invested heavily in Formula 1 by building a circuit in Jeddah and signing a 10-year contract with Liberty Media, owners of F1, to host at least one race each season in the country. Additionally, they advocated for a second race in Qiddiya by signing multi-million dollar marketing deals with drivers, including Fernando Alonso. This paved the way for other Gulf countries to develop their own economic plans to transform their oil-dependent economies into more sustainable and diversified ones. Qatar implemented the National Vision 2030 and constructed state-of-the-art stadiums for the 2022 FIFA World Cup. The United Arab Emirates launched the "UAE Vision 2021" and "UAE Vision 2071" initiatives, investing heavily in sports by hosting events such as the Dubai World Cup (with horse racing), Dubai Tennis Championships, and Dubai Rugby Sevens, among others. They also backed the Emirati former rally driver Mohammed Ben Sulayem in the FIA Presidential elections for choosing the successor of Jean Todt. The eventual election of Ben Sulayem also naturally increased the Gulf influence in F1. While this growing Gulf influence benefits the countries’ reputation, economy, and globalization, the administrative change has led to various political debates. Drivers such as Lewis Hamilton and former F1 driver and world champion Sebastian Vettel are actively engaged in activism for human rights and social justice. They often use their platform to speak out on global issues — Hamilton has worn a special design rainbow helmet supporting LGBTQ rights and a Black Lives Matter shirt before races. Hence, a major controversy emerged when The FIA (Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile) changed its International Sporting Code and endorsed drivers to receive written permission from the FIA to make any "political, religious and personal statements." FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem further said he would prefer the drivers to leave their "private personal agendas at home.” It was later clarified that the drivers were actually free to say whatever they wanted in the press conferences and this ban was only for formal events like podiums and grid ceremonies. This was just one of the multiple political debates going around in the F1 paddock. Even though there aren’t absolute restrictions on the rights of expression and political speech, the drivers and the teams have to be more careful with their words and actions in Middle Eastern countries. In conclusion, sportswashing and economic goals lie at the heart of the rise in Gulf investment in sports and Formula 1. While it sometimes leads to political controversies, it benefits both the states and the sport. In a way, it also gives the drivers the platform to be vocal on the social injustices and inequalities in the countries they are racing at and draw attention to these issues on the global stage. It shouldn’t be forgotten that Formula 1 is a platform that reaches an immense global audience and it can be instrumental in shaping public opinion. Hopefully, F1 not only provides breathtaking races in the Gulf but also carries the “We Race as One” spirit to these countries.

In Palestine, memory has always been a form of resistance. Today, it lives not only in embroidery and heritage, but on digital screens across the world. Across Gaza, the West Bank, and the Palestinian towns inside Israel, a new generation is documenting life, loss, and love in "real- time" — transforming social media into a living archive of survival. < Back Digital Resistance: How Young Palestinians Use Social Media to Preserve Memory Mariam Mahamid November 6, 2025 In Palestine, memory has always been a form of resistance. Today, it lives not only in embroidery and heritage, but on digital screens across the world. Across Gaza, the West Bank, and the Palestinian towns inside Israel, a new generation is documenting life, loss, and love in "real- time" — transforming social media into a living archive of survival. When mainstream media misrepresents or erases Palestinians voices, young creators step in to fill the silence. Through platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, they reclaim the narrative — one post at a time. From Bisan Owda 's heartfelt stories and Plestia Alaqad 's field reports in Gaza", to Muna El-Kurd documenting displacement in Sheikh Jarrah, and artists like Tamer Nafar and Nadeen Khoury using performance to challenge silence — each of them adds a fragment to Palestine’s digital memory. Even creators such as Marwan Halabi keep the Palestinian dialect and humor alive online, showing that even humor can be a form of resistance. Together, these voices form a patchwork of truth — connected by hashtags instead of threads (traditional Palestinian embroidery). For many in Gaza, sharing the truth is an act of immense risk. Saleh Al-Ja’frawi , a young content creator, used to post brief videos capturing daily life between airstrikes — snippets of hope amid chaos. His camera became his way of coping and communicating with the world. When he was killed while filming, his final posts turned into memorials: fragments of a story that will not fade. Even after his death , his account remains — a reminder that in Palestine, to document is to resist. According to Access Now’s 2024 report "Gaza, Genocide & Big Tech ", major social media companies have repeatedly removed Palestinian content, shadow-banned accounts, and labeled eyewitness reports as "sensitive"or "misinformation." The stated reason for many of these removals is that the posts contain explicit or graphic imagery — footage of bombings, the wounded, or scenes of destruction. Yet these images are often the only proof of what is happening on the ground. As a result, Palestinians documenting the war face a constant dilemma: how to show the reality without violating platform policies. Many creators blur images, crop videos, or use symbols and coded language to avoid deletion. In doing so, they expose the paradox of the digital age — that the same platforms built for visibility can also enforce invisibility. This digital erasure mirrors the physical destruction on the ground: while bombs silence cities, algorithms silence witnesses. Yet, Palestinians continue to post, rebuild, and remember — proving that resistance survives in every upload. Palestinian heritage has always depended on acts of remembrance. Where previous generations preserved identity through tatreez , such as traditional Palestinian embroidery, today’s youth are doing so through images, captions, and live streams. Today’s youth are doing so through images, captions, and live streams. The method has changed, but the purpose remains the same. According to "Digital Activism in Perspective: Palestinian Resistance via Social Media ", social platforms have become “virtual spaces of protest” where storytelling and collective memory merge. Projects like "Visualizing Palestine " and the "Palestinian Museum Digital Archive " extend this tradition into cyberspace, transforming data and memory into visual testaments of truth. Palestine’s digital activism carries the same spirit of remembrance that once lived in thread and fabric. In colonized societies, memory itself often becomes a way to survive — a quiet act of resistance passed from one generation to the next. As historian Pierre Nora wrote in 1989, these "sites of memory" are spaces where people preserve identity when physical places or traditions are lost. For Palestinians, the internet itself has become one of these sites — a shared space where loss and belonging coexist in every post. Each photo, voice note, or caption becomes a modern heirloom passed from one timeline to another. Yet telling these stories online comes with its own battles. Palestinian content is often restricted or deleted by platforms that claim neutrality. Reports from Amnesty International and the Meta Oversight Board reveal how algorithms systematically suppress Palestinian voices, echoing what researchers call "systematic digital repression." As scholar Miriyam Aouragh wrote in 2008, this represents a new kind of "everyday resistance on the internet," where activism becomes embedded in daily digital life. Yet the community finds ways around it — mirroring posts, translating captions, saving content before it disappears. Every repost becomes an act of defiance, every share a heartbeat of persistence. As noted in "Social Media’s Key Role in Palestinian Activism for Gaza ", the online sphere now serves as both a newsroom and a memorial wall. This convergence between memory and technology mirrors the old forms of preservation — when tatreez carried stories across generations, and now when data carries voices across screens. Digital resistance doesn’t end when the Wi-Fi is cut off. It lives in conversations, in art, and in the quiet insistence to remember. These young Palestinians aren’t just documenting conflict — they’re preserving humanity. Their feeds may scroll endlessly, but their stories root deeply. Beyond the posts and the algorithms lies something more enduring: a collective determination to exist. Each act of sharing, archiving, or even mourning online becomes a declaration of identity. For Palestinians, visibility itself is survival — an assertion that their stories cannot be deleted, even when their accounts can. This persistence transforms technology into testimony, and testimony into truth. Just as every stitch of a tatreez once carried a story, every pixel now carries a memory — a thread of continuity between past and present. Through both fabric and fiber optics, Palestinians continue to prove that resistance is not only about struggle, but about the refusal to be forgotten. Photo Source: Raw Pixel, Creative Commons

Lorsque la question des nations sans états indépendants est abordée, on pense souvent aux Palestiniens, aux Tibétains, aux Berbères. À cette liste des “opprimés des opprimés” , il faudrait rajouter les Kurdes. < Back Vous Voulez Savoir Plus Sur les Kurdes? C'est Par Ici By Amalia Heide March 31, 2023 Lorsque la question des nations sans états indépendants est abordée, on pense souvent aux Palestiniens, aux Tibétains, aux Berbères. À cette liste des “opprimés des opprimés” , il faudrait rajouter les Kurdes , considérés comme étant, parmi les peuples sans État, le plus démographiquement nombreux dans la région du Moyen Orient. La distribution du peuple kurde dans différents États, et donc sous différents régimes politiques, nous amène à nous questionner sur l’évolution régionale du nationalisme kurde depuis sa naissance au début du XXe siècle. Faisons un récapitulatif historique. Historiquement, les mouvements nationalistes kurdes ont tous revendiqué un État kurde indépendant, que ce soit pour le PKK en Turquie, le PYD en Syrie, ou les kurdes irakiens (GRK) et iraniens. Le sujet de la création d’un État Kurde indépendant avait été envisagé dans le traité de Sèvres en 1920 après la chute de l’empire ottoman mais n’avait pas connu suite du fait du refus du fraichement constitué Etat turc nationaliste à perdre des territoires ainsi que du besoin du Royaume-Uni de contrôler rapidement la région, où l’on avait récemment découvert du pétrole. Se signa ainsi le traité de Lausanne en 1923 pour remplacer le traité de Sèvres. Celui-ci prévoit la création de l’État syrien sous le contrôle de la France et du Royaume de l’Irak sous contrôle du Royaume-Uni. Pas un mot sur le statut des Kurdes ne figure sur le traité. Les kurdes se trouvent ainsi dispersés entre la Turquie, la Syrie, la Perse et l’Irak. Leur lutte pour la revendication qui s’ensuit s’est souvent traduite en mouvements politiques qui ont connu des répressions très violentes notamment de l'État Irakien avec le massacre de Halabja en 1988 avec des armes chimiques. En Turquie, les répressions contre le PKK ont même poussé ce dernier à évoluer sur sa position à la fin des années 90 et début 2000 pour passer d’une revendication indépendantiste à une revendication autonomiste, et à un changement de méthode qui implique en principe moins de violence. Néanmoins, cette évolution est à nuancer puisque le PKK est encore reconnu comme étant une organisation terroriste par beaucoup de pays tels que les Etats-Unis et l’Union Européenne. Les violences et les attentats ne sont pas disparus. Le susdit massacre de Halabja en Irak a suscité un important émoi de la communauté internationale. Cette agitation a permis aux États Unis d’instrumentaliser la question des nationalismes kurdes dans le cadre de la première guerre du golfe en incitant ces derniers à la révolte afin de déstabiliser l’Irak. À la suite de cette guerre, les Kurdes en Irak ont pu établir une zone autonome qui a ensuite reconnu la pleine reconnaissance de l'État irakien dans la constitution de 2005 après la chute de Saddam Hussein. Le Kurdistan irakien est toujours là et constitue la forme la plus institutionnalisée et stable d’un État kurde après l’existence éphémère de la République kurde de Marhaba en Iran en 1946. En 2017, un référendum a été organisé dans cette région de l’Irak sur la question de l’indépendance qui a obtenu 92.73% de votes en faveur. Contrairement aux attentes, ce référendum a été une source importante de divisions. En effet, les mouvements kurdes ne sont pas unis et de nombreuses divisions persistent encore aujourd'hui. Étonnamment, la question de l’autonomie ou l’indépendance est une source de désaccord important entre les mouvements nationalistes kurdes car certains ont changé leur position et leur angle de lutte. C’est le cas notamment en Turquie , où le parti politique kurde (PYD) fut créé en 2015 ayant pour objectif un Etat autonome démocratique, égalitaire, pacifique et écologiste dans le respect des frontières turques. Il s’agit d’un parti ayant des relations proches avec le PKK mais qui ne soutient pas publiquement leurs actions violentes. Cette nouvelle idéologie fut exportée au mouvement en Syrie. L’évolution dans ces revendications du mouvement kurde va totalement à l’encontre du nationalisme kurde en Irak, où le discours indépendantiste « pankurdiste » est certes en voie de disparition , mais où l’on cherche activement la mise en place d’un État-nation « kurdistanais irakien ». Cet affaiblissement d’un sentiment d’appartenance commune kurde et donc les divergences de revendications expliquent pourquoi à présent nous devons parler des nationalisme s et non d’ un nationalisme kurde. En outre, les soutiens de puissances étrangères à certains mouvements kurdes ont participé à augmenter les tensions entre les différents mouvements qui ont parfois évolué jusque vers des luttes armées. C’est le cas de l’Irak soutenant les kurdes iraniens et inversement l’Iran soutenant les kurdes irakien pendant la guerre de 1980-1988, ce qui fait que les deux groupes kurdes s’affrontent à plusieurs reprises. Pour mettre un exemple plus récent, le jeu d’alliance dans la région fit que, lors des révoltes contre Bachar-Al Assad en Syrie, le GRK (les kurdes d’Irak) étaient soutenus par la Turquie tandis que la Turquie était du côté de l’opposition syrienne. Au contraire , le PYD (groupe kurde de Syrie) soutenait (au moins au début) le régime syrien. Comme le PYD et le PKK sont proches idéologiquement et que le régime turc et les Kurdes de Turquie ne s’entendent pas très bien, à la fin, nous voyons que le PYD et le PKK s’opposent dans ce jeu d’alliances. C’est hallucinant de voir l’impact que les intérêts des puissances extérieures peuvent avoir sur des mouvements qui étaient à l’origine extrêmement proches. Mais cette discordance et tensions entre mouvements kurdes est à nuancer. Même s'il existe des divergences et même des conflits d'intérêts, il existe encore une certaine solidarité kurde transfrontalière qui fait preuve de l'existence encore latente d'une identification commune. Un exemple est la prise en charge de réfugiés lorsque se produisent des persécutions de la part des Etats. Celui-ci est le cas à présent avec les jeunes kurdes iraniens, victimes des répressions actuelles de la part de l'Etat Iranien suite au mouvement social, qui fuient et sont accueillis par le Kurdistan irakien.

Ever since the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia has understood that it is surrounded by dangerous neighbors. < Back Armenia: The EU As a Destination? By Jad Toufic Toutinji April 30, 2024 Ever since the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia has understood that it is surrounded by dangerous neighbors. Notably, Armenia’s unreliable ally, Russia, does not even consider Armenia’s interests as a secondary priority. Since the defeat and the rise of a new geopolitical opportunity through the Russia-Ukraine war, Armenia has seriously taken into consideration to join the European Union (EU), and the EU has cleared their way to apply. Thus, the Western bloc, especially after Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced the freezing of its Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) membership. In March, the Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan said that applying for an EU membership is “being discussed.” Later, the European Parliament passed a resolution confirming that Armenia can apply for membership as it meets the requirements of the Maastricht Treaty Article 49. What are the motives for both sides? What about Russia? Armenia’s motives to join the EU are mostly defensive. Located in the Caucuses and surrounded by threats from all its neighbors (apart from Georgia), it makes absolute sense that it seeks to ensure its security. With Russia occupying Ukraine and having proven untrustworthy and unreliable in the war against Azerbaijan, France, arguably the leader of the EU, has strongly been a resort for arms sales and strengthening the military. For example, in October 2023, Paris declared it would sell an air defense system to Armenia and provide other military and humanitarian aid. Thus, in a time when Armenia feels dangerously besieged, the EU appears as an inevitable option. On the other side of the story, the EU would benefit strategically from swaying Armenia to its side. First and foremost, a foothold in Armenia presents an opportunity for military pressure on Türkiye but also, obviously, Russia. Moreover, in the long run, leverage in Armenia can, should any geopolitical shifts take place, provide access to energy resources through Azerbaijan and potentially avoid Turkish and Russian hegemony over it. Not only so, but seeing the widespread Armenian diaspora, especially in the Middle East, the EU would also gain several political influences in the region, for instance, in Türkiye and Lebanon. Nevertheless, a shortcoming that the EU might discover later is that expanding into Armenia could translate into a consistent risk of immigrant influx from Central Asia, the Caucasus, Russia and the Middle East region. Inevitably, too, the geopolitical benefits will translate into further tensions with Iran, Türkiye and Russia as these countries begin to feel surrounded. The EU may have to interfere politically and potentially militarily on several occasions if the aforementioned countries decide to act upon or create political traps for the EU countries. As to Russia, apart from the political and security messages, Armenia joining the EU will be seen as an intrusion in a region historically dominated by it, which puts Putin’s narrative of an alternative to the West under doubt. But, Armenia is not in continental Europe. The precedent for a non-European geographic country being in the EU exists if we consider Cyprus as being part of Asia or looking at the non-European territories of France and other European countries too. Not to forget, joining the EU is more reliant on upholding the values assigned in the Maastricht Treaty and the Copenhagen Criteria, which do not give reference to geographic location. Moreso, Armenia has already politically engaged with Europe through participation in bodies like the Council of Europe. Is it as easy as it sounds? It would be naïve to assume that Armenia joining will take place in a matter of months. Firstly, EU accessions are known to take years, often decades, to be fully completed. By the time a full accession takes place, if it ever does, the geopolitics of the region and the role of Russia might have shifted significantly. Apart from the natural time constraints, there are still over 10,000 Russian troops in Armenia. In April, however, Yerevan sent an official request to Moscow to remove its troops from Zvartnots International Airport, as Armen Grigorian, Armenian Security Council Secretary has said. The Kremlin (at the time of writing) denies receiving an official request, explaining why it has not started any withdrawals. Nonetheless, it is doubtful that Moscow would commit to withdrawal as it would lead to Russian loss of influence. In the past, Russia has pressured the continuity of Russian troops on ex-USSR territory, whether forcible or willingly, such as in Georgia and Crimea; hence, it would not be surprising if Russia decides to infringe upon Armenian sovereignty to protect its regional hegemony. In the future, it would be expected to see that this infringement will keep on increasing the closer Yerevan becomes to Brussels. The real question would be to see whether Russia might be further pressured by Armenian rapprochement to the EU that it intervenes militarily or leads a coup d’état. Another difficulty is geography: are small European states willing to deal with the threats surrounding Armenia, especially at a time of the rise of the European right? In light of the recent rapprochement between Hungary’s Orban and Türkiye’s Erdogan, will a hampering of the process of accession also take place by Türkiye via Orban? Lastly, Armenia is geographically isolated from most trade with the EU, so it remains to be seen whether or not further economic integration plans will be proposed and are feasible even; in another sense, will the driver for accession remain only for security purposes for Armenia? In a decade’s time, if no economic integration proposals take place, the incentive to join the West might change, thus slowing or even ending the attempt.

< Back The Implications of the Piraeus Port As Part Of The Belt and Road Initiative Lydia Ntourountou February 28, 2025 The need for humans to communicate and exchange goods and ideas can be traced back to thousands of years ago. Despite the virtual impossibility of bridging societies across the globe, efforts were constantly being made to ensure the continuation and development of trade and commerce, inevitably followed by cultural exchanges. One of the most impressive developments was the Silk Road, established in 130 B.C.E. , during the period when China officially opened trade with the West. This pioneering network of routes managed to connect different civilizations, allowing the exchange of products and ideas from East Asian societies to East African and Southern European ones. Chinese silk, tea, perfumes and other products were sought-after in Egypt, Rome and Greece and not only did this allow for the exportation of such products, but most importantly, it marked the beginning of trade on an international scale. The gradual collapse of the network around 1450 A.D. marked a new beginning: international maritime trade . And though it would, indeed, take some centuries before it truly became global, this “sea-based globalization” has become the most prevalent form of trade, with over 80% of the volume of international commerce goods traveling by sea. China’s role in it is undoubtedly worth examining, considering that it remains the country with the largest amount of cargo ship exports annually. This exceptional economic activity is closely linked to what has been characterized as the New Silk Road, officially titled China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), an incredibly ambitious infrastructure project adopted by Xi Jinping’s government in 2013. This time, however, it is not limited to maritime trade but focuses on the overall development of a vast network of railways, ports, energy pipelines and highways that aim to facilitate a wide range of economic activities between Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Already, over two-thirds of European Union member states have joined the BRI, leading to a rise in Chinese investments in these countries to fund industrial projects. The vision promoted by Xi Jinping, though quite compelling, has attracted a lot of doubt and criticism; one of the main BRI projects sparking concern is the Budapest-Belgrade railway, aiming to create a fast train line connecting Hungary and Serbia. However, Hungary’s ability to repay the loan, as well as the actual profitability of the railway, has caused a lot of uncertainty. However, Xi Jinping’s project does not end here but takes on a rather drastic form regarding Greece’s involvement in the One Belt One Road Initiative. Indeed, Greece could be considered a unique case, since it hosts the most successful BRI project as of 2024: the port of Piraeus . Although a significant peak in bilateral economic and political relations between Greece and China dates back to the Greek debt crisis of 2008, during which Beijing offered to buy Greek government bonds, it is in the past couple of years that we notice the prevalence of Chinese influence in Greece. In 2016, Athens signed a contract with the company COSCO (China Ocean Shipping Company), giving it access to 51% ownership of the port, before finally gaining another 16% shares in 2021, allowing it to possess a total of 67% and therefore owning the majority of the port. If Piraeus is classified as the fifth largest port in Europe, with around 5 million twenty-foot equivalent units passing annually, it is important to examine this success with caution. It must be highlighted that this project benefited Athens in maintaining its position as an important hub in maritime trade while securing its place as an essential geopolitical actor facilitating the connection between the EU and Asian markets. But does Xi Jinping’s policy serve the sole purpose of fully establishing the Belt and Road Initiative? If so, what does this mean for Greece? According to an article published by Plamen Tonchev , China’s objectives in Piraeus could be briefly summed up in three points: 1) utilize Greece’s position in the framework of the BRI, 2) win over the country’s political, business and academic leaders and ensure its backing of China, 3) influence the EU through “friendly” member states, one of which would be Greece. We notice that Beijing’s policies in this case are not extremely direct or “disruptive” and mostly take the form of a strong economic presence in this region. However, this active and powerful presence inevitably leads to political and economic dependence. Greece, because of its small size and low level of population (around 10 million), could be considered a country that requires external “backup,” notably because of the regional tensions surrounding and directly influencing it. We could not talk about its foreign policy without mentioning the United States, characterized as Greece’s closest historical “ally” and whose relations with the country were recently referred to as “ excellent ” by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis. Having secured a five-year defense cooperation with the US and working together in matters of energy finance and military, their bilateral relations do indeed seem quite secure. But, amidst a period of uncertainty concerning the policies to be implemented after the US presidential elections, will Greece be capable of balancing two powerful “enemy nations,” both having interests in the Mediterranean region? This question seems even more pertinent after the U.S. Defense Department blacklisted COSCO by listing it as a company working with the Chinese military, which COSCO denied. This decision cannot be followed by legal sanctions for the commercial sector and so far does not seem to have any direct impact on the shipping company. However, it raised alarms in Piraeus , considering that the blacklisting could act as a “ deterrence ” for some importers. It also reminds us of the tensions between these geopolitical actors and the fact that countries with smaller economic and political power, such as Greece, are caught in the middle. Although we cannot predict the outcomes of the significant Chinese ownership of Piraeus , the fact that Greece’s biggest port is owned by a foreign power will have an important impact on its future policies, as well as its relations with other countries. What is interesting, however, is that China’s project affects the game of power and slowly shifts the economic narrative from the West to the East. Whether Greece will be able to successfully balance in between, without completely becoming dependent on either power, is to be determined. Photo credits: Rory Boon on Flickr

Today, there is mounting evidence to demonstrate that the U.S. is trying to break down the enemy they themselves spent so much time creating. < Back Unforeseen Consequences: The U.S. Role in Iran’s Military Rise Isabella Suels for Sciences Defense December 31, 2024 In a toast for his Imperial Majesty Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson once proclaimed, “the ornament of a house is the friend who frequents it”. Throughout his reign of 38 years, the Shah became a glimmering ornament in the White House, frequently meeting with U.S. presidents from Dwight D. Eisenhower to Jimmy Carter. During the Shah’s reign, Iran was valued as one of the most dependable U.S. allies in the Middle Eastern region. This relationship became especially strong during the Johnson administration (1963-1969), during which Iran transitioned from a client state that was controlled and supported by the U.S. into an emerging partner. Prior to Johnson, the U.S. was widely concerned with Iranian political, social and economic reform. The U.S. believed that the key to long-term stability in Iran relied on economic prosperity and wanted to support them in those endeavors. Consequently, during the Cold War, Iran frequently supported U.S. policies in Vietnam and the Dominican Republic. However, there was a significant roadblock in the U.S.-Iran relationship because the Shah had an insatiable appetite for military equipment that Washington could not tame . Therefore, in order to keep the Shah’s demands at bay, the Johnson administration adopted a policy of stalling. The U.S., believing they had Iran in their pocket, had no reason to imagine that Iran would turn towards other countries to increase their weapons arsenal. However, U.S. reluctance to provide Iran with the suitable amount of weapons requested, forced the Shah to turn towards U.S. adversaries to bolster his weapons stockpile. In particular, the Soviets had offered the Shah several squadrons of advanced MiG 21 aircrafts . This incident fractured the relationship between Washington and the Shah, which ended up being a necessary step that helped Iran acquire more weapons from the U.S. despite their hesitancy to provide them. In November of 1965, the Shah decreed that he was seeking $200 million in military purchases to meet Iran’s vital security needs. The U.S., knowing that Iran could obtain weapons from its adversaries, barred the transaction between Iran and the Soviets and gave Iran the military upgrades they had been asking for. This story would repeat itself throughout the years: the Shah would argue that “the continued military weakness of Iran may make it susceptible to the evils of aggression,” and then re-utter his threat of seeking arms elsewhere. Consequently, the U.S. would hand over a couple million dollars to expand Iran’s artillery. It was a fairly reasonable deal between the two: the U.S. would supply Iran with state of the art American-made weapons whilst also supplying it with an influx of American culture. In turn, the U.S. had easy access to Iranian oil. With this agreement, not only did Iran get richer in arms, but it also got richer in American culture as the Shah’s government became increasingly pro-Western while he sought to modernize the country. However, tensions were mounting among the population as the relationship between the U.S. and Iran flourished, and eventually they boiled over during the 1979 Iranian revolution. The revolution resulted with the ousting of the Shah and the end of the powerful alliance between Iran and the United States, which put to an end the influx of arms into Iran and the outflux of oil. Nevertheless, no more arms were needed as Iran’s armed forces lay equipped with state of the art equipment after years of trade. In the present day, tensions continue to rise between Iran and the United States. Ironically, the U.S. is fighting against an army of its own making. Although American influence was banished from Iran in 1979, the American artillery left behind was not. Fleets of naval destroyers, motor torpedo boats and squadrons of F-4C fighter jets were left in the hands of a new anti-Western government. This impressive array of weaponry has not gone to waste, rather Iran has decided to “share the wealth” by sending over ships loaded with weapons to the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. Treaties such as the Iranian Nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Actions, have seeked to ease tensions between Iran and several world powers including the United States. The Nuclear deal was set to prevent a revival of Iran’s nuclear weapons program and thereby reduce the prospects for conflict. However, the deal has fallen into jeopardy since President Trump withdrew from it in 2018, giving rise to a more resentful and belligerent Iran. In tandem with the U.S. withdrawal from the Nuclear deal, throughout the years the U.S. has also conducted multiple rounds of seizures on Iran’s ammunition. These seizures are aimed to disrupt vessels en route to smuggle weapons to the Houthis and other Iranian backed groups. Lately, the US has transferred this seized Iranian military equipment to the Ukrainians. These efforts to weaken Iran’s military are a direct result of the long and complex history between these two countries. Today, there is mounting evidence to demonstrate that the U.S. is trying to break down the enemy they themselves spent so much time creating. Source: U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Wikimedia Commons

For most students, the first few months are very fun and exciting, filled with opportunities to meet new people, by attending tons of parties, going to the beach after classes, and taking a train to Monaco or Nice on the weekends. But around November, as the sun starts to fade away, the initial joy of the people is nowhere to be found. < Back Studying in Menton: A Dream or a Curse? By Selin Elif Köse December 31, 2023 With a population of 30,679 and a size of 14,05 km2, Menton is one of the smallest cities in France. In the heart of Cote D’Azur, Menton is often filled with tourists and, of course, Sciences Po students. Yet, this colorful town stands as a unique case to host one of the most prestigious universities in the country. For most students, the first few months are very fun and exciting, filled with opportunities to meet new people, by attending tons of parties, going to the beach after classes, and taking a train to Monaco or Nice on the weekends. But around November, as the sun starts to fade away, the initial joy of the people is nowhere to be found. This makes me wonder, is this a universal college experience or distinct to Sciences Po Menton? If so, why are students in Menton not happy? The Social Bubble “Being in Menton, by nature of it, is isolating,” a first-year student describes. Here, students do not have a usual university life experience, as the Menton campus is not actually a campus . Unlike other universities where most students live in dorms or “Crous logement,” in Menton the majority live in apartments which puts invisible barriers and increases the distance between them. Additionally, there is a severe lack of coffee shops, pubs, bars and restaurants apart from the tourist traps and Le Retro, which restricts socialization, especially for people who don’t like going to parties at Soundproof. Here, another problem arises: who do you socialize with? At a campus with a student body of approximately 400 people, most people know each other at least by name, and friend groups are relatively strict, so even when you are socializing, it is quite rare to meet someone new. The division between French and English tracks is also worth mentioning since the two groups rarely see each other, limiting the interactions and the possibilities of forming new friendships. Everyone majoring in social sciences also decreases the range of perspectives on campus. These perspectives are often similar to each other given that most students' socio-economic background is frequently middle class or upper middle class. An Education Like No Other “My motivation is disappearing day by day, hard-work is almost never enough here,” a French-track student answered when asked about their opinion on the education system. In a November CVC meeting with 1A student representatives, campus director Youssef Halaoua said, “Most of the time teachers are new, i.e. they have not taught before–and some of their first teaching experiments are at Sciences Po.” In such a prestigious university like Sciences Po, the quality of teaching can be questionable from time to time. This particularly becomes problematic when considering the school tuition (relatively high by French standards), which is also subject to a five percent increase next year. Additionally, the work load can often be more than challenging because students have to deal with essays, presentations, and exams without catching a break. This is completely understandable for a competitive university, but particularly for French track, which is often regarded as more difficult than English track. Many students experience stress and frustration due to the harsh grading system that fails to recognize the effort students put in. Considering that third-year placements are based on grades, this perceived gap between French and English track students creates an unfair competition. Furthermore, the education system is mostly based on memorization — another point that frustrates students who wish to engage more critically with course content. Administrative Policies “I feel like the administration is not helping us when we need it but rather making our life even harder,” a 2A said. There has long been tension between students and administration on the Menton campus, but these issues arose with the Israel-Palestine conflict this year. The violation of freedom of expression and the calling of police on the students blockade were just some examples of the lack of cooperation with students. Students have felt disconnected from the administration as a result. There is also a stringent two-absence policy where students can only miss two classes per course, including excused absences such as medical issues. However, the campus doctor cannot issue medical notes, which compounds this problem. Even if they are not feeling well, students feel obligated to go to class, adding to the pressure on their shoulders. Furthermore, many students complain of lack of access to mental health services. An English-speaking therapist should be present and available to students not just once a week, but more, since the majority of the campus are international students. What Should Change Overall, it is clear that change must occur within the administration’s stance. The common feeling shared between students is that the administration is making decisions against students’ interests. In a campus like Sciences Po Menton, a need for a more considerate and collaborative administration is apparent. In addition, the mental support system should be improved. Recognizing these problems and voicing them are crucial – how long can Sciences Po keep looking the other way?

If we understand that proper wording can strongly impact policy and recognition of the suffering of persecuted peoples, then it becomes all the clearer why so many are arguing on whether the war in Gaza constitutes a genocide, and whether the treatment of Uyghurs is a crime against humanity. < Back Terminology and War Crime Denial Anna Halpern February 28, 2025 We have often heard of South Africa’s much-mediatized Genocide case against Israel in front of the ICJ , and many of us have also seen Amnesty International’s reports which call the mass deaths in Gaza a genocide . The controversy surrounding the appropriate term and the clear political game behind any position adopted on the matter really seem to have reopened the question of politics behind the terminology. While we may have heard this debate before, the end of how we name events so that they match the reality of the context of the war in Gaza is part of a far larger issue that has deep historical roots. Indeed, the use of terminology to manipulate public opinion and deny war crimes and genocides is a very powerful tool that has been employed throughout the 20th and even 21st century. Before entering the specifics of the cases that we will compare, it seems impossible not to define the terms that are so critically argued upon. Genocides, war crimes and crimes against humanity are all international crimes committed by individuals or governments that “ affect the core dignity of human beings.” In order to understand the conflict of namings and narratives, one must know the terms’ definitions and history. War crimes refer to “serious breaches of international humanitarian law committed against civilians or enemy combatants during an international or domestic armed conflict, for which the perpetrators may be held criminally liable on an individual basis.” This definition is derived from the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva Convention of 1949 and its additional protocols and Article 8 of the 1998 Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The definition of a crime against humanity “ encompasses crimes such as murder, extermination, rape, persecution and all other inhumane acts of a similar character (wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health), committed ‘as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.’” It is codified in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the ICC. Finally, the term genocide was originally coined by Raphael Lemkin and first appeared in his 1944 work “ Axis Rule in Occupied Europe .” It is defined in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. “It is the specific intention to destroy an identified group either ‘in whole or in part’ that distinguishes the crime of genocide from a crime against humanity.” These definitions also highlight the critical fact that the term Genocide, for example, simply did not exist during some of the events that now are argued to fit within this definition. Such questions add to the terminological dispute the question of the possibility of judging such an event through the lens of a crime that did not exist at the time. Keeping this background in mind, we can now consider how the application of these definitions has been used and disagreed upon. An extremely famous case of genocide denial and terminology debate is the case of the Armenian genocide of 1915 which Turkey, and much of the international community, still officially do not recognize despite vast scholarly support. However, the debate over naming and recognizing this event is not unique. While we cannot explore all cases that have sadly occurred, it appears relevant to look at a few more historical cases that have yet to be fully recognized. We will consider the Japanese massacres and war crimes during the invasion of China namely in Nanjing (December 1927 to February 1938) as well as the Bosnian genocide denial (1995). These cases can be linked to a far more recent lack of recognition by China of its persecution of the Uyghur minority. Through both historical examples and the current cases in Gaza and China the critical importance of terminology is underlined, and its broad political implications clearly seep through. The case of the Armenian genocide is a blatant example of the difficulty of earning official recognition of war crimes, especially genocide, and the tricky word game played by Ankara is critical in this terminological warfare. The Armenian genocide is well recognized by historians and institutions —the creator of the term himself thought to apply it to the context of Ottoman crimes against Armenians in WWI. However, the international scene is not always ruled by expert opinions—as we know all too well—but often is far more politically guided. Thus, the reality is that only 33 countries currently recognize the genocide, and this list notably does not include Turkey. Indeed, Turkey has always maintained a policy of denying “ a deliberate policy of genocide.” The official website of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs portrays the Armenian view as an “embellishe[d]” version that it “selects” in order to vilify Turkey. Moreover, the website follows the phrasing “The events of 1915,” commonly used in official Turkish statements on the matter. Thus, this decision not to call it a ‘genocide’ is intrinsically linked to the maintenance of a very different narrative regarding the events themselves and is a tool aiming to prevent the acknowledgment of the extent of the devastation recorded by most non-Turkish historians. But national narratives differing regarding war crimes is not something that is exclusively reserved to the rather well-known case of Armenia and Turkey. Indeed, Sino-Japanese relations are still strained to this day by very controversial Japanese positions concerning the “Nanjing Massacre” or the “Rape of Nanjing” which in Japan is sometimes referred to as the “ Nanjing incident .” This case is not quite as clear as the case of the Armenia-Turkey disagreements. Indeed, Japan has been largely criticized for its unclear position, with varying positions from an acknowledgment of the Tokyo Trials and remorse for the suffering caused during WWII to an outright denial of the “Nanjing Massacre.” This public debate and division is all the more relevant to Japan’s international relations, within which it has maintained an unclear discourse. While it has apologized in general terms for Imperial Japan’s policies and actions, “many Japanese apologies have looked like “one step forward, one step backward.” Moreover, the lack of a unified messaging has led to questionable word choices such as referring to the “so-called Nanjing massacre” and has even seen the denial of certain Japanese war crimes. Thus, the lack of clear terminology and strategic uncertainty of positioning has led to the possibility of denials and belittling of war crime s which have affected Sino-Japanese relations. In a more recent and still very open wound, we can also consider the case of the Bosnian genocide. This refers to the massacre of Srebrenica in July 1995 which was ruled by the International Court of Justice and International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia a Genocide. It occurred during the Bosnian War, where Bosnian Serb forces committed grave human rights violations and war crimes. Despite such international recognition, Bosnian Serb Politicians have largely denied such crimes, and have recently adopted a report denying the genocidal nature of the massacre. This comes in a context of great disagreement with a UN resolution to commemorate the Srebrenica Genocide by Serbian and Bosnian Serbs. This only serves to highlight that terminology arguments are crucial tools in the hands of genocide deniers and ultimately still have massive repercussions on Bosnian society thirty years after the events. This case is a prime example of the critical importance such terms hold and the real impact they can have. While all of these historical cases are immensely important and still have repercussions to this day, they also serve as a warning sign of the dangers of unclear terminology or intentionally untrue naming of grave events. It seems only fitting to look from such events to current war crimes, human rights violations and potential crimes against humanity whose terms are still under discussion such as the case of Uyghurs in China and the war in Gaza. If we understand that proper wording can strongly impact policy and recognition of the suffering of persecuted peoples, then it becomes all the clearer why so many are arguing on whether the war in Gaza constitutes a genocide, and whether the treatment of Uyghurs is a crime against humanity. Though in these two cases the final rulings are not given, both the ICJ’s indications of measures to be taken to prevent a potential genocide and the UN’s report accusing China of potential crimes against humanity indicate a high chance of such crimes having been committed and have led to no acknowledgment on the part of Israel or China. Such lack of impact of international warnings and refusal to acknowledge the terms used by both parties highlights a consistency in patterns of denial of crimes and seems all the easier to read through given such historical context. As a post scriptum, I feel that I must explain the lack of inclusion of a very well-known denial, and that is Holocaust denial. This is indeed a critical issue that merits being addressed. However, as I mentioned at the beginning, I did not have extensive space to delve into all cases of denial, and I found it to be far more interesting to focus on less well-known issues that have less media attention and deserve to be recognized. This does not in any way take away from the importance of Holocaust denial and of course we should consider a far wider range of events than the selected cases of this article when considering the real impact of terminology disagreements and denial. Photo credits: Diane_Krauthamer on Flickr

< Back The New EU Commission and its Implications Stanimir Stoyanov December 31, 2024 December marks the beginning of a new five-year mandate of the European Commission. In June 2024, Europeans headed to the polls to elect their representatives in the European Parliament, tasked with voting in a new European Commission. On Nov. 27 Members of the European Parliament voted in a new Commission headed by Ursula von der Leyen. As the executive branch of the European Union, the Commission is one of the most important political bodies in the world. Despite its critical role, it remains relatively unfamiliar to the general public. So, this prompts the question, why is the European Commission important? The power of the European Commission The European Commission holds the majority of executive power within the EU. Its functions are to propose legislation based on parliamentary resolutions, enforce EU Regulations and manage the Union’s day-to-day affairs. Put simply, it steers the ship, which carries around 450 million citizens from 27 member states. The Commission's main jurisdiction is regarding trade agreements and environmental policies, which are considered collective European efforts. The Commission's decisions are detrimental on both the European and global stage. It is even responsible for the small things in our everyday lives, such as bottle caps being attached to plastic bottles or Apple being forced to change its charging cables to the universal Type-C. With political instability prevalent in many member states, more significantly in France and Germany, the Commission holds an increasingly important role in European unity. The New European Commission The Commission comprises one member for each of the 27 member states, including six Executive Vice-Presidents. Following this year's EU elections, the European Parliament faced the task of selecting a new Commission President. On July 18, Ursula von der Leyen was re-elected to continue her presidency. Despite a Parliament with more left-leaning MEPs than before, von der Leyen secured her position, albeit with a narrower margin of approval compared to her first term. Meanwhile, the Commission she proposed in November reflected a noticeable shift toward the center-right, with strong representation from the European People’s Party and other conservative groups, echoing the political turbulence seen across EU member states. However, the composition of her new team reflects both continuity and change, with a reshuffled College of Commissioners aiming to tackle pressing issues such as digital transformation, climate policy and industrial competitiveness. These are the new Collage’s six Executive Vice-Presidents, each overseeing critical policy areas: Teresa Ribera Rodríguez (Spain) – Leading the EU's Green Deal efforts for a just and competitive transition. Henna Virkkunen (Finland) – Focused on digital sovereignty and technological innovation. Stéphane Séjourné (France) – Tasked with revitalizing European industry and the single market. Roxana Mînzatu (Romania) – Overseeing education, skills, and social policies. Raffaele Fitto (Italy) – Managing cohesion policy and regional development. Kaja Kallas (Estonia) – Serving as Vice-President and High Representative for Foreign Affairs Prospects and implications of the new European Commission Before being voted in as President of the new Commission, Ursula von der Leyen addressed the European Parliament, outlining her plans and goals for the next five years. Her key priorities include advancing climate neutrality targets, promoting technological sovereignty and strengthening the EU’s influence on the global stage. A central theme of her speech was the Commission’s firm stance against Russia, bolstered by strong critics like former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, now serving as High Representative for Foreign Affairs. This is a continuation of current EU politics when it comes to dealing with Russia, with an even tougher emphasis on support for Ukraine. The Commission also aims to bolster the EU's defense sector by increasing spending and investments. The task of delicately balancing economic growth with environmental commitments has been entrusted to France’s Stéphane Séjourné and Spain’s Teresa Ribera Rodríguez. In addition, the EU is working to achieve greater economic independence, particularly in light of proposed tariffs from the incoming U.S. president. This reflects a broader effort to reduce reliance on external actors for innovation and economic stability. Additionally, von der Leyen has proposed stricter migration policies, emphasizing increased deportation measures, following demands from many national governments for a tougher EU-wide stance on the matter. Is it really a “new” Commission? Some have voiced critical opinions of the new Commission, arguing that it represents more continuity than change. The approach of appealing to a wide political spectrum by providing broad and vague commitments has led to concerns that the Commission’s agenda lacks the required innovation to tackle emerging challenges effectively. This Commission was voted in with the lowest level of support ever, which is raising concerns about political stability on the European level. While such factors, coupled with the same President’s face suggest a continuation of existing policies, the College choices hint at a lean to the right in European politics. We are now at the beginning of the new 2024-2029 European Union mandate, with the future being as uncertain as ever, the new Commission has the important task of representing the European people and fulfilling its duties faced by both internal and external hardships. While its plans appear promising on paper, only time will reveal whether it can achieve its ambitious goals. What is clear, however, is that during a time of deep polarization within Member States, the Commission plays a vital role in maintaining cohesion among Europeans while advancing the EU’s global ambitions.

If restored to its original role as a subaltern tool of social action, the threads of the hatta will once again weave together the working classes on both banks of the Jordan River in their struggle for liberation. The national meanings now attached to the hatta’s colors are constructs designed to essentialize and divide—a red herring distracting from the real story of our grandparents’ hattas. < Back Weaving Both Banks of the River Together: The Keffiyeh and the Construction of National Identity in Jordan and Palestine Anonymous February 28, 2025 Last summer, not far from Menton, in the neighboring city of Cannes, American-born Palestinian-Dutch model Bella Hadid attended the Cannes Film Festival . She wore a dress adorned with an infamous red-and-white checkered pattern, designed as a recreation of the Palestinian keffiyeh by Michael Sears and Hushidar Mortezai , the designers behind the 2000s label Michael & Hushi. Her buzz-worthy attire was promptly met with the usual outrage that Palestinian cultural expression faces in the West. Yet, unbeknownst to many, the backlash was twofold—not only from Western outlets but also from Arab-Jordanian ones, albeit for entirely different reasons. On Jordanian social media, the dress became the punchline for playful yet pointed jokes: " Bella Hadid wears El-Shemagh Al-Urduni Al-Mohadab " (Bella Hadid wears the refined Jordanian shemagh). Though made in jest, these remarks stemmed from a deeper cultural tension—the widespread perception that the red-and-white shemagh (the Jordanian term for keffiyeh) is distinctly Jordanian, while the black-and-white one is Palestinian. To the untrained eye or the non-Arab reader, these differences may seem trivial, even silly. Yet, within the Jordanian context, they have shaped the very fabric of national identity construction. In many ways, Palestinians—who, according to national statistics, make up two-thirds of Jordan's population—became the "other" to the Jordanian national identity. This "othering" occurred because, as Edward Said notes , "the development and maintenance of every culture... involves the construction of opposites and 'others,' whose actuality is always subject to the continuous interpretation and reinterpretation of their differences from 'us.'" The Palestinians, in a sense, were low-hanging fruit—an identity to be reinterpreted in ways that emphasized the differences that define what it means to be Jordanian. Interestingly, during the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank in the 1950s, Palestinians were granted Jordanian citizenship. This policy can be interpreted as an attempt at diluting Palestinian identity by merging it with the Jordanian one. However, simultaneously, as previously mentioned, there were also attempts to depict Palestinian identity as distinct as to highlight the crevices defining Jordanian identity, especially in the 1970s following the events of Black September —an inherently contradictory approach. And yet, anyone who has ever attended the Jordanian derby between the Amman-based club Al-Faisaly FC and the Al Wehdat FC, a Palestinian refugee camp in Amman, knows that this approach—no matter how fraught with contradictions—yields outstanding results. It yielded results of othering that are echoed in the chauvinistic chants of fans , seeking to declare and assert to the opposing crowd who is in fact Jordanian. Results so astonishing that a subtle difference in headdress seems to have mustered a rhetoric of prejudice almost as natural as the passage of time itself, not unlike the animosity borne out of the conflict between age-old sworn enemies. For my generation, these classifications are all we have ever known. Yet, like all national identity construction processes, they are not age-old; they are recent, and, one must emphasize again, imagined . The untold truth is that these distinctions are only as old as the colonial Westphalian order—that is, not old at all. You see, the keffiyeh or shemagh is simply a patterned variant of what is known as the hatta —a plain white headdress worn by the peasantry ( fallah ) or proletariat in the southern Levant long before the Sykes-Picot borders existed. It was, in many ways, a class symbol. While the bourgeois elite wore the Ottoman fez or tarboush , the lower-class fallah wore the hatta. Following a series of peasant -led Arab revolts against British and Zionist colonialism in Mandatory Palestine during the 1920s and 1930s, the fallah ’s hatta was popularized as a tool for grassroots anti-colonial, anti-bourgeois resistance. However, this bottom-up aspect of the movement ended shortly after the hatta was institutionalized by the PLO—not as a tool for fallah -led social action, but rather as a national cultural emblem in the decades that followed. The irony of its anti-bourgeois origins—whether against the Nashashibis in the 1920s and 1930s, the PLO itself in the 1960s and 1970s, or even Bella Hadid today—was largely forgotten in this effort to collectivize indigenous memory. The colored variants of the checkered pattern, however, emerged when Glubb Pasha , the British commander of the Jordanian Army in the 1950s, sought to distinguish his East Bank (Jordanian) soldiers from West Bank (Palestinian) soldiers by assigning them red-and-white and black-and-white checkered keffiyehs, respectively. Glubb’s colonial strategy—an archetype of racialized subjectivity —stripped his colonial subjects of their humanity, reducing them to a color-coded system of control. While the Jordanian nation-building process used the shemagh to assert postcolonial national identity by—ironically—reinforcing a colonial policy at the expense of both the Levantine fallah and Palestinians, the Palestinian national identity project sought to cultivate a memory for an anti-colonial struggle—yet it did so by erasing the fallah ’s agency in that very struggle, cutting it at the knees. Lost in the chauvinistic Jordanian football chants is the memory of our peasant grandparents, whose cultivation of the Levant’s land once transcended Sykes-Picot borders, who led the fight for a homeland untainted by colonial divisions. Lost is the memory of Kayed Mfleh Obaidat —the first martyr for the Palestinian cause—a Transjordanian peasant from the Jordanian town of Irbid who led the Tal al-Thaaleb revolt , the first armed confrontation with settlers on Palestinian land in 1920. Palestinians and their struggle should not be cast as the “other” to Jordanian “stability.” After all, the very symbol we now associate with stability—our mighty red shemagh—was once a banner of class conflict, just as the Palestinian keffiyeh was. Both came from a marker of a lower status that later spearheaded the most successful anti-colonial resistance in the region to date. They were then co-opted by elites, stripping the working class of its agency and reducing its role to a hollow cultural one. Worse still, this co-option was cemented by a colonial officer who weaponized the distinction between the two headdresses to sever working-class Jordanians from a cause once inseparable from their own—a struggle once fought in unison with the Palestinian working class in joint defense of the very same land that fed them both. My grandmother, from the northern Jordanian village of Beit Ras—a village in the Houran Valley stretching from southern Syria to northern Jordan—did not wear a designer Michael & Hushi dress. She wore a red-and-white patterned shemagh her entire life. Her very own sister wore a black-and-white one. My grandfather, older than both, wore a simple white fallahi hatta . I find it difficult to see what truly differentiates them from a fallah in Tiberias—artificial borders and hatta color palettes be damned. But I can easily see who benefits from the internalization of this division. Make no mistake, I did not endeavor to write this article to deny the existence of inter-Levantine cultural differences. Rather, I aimed to show that these differences, in their original sense, did not conform to Sykes-Picot lines, Glubb’s orders or elite co-option. They followed no imposed boundaries but rather the organic ways of the people themselves in their struggle for self-determination. Any attempt to manipulate these distinctions into reinforcing Westphalian borders and upholding the socioeconomic stratification that preserves the colonial political order should not—and will not—prevail in the face of the Southern Levant’s fight for a dignified existence in its homeland. If restored to its original role as a subaltern tool of social action, the threads of the hatta will once again weave together the working classes on both banks of the Jordan River in their struggle for liberation. The national meanings now attached to the hatta ’s colors are constructs designed to essentialize and divide—a red herring distracting from the real story of our grandparents’ hattas . That is the story of a simple piece of cloth they donned atop their heads, which—in all its colors, patterns, and glory, once carried the means to invert class power and strike fear into the hearts of colonialists and their collaborators. It is this legacy of cross-Palestinian-Jordanian working class anti-colonial upheaval—not that of imposed national divisions and hollow cultural signifiers—that must be celebrated, reclaimed and re-enacted, whether in football stadiums or film festivals. Photo credits: Bethany Ann Khan on Flickr

< Back Second-Year Fraser Byers Produces Documentary About Ventimiglia’s Humanitarian Crisis By Colette Holcomb November 30, 2022 In the idyllic bubble of Menton, it is easy to forget the humanitarian crises occurring less than 20 kilometers away in the Italian city of Ventimiglia. Yet, every year, over 30,000 migrants pass through the border town, risking their lives in hopes of a better future. The 2020 closing of the Italian Red Cross Camp and an intensified French police presence has exacerbated the already dangerous humanitarian conditions for migrants at the Franco-Italian frontier. After seeing the implications firsthand through volunteer work at the border, second-year Sciences Po student Fraser Byers wanted to bring awareness to the migrant crisis by producing a documentary film detailing personal accounts of the journey to Europe and what daily life looks like for migrants. This past summer, he worked with friends Nico Romero and Zara Gounden to create the Twenty Miles More project with the support of a Davis Project for Peace grant of $10,000. Romero, an aspiring filmmaker, is the director, cinematographer and editor. Gounden, a New York University student at NYU London, is the co-producer, production accountant and secondary content writer. Twenty Miles More aims to share the story of Ventimiglia as a representation of the complexity that emerges when those in search of safety and security meet barriers to a better life. “I believe that storytelling through this medium [documentaries] is the best way to share with audiences unadulterated accounts of the human tragedy occurring in this region. Documentaries are a form of reporting that invites a visual element. [They] bring validity and often establish a greater emotional connection. I believe that these characteristics are inherent to responsible documentary storytelling [and] are crucial to shifting public opinion…” says Fraser Byers, the executive producer and water survey lead of Twenty Miles More. Beyond the documentary, the project includes research on the water quality of the Roya River — particularly seeking to answer whether the river is a safe water source for migrants. Without the Red Cross Camp, the Roya river has become the primary site where migrants bathe, use the bathroom and access drinking water. Aside from organic human waste, the river is polluted with garbage and spilled oil, and there is concern that the water contains hazardous heavy metals from the upriver industry. “The Roya flows through both French and Italian territories where there is significant industrial and agricultural development — making the unknown chemical and organic qualities of the water a concern considering the high chance of dangerous contaminants,” explained Byers. Through this research, the project will help non-profits and other organizations working in the area to provide safer drinking and bathing alternatives. Over the summer, the crew was able to conduct primary filming and water assessment and have now moved into post-production. Filming began just four months after the beginning of the Ukrainian-Russian war. The timing allowed for a unique framing of the treatment of primarily African and Asian migrants entering Ventimiglia in the context of the treatment of Ukrainian refugees in other areas of France and Italy . Of particular concern is police treatment; throughout the documentary, law enforcement is shown discriminating against migrants and even illegally refusing underage asylum seekers. Given the sensitive nature of much of the documentary’s content and the depth of personal stories shared in the film, the project team wanted to ensure that they were taking an ethical approach to research and production. To do so, they worked with various organizations operating in Ventimiglia and generally in migrant advocacy and aid, such as Caritas, 20K, Red Cross and Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders). These partnerships are also set to collaborate on distribution; the team plans to share the unedited interviews with organizations. They are also applying to various film festivals to showcase the documentary. If you are interested in supporting the Twenty Miles More project, contact Fraser Byers at fraserbyers@gmail.com or check out their website, 20milesmore.org .

The vote of each EU citizen is key to shaping a consensus for the Union; now, let's see which path they determine we take. < Back EU 2024 Elections : Why the Whole World is Looking at the Results By Sina Hosna for European Society May 1, 2024 When many countries are looking to the United States’ elections amid all the others happening in 2024, the European Union (EU) legislative elections will take place on June 9. On that day, citizens of all 27 member states of the EU will be able to vote for the candidates of their national parties to represent them in the European Parliament. In a period of major conflicts, the EU plays one of the biggest roles on the international scene. Both outside and within its borders, the Union is being sorely tested in the face of its challenges. Even on its borders, the crisis exists and has to be treated. Let’s look at what is exactly at stake on June 9, the day 448 million people will head to the polls. Before entering the subject, let’s make a little reminder for our readers: The EU is a political and economic union of 27 member states in Europe. The project traces its roots back to the aftermath of World War II to foster peace, stability, and prosperity on the old continent. The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) precursor to the EU, was established in 1951 by six founding members (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany) to integrate key industries and prevent future conflicts between European countries. Over the decades, the project evolved, expanding its scope to include economic integration, the establishment of a single market, and the adoption of a common currency, the Euro (€). Today, the EU encompasses a wide range of policies and institutions aimed at promoting cooperation, solidarity, and shared values among its member states. First, let’s look at the organization of the election. The EU Parliament election is organized every five years and for the tenth time this year. It is the only time citizens of the European Union can vote directly for their representatives. One fundamental aspect of the EU legislative elections is the proportional representation system. Unlike many national electoral systems, where winner-takes-all dynamics prevail, EU elections employ proportional representation, ensuring that the composition of the European Parliament reflects the diverse political spectrum across member states. 720 Members of Parliament will be elected this year, with 46 seats deleted post-Brexit and 15 seats added since the last elections due to the growing population of member states. The seats of each member state are calculated by population size: Germany, the most populated country in the UE (84 million inhabitants) has the largest number of seats (96), and France follows with 81 seats - 2 were added since 2019 - and the least populated country of the EU, Malta, has the minimum number of seats a state can have: six (as do Cyprus and Luxembourg). Each citizen will have the opportunity to vote for one of his local political parties which is represented in one of the 10 European political parties. These 10 parties are united in eight groups that make up the European parliament, covering approximately the entire political landscape like the S&D (Socialists and Democrats) for the left, EPP (European People’s Party) for the center-right, Renew Europe for the right/liberals, … This parliament, the only directly elected legislative branch of the EU, holds significant powers. It shares the legislative power with the Council of the European Union (meeting of the ministers of each subject) and it has the authority to amend, approve, or reject proposed legislation, all in collaboration with the Council. This co-legislative role ensures that laws reflect the interests and concerns of EU citizens as represented by their MEPs. The European Parliament can also serve as an initiator of legislation. While the European Commission has the sole right of legislative initiative, the Parliament can request the Commission to propose new laws or amendments to existing ones in the EU law. Moreover, the Parliament can propose its resolutions and reports (of its MEP’s), which may influence the legislative agenda and shape EU policies. The Parliament plays a role of scrutiny and oversight over EU institutions. Through hearings, inquiries, and the power to adopt resolutions and recommendations, it holds these institutions accountable (in the name of the citizens of the EU) for their actions and decisions, ensuring transparency and democratic accountability. The European Parliament is also responsible for the EU budget, still with the Council and the nomination of the president of the Commission and its Commissioners with hearings. The last election in 2019 had a turnout of 50.66%, and the election saw the first surge in voter participation since the first election in 1979, reflecting heightened interest and engagement in EU affairs among citizens. What has been highlighted the most was the rise of populist and eurosceptic parties across Europe. Parties like Matteo Salvini's Lega in Italy and Marine Le Pen's Rassemblement National in France made significant gains, reflecting growing disillusionment with mainstream politics and EU institutions. There is an additional challenge with transferring powers to the local — such as municipal — to the supranational EU level. The process is too slow for some Europhiles or giving up too much national sovereignty for Eurosceptics. This is where the EU institutions have to find a balance: how to convince the people in the EU’s capital cities as well as the inhabitants of the countryside in the depths of Bulgaria? The challenge of the EU institutions is to convince all its citizens of its project and the impact it can have on the world. We can see it, particularly in the war in Ukrain e, where the EU provides military resources, welcomes Ukrainians fleeing war, and has fast-tracked the candidacy of Ukraine to the Union. Also, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the EU plays an important role in diplomacy and humanitarian aid. All the reforms of the EU have been voted on by the former composition of the European parliament and the direction the Union will take will be decided on June 9. The future of the EU and the world is at stake. The vote of each EU citizen is key to shaping a consensus for the Union; now, let's see which path they determine we take.

"If you don't believe at your age that you're not going to change the world, who will?” < Back How to Begin a Career in Change-Making? A Guide for the Idealists & an Interview with Lucile Marbeau By Lara Harmankaya For ambitious Sciences Po students, the search for a career is already on the agenda. LinkedIn accounts have been made, and attempts to network with professors after class are common. There is, after all, the frightening prospect of unemployment that is constantly reminded to us by our friends studying STEM. Yet, I have come to notice that this attachment to internship-hunts and forming the right network is not one that completely stems from the pursuit of self-interest and prestige. In fact, I suspect that a large part of this future-oriented thinking is derived from the students’ motivation to change some of the problematic characteristics of our world — as idealistic as that sounds. Admitting that such thoughts circulate in my head quite regularly, I decided to inquire into the life of a practitioner who works in the humanitarian field. Lucile Marbeau, a Sciences Po graduate and the Deputy Communications Manager of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), kindly agreed to my proposal to interview her. She offered insights into the structure of the ICRC, described the progression of her career from freelance journalism to communications, and shared some advice on how young people can enter into this field. The interview took off with an overview of Marbeau’s career, beginning with her time in journalism, through which she became acquainted with the functions and operations of the ICRC. She told me that she worked in Kosovo, Israel and the West Bank, where she came to know about the International Community of the Red Cross and also the Palestinian Red Crescent. She made sure to carefully differentiate between the national and international components of the Red Cross, which often get confused. She stated that ‘national societies,’ such as the French Red Cross and the Egyptian Red Crescent are not the same as the International Committee of the Red Cross, which has its headquarters in Geneva. The ICRC is not affiliated with any government, as are the national Red Cross societies. What also distinguishes the ICRC is the fact that its mandate is “specifically on armed conflicts to assist and protect the victims of armed conflicts, and also to continue on developing and promoting international humanitarian law.” In her words, its “basic aim is to make war less horrible.” One way is through the organization’s work on finding missing persons, which Marbeau’s journalistic research on the Kosovo conflict directed her to learn more about. She appreciated how the ICRC is able to keep the files of missing persons alive, even when the political incentives to do so begin to disappear. It becomes one of the very few sources of answers to families who are desperate for even the smallest trace of information about their loved ones. Acknowledging the importance of such efforts, she seized the opportunity to be a part of this organization when it appeared. For her, the transition from journalism to working as a spokesperson for the ICRC entailed “a different frame of mind.” “The international community of the Red Cross, because it's a neutral organization, is going to act differently and discuss things in confidence bilaterally with the parties and not so much in the public,” quite unlike the work of a journalist who must “address political issues” directly and dauntlessly. Leaving behind a political voice to not “diminish our access to the victims of the conflict” appears to be a worthy sacrifice. In fact, not even a sacrifice at all, but a practice of diplomacy: “what I appreciated arriving in the international community of the Red Cross is this position of neutrality, of not saying, who is right, who is wrong. And it's not for the ICRC or a philosophical point of view at all. It's much more a principle, a guiding principle, in order to be talking to all sides.” Also, it is necessary to protect the institution’s ability to “act in favor of those who are missing, those who are detained, for the wounded, for the civilians, and the most vulnerable categories of people in war.” When asked to elaborate more on her experience working as a journalist, she replied by saying that one of its main merits was the way it prompted her to “really dig into specific contexts.” Through her visits to Israel and the West Bank, she believed she was “able to understand more and more with finesse the conflict itself and the polarization between communities.” She revealed that she learned how to not look at issues with “judgements that often come with ignorance of the historical dynamics, and of those who aren’t hurt directly by the conflict.” Instead, she pointed out the importance of going to the area of conflict physically, or communicating with others “whether they be politicians, academics, activists, people who are trying to change things, and to be able to give that back to people who will never have that opportunity.” For Marbeau, at the heart of journalism is “to enable the reader to understand why this is a conflict, and what are the different views which are being expressed.” She continues: “As a journalist, you have the privilege of being able to have that access to people. But then it's also a huge responsibility, because when you write, you have power. You have power over those who don't necessarily have the same knowledge as you do. So you have a power to influence, and this is where for me, it remains extremely important to be honest intellectually, and to really convey as many possible facts and conflicting views.” Navigating the battles of clashing interests is one of the most significant and challenging duties of ICRC delegates. Yet, sometimes people outside the field of international humanitarian law fail to understand what this job is composed of. In quoting ICRC delegate Marcel Junod’s Le troisième combattant , Ms Marbeau emphasized precisely what the principal objective is: “the role of the humanitarians is to go in between the opposite sides and create a space, a humanitarian space. And this is what's precious about the work that my colleagues do everywhere in the world.” They aim to “preserve as much possible humanitarian space within the fighting.” International humanitarian law is one of the few leverages utilized for this purpose. The difficulty arises from the fact that “the time of the fighting, the time of the suffering, the time of the media, isn't the same. And it requires often from colleagues a lot of patience before getting some results and constant, constant dialogue with the different parties.” Thus, as we can see, the application of law which is embedded in the Geneva Conventions, principally emerges from “a lot of patience, diplomacy, and time.” A career in this field could be the right choice for you if you find yourself able to overcome such complications. Marbeau’s extensive knowledge of the ICRC’s functions and institutional structure was also very informative. When I asked her about how she and her colleagues deal with obstinate politicians, uncooperative officials and other political obstacles that hinder their objectives, she underlined the place of “collective responsibility” when respecting and implementing humanitarian law. At the ICRC, it is the cooperation of many branches that ensures compliance with “the law of the weakest.” “We're going to be speaking with the legal services of the ministry, for instance, of defense. It's then going to be the Head of Delegation who's going to be talking to ministers. It's going to be our colleague who is himself a former military who's going to be discussing and doing training in international humanitarian law directly [with] the military. So you're going to have at different levels, by different specialized colleagues, who work on different parts of the party to really bring a culture of respect for the law.” Even in the case of documenting ongoing grave violations, the interconnected network that constitutes the human rights field allows the ICRC to urge other actors to play their part. “When we've already gone through all the chain of commands, spoken to the highest level of the authorities—when nothing is moving—then what you do is mobilize other countries… And so this is what we remind them at some point, saying, ‘we know you're financing them. You're sending them weapons. You have a responsibility in making sure that they don't commit violations.’” Accountability is key in this field as it is in others. Without it, the successes of the ICRC in preventing violations would never materialize. The rest of the interview was dedicated to her advice to young people. When I inquired about whether she finds her job fulfilling, and her recommendations to start a career in humanitarian work, her first response was, “Yes, but the first thing I'd say is act now. There's already things that you can do in your environments, working, volunteering for, for instance, at the French Red Cross, or the Red Cross of Monaco, other groups, there's already some social work that can be done where you are, and you don't need to wait…to work to help the most vulnerable and defend them.” As we begin preparing for our month of Parcours Civique volunteering, perhaps this can remind us of the salience of gaining experience and exposure to realities early on. Her second piece of advice was to pinpoint the “identity” of the kind of organization one may want to work for. She suggested that, “if you want to do advocacy work, it's not going to be with the International Committee of the Red Cross, at least not publicly. There, you have to turn to organizations like Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, then have others who are going to be more specific on certain issues. But if the role is to speak out, if you want to speak out to the world about violations ongoing and for people everybody to know about it, it's not going to be in the International Community of the Red Cross because we work in a much more discreet manner…we need to be able to assure that we stay in the field and be able to help people on both sides of the front line to discuss with all the parties.” The first step in beginning a career in either of these pathways is through trying them out, and utilizing our Parcours Civique could be a beneficial way to do so. One of the main takeaways from this interview, for me, was the importance of overcoming passivity. Marbeau’s commitment to diplomacy and dialogue–as the spokesperson for the ICRC–was evident, yet she was also cognizant of how “collective action is needed in order to keep those minimal rights.” Just like the collaboration that takes place between the many institutional branches of the ICRC, international actors and different stakeholders must work together to achieve solid, tangible results. This is all the more pertinent now, where “the use of force is strongly coming back on the international scene as a way of solving conflicts.” When I asked her to share her expectations from future generations and what she wishes to see more of in the future, she urged us, the future generations, to “not get beat down, by whether it be national politics or world politics, thinking that your voices don't matter, that things are messed up, that things won't change. Because, I mean, when you look at it through history, you can righteously be despaired. But you must also see the positive evolutions of rights, which have been fought for and which have been achieved.” Feeling small and impotent on a larger scale is a natural occurrence for all of us. Marbeau’s message is one that encourages us to direct these feelings into action, on whichever scale that may be. “Some people tend to also kind of retreat in their personal sphere because they feel powerless. And I think one of the messages to say is, well, even if you feel powerless, you're still going to get impacted by what's going on in your environment, whether it be national or international. So you have to believe again in the fact that you can do something about it. Or else you're only a victim. You're only receiving the blows. You're only passive.” I wish to conclude this article with Lucile Marbeau’s final words of motivation, which I believe need to be emphasized one more time. “I'd say, really start engaging yourselves now. And it's the best way to see also to see what interests you the most, what issues you hold more dearly also. Because, depending on your age, there's different strengths and weaknesses. And for now, you need to believe. If you don't believe at your age that you're not going to change the world, who will?” “So it's also about believing again in the fact that values, reason, law, can triumph over force and antagonisms. And it's almost a bit idealistic, what I'm saying.” This may be true, but if we are not idealists, then who can we entrust with the goal of imagining a more ideal world?

From Nov. 24 to 26, the ummah Mentoniya traveled to Reims to participate in SPMUN, encapsulating two days of intellectual collaboration unfolding under the Model United Nations (MUN) banner. < Back Reflecting on SPMUN 2023 By Naïa Berliocchi for MEDMUN December 31, 2023 From Nov. 24 to 26, the ummah Mentoniya traveled to Reims to participate in SPMUN, encapsulating two days of intellectual collaboration unfolding under the Model United Nations (MUN) banner. The theme of this year, "Embracing Transformation: A juncture for a better future," served as the backdrop for impassioned debates and visionary dialogues. Throughout the summer, the RIMUN and MEDMUN teams collaborated tirelessly for months, striving to make the 3rd edition of SPMUN 2023 a memorable experience. In total, the event gathered 220 students from all seven Sciences Po Paris campuses. Thus, a journey began for 46 students from the Menton campus of Sciences Po Paris as we embarked on an excursion of both distance and in the realms of diplomacy and discourse. This journey commenced early for us, but it was worth it. At 5 a.m., we gathered in Bastion at the crack of dawn and bid farewell to the sun-kissed shores of Menton, braving a grueling fifteen-hour bus ride, all for a rendezvous in the regal city of Reims, where history whispers through the stones of its majestic cathedrals and the spirit of kings still lingers. Although we missed the welcome cocktail held at 5:30 p.m., we arrived just in time for the opening ceremony. The masters of ceremony, Tarun Ruschmeier and Shereen Abdul Razak from RIMUN, and Crystal Cordell, Reims campus director, welcomed us. We were then introduced to the general theme and the committees by RIMUN and MEDMUN executives, Mara Beteagu, Lisa Poisson, Rebeka Tatham, and Luna Ragozino. Additionally, the incredible guest speaker Hugues Pernet, former French Ambassador to Ukraine, honored us with his presence and delivered a speech. Finally, the opening ceremony concluded with words from Othman Benjelloun (Secretary General of MEDMUN) and Alicia Petrella (President of RIMUN), who officially declared SPMUN 2023 open. The participants then met up at "Le Saint-Maurice," roughly a rémois equivalent to "Le Rétro," exclusively reserved for the occasion. However, it seemed that the esteemed delegates preferred to spend the evening at Anamour, the local kebab restaurant. Afterwards, the ummah, used to the sunny and warm south, braved the bitter cold in Reims, and made their way to their host's places: students from the Reims campus who had set up their rooms for us to spend the nights in. This opportunity to meet new people became a truly bonding experience. From Saturday onwards, we delved headfirst into debates, formed alliances, and addressed global issues across eleven committees, catering to all levels of expertise, from beginner to expert, in either French or English. Delegates renegotiated the Kyoto Protocol, debated the introduction of artificial intelligence, addressed security challenges in Libya, and much more. The highly anticipated moment arrived at the end of the conference's second day: the party. At 10 p.m., future diplomats gathered at Nemes, an Egyptian-themed bar. Despite the absence of Arabic music played by the DJ, who, during the day, had been seen in formal attire as a delegate, we had a fantastic time until 2:30 a.m., showcasing Menton's party spirit to other Sciences Po students. Of course, true to its vibrant spirit, Menton brought the heat – quite literally – over the weekend. As the ummah Mentonniya ignited the other delegates with their enthusiasm, the frozen halls of Reims found themselves warmed not just by the fervor of discussions but by our fiery passion and amazing chants. Consequently, Menton didn't fail to stand out during snack breaks, lunches, ceremonies, and parties, echoing "Et quand Menton entre dans la salle, c’est tout Sciences Po qui se met au halal,” singing “Sciences Po Menton je t’aime," and dancing in circles to 3 Daqat. On Sunday, at 2 p.m., as the end drew near, the well-dressed participants headed to the Grand Amphithéâtre for the closing ceremony. A recap video of the weekend was screened, followed by speeches from Sofia Bartolini and Penelope Gelman (MEDMUN crisis co-directors), Rania Moalla (MEDMUN) and Carla Mory (Logistics of RIMUN), and the wonderful speaker Henry Zipper de Fabiani. After the chairs of each committee announced and awarded prizes for “best delegate,” Othman Benjelloun (Secretary General of MEDMUN) and Alicia Petrella (President of RIMUN) gave the final speech, officially closing this edition of SPMUN. With suitcases in hand, we boarded the bus where Jean-Jacques and Jean-Louis awaited us to depart Reims and its historic charms. After a 14-hour overnight bus journey, we arrived back in Menton at 6.30 a.m., just in time for some of us with 8 a.m. classes! Yet, it was with fond memories of the incredible time we shared during this weekend, thanks to the hard work of the MUN teams, that we returned home.

Sanctions do more than empty out grocery aisles and indirectly kill the innocent recipients. While the proposed intention is to combat autocratic regimes through economic means, rather than traditional uses of violence, the effect is often counterintuitive, propping up the very regimes they aim to weaken. < Back Sanctions: The Key to a Longstanding, Powerful, Authoritarian Regime Isabella Suels for Amnesty Sciences Po Menton April 30, 2025 We have entered a new era of warfare. Rather than tanks, bombs and guns, sanctions have become the weapon of choice. Unlike the aforementioned tools of destruction, sanctions do not cause direct harm. Rather, their harmful nature is disseminated through food shortages and inflation, which are de trimental and, in some cases, deadly. Nevertheless, sanctions do more than empty out grocery aisles and indirectly kill the innocent recipients. While the proposed intention is to combat autocratic regimes through economic means, rather than traditional uses of violence, the effect is often counterintuitive, propping up the very regimes they aim to weaken. Autocrats feed off sanc tions. Financial penalties are often the glue that holds a nation together. They create the perfect launching-point for the creation of the rally ‘round the flag : a period of increased short-run popular support of a country's government or political leaders during periods of international crisis or war. This phenomenon compels us to look at the imposition of sanctions as an indirect attack on a country; leaders use the implementation of these sanctions to forge a strong sense of national identity, often placing themselves as a figure of unity and strength for their people. For instance, in Iraq, during the reign of Saddam Hussein, the U.S. imposed heavy sanctions on Iraq. The side effects of these sanctions included the usual suspects: food insecurity and malnutrition, which continued through the thirteen years of sanctions. However, the effects of U.S. sanctions spanned far beyond that period. The effect of ongoing malnutrition, specifically among children, resulted in long-term health problems and cognitive deficits. The suffering experienced by children and vulnerable communities in Iraq during this period changed Iraqis’ perception of the West. As the spread of disease throughout the population came as a consequence of the sanctions imposed by the West, it became clear that Western powers were to blame for the humanitarian crisis. With sanctions as the main perpetrators, pressure was taken off Saddam Hussein and his track record of enforced disappearances, killing, torture, execution, and more during his tenure. Although the sanctions were framed as “denying Saddam access to funds,” their reach went far beyond that, denying ordinary Iraqis access to basic rights. Therefore, resulting in an onset of hyperinflation, the government could not provide people with livable wages, and critical government institutions crumbled. Hence, the detrimental effects of Western sanctions strengthened Saddam Hussein’s argument that the West was the enemy of the Iraqi people. The primary goal of Western sanctions was to create enough pressure to oust Saddam Hussein from power. However, his reign would persist until April 2003, following the United States’ invasion of Iraq. Years after his demise, the legacy of Saddam Hussein is complex and the negative memory of the sanctions remains unchanged. This is why countries must be cautious of the power their economic sanctions hold. There is a fine balance between political pressure and human rights violations that gets buried under the sanctions. Once that line is crossed, it is hard to jump back to the other side, and it leaves a vacuum that gets filled by newfound alliances. Sanctions breed isolation as countries are discouraged from trading with sanctioned countries in fear that Western countries will cut ties, thereby motivating countries under heavy sanctions to forge alliances with each other. Alliances built on the common trait of isolation are not uncommon and hinder the original goals of sanctions. If the point of this economic weapon is to ostracize, it completely falls short when countries join forces to keep themselves above water in the midst of economic turmoil. As was best highlighted between the relationship of the U.S.S.R. and Cuba during the Cold War, the heavy U.S. sanctions placed on both these countries allowed them to craft a strategic alliance that kept Cuba afloat during the reign of Fidel Castro. Even today, decades after their initial relationship blossomed, Cuba and Russia benefit from one another. For instance, since late 2023, Cubans have even been lured to fight in the Russian army with the prospect of high pay and a Russian passport as a reward for their services. This renaissance of Cuban and Russian relations further demonstrates how the consequences of sanctions outlive presidents, governments and, in this case, even countries. With the ongoing trade war between the United States and countries around the globe, it remains to be seen how these current events will influence our world today. As the United States unloads its economic arsenal, it is only a matter of time until it resorts to sanctions. The only thing that remains for certain is that sanctions are an extremely powerful tool, and if used without caution, they could aggravate rather than tame. Photo source: Unsplash

Individuals, as a group, have power. We can work for ocean protection on different scales. May it be respecting the sea and its ecosystems by disposing of your waste and cigarette butts at the beach, signing petitions or working with associations. < Back A Blue Planet: Let’s Talk About the Oceans Maud de Boysson for Environmenton February 28, 2025 As Menton students, there is one constant in our lives: the Mediterranean Sea. We go to class, we see it, we party, we see it, we work in the library, we see it, we go to the beach for a swim, well, we’re in it. The Mediterranean is the highlight of our days more often than not. But what do we know about its ecosystem and the risks it faces less than 200 meters from where we live? When one is talking about the environment, our first thought is often about land, animals, forests or pollution. This is quite reasonable since those are the parts of our planet that we are most in contact with and are able to capture our attention on a global scale. We have witnessed it recently with the gigantic fires that engulfed the city of Los Angeles in January 2025, turning everything to ashes in its wake. However, today, I would like us to explore a quieter part of our planet. A part that we rarely think about but is as vibrant and important in the fight against climate change as the rest of our world: the oceans. Bodies of water represent 72% of our planet, as well as half of the oxygen we breathe every day. They produce 15% of the animal protein we consume, regulate the temperature of the planet and absorb carbon dioxide (CO2), making our air breathable. They are vital to our survival as well as the survival of all species. Yet we know very little about them, as 80% of the oceans remain unknown to humans and some claim that we have more knowledge about the moon’s surface than about the ocean. Like the rest of our planet, oceans are affected by climate change. They are slowly getting hotter and are, as a result, less efficient in their task of regulating the earth's temperatures. They are getting more polluted and more acidic, and marine and coastal ecosystems are victims of overexploitation and are unable to renew their resources. One of the main problems is that, as for every climate change-related issue, all these variables are connected. Indeed, oceans absorb carbon dioxide and regulate our planet's temperature. However, as they absorb more and more CO2 and the temperatures get warmer, the oceans also become more acidic and are less efficient in their absorption of CO2. Moreover, the warming of the ocean, while nice for a dive in the middle of the winter, has tragic effects on sea organisms desperately needing cool water to survive. The combination of decades of overfishing and the decrease in fish’ survival rates are crisis factors that are also linked to the oceans because we are trying to fish more each year while the populations are not able to keep up with our consumption. Indeed, according to the United Nations (UN) Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in 2020 more than 25% of the fish population was overfished . To sum up, the situation of the oceans is as dire as its emerged counterpart and actions must be taken to protect them. Diverse activists, NGOs and foundations work on it, trying to be heard by decision-makers. Next June, the United Nations Convention for the Ocean (UNCO) will be hosted by Costa Rica and France and will happen in Nice. It is only the third convention of this type and will be similar to the Conference of the Parties (COP), a place for exchange between countries, NGOs and scientists. The conference will be held from the 9th of June to the 13th, providing a place to discuss ocean-related issues such as the development of marine protected areas, the protection of ocean floors against deep mining as well as the protection of marine biodiversity in international waters. One of the main goals of the conference is for the “high seas treaty” to be ratified before its grand opening. This treaty is a text promulgated by the UN that wishes to protect international waters’ biodiversity, of which 1% are currently protected, by creating important Marine Protection Areas (MPA) all over the world. This text aims to protect at least 30% of the oceans’ surface. However, as of now, only seventeen countries have ratified the treaty, which is 43 countries short of the necessary 60 to have it transformed into formal international law. In the context of climate change and the latest revelations that we are already over the 1.5-degree threshold that was indicated as a clear limit in 2015 during COP21, marine environments, now more than ever, need to be protected. Nevertheless, this protection seems unlikely, as countries and companies do not cease exploiting our planet. Deep sea mining, for example, is the latest initiative to gain access to resources, such as copper, nickel, cobalt and manganese, that are necessary for technological production and are becoming rarer in traditional mines. However, the extraction of metals in zones that are often thousands of meters deep under the surface of the water and have never seen the faintest trace of humanity will have an impact on ecosystems and biodiversity that are among the purest (by which I mean they have not been damaged by humans’ action) in the world. Moreover, similar to the COP, many are wondering about the efficiency of these new initiatives, especially after the second withdrawal of the United States of America from the Paris Agreement following Donald Trump’s investiture. The latest COP has been unsatisfactory and who is to say that we will get better results with yet another instance of simple discussions with no concrete action? Multilateralism and collaboration against climate change on an international scale seem more fragile than ever, and it does not seem like we are getting any closer to efficient measures. However, this does not mean that we are powerless since individuals, as a group, have power. We can work for ocean protection on different scales. May it be respecting the sea and its ecosystems by disposing of your waste and cigarette butts at the beach, signing petitions or working with associations. I am a firm believer that when the situation seems desperate, we have to take action one step at a time. Actions, as small as they can seem, can have an important impact. The “look down action” for example, rallied activists from all over the world to oppose a deep sea mining project in Norway and won. This shows us once again that activism has results, if enough people put pressure on government officials and companies. So next time you feel anxious about climate change, I recommend taking a deep breath, looking at the sea and letting yourself be engulfed by its infinity. Wait a bit in the silence of the waves and then call a fellow ecologist to resume working together. This is now our only path forward. Photo credits: Pedro Meerbaum

Besides our ambitions to keep students informed and to make room for our photographers and journalists to exercise their talents, the Menton Times also has a mission to give a voice to all students on campus. < Back Letter from the Editor By Celeste Abourjeili September 30, 2021 Dear SciencesPistes, Welcome to the first ever (teaser) issue of the Menton Times ! I am beyond excited to see where the Menton Times team of 2021-2022 will take this newspaper and where it will settle for future generations of Mentonaise students to come. The goal of the Menton Times — and its parent organization Menton Policy Review (MPR) — is to get information to students in a quick and reliable manner. With that goal in mind, the Menton Times is proud to publish news monthly and on a consistent schedule. Journalism, in its many forms, is a pillar of democracy. Journalists are empowered to dictate the global narrative and shape public sentiment. As students of politics, and as citizens of the uncensored world, we have a duty to support free press and enjoy as much news content as our students are willing to produce. With that, I gladly announce that the Menton Times is committed to reporting breaking news, whether as part of our monthly issues or as social media publications. The Menton Times is also thrilled to bring photojournalism to the Menton Campus. Besides our ambitions to keep students informed and to make room for our photographers and journalists to exercise their talents, the Menton Times also has a mission to give a voice to all students on campus. By that I mean that the Menton Times is glad to report and maintain archives of campus affairs via our photos and articles. We also look forward to working in collaboration with other associations and guest contributors to make more voices heard and to tell the stories of the SciencesPo Menton community. I encourage all SciencesPistes to give it a try — there are no qualifications for story-telling. Finally, I started the Menton Times in order to bring conventional news reporting to Menton. This traditional but modern newspaper hopes to serve the SciencesPistes in Menton, and to that end, I welcome you to a wonderful year of reporting! Happy reading. Celeste Abourjeili Editor-in-Chief The Menton Times Chers SciencesPistes, Bienvenue à la toute première édition du Menton Times ! Je suis impatiente à l'idée de voir où l'équipe du Menton Times de 2021-2022 va emmener ce journal et où elle s'installera pour les futures générations d'étudiants mentonnais à venir. L'objectif du Menton Times - et de son organisation mère Menton Policy Review (MPR) - est de fournir des informations aux étudiants de manière rapide et fiable. Avec cet objectif en tête, le Menton Times est fier de publier des nouvelles mensuelles et selon un calendrier cohérent. Le journalisme, sous ses nombreuses formes, est un pilier de la démocratie. Les journalistes ont le pouvoir de dicter le récit global et de façonner l'opinion publique. En tant qu'étudiants en sciences politiques, et en tant que citoyens d'un monde où nous pouvons nous exprimer, nous avons le devoir de soutenir la presse libre et de profiter d'autant de contenu que nos étudiants sont prêts à produire. Sur ce, je suis heureuse d'annoncer que le Menton Times s'engage à rapporter les informations de dernière minute, que ce soit dans le cadre de nos numéros mensuels ou des publications sur les réseaux sociaux. Le Menton Times est également ravi de mettre en avant le photojournalisme au Campus de Menton. Mais outre nos ambitions de tenir les étudiants informés et de permettre à nos photographes et journalistes d'exercer leurs talents, le Menton Times a également pour mission de donner une voix à tous les étudiants du campus. Je veux dire par là que le Menton Times est heureux de couvrir les actualités du campus par le biais de nos photos et articles. Nous sommes également impatients de travailler en collaboration avec d'autres associations et chroniqueurs invités pour faire entendre plus de voix et raconter les histoires de la communauté de SciencesPo Menton. J'encourage tous les SciencesPistes à essayer - il n'y a pas de qualifications requises pour raconter des histoires. Enfin, j'ai lancé le Menton Times afin d'apporter des nouvelles conventionnelles à Menton. Ce journal traditionnel mais moderne espère servir les SciencesPistes de Menton, et à cette fin, je vous souhaite de profiter pleinement de cette merveilleuse année de reportage ! Bonne lecture. Céleste Abourjeili Rédactrice en chef Le Menton Times

The Feminist Union, most commonly known as the FU, is the feminist association on campus. We advocate for better equality between men and women and our aim is also to fight against any kind of violences, whether economic, social, or sexual towards women. < Back Association Feature: Feminist Union By Zélie Savinien September 30, 2021 The Feminist Union, most commonly known as the FU, is the feminist association on campus. We advocate for better equality between men and women and our aim is also to fight against any kind of violences, whether economic, social, or sexual towards women. To do so, we organize multiple events such as the consent talks at the beginning of the year or octobre rose (Pink October.) We want everyone to feel included in this association, so if you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us on our social medias!

< Back Trump and Republicans Win 2024 U.S. Elections Pracheth Sanka November 30, 2024 He’s done it. Donald Trump has won the 2024 Presidential Election, ascending, once again, to the coveted office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. He has achieved a feat not seen in over one hundred years, joining Grover Cleveland as the only two presidents to serve non-consecutive terms. He also became the first Republican presidential candidate to gain a majority of the voter share since George W. Bush in 2004, breaking a four-election-long streak of Democratic dominance in the popular vote. His shocking success arrived following several Election Eve predictions for a Vice President Kamala Harris victory. While many outlets stated the race was “too close to call,” notable pollsters and forecasters painted more optimistic pictures of Harris’ hopes. Ann Selzer’s reputedly reliable Iowa poll indicated a silent majority of democrat support in both conservative and swing states, and Allan Lichtman’s “Keys to the White House” predicted an incumbent party win this electoral cycle. Both The Economist and opinion poll aggregator FiveThirtyEight gave Harris a lead in simulated estimations, albeit with extremely tight results. Despite these grim projections for Trump, he had an outrageously strong showing, winning all seven battleground states en route to gaining 312 electoral college votes and more than 75 million votes. The White House was not the only favorable outcome for Republicans, as they gained control of the Senate, retained their narrow majority in the House of Representatives and maintained their majority of Governors nationwide, winning seven out of the ten gubernatorial contests. They won high-profile Senate races, namely in Texas, where the infamous incumbent Senator Ted Cruz won decisively against the underdog U.S. representative Colin Allred. In Montana, political newcomer Tim Sheehy prevailed against the long-time incumbent, the moderate Jon Tester. Both of these races were described as tight and dead heats in the lead-up to November 5th. Still, decisive Republican victories indicate the prevalent and enduring conservative ideals among the progressive facades. President-elect Trump will now benefit from a perfect Republican trifecta, which entails a conservative control of all three branches of government. In the first two years of his initial term, he was gifted Republican command of the Senate and House of Representatives but battled against a divided Supreme Court. But now, with a 6-3 right-wing majority, Trump has the legal and political framework to enact his Agenda 47, or perhaps the more controversial Project 2025. He’s also been busy building a czar-studded and loyalist cabinet to reign in the executive branch. There have been some notable picks among the bunch, such as Florida Senator and foreign policy hardliner Marco Rubio as Secretary of State and South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem as head of the Department of Homeland Security. Incoming Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, a subtle and often off-stage figure, will head Trump’s advisory team. Rising the ranks as an election strategist, “The Ice Maiden,” as Trump has affectionately anointed her, has become a close right-hand woman on the campaign trail, a quiet character who brings order and competence to an otherwise chaotic campaign trail. Further, Trump is not scared to appoint those new to government. His expected appointee for the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth , is a Fox News correspondent who has never worked in the Department of Defense and whose closest experience is being an Army Veteran. To streamline and economize government operations, Trump has picked two leading campaign partners to head the new Department of Government Efficiency: Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. For Musk, the CEO of X and the world’s wealthiest person, this would be the first public position he’s held, and his contracts with the Federal government have raised alarms of a possible conflict of interest. Likewise, Ramaswamy’s closest call to office came with his 2024 Presidential campaign, a role he was ready to take on after being a career biotech entrepreneur and near billionaire. These appointees highlight Trump’s vision for a devoted and dependable executive branch. His cabinet and advisory committee will be composed of people who won’t tell him no, an essential element in achieving his goals in the next four years. This means the “ Dictator on Day One ” can quickly enact some of his most crucial policy proposals. Expect to see hefty tariffs levied —especially against Chinese imports—and a push toward a more protectionist approach to trade. Despite fears of large migrant detention centers and promises of a mass deportation mission, Trump will much more realistically use executive action to halt catch-and-release policy and restore his 2019 “Remain in Mexico” practice to reign in the crisis in the United States’ southern border. Also, look for Trump to use his executive power to majorly cut down the size of the federal bureaucracy, adding party adherents to the administrative state, and to pardon many of those convicted for their actions of storming the Capitol on January 6th, 2021, another show of affection to his loyalists and fanatics in his quest for a fully conservative government. Though he needs congressional support for certain legislative measures, Americans should predict a continuation and expansion of his 2018 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and more than likely see a steep decline in aid to Ukraine and an increase to Israel, which comes along with promises to end both conflicts as soon as possible. With the control of the Senate and House, expect a slew of conservative bills to be passed. Republicans have two years before the 2026 midterm elections to enact a hardline, right-wing agenda before their bicameral majority becomes jeopardized. Though the future looks bleak for many Democrat and left-leaning voters, this election cycle offered some spots of hope. In Arizona, far-right MAGA devotee Kari Lake was defeated by Ruben Gallego, adding to a set of liberal policy-makers and executives who hold statewide office. Despite Trump carrying the state by 3 points, North Carolina saw Democrat wins in its high executive offices. Established Democrats Josh Stein, Rachel Hunt, and Jeff Jackson became the Governor, Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General respectively, sweeping the top three elected offices in the state. In the State House of Representatives, Democratic wins can help break the years-long Republican supermajority, allowing Stein to effectively use his veto power to curb conservative policy. Out of the ten states that left abortion measures to public referenda, seven codified or strengthened protections in their state’s constitution. Only Florida, which failed to reach the sixty percent threshold needed, and hyper-conservative Nebraska and South Dakota were unsuccessful in the effort to enshrine and protect abortion rights. Though eclipsed by the result of the Presidential election, these small victories provide optimistic outlooks for Midterm elections and individual state policy for the near future. But in the end, Trump won. Republicans won. Handily, America’s left-wing lost, and for at least two years, conservatives will have a straightforward path to achieving their ideals. This will undoubtedly manifest itself in a Reagan-esque, populist call back to a time of American “greatness,” with streaks of protectionism and nationalism, a full fall into Trumpism by the Republican right. While it is possible to gauge some of the precise ways this will come about, with near-guarantees of tax cuts and Trump loyalist appointees, the future does seem fairly uncertain, especially with some small Democratic shifts occurring across the country. What is certain, though, is that come January 20th, President-elect Donald Trump will take office, ushering in a new era of his dominance in American politics.