Search Results

During the European Union Foreign Ministers’ meeting on Jan. 22, the Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz presented a video discussing the creation of an artificial island off the coast of Gaza to serve as a maritime port and potentially an airport for the strip in the future. < Back Artificial Island Proposal for Gaza By Jad Toufic Toutinji February 29, 2024 During the European Union Foreign Ministers’ meeting on Jan. 22, the Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz presented a video discussing the creation of an artificial island off the coast of Gaza to serve as a maritime port and potentially an airport for the strip in the future. Even if this proposal was found “very interesting” by the EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell, it was also regarded as off-topic amidst the current war in the Gaza Strip. In fact, Katz was recommended to focus more on the security concerns in the region instead of suggesting a proposal which has been mentioned on several occasions since 2011. Many skeptics regarded this artificial island as an indirect response to the question on the future of the Gaza Strip. Due to its timing, many perceived the proposal as a suggestion to relocate the Palestinians living in Gaza to the island in the long term in order to eliminate Hamas or to annex the Gaza Strip. Nevertheless, the Israeli Foreign Ministry denied that Katz made any claim of relocation of Gaza’s population in his defense and insisted that the plan was only a commercial vision for the Strip. What is the Proposal Really About? In its essence, the project is an alternative proposal to building a coastal port in the Gaza Strip. Since Gaza is a coastal region surrounded by Israel to the East, a method of achieving economic development through trade would be to build a maritime port. Given that there exists no secure connection to the West Bank, and thus the Arab world, and a limited crossing in Rafah connecting to the Sinai Peninsula, the path towards integrating Gaza into the global economy is to look to the Mediterranean Sea as most civilizations of this region have done historically. Based on the security concerns presented by Hamas, Israel suggests that the port be controlled by an international force inland while the Israeli navy takes responsibility for securing the maritime borders. Even if little information has been disclosed regarding the matter, the main idea is to build an island port for Gaza in an endeavor to prevent a coastal port, which Hamas might utilize to strengthen its armament. In the video presented by Katz, some commercial installations were also displayed, alongside a potential airport lane, which might replace the Gaza airport that Israel destroyed earlier this century. What are the Potential Complications? Many Israeli ministers, headed by the main proposer, Israel Katz, have been complimenting the idea, claiming that it would bring an infrastructural tool for the economic development of Gaza without threatening Israel’s security. However, skeptics have not been silent on the matter every time the proposal resurfaces. Most evidently, the main predicament behind the proposition is the sovereignty question: can a Palestinian state be created if Palestinian authorities do not cement their control over their main economic infrastructure? Not only so, but others even go as far as saying that the maritime control by Israeli forces, as well as inland control by international ones, will legitimize the Israeli blockade of Gaza, not to ignore in this situation Israel’s historical tactics in breaching sovereignty through claims on security. In this situation, it would be unsurprising that Israel pressures the future Gazan authorities by blocking maritime trade for security concerns. Also, despite some calling for a cooperation between international forces and the Palestinian authorities inland, it is not even known who are the proposed ‘legitimate’ authorities, especially after current events. Regarding the costs of the port, which are projected to reach $5 billion dollars, it is unclear who will cover them. If the future Gaza authority is held responsible for the charges, then it is doubtful that such an authority will be able to fund an artificial seaport and rebuild the demolished strip. Other reports in years past hinted that China and Saudi Arabia are willing to build and fund the project. However, considering the unstable geopolitical situation of the region, and in parallel with the detrimental invasion, it would be unlikely for the Chinese to invest in the Gaza strip. As to the Saudis, as long as an Iranian proxy exists, they will not invest in the region, considering the case of Lebanon with Hezbollah. Moreover, Israel will have a role in the investment, yet not only might Palestinian authorities reject it to avoid public discontent and political dependency, but also the Israeli public will be reluctant, especially after the Oct. 7 attacks. On the other hand, Israeli authorities, depending who reaches power at that time, might regard such an investment as a way to correct Israel’s public image in the international media. Environmentally, there will inevitably be negative consequences; however, no prominent studies have been conducted on whether a coastal seaport will be more environmentally friendly or not. Reality of the Current State? In the current state of war, with more than 90 percent of the Gaza population staying around the Rafah crossing in the south, it is expected that allegations regarding the relocation of Gazans on to the proposed island would surface. Realistically, however, three points can be made: first, it would be cheaper for Israel and the U.S. to pressure Egypt, as well as Gulf countries, to host the 1.8 million refugees than to build a costly island. Furthermore, building an artificial island requires years to be finalized: if Israel lacks something, it is time, especially with the rising death toll of Israel Defense Force soldiers as well as public anger. Finally, it is unlikely that Israeli allies will accept the relocation due to potential infringement of further human rights, which will arouse the already incessant fury amongst pro-Palestine manifestations in Western communities. It is important to note that when Katz displayed the video, it was also followed with another video that proposes a trade route connecting India to the Middle East. As readers were shocked with the timing chosen to revive the island seaport proposal, many overlooked the second proposal, thus little information has surfaced around it. Yet, the second video most probably refers to the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) trade route proposed in September, prior to the Oct. 7 attacks. This trade route which would connect India to Europe through the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel, thus bypassing the Suez Canal, throws doubt on the economic efficiency of an Island in Gaza. Putting into perspective, the already pre-constrained island would be competing with an international trade route a few kilometers away; in other words, even if the seaport provides integration for Gaza into the globalized world, the competition will demolish potential long-term investments, possibly leaving the future Palestinian authorities in huge debt. Clearly, no trade route through the island can be made into the region without passing through Israel, so IMEC will be more favourable for traders. A Political Message? Finally, the timing of the videos, amidst International Court of Justice trials on genocide allegations, reflects an indirect message to Hamas and the world: Israel has won the war against Hamas and it will do as it sees appropriate with the Gaza Strip in the future. Moreover, both videos can also be a political pressure to Egypt to accommodate the refugees or else face the crippling economic effect of a cheaper alternative to the Suez Canal.

For most of us, the French-Italian frontier in Menton is a concept, a sort of imaginary line of cheaper groceries and good pizza. One could possibly remain oblivious to this privilege as long as they never venture towards the Ventimiglia train station, where some are desperately trying to cross a very real border in the hopes of a safer life. To try to alleviate their struggles, SciencesPo Refugee Help and Cinementongraphe decided to team up and organize a screening of Lebanese director Nadine Labaki’s film, “Capernaum.” < Back Thou Shall Not Be Indifferent: Nadine Labaki’s Wake Up Call to the West By Krzysztof Kaluzny October 30, 2021 For most of us, the French-Italian frontier in Menton is a concept, a sort of imaginary line of cheaper groceries and good pizza. One could possibly remain oblivious to this privilege as long as they never venture towards the Ventimiglia train station, where some are desperately trying to cross a very real border in the hopes of a safer life. To try to alleviate their struggles, SciencesPo Refugee Help and Cinementongraphe decided to team up and organize a screening of Lebanese director Nadine Labaki’s film, “Capernaum.” All the proceeds funded food distribution for refugees and immigrants in Ventimiglia. The film’s title refers to the biblical city of Capernaum, a place damned and abandoned by God. The protagonists of the film are also forgotten, not necessarily by any form of divine power, but by the Western world and the international public. We follow the life of a 12-year old Zain, whom we meet in court as he tries to sue his own parents, through retrospections of his childhood on the streets of Beirut. Labaki’s decision to cast herself as Zain’s lawyer was purely symbolic. After all, just like her character, the director is giving a voice to the voiceless by providing them with a floor to share their stories. The main character is played by a Syrian refugee who himself grew up in Beirut’s slums, Zain Al Rafeea. The name used in the film was no coincidence: Labaki had changed it after casting the boy, highlighting that the protagonist’s experience in the film reflects the reality of children living in Lebanon. Neither of the Zains had received any schooling. Al Rafeea had to learn his lines by having them read to him as he was illiterate at the time of the shooting. It is impossible to tell that Al Rafeea is not a professional actor throughout the film. He lived that life, he did not have to act. It is perhaps the profound sadness in his eyes that shows the hardships he has been through despite his young age. After having run away from his parents, we witness Zain trying to survive in a hostile urban jungle. Long, stunning shots resemble a fairytale-like child’s odyssey, however, the story is far from The Little Prince’s narrative. The boy interacts with a lot of strangers who all have their problems and shattered dreams of a better life. One of them is a young girl, a refugee from Syria. She tells Zain she received food and is going to move to Sweden. Zain asks her how he could receive the same benefits, and she answers point-blank: you are not a Syrian refugee. This one sentence struck me, especially looking at the girl’s t-shirt which reads “I am Lebanese.” That’s precisely how selective the West is when it comes to providing help. When Zain is referred by the girl to a human trafficker, he receives another blow - he lacks any documents, or as the trafficker describes it, ‘a proof you’re a human being.’ The issue of undocumented people is a recurring theme over the course of the film. Those in power expect a birth certificate from people who can’t afford medical aid in a life-threatening emergency,much less to deliver an infant in a hospital. The film’s somber atmosphere was amplified by a haunting score by Khaled Mouznar, Labaki’s husband who collaborated closely with her in the production of the film, making it, as Labaki called it in her acceptance speech of the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival, a “family film created at home.” Given how heart-breaking the story was, it would be simply cruel if the film ended without some positivity or a glimpse of hope. We saw how Zain posed for a camera to have a picture taken for his ID card. Finally, Zain was recognized as a ‘human being.’ What we consider to be a rather inconvenient chore every few years was a life-changing moment for him. The real Al Rafeea also moved forward; his family has been granted asylum in Norway. When Labaki called Al Rafeea to share the news that the film was nominated for an Oscar for Best Foreign Film, Al Rafeea was in school with teachers and new friends. Labaki might not have won the Academy Award, but I believe the opportunity to make a difference in Al Rafeea’s life was the biggest prize she could gain for this film. As her own character in the story, she was not able to change the system. The best she could do was help an individual. The rest, as for judges in a courtroom, is for the audience to reflect on and decide.

Imaginez regarder les aventures de meurtres comme ceux de Jeffrey Dahmer ou l’affaire des frères Menendez. C’est ce que propose la série Netflix Monsters qui, malgré les polémiques, a tout de même enregistré 12,3 millions de vues lors des quatre premiers jours du lancement de la deuxième saison. < Back Le True crime: quand l’horreur devient divertissement Elsa Uzan February 23, 2026 Imaginez regarder les aventures de meurtres comme ceux de Jeffrey Dahmer ou l’affaire des frères Menendez. C’est ce que propose la série Netflix Monsters qui, malgré les polémiques, a tout de même enregistré 12,3 millions de vues lors des quatre premiers jours du lancement de la deuxième saison. Cette série relève du genre des documentaires true crime même si la série reste très largement romancée. Ces programmes sont des reportages sur des affaires réelles de meurtres, ou de manière plus générale, d'événements violents et traumatisants. Ces œuvres adoptent un format documentaire et un style d'investigation, en présentant des récits de ces crimes et de leurs conséquences. La criminalité apparaît dans ce contexte selon l’historien Daniel LaChance et le professeur de justice pénale Paul Kaplan comme « à la fois comme très proche et assez étrangère, une menace perpétuelle pour la vie quotidienne, mais extrêmement lointaine dans son origine et ses motivations, à la fois banale et exotique dans le milieu où elle se déroule. » Pourtant l'intérêt pour les crimes n'est pas un phénomène nouveau. En effet, les premiers récits criminels circulaient dès le XVIe siècle en Europe sous la forme de brochures de comptes rendus de crimes et d'exécutions. Le genre est caractérisé par un style sensationnaliste, présentant les informations policières à travers des détails mentionnés afin d’effrayer et de choquer le public. Les narrateurs décrivent de manière extensive la violence en mettant l'accent sur les détails techniques de la scène du crime, grâce à des explications d'experts. Ce genre hybride mêle des aspects de l'actualité, avec des instruments et des objectifs de divertissement. Les émotions des spectateurs sont en quelque sorte manipulées grâce à des preuves issues de l’enquête et à un langage audiovisuel. Le côté sensationnaliste du genre entraîne l’émergence de plusieurs problématiques. D’abord, la diffusion de documentaires de true crime s’accompagne généralement d’une perte drastique de la vie privée des victimes due à l’intérêt médiatique. Les fans de true crimes sont décrits par celles-ci comme des individus ayant un attachement malsain pour ces affaires, ce qui entraîne parfois des interactions étranges voire nuisibles particulièrement avec les proches ou les victimes. Il faut tout d’abord remettre ces discussions dans leur contexte: elles interviennent généralement dans un cadre d'imposition des fans dans la vie privée des victimes qu’elle soit physique ou virtuelle. Cela se traduit aussi par un sentiment de dépossession de leur histoire et de perte de contrôle qui l’accompagne notamment lorsque les fans partagent leurs théories sur l’affaire, bafouant de fait les limites personnelles des victimes. Les interactions vont bien au-delà des relations sociales traditionnelles : elles créent de l’anxiété, un sentiment de malaise et d’impuissance des victimes. Il faut toutefois noter que de tels documentaires ont permis de rouvrir des affaires comme celle de Catherine Harron, résolue en 2016. De plus, ces documentaires suscitent des débats sur la représentation des femmes. Les victimes y sont généralement des femmes, ce qui accentue les stéréotypes de vulnérabilité féminine. Ces documentaires sont aussi décriés pour leur tendance à donner une représentation manichéenne des criminels qui sont soit glorifiés, soit présentés comme des monstres. Pourtant un grand nombre d'entre eux ont eu une enfance difficile qui, loin d’excuser leurs comportements, peut au moins partiellement expliquer leur recours à la violence. En effet des études démontrent que les personnes ayant subi des maltraitances infantiles présentaient des niveaux d’agressivité plus élevés. Une notion plus contemporaine émerge, théorisée par Daniel LaChance et Paul Kaplan : celle de « crimesploitation. » Elles qualifient les émissions de téléréalité combinant à la fois le « true crime, » qui narrent des affaires criminelles réelles, et les films dit « exploitation, » soulageant le désir voyeuriste d'assister à la violation de tabous. La crimesploitation est caractérisée par une expérience particulière de domination du criminel. L’arrestation, l’humiliation et la condamnation des criminels est l’occasion pour les spectateurs s’assimilant aux figures d’autorité de sentir une forme de liberté dans la position de sauveur. Les spectateurs éprouvent une forme de domination physique avec les scènes d’arrestation du criminel mais aussi psychologique par l’humiliation et la perte de contrôle de celui-ci. Cette expérience procure une sensation d’exaltation: le spectateur vit un mélange de puissance et de sécurité, ressentant l’excitation du contrôle tout en étant à l’abri des conséquences. Pour d’autres spectateurs, la crimesploitation est aussi une manière de se rebeller de manière légale contre l’autorité. Le criminel est souvent présenté comme débarrassé des contraintes psychologiques de la discipline propre à la vie moderne. Les films d'exploitation criminelle ont offert aux Américains la capacité d’avoir un sentiment de contrôle, particulièrement dans un contexte où la sécurité personnelle semble inatteignable. En effet, le pays se caractérise par une préoccupation continue pour la criminalité et la sécurité personnelle, que ce soit dans les médias ou dans les discours publics. Cette inquiétude est accentuée par des taux de criminalité localement élevés dans certaines zones et surtout par la médiatisation intensive des crimes violents dans la culture populaire américaine. La crimesploitation procure aussi un plaisir de transgression autant qu’un plaisir lié à la répression du criminel. Ces émissions montrent comment le monde agit à travers les autorités pour contrôler les déviants. Par la représentation des actes criminels en omettant certains détails, les documentaires peuvent influencer négativement l’opinion publique et affecter la légitimité associée aux policiers et aux autorités judiciaires selon Emily Jane Wade, chercheuse spécialisée dans l’étude du true crime . Le plaisir de la transgression criminelle risque ainsi de devenir aux yeux de certains téléspectateurs plus attractifs que le plaisir de vaincre le criminel. Le chaos véhiculé par ces émissions peut possiblement devenir incontrôlable. En effet, la théorie de la cultivation de Gerbner et Gross démontre que l’exposition prolongée à la violence médiatique structure nos perceptions du monde réel. Les contenus très dramatiques ou violents cultivent ainsi une vision du monde exagérément menaçante. La crimesploitation procure un sentiment de contrôle tout en répondant à l’ennui. La crimesploitation mêle deux mécanismes d’affaiblissement de l’ennui: une consommation des médias de masse et la perpétration d’actes criminels. L’ennui n’est pas seulement un manque d’activité: c'est un sentiment existentiel de vide ou de stagnation que la crimesploitation comble en donnant l’illusion d’agir et de s'identifier au criminel. La crimesploitation est une forme particulièrement puissante de média de masse, car elle capte le désir de consommer du contenu et de s'approprier le criminel pour satisfaire ses propres besoins. Les fans de true crimes sont selon la chercheuse à l’université de Lancaster Judith Fathallah « absolument mainstream, un élément incontournable, infiniment rentable et parfois respectable du paysage médiatique. » Le public doit toutefois selon elle « constamment négocier et surveiller la frontière qui le sépare d'un mauvais fan présumé, c'est-à-dire le fan obsessionnel d'un criminel. » Elle affirme que la consommation même régulière est devenue culturellement acceptable en raison de sa popularité. Cette popularité pose question sur l’état de notre société actuelle : si nous consommons autant ce genre de divertissement, qu’est-ce que cela dit de notre société ? Cette fascination pour le crime révèle autant notre désir de comprendre le passage à l’acte que notre appétit pour l’extrême, la violence. Photo source: Pexels, kat wilcox

Sciences Pistes Model United Nations (SPMUN) has come and gone — but that won’t stop us from reflecting upon the amazing experiences that were had by those 170 Sciences Pistes who partook in the first intercampus event of the 2022-23 academic year. < Back Reflecting on the 2022-2023 Sciences Pisted Model United Nations Conference By Georgia McKerracher December 31, 2022 Sciences Pistes Model United Nations (SPMUN) has come and gone — but that won’t stop us from reflecting upon the unique experiences that were had by those 170 Sciences Pistes who partook in the first intercampus event of the 2022-23 academic year. The conference focus on “Reconstruction and Redirection” proved to be a popular one — with three language committees, highlighting the true diversity of Menton as a site sandwiched between a variety of Mediterranean states and bringing together aspiring policymakers, diplomats, leaders and journalists from across the world. The opening ceremony kicked off with an address from the Permanent Observer of the International Chamber of Commerce in Geneva and former Australian Ambassador to Nepal and Chile, Mr. Crispin Conroy. Not only did he manage to diplomatically ingratiate himself to the community through remarks about the beauty of our campus, but he also spoke about his experiences as a gender parity champion and reflected on the roots of the ICC, League of Nations and the Paris Climate Agreement. According to Conroy, the multilateralism of our increasingly globalized world is today threatened by the politics of fear we are witnessing engulf the world’s democracies; therefore, he positioned his audience to reflect on their duty to rethink the multilateral approaches they can employ to further the global common good. Secondly, Sciences Po Refugee Help’s representatives Cameron Sterling and Ferida Altun delivered a moving speech to the audience, condemning the militarization of the Italian-Franco border and the human rights abuses which occur right next to our campus daily. They informed the community of the systemic police brutality and migrant mistreatment that occurs daily, with Sterling extending this theme to her SPMUN position as Chair of the UNHCR English-speaking committee alongside second-year Sienna Bertamini. Crisis also had many intriguing happenings — from day one, when we saw a peasant revolt, followed by a bout of dancing to Cotton-Eyed Joe, to Melania Trump assassinating Marjorie Taylor Greene in the Bahamas. As usual, Crisis directors Riwa Hassan and David Ederberg did a marvelous job ensuring the committee’s activities were punctuated by random but stimulating ebbs and flows of chaos. At the ceremony’s closing, MEDMUN organizers, chairs and delegates all came together to reminisce on all that had taken place throughout the weekend. Second-years Sami Omaish and Vinciane Rosenzweig gave an opening address to the fatigued yet good-spirited crowds, followed by Pauline Da Cunha and Lucie Taïeb from the Paris MUN as well as Madeline Crepin Calarnou from the Poitiers MUN. Paraphrasing the resonant words of Menton Campus Director Yasmina Touaibia’s opening ceremony speech, for this weekend, we didn’t only see the well-known “Ummah Mentoniyya’ – but we had the good fortune to see the collectivity and unity of the wider ‘Ummah Sciences Po.”

There may be a wider loss of confidence in the Egyptian government’s ability to successfully navigate its debt burden and stabilize its economy: Egyptian sovereign debt prices have been falling in recent weeks, while prices in comparable countries have risen or remained stable.  < Back The Shifting Regional Political Landscape and the Impact on Egyptian Assets By Noor Ahmad September 27, 2023 Egypt, along with many other developing countries, is suffering from the aftereffects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on grain and energy prices as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Recently, however, some indicators suggest that there may be a wider loss of confidence in the Egyptian government’s ability to successfully navigate its debt burden and stabilize its economy: Egyptian sovereign debt prices have been falling in recent weeks, while prices in comparable countries have risen or remained stable. As recently as December 2022, Egypt entered into its third loan program with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) since Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s regime took power. This normally would be a positive development and result in a favorable disposition of international capital markets toward a country. The loan amount of three billion dollars is small in comparison to Egypt’s financing needs, estimated at $17 billion this year. Still, an IMF agreement is typically accompanied by additional financing from international and regional partners like the Gulf states. In this instance, another $14 billion of financing is anticipated from the latter group. Egypt has also agreed to sell its state-owned assets as part of its agreement with the IMF. Many of these assets have arisen from an expanding military presence in Egypt’s economy during President Sisi’s tenure, as the President has granted privileges and favors to his generals and the military at large to cement his grip on power. A 2020 World Bank estimate suggests that the military owns 60 companies in 19 of the 24 economic sectors. For example, the National Service Projects Organization, a military affiliate, oversees 30 companies in the food, mining, petroleum, and construction sectors. In addition, these companies have an inherent advantage as they pay no taxes or customs duties, unlike the private sector. There are several fundamental issues with this plan. Firstly, there is little visibility of these assets and their profitability to the public; secondly, divesting them to the private sector would result in the loss of military patronage, and President Sisi has been announcing privatization initiatives since 2019 with minimal progress; lastly, the buyers are likely to be mostly Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) sovereign wealth funds which are known to be opportunistic. During his visit to Egypt, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, announced deals totalling $7.7 billion. Out of this deal, some $1.3 billion have been invested based on reports from Egyptian state-owned news company Al-Ahram. But progress has since stalled. Similarly, the Qatar Investment Authority has been in discussions to purchase a stake in Vodafone Egypt, which Telecom Egypt partially owns. These negotiations are also at an impasse. Beyond the traditional financial negotiations, there are likely to be deeper political drivers that need to be considered. In the case of Saudi Arabia, an ongoing dispute about the transfer of two Red Sea Islands, Tiran and Sanafir, which Egypt agreed to in 2017 is once again stalled – these were islands disputed and claimed by Saudi Arabia for many years. The Saudis may be using their financial clout to pressure the Egyptians, who are fast approaching their self-imposed deadline of June 2023 for divesting six billion dollars in assets to buy financial headroom for their crisis-hit economy. Beyond this, the transfer of islands has a wider impact on the attempt to normalize Saudi-Israeli relations following the Abraham Accords. Brokered by the United States, the Islands transfer would also open Saudi airspace to Israeli air traffic. This is an important regional development for which the Saudis would seek to use all leverage to accelerate. Likewise, the stalled Qatari negotiations may include this dimension, as they come under pressure from the Saudis and the Americans to further regional normalization. The Egyptians have used the delaying tactic on the islands to pressure the United States to release part of its one billion dollars in military aid that the Americans have held up to force the Egyptian government to improve its human rights record. And the above drama is taking place against a wider rapprochement in the region. A recent Chinese initiative facilitated talks between the Saudis and the Iranians on normalizing relations and enforcing a ceasefire in Yemen, where both countries are involved through proxies. A normalization of Saudi Arabia with its traditional foes, Israel and Iran, would diminish Egypt’s role in the region, given that the Egyptian military has historically provided an umbrella for Saudi security. Standard & Poors Global Ratings, one of the three biggest credit rating agencies, issued a report on the state of the Egyptian economy and its creditworthiness in January 2023. It stated that it considered the importance of stability in Egypt a major incentive for official and commercial lenders to help it meet its external finance requirements. It also opined that the Egyptian government was committed to the necessary reforms and viewed its growth prospects favorably. Most notably, Egypt has begun to benefit from the return of foreign tourists and is making headway in its gas exports. The transition of Egypt’s economy from military-run to private-sector growth is unlikely to be straightforward as vested interests hinder the process. At the same time, regional politics is likely to cause turbulence in negotiations for the sale of assets and increase of financing. But the normalization of relations between the Saudis, Israelis and Iranians will likely take several years, given historical distrust and regional rivalries. The Saudis and the remainder of the Gulf Cooperation Council are unlikely to abandon Egypt, given its military importance. The turbulence in Egypt’s financial assets is most likely a response to the drama unfolding in the region.

Every Olympic Games opens with a patriotic parade featuring all the athletes, each team entering the stadium waving their national flag. At the 2026 Milano-Cortina Winter Olympics, the United States of America athlete delegation was greeted with cheers and applause. However, when the cameras cut to Vice President JD Vance in the stands, the audience’s sounds of support quickly morphed into prolonged boos and jeers. < Back American Patriotism at the Milan Olympics in the Age of Trump Rose Harrill April 1, 2026 Every Olympic Games opens with a patriotic parade featuring all the athletes, each team entering the stadium waving their national flag. At the 2026 Milano-Cortina Winter Olympics, the United States of America athlete delegation was greeted with cheers and applause. However, when the cameras cut to Vice President JD Vance in the stands, the audience’s sounds of support quickly morphed into prolonged boos and jeers. This negative response to the American Vice President reflects the current sense of unease generally held by most Europeans in regards to the Trump Administration and its foreign policy. During President Donald Trump’s second term, there has been a clear shift in U.S. policy, marked by aggressive attempts to annex Greenland, tensions with NATO and wavering support for Ukraine. Europeans now appear to be not only overwhelmingly distrustful and scrutinous of the U.S. government, but seemingly symbols of American patriotism as well. And it’s not only Europeans that feel this way, many Americans themselves are increasingly unhappy with the current Trump administration. American athletes are now caught between previous expectations of uncritical patriotism during the Olympics, with politicians like JD Vance instructing them to just “play their sport” and not “pop off about politics”, and a new reality in which both global audiences, as well as many Americans, question what the flag truly represents. The controversy surrounding the Trump Administration and the Olympics worsened after the U.S. men’s hockey team won gold for the first time in 46 years. A video quickly surfaced online of the team receiving a congratulatory phone call from President Trump. During this call they laughed along to a seemingly misogynistic joke made by the President as he claimed he would “have to” invite the gold medal winning women’s hockey team to the White House as well. The men’s hockey team ultimately accepted the invite and attended President Trump’s State of the Union address, which was viewed as a heavily politicized event. The U.S. men’s hockey team has faced significant backlash following the circulation of these videos. The players have been labelled as sexist and degrading, and have been criticized for not standing up to President Trump when he made inappropriate comments. They’ve received even further condemnation for accepting the President’s invitation to the White House. Historically, it is quite common for gold medal winning American athletes to accept congratulatory phone calls from the President, or to even visit the White House. But in this political climate, everything is polarized. Whether intentional or not, these celebrations now carry a political weight. Proximity to President Trump or the White House can be easily seen as an endorsement of his policies. So this begs the question: how are American athletes supposed to navigate patriotism in this political climate? Are they still simply playing on behalf of their nation, or do they now serve as direct representatives of their government and the President? As public figures, is it their job to stand up for what’s “right”? There is a blurred boundary emerging now that didn’t exist previously. When asked about the U.S. men’s hockey team’s decision to visit the White House, star player Jack Hughes enthusiastically declared their excitement. “Yeah, we’re excited,” he said . “Everything is so political. We’re athletes. We’re so proud to represent the U.S. When you get the chance to go to the White House and meet the President, we’re proud to be Americans, and that’s so patriotic. No matter what your views are, we’re super excited to go to the White House.” For Hughes, and the rest of the men’s hockey team, it seems that patriotism is represented through unwavering support for your country despite its faults. However, for many other athletes, patriotism seems to mean dissent when necessary, as love for your country does not have to mean it is exempt from criticism. In fact, sometimes loving your country means you have an obligation to fight for it when you disagree with what it’s doing. The U.S. women’s hockey team, for example, declined President Trump’s invitation to the White House. When asked what it’s like to represent the U.S. in the Olympics given its current political situation, freestyle skier Hunter Hess responded that it brings up “mixed emotions” and is “a little hard” for him. “There’s obviously a lot going on that I’m not the biggest fan of, and I think a lot of people aren’t,” he said . “ Just because I’m wearing the flag doesn’t mean I represent everything that’s going on in the U.S.” U.S. figure skater Amber Glenn, who identifies as queer, also criticized President Trump at the Games, stating that she will not visit the White House either following her team’s gold medal, as his administration has made it “a hard time for the [LGBTQ+] community.” This dissent from American athletes towards the President and his administration during these Games marks a stark contrast from the political climate during the 2024 Olympics in Paris. In the summer of 2024, Joe Biden was the President of the United States and Kamala Harris’ campaign for presidency was taking the country by storm. Discussion surrounding American politics will always occur on some level at prominent international events like the Olympics, but in Paris it was taking place on a much smaller scale. The Biden administration was considered to be much more aligned with the traditional democratic values of the U.S., so American athlete activism was typically more focused on widespread social issues and international conflicts than targeted at the White House specifically. Now, coverage in the U.S. of the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics has seemingly been dominated by political commentary and statements from American athletes on the situation within their country. There’s been a significant decline in unbolstered patriotism from fans as well. Many Americans now feel uneasy about waving the flag as defiantly as before. The culture of being an American athlete has changed dramatically as the political climate in the U.S. has grown more tense and polarized. Representing the U.S. now holds a different weight, leaving athletes at a crossroads. Do they succumb to the Trump administration’s definition of patriotism – blind loyalty to the country with a priority for a unified appearance above all else? Or, do they dictate that true patriotism and love for one’s country is rooted in the ability to criticize it and the determination to fix its flaws? Photo source: WikiCommons

Qui sont ces étudiants, et comment leurs actes du 17 novembre 1973 ont-ils acquis une portée profondément démocratique et déterminante pour l’avenir du pays? En quoi ces réponses nous illuminent-elles quant au rapport contemporain de la société et de l’univers politique grecs vis-à-vis des valeurs démocratiques et des mouvements étudiants? < Back « Pain, Éducation, Liberté! » Un Regard Sur Le Soulèvement De Novembre 1973 En Grèce Margarita Kopsia January 31, 2025 Qu’est-ce que, vraiment, résister ? Et quelle signification ce mot acquiert-il en fonction du contexte socio-politique d’où on se place? Si les réponses qu’il est possible d’apporter à cette question sont nombreuses, la position de la Grèce en la matière mérite d’être étudiée. Sujet d’abord sanglant et délicat, le soulèvement de l’université polytechnique d’Athènes du 14 au 17 novembre 1973 est progressivement devenu une commémoration nationale, célébrée chaque 17 novembre. Moment violent, il fut aussi—et demeure—un événement profondément symbolique et porteur d'espoirs; à présent honoré, il est impossible d’en parler sans l’associer à la fin de la dictature militaire qui était au pouvoir depuis le coup d’État du 21 avril 1967. Mais plus qu’emblème de résistance face à cette parenthèse dure et autoritaire pour le pays, agissant en tant que catalyseur du démantèlement de la dictature des colonels, le soulèvement du 17 novembre est aussi celui d’un profond renouveau . Car luttant pour « le pain, » « l’éducation » et « la liberté, » le combat acharné des étudiants a aussi signé l’entrée dans une nouvelle ère démocratique, marquée par une meilleure ouverture politique, ainsi que par un développement plus conforme au respect des droits et libertés de la population grecque. Qui sont ces étudiants, et comment leurs actes du 17 novembre 1973 ont-ils acquis une portée profondément démocratique et déterminante pour l’avenir du pays? En quoi ces réponses nous illuminent-elles quant au rapport contemporain de la société et de l’univers politique grecs vis-à-vis des valeurs démocratiques et des mouvements étudiants? La démocratie, confisquée et asphyxiée En plein cœur de la guerre froide, le contexte politique de la Grèce est extrêmement agité; suite à la victoire des forces royalistes lors de la guerre civile grecque de 1946 à 1949, opposant les dirigeants soutenus par le Royaume-Uni et les États-Unis aux grecs communistes, plusieurs gouvernements instables se succèdent. Les « élections législatives anticipées » qui étaient censées avoir lieu en 1967 sont la conséquence directe de la dissolution parlementaire qui était entraînée par le manque de soutien à M. Canellopoulos, nommé par le roi suite à l’échec des accords législatifs et gouvernementaux passés entre celui-ci et les autres partis majoritaires. L’avenir politique du pays se voit particulièrement menacé par le putsch du 21 avril 1967. Réalisé par trois militaires—les colonels Georges Papadopoulos , Nicolaos Makarezos et le général Stylianos Pattakos—l’épisode est intimement lié à l’appartenance de la Grèce au « bloc de l’Ouest » dans le contexte des alignements géopolitiques de l’époque. Le coup d’État est ainsi réalisé sous prétexte de protéger le pays de la « menace communiste » et afin de préserver l’alliance du pays avec les États-Unis, sachant que la Grèce avait rejoint l’OTAN en 1951. Il faut noter cependant, que la présence de cette « menace » est largement injustifiée, ce que n’ont manqué de préciser de nombreux médias de l’époque, y compris a l’international. Ainsi, Le Monde déclare dans ses publications datant de l’année 1967 que « l’intervention [...] allait au-delà du but invoqué au début, » cherchant notamment à assurer la victoire de la droite malgré l’ascension de l’Union du centre. Pour le journal L’Humanité , il s’agit même d’une « dictature absurde et criminelle qui s’est imposée par peur des élections. » Car sur la période 1967-1973, la vie sociale et politique du pays est « paralysée . » « Rythmée » par l’« enfermement » et la « torture » dont les opposants politiques sont systématiquement victimes, la dimension autoritaire du régime écarte la perspective d’un espace de dialogue ouvert, pluriel et engagé. Parallèlement, l’emploi généralisé de la censure constitue une autre sombre réalité, entravant les libertés d’expression et d’opinion des citoyens. Avec l’arrivée au pouvoir des colonels, « les garanties constitutionnelles des droits de l'Homme sont suspendues, » obstruant toute tentative de critique du régime et interdisant même les « grèves . » Mais si la majorité de la population grecque est poussée à la « passivité » par le régime des colonels, les voix des opposants exilés continuent de retentir et alimentent fortement les animosités populaires envers la junte, ainsi que l’opposition de divers gouvernements de l’étranger. Pour certains exilés, il est même question de « militer contre la junte sur le territoire français » à travers leur implication dans des « réseaux de la résistance, » à l’instar de Melina Mercouri —ancienne ministre de la Culture grecque—et Mikis Théodorakis, célèbre compositeur et futur ministre d’État grec de 1990 à 1992. Étudiants: voix ou moteurs légitimes de la construction démocratique ? Pendant la junte, les étudiants souffrent tout particulièrement. Leur sévère manque de représentation se matérialise tout d’abord à travers « l’ impossibilité » pour les étudiants « d'élire des représentants au sein des institutions universitaires. » Sont mis également en place des « tribunaux de discipline, pouvant expulser tout étudiant ayant des activités jugées non convenables, » tandis que la loi 1347 oblige « au service militaire immédiat » tous ceux qui s’organisent et s’engagent au sein de syndicats. La forte présence syndicale dans l’enseignement supérieur grec fait par ailleurs que, selon un point de vue sociologique, les universités grecques deviennent des « institution[s] sociale[s] » à « caractéristiques politiques. » Bénéficiant d’un « statut symbolique comme espaces de défense des valeurs démocratiques, » cela explique en grande partie par les dynamiques de rassemblement et de politisation des étudiants qui se sont progressivement construites et exacerbées depuis 1973. La vague de manifestations s’opposant à la junte militaire est entamée par les étudiants de la Faculté de Droit d’Athènes le 21 février 1973 , date à laquelle ceux-ci se barricadent à l’intérieur de leur établissement pour appeler à la fin de la dictature. L’insurrection des étudiants de l’école Polytechnique qui survient quelques mois plus tard s’étend jusqu’à d’autres universités telles que celles de Patras ou de Thessalonique, entraînant également de nombreux autres civils désireux de décrier les modalités d’exercice du pouvoir du régime en place. La création d’une station de radio étudiante, adressant « un appel [...] à la population » participe également à la propagation de leur message, tout en cultivant un profond sentiment de solidarité parmi tous ces manifestants. L’occupation de l’université polytechnique elle-même fut aussitôt sévèrement réprimée par l’armée, dont l’intervention consista notamment en l’envoi de chars militaires. Le bilan est celui d’au moins 27 morts et de dizaines de blessés, faisant de cet épisode une véritable « plaie » de l’histoire contemporaine grecque. Son sillage, celui de la ‘ Metapolítefsi ’—soit la transition démocratique grecque qui s’en suivit—rappelle néanmoins les mérites du fervent maintien et de la défense des idéaux démocratiques, notamment au vu des difficultés que ces derniers ont eu à s’imposer et à véritablement former part de la réalité politique et constitutionnelle grecque. Cela ferait-il des étudiants les « garants » de la démocratie en Grèce à l’époque contemporaine, régime ayant su s’extraire de sa trajectoire fragile, tumultueuse et menacée? Les étudiants sont-ils capables de changer le cours de l’histoire? Jour partiellement férié, durant lequel les établissements scolaires restent fermés, le 17 novembre constitue aujourd’hui un moment de « fierté nationale. » Les étudiants ayant participé aux soulèvements de novembre 1973 s’étaient auto-proclamés ‘ Eleftheroi Poliorkimenoi, ’ soit une référence directe à la lutte pour l’indépendance grecque et à l’œuvre de Dionysios Solomos—poète dont émane l’hymne national grec. Sous la plume de nombre de poètes et d’écrivains tels que Pour Yánnis Rítsos—poète et militant du Parti communiste grec, emprisonné pendant la dictature des colonels—les étudiants du 17 novembre deviennent des figures héroïques et inspirantes, portant en elles les fruits et les symboles de la bravoure et de la détermination. À eux seuls, les soulèvements du 17 novembre n’auraient pas entièrement rétabli le sort démocratique du pays, mais il demeure que les efforts des étudiants y ayant pris part aient été des mécanismes déclencheurs de la ‘ Metapolítefsi. ’ Portant avec ardeur et conviction l’ espoir et la promesse démocratiques, le pouvoir qu’a eu la jeunesse à influencer le cours de l’histoire en 1973 reste incontestable.

For a week, we explored Israel’s historic sites, met with members of Israel’s civil society, and enjoyed spending time in the region that us Mentonese students have been studying so passionately. < Back Visiting Israel with the UEJF By Lionel Chambon April 30, 2022 In early February, I was approached by the Union des Étudiants Juifs de France (UEJF) Menton Chapter president, 2A Cécile Toussaint, about a potential week-long trip to Israel. I was both surprised and honored. I quickly found that nothing stood in the way of embarking on what would become an amazing week of visits, events, talks, and time spent with a wonderful group of people, many of whom I had not met before. The trip was organized by the national board of the UEJF in conjunction with Sciences Po’s UEJF Paris and Menton chapters. UEJF had invited campus associations, be they political, cultural, or environmental, to send one or two representatives to take part in the trip. For a week, we would explore Israel’s historic sites, meet with members of Israel’s civil society, and enjoy spending time in the region that us Mentonese students have been studying so passionately. On February 28, early in the morning, the whole group met for the first time in Orly Airport. Traveling alongside the Sciences Po students was a group of students from Sorbonne-Paris I. By the early afternoon, we arrived at Ben Gurion International Airport. Despite one of us having Lebanese stamps in our passport, we all managed to clear customs, pass a mandatory PCR-test and get to our first destination, Neve Shalom, by the early evening. A village situated between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, Neve Shalom was founded in 1969, designed to accommodate inhabitants from all backgrounds. In 2006, Roger Waters (Pink Floyd) held a concert there, attracting a crowd of around 40,000 people. Neve Shalom presented a great opportunity for us to settle in and get to know each other. There, we were introduced to our guide for the week, Moty Likwornik, who has been a guide in Israel for several decades and has even accompanied foreign government delegations. Moty talked to us about Israel’s history, its ancient civilizations, and geography. We got to appreciate the countryside and excellent Middle Eastern food. Not only would Moty stick with us the entire week and share his expertise on the region, but also entertain us during bus rides with anecdotes and gossip he accumulated over the years. We spent the following Tuesday, our first full day in Israel, in Jerusalem. In the morning, Moty guided us across Mount Zion into Jerusalem’s holy sites, which we were fortunate enough to visit in great weather and not too much commotion. From the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock to the Wall of Lamentations and the Holy Sepulcher, it was incredible to walk across the historical sites which have been at the root of civilization for thousands of years. Visiting these holy sites was a touching experience for many of us, especially Muslims and Jews. For many, this was the first time they were able to visit their religions' holy sites. The Wall of Lamentations is allegedly all that is left of an ancient Jewish temple destroyed by the Babylonians, located not far from what is left of Mount Golgotha, where Jesus was once crucified. During the day, we also had some time to dive into one of Jerusalem’s Souqs, and discovered more of the local cuisine and arts scene. For many Jews in the group, it was their first time visiting Israel, making the exploration of the holy sites all the more special. In Jerusalem, we also had the opportunity to meet a Palestinian lawyer specialized in human rights law and an Israeli peace activist to discuss challenges Palestinian populations face within Israel, segregation, inequalities, and possible avenues for dialogue. For our final step of the day, we visited Jerusalem’s Hadassah hospital and met a French-Israeli surgeon. It was enriching to hear from actors within Israeli civil society who experience all kinds of difficulties and conflicts, but also opportunities to work together to complete meaningful work in the hospital on a daily basis. The following morning, we were greeted at the Hebrew University, one of Sciences Po’s Israeli partner institutions. There, we commemorated the victims who died during a Hamas bombing of the university cafeteria during the Second Intifada, including David Gritz, who was a Sciences Po exchange student at the time. We listened to testimony from Dror Even-Sapir, who sat only a few chairs down from David and survived the attack. Today, he works as a journalist in Israel and France. We also met Benjamin Canet, a former president of the UEJF Sciences Po and Israeli citizen. After leaving the university, we were supposed to visit the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. But, this was unfortunately cut from our agenda as an important vote took longer than expected and the deputies that had agreed to meet with us were no longer available. Nevertheless, we were able to look at the Knesset from the outside before we moved on to our visit of Yad Vashem, Israel’s Shoah remembrance site. There, we met Shlomo Balsam, our museum guide and Shoah survivor, who shared his own story with us, as well as that of many other survivors he had met — stories of lives destroyed, immeasurable loss, suffering, and desperation. Yad Vashem explained the Shoah through the perspective of those who had lived it by exhibiting artifacts and possessions that survivors had donated to the museum. No newspaper article could do justice to the thoughts and emotions that washed over us at Yad Vashem. Upon leaving, the mood among our group was despondent. The drive from the remembrance site into the Negev desert was the only outing in the entire week during which the bus remained silent. Nevertheless, we finished the day with a warm welcome in the Negev by a Bedouin tribe that hosted us. We were fortunate to enjoy some traditional coffee, tea, and foods by a campfire. But, it was only after the sunrise that we truly grasped the breathtaking scenery that surrounded us. The Negev surrounds the Dead Sea and stretches across Israel and Jordan. That Thursday, we woke up at 3:30 a.m. to climb Mount Masada in time for the sunrise. Masada is a very mythical place in Israeli and Jewish history, having been one of the last bastions of the Jews against Babylon. Up there, the view across the desert into Jordan and the Dead Sea is breathtaking, and Moty guided us through Masada’s ancient ruins. Next, we descended Masada and relaxed by the Dead Sea for the rest of the morning, which was surprisingly cold, yet very enjoyable under the desert’s beaming sun.From the Dead Sea, we headed West to the Arab-Israeli village of Abu Gosh. We were greeted by the town’s mayor, a Chechen Imam, a Catholic priest, and the French Consul-General of Jerusalem. Abu Gosh is known to host all religious communities. The mayor of the village stayed with us and shared insights on what governing such a diverse city was like before we departed for Tel Aviv later that night. Tel Aviv is Israel’s economic center. It is barely 100 years old and was built with socialist inspirations before gradually growing into a booming metropolis. Moty showed us Tel Aviv’s historical center and places such as Dizengoff Avenue, named after Tel Aviv’s first mayor, and Ben Gurion House, home of Israel’s founder and first prime minister. We also had the chance to discover Tel Aviv’s Souq before meeting with the French ambassador to Israel, Eric Danon. He talked to us about the war in Ukraine, changing dynamics in the Middle East following US disengagement, the signing of the Abraham Accords, and France’s role in the region. We also met Denis Charbit, a leading French political scientist on Israel and the history of Zionism. We concluded the day by celebrating Shabbat together, an opportunity for many to learn more about Jewish traditions and customs. During Shabbat, the day of rest, most of us used the opportunity to freely walk around Tel Aviv and discover other parts of the city. Some headed to Yaffa, where the beautiful coastline along the Mediterranean Sea could be admired. On the walk to Yaffa, our surroundings shifted to more heavily reflect the Palestinian and Arab culture and lifestyle. After Shabbat was over, we had the occasion to dive into Tel Aviv’s nightlife, which is also one of its most popular attractions. On our last day in Israel, we met students from Tel Aviv University and paid tribute to Ytzhak Rabin, a former prime minister murdered by an Orthodox nationalist in 1994, who was heavily involved in the signing of the Oslo Accords. After six days packed with experiences and memories, it was time for us to head back to the airport for our flight back to Paris. When studying the Middle East, it is always enriching to visit the region to build on what we have learned in the lecture room. Visiting Israel has definitely contributed to my understanding of the region, its dynamics, and its conflicts. I would like to thank the UEJF France and the UEJF of Sciences Po, especially Cécile Toussaint, for their hard work and dedication in making this trip possible and accessible to all of us. It was definitely a week to remember!

On the Weekend of November 26th, the BDA took part in the Weimart, a collaborative intercampus event. Over the course of the weekend, Menton’s artists contributed to the development and performance of a fantastic showcase. < Back Menton à Dijon: Menton’s BDA Puts On Electrifying Showcase for the Intercampus Music and Arts Weekend By Cameron Sterling January 31, 2022 On the night of November 26, the Bureau des arts piled into a bus and travelled to Dijon for the Weekend inter-campus musique et art (WEIMART), an intercampus event focused on the arts. For the weekend, we were tasked with forging bonds across campus communities to create an arts show centered around Ancient Greek Myths. Arriving in the morning, Menton students found themselves confronted with a full day of art. With just a few hours of rest, artists in the fields of visual arts, music, dance, film, theater, oration, photography, and fashion all planned and executed a depiction of an Ancient Greek Myth in a six-hour time period with a plan to present it in a showcase the following day. The musicians of the WEIMART, representing Menton with Eliana Seroussi, Sienna Bertamini, Lena Westlund, Saoirse Aherne, and me, chose to depict the myth of Orpheus through a concert accompanied by an oral exposition written and performed by Azra Ersevik. The setlist included “Wonderwall,” “Mystery of Love,” “Don’t Look Back in Anger,” “Highway to Hell,” “Always Remember Us This Way,” and “Hey You.” On the subject of complementing her oral performance with the music, Ersevik says “During the WEIMART, I was a storyteller. I told the myths of Eurydice and Orpheus during musical breaks. The experience was very interesting and rich since it was new to me. It was a good opportunity to meet new people, new ideas…and I hope to be able to attend a new WEIMART and see our excellent Mentonese Ummah at work again.” Though the performance came together nicely, it was not without obstacles. There were about 25 musicians ranging from Latin Percussionists to Classical Cellists that needed to coordinate their own experience and playing styles to produce a finished show. Nevertheless, we succeeded in creating a memorable performance. Other notable performances included the dancers, who managed to learn and choreograph an entire routine in the short time period provided. Or the filmmakers, represented by Menton 2A Lilinaz Hakimi who wrote, shot, edited, and produced a short movie during the one day period. Personally, I was taken aback by the ability of students involved in the other disciplines to create such cohesive works of art with one another. But after engaging in conversation with the other artists, it seems that we had all managed to impress one another! The most important aspect of the WEIMART is that, unlike its competitive sibling, the WEIC, is its collaborative nature. 1A Sienna Bertamini, one of Menton’s many talented singers, reflected that “creating art together is a way to connect with people that supersedes any other kind of communication. When I share ideas, work with other singers, and practice harmonies, it shows that, simply, anything is possible.” On the stage floor, many musicians shared techniques. While students from Poitiers introduced me to Latin style precision, 1A Saoirse Aherne learned the basics of Gypsy Jazz from Pablo, a Parisian guitarist. It is not only the talent of Sciences Po’s artists, but the feat of coordination and collaboration that was so special about the WEIMART. Oftentimes, we find it difficult to coordinate projects with our closest friends or in our course triplettes; it is special for a group of strangers to create such breathtaking artwork. Of course, we cannot pretend that the WEIMART was merely a spontaneous outburst of artistic creativity. Students worked tirelessly to create this event, facing a constantly changing situation due to the cancellation of the WEIC and a COVID outbreak on the Nancy campus. It went so smoothly thanks to the efforts in part by the Dijon BDAs, as well as the respective BDAs of the campuses in attendance: Le Havre, Menton, Poitiers, Paris, and Nancy. On our own campus, 2As Salim Outinari and Seroussi facilitated the planning and logistics of the event.

Marseille, deuxième ville de France, port phare de la Méditerranée, permet de comprendre la complexité du rapport entre la France et l’immigration. Une sorte de « je t’aime, moi non plus », d’une réécriture de la véritable histoire de l’imigration, ou encore d’un profond melting pot urbain. D’un côté, Marseille est une des villes les plus cosmopolites de France, avec une partie de la population favorable à plus d’immigration. D’un autre, un électorat de plus en plus séduit par les discours anti-immigration du Rassemblement national (RN). < Back Marseille, toujours une ville d’immigration? Raphaël Guermonprez for SPRH March 31, 2025 Ce mois de janvier 2025, le Premier ministre français déclarait que les Français avaient très largement un « sentiment de submersion migratoire. » Pour beaucoup, ce type de métaphore est inhéremment lié à l'extrême droite, qui, depuis toujours, fait des immigrés un réel bouc-émissaire. Dans un contexte politique au point mort, pointer du doigt les migrants comme la faute de ce marasme paraît idéal, surtout dans un pays où près de sept Français sur dix partagent l’impression de Monsieur Bayrou. Marseille, deuxième ville de France, port phare de la Méditerranée, permet de comprendre la complexité du rapport entre la France et l’immigration. Une sorte de « je t’aime, moi non plus », d’une réécriture de la véritable histoire de l’imigration, ou encore d’un profond melting pot urbain. D’un côté, Marseille est une des villes les plus cosmopolites de France, avec une partie de la population favorable à plus d’immigration. D’un autre, un électorat de plus en plus séduit par les discours anti-immigration du Rassemblement national (RN). De nos jours, à Marseille, il n’est pas rare d’entendre, comme ce qu’explique Sarah à France Bleu Provence , « J'ai des collègues qui disent 'Moi, j'en ai marre de tous ces Arabes, de tous ces Noirs, il faut le RN ... Moi, on m'a dit 'Mais toi ça va, tu es intégrée'! Mais pourquoi on me parle d'intégration? Je suis née en France, je suis autant Française que toi! » . Mais quel serait le problème? Qu'est-ce-qui dérange avec l’immigration à Marseille? Y a-t-il une vraie ‘submersion?’ Marseille a-t-elle oublié son histoire faite de récits migratoires? Entre Marseille et l’immigration, une longue histoire Depuis l’Antiquité, la cité phocéenne est sujette à des circulations de populations étrangères. Des Grecs aux Francs en passant par les Italiens, la ville s’est construite avec l’immigration. Néanmoins, il convient de nuancer cette vision, et comprendre que l’immigration telle qu’on la connaît de nos jours s’est amorcée bien après. Même si la Marseille antique connaît des circulations de populations en raison de sa position stratégique dans le bassin méditerrannéen, c’est à partir du XIVème siècle que des individus migrent en Provence pour répondre à la demande de main d'œuvre. Le point fort de la ville, c’est son port. Ce dernier permet un développement commercial de la région et entraîne également une progression de mouvements migratoires et de brassages culturels, issus d’Europe du Sud mais également d’Orient, du XVIème au XIXème siècle. C’est le long des XIXème, XXème et XXIème siècles que l’immigration telle qu’on la connaît de nos jours émerge réellement à Marseille. Cette immigration est liée à deux facteurs. Le premier est le besoin de main d'œuvre. Étant une ville commerciale en développement, des populations italiennes, corses, espagnoles, maghrébines, sud-asiatiques ou encore subsahariennes vont affluer progressivement dans la cité phocéenne. En second lieu, plusieurs populations se sont implantées à Marseille en quête de refuge, fuyant des discriminations, des conflits, voire des génocides, tels que les Arméniens, les Juifs ashkénazes ou encore les pieds-noirs. Une ville tourmentée entre hospitalité et hostilité, pauvretés et richesses Ce qui surprend à Marseille, c’est l’ambivalence qu’il y a vis-à-vis de l’immigration. Étant donné sa proximité avec la mer, mais également son cosmopolitisme déjà très marqué, Marseille est un endroit privilégié d’implantations de la part des populations migrantes, issues surtout de couches défavorisées, par exemple, venant d’Afrique du Nord ou des Comores. C’ est pourquoi plus de 10% de la population du département des Bouches-du-Rhône (Marseille) est immigrée. La pauvreté les entraîne dans les quartiers les moins favorisés de la ville. A titre indicatif, l’écrasante majorité des immigrés Algériens et Comoriens, qui représentent les plus grandes communautés étrangères de la cité phocéenne, habite dans les arrondissements les plus précaires, tels que le 16ème ou le 3ème arrondissements. A l’inverse, Marseille est symbole de réussite et d’insertion pour d’autres immigrés. Des populations d’origine étrangère, étant présentes depuis plusieurs générations à Marseille, habitent dans les zones les plus favorisées de la ville. C’est notamment le cas des Arméniens, ou encore des Italiens. L’homme d’affaires Alain Manoukian en est l’exemple parfait: issu d’une famille ayant fui le génocide arménien, il est fondateur d’une entreprise au chiffre d’affaires à plusieurs dizaines de millions d’euros. Même pour les personnes à l'installation plus ‘récentes’, certains brisent le plafond de verre et connaissent une ascension sociale considérable. C’est le cas du quinquagénaire Karim Loufti , issu d’une famille d’origine marocaine, aujourd’hui à la tête d’un important groupe d’agroalimentaire halal. Marseille est ainsi à la fois une terre propice et une terre hostile au phénomène migratoire. Nous observons d’abord que Marseille, au niveau de l’immigration récente, reste une ville qui accueille. Face à une demande croissante en main d'œuvre, notamment dans les secteurs du bâtiment et des travaux publics, de la sécurité et du gardiennage, ainsi que de l'hôtellerie-restauration , l'immigration est une nécessité au développement économique de la ville. L’économie marseillaise tourne grâce à aux professionnels étrangers, ou aux individus ayant acquis la nationalité française depuis peu. Néanmoins, face aux discours anxiogènes du flanc droit de la scène politique, certains Marseillais s’avèrent de plus en plus hostiles aux immigrés, qu’ils accusent directement de tous les maux, tels que l’insécurité ou encore l’« invasion culturelle », avant même de cerner les raisons de leur déviance et de leur spécificité. La mairie de Marseille, d’orientation socialiste, s’efforce, malgré des désaccords avec d’autres acteurs politiques, comme le gouvernement ou des députés plus à droite, et malgré certaines politiques publiques controversées, de faciliter, à son niveau, l’intégration des immigrés dans l’environnement francoprovençal. En août 2021, d’après Nelly Assénat pour France Bleu Provence, « Deux jours après la prise de pouvoir des talibans en Afghanistan, le maire de Marseille assure que les personnes qui “viennent de Kaboul ou d'ailleurs” auront “toujours une place” à Marseille. » La scène culturelle marseillaise est également engagée pour mettre de la lumière sur la réalité de l’immigration dans la région. Cette réalité est à la fois une chance et une nécessité, mais également souvent une blessure pour ces mêmes migrants, devant quitter leur terre natale en raison de problèmes multidimensionnels, à la recherche de meilleures opportunités. C’est d’ailleurs ce que met en valeur la nouvelle exposition du Musée des civilisations de l’Europe et de la Méditerranée (MUCEM) intitulée « Revenir. » De plus, plusieurs quartiers de la cité phocéenne regorgent d’affiches, de peintures murales et de commerces solidaires, célébrant le cosmopolitisme à la marseillaise, tel que le Cours Julien, ou encore Noailles. Affiche de l’exposition « Revenir » // Graffiti au Cours Julien de Mahn Kloix rendant hommage à l’activiste aidant les migrants Cédric Herrou. La vérité sur les problèmes de la cité phocéenne Bien que la municipalité de Marseille fasse beaucoup d’efforts quant à la régularisation, l'intégration et l’insertion professionnelle des immigrés, il existe une réelle ghettoïsation des quartiers connaissant une forte population immigrée. C’est ce que décrit Philippe Pujol—journaliste de renom international originaire de Marseille. Pour lui, nous assistons à un abandon de la part des pouvoirs publics de ces zones, ce qui crée une réelle isolation, et par conséquent, une tendance significative au banditisme, ce qui explique la forte criminalité de ces endroits. C’est ce que Pujol montre d’ailleurs dans son documentaire « Péril sur la ville » datant de 2020, racontant la dure réalité de la vie dans le quartier défavorisé de la Belle de Mai. L'effondrement de la rue d’Aubagne en 2018, en plein quartier de Noailles, révèle aussi ce manque de prise en charge de ces quartiers, et de leurs habitants, souvent laissés pour compte. Paradoxalement, ce n’est pas la « submersion » qui est réellement préoccupante à Marseille (ni d’ailleurs autre part en France), mais plutôt la mise en péril des couches les plus précaires de la population marseillaise, souvent issues de l’immigration. L’influence des politiques hostiles à l’immigration et à l’aide sociale ne fait qu’aggraver la situation qui, à termes, entraîne une exclusion sociale, elle-même propice à la délinquance et aux incivilités. Dans une recherche approfondie, l’association Ritmo révèle la ségrégation socio-spatiale à Marseille, où le manque d'infrastructures de sport, de culture ou encore de mobilité, dans les quartiers nords (quartiers les plus précaires) est flagrant. Ainsi, le lien entre l’immigration et la cité phocéenne se détériore, du fait d’une précarisation des conditions de vie des populations immigrées et d’un relent xénophobe et raciste de la part d’une partie des Phocéens—adhérents aux idées phares de l'extrême droite française. La seule solution pour réparer ce lien, pourtant nécessaire à la prospérité de la ville, semble être celle d’une meilleure gestion, à une échelle nationale, voire européenne, de la question migratoire, afin d’éviter l'exclusion sociale et favoriser l’intégration socioprofessionnelle. En fin de compte, la seule vague qui semble submerger les Français n’est pas une vague migratoire, mais une vague de radicalisation de la scène politique. Photo source: Jeanne Menjoulet 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 .

Ventimiglia, with its stunning natural beauty, becomes an ominous backdrop to a crisis that demands profound reflection on our collective priorities and values. The postcard landscape starkly contrasts with tired faces and stories of vulnerability that struggle each day to emerge from the dust and contempt. It is insufficient to justify the denial of hospitality with political rhetoric; it reflects a system that ignores the suffering of many in the name of false security. < Back Demolishing Dignity: The Eviction of Migrants in Ventimiglia Violetta Pepe for SPRH Menton November 30, 2024 A humanitarian crisis is currently unfolding in Ventimiglia, a town in the province of Imperia nestled between the blue Mediterranean and the Ligurian Alps. Known as the Western Gateway of Italy, Ventimiglia is the last Italian city before the French border. It has become a central hub in Europe for migrants heading towards France, Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands and Scandinavian countries.The migration trend was initially spurred by the Balkan crises in the 1990s, followed by a significant influx of Kurdish and Albanian migrants in 1996. This pattern intensified with the Tunisian wave during the Arab Spring in 2011, and subsequent years brought increased migration from Eritrea and Syria, especially during the European migrant crisis of 2015. The situation worsened with the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, which exacerbated vulnerabilities and led to a surge in homelessness among migrants. In 2015, the humanitarian situation escalated with the closure of the French border, the start of evictions and the use of force to disperse migrant camps. Combined with a widespread campaign of defamation and criminalization of solidarity, the space for civic action was stifled . The latest eviction on October 10, 2024, carried out by the provincial committee for public order and security of Imperia, targeted the tent city set up on the banks of the Roya River through a joint operation by police and carabinieri. This eviction affected migrants traveling along the Balkan and Mediterranean routes, coming from Africa and from the Greater Middle East. The events of October 10th unfolded through a series of coordinated actions by authorities that, within just a few critical hours, completely upended the already fragile living conditions of the migrants sheltering under the bridge. At 7:30 a.m., the first excavator arrived at a parking lot on Via Tenda, accompanied by two municipal workers who announced that the eviction was set to begin at 8:00 a.m. Thanks to advance rumors, the team from No Name Kitchen (NNK), a grassroots organization providing support to migrants, along with local activists, managed to notify those sheltering under the bridge without causing panic. Ten minutes before the operation began, four activists entered the camp to wake residents, giving them a brief chance to collect their belongings. Many were still asleep or engaged in their morning prayers as dawn broke. At 8:00 a.m., authorities arrived in force, including heavily armed police units such as the Carabinieri and Digos, as well as local police, the mayor, the prefect and various journalists. One Digos officer filmed the operation as police forces entered “The Bridge” from both sides, effectively enclosing the residents. The event was marked by shattered hopes and the systematic destruction of the migrants' few possessions. Throughout the day, law enforcement dismantled a camp that, although precarious, served as a haven for hundreds of migrants. Heart-wrenching images show tents torn and destroyed, personal belongings scattered like leaves in the wind and piles of goods reduced to rubble; each abandoned item tells a story of hope, escape and despair. In total, around 40 to 50 individuals were evicted on the 10th of October, all of which had been asking for asylum. Some were sent to Caritas in Ventimiglia, despite it being well-known that the shelter only serves women and children. "Despite an initial attempt to provide the individuals under the bridge with a dignified housing alternative, the situation remains unresolved and the eviction will leave dozens of people without even a fragile shelter, with no choice but to sleep on the streets," stated Dr. Maria Cristina Daniele of Doctors of the World in Ventimiglia. "All of this fails to take into account the individual situations and the physical and mental vulnerabilities they suffer from. We at Doctors of the World strongly demand that these individuals be properly cared for in equipped centers, as the centers adhering to the SAI network for vulnerable individuals should be, in accordance with the Guidelines on Vulnerabilities created and disseminated by the Ministry of the Interior in April 2024." A video of the eviction has been proudly shared by the local newspaper in the name of the mayor of Ventimiglia ,Flavio Di Muro, who justified the eviction by stating that "many migrants refused to be accommodated in specific centers." His words echo a distorted reality, as he mentioned: "We have offered various migrants who applied for international protection access to the network of extraordinary reception centers (CAS) in the province. There are available beds in other cities, but many of them shun any form of integration, hospitality and placement." However, the truth is quite different. The absence of effective integration and reception policies makes the migrants' choice an act of self-defense rather than mere reluctance. Last year, Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi visited Ventimiglia , promising to create a Distributed Reception Point to host close to 300 people, providing a humanitarian response to those in transit. Officials identified a site at the former Ferrotel, the railway workers' hotel located in the station square, to serve this purpose. Yet, a year later, no progress has been made. The reduced flow of migrants in recent months has been used as an excuse to question the necessity of this reception point, with some considering the expense unjustified. Migrants have thus not been offered a real and dignified alternative, and the lack of adequate and ready centers makes their refusal a response to a failing system that has denied basic rights for years. While the mayor speaks of security for residents, migrants continue to live in a limbo of vulnerability. Ventimiglia, with its stunning natural beauty, becomes an ominous backdrop to a crisis that demands profound reflection on our collective priorities and values. The postcard landscape starkly contrasts with tired faces and stories of vulnerability that struggle each day to emerge from the dust and contempt. It is insufficient to justify the denial of hospitality with political rhetoric; it reflects a system that ignores the suffering of many in the name of false security. The words of Di Dato, coordinator of Doctors Without Borders, resonate strongly : "The situation in Ventimiglia reflects the direction of European migration policies, focused on containment rather than protection." Yet, Italian and European institutions continue to turn a blind eye, trapped in a web of bureaucracy and indecision. What is needed is a radical paradigm shift, putting humanity and people's needs at the forefront instead of an obsession with border control. The brutality of migration management is a warning sign we cannot ignore. The images of migrants huddled around makeshift fires in the cold embrace of the winter season can no longer simply be watched and forgotten. In the script of an unending crisis, a collective response becomes essential , demanding an informed and active public opinion seeking justice. The call to dignity is an urgent anthem that must remain alive.

< Back Populism Is Shaping the Italian Upcoming Elections By Maeva Sole Alagna September 27, 2022 If you were to walk down any main Italian lane this September, you would feel overwhelmed by the high-impact street advertising and billboard displays. It is not the upcoming Milan fashion week that has induced this promotional frenzy –– it is the general political snap election of Sept. 25, 2022. Following the resignation of Prime Minister Mario Draghi in July, which plunged the country into a severe political crisis, Italians are called to vote for a new parliament and are now undergoing a ferocious electoral campaign. The right-wing coalition, starring Giorgia Meloni’s post-fascist Brothers of Italy party, Matteo Salvini’s anti-immigrant League and Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia, is predicted to attain 46% of the vote. The left, led by the Democratic Party (PD), is forecasted to win 28.5% of the vote, while the populist Five Star Movement (M5S) — which seems to reject any coalition — could reach up to 13%. Pollsters foresee Meloni’s triumph, representing a turning point in Italian history: the first post-war far-right government and its first female prime minister. But how have we come to this point? Since the breakdown of the former party system in the early 1990s, electoral support for populist parties has constantly been increasing. These movements now transcend any distinction between right and left extremes of the political spectrum and agree on the idea that its leaders alone represent “the people” in their struggle against the “elite establishment.” The aggregate votes for populists increased from 30% in the general election of 1994 to almost 70% in 2018. No other major Western European democracy has witnessed such rising support for populists. Party leaders have built their campaigns by responding to people’s collective sentiments of anti-institutionalism, anti-factionalism and distrust towards politics and society. Moreover, populist candidates continue to benefit from massive online electoral advertising — pricey but profitable. By gathering data for individual parties over the last month, the magnitude of the phenomenon can be quantified. Matteo Salvini’s party spent 51 thousand euros in thirty days between Instagram and Facebook; Meloni followed with a social media expenditure of 40 thousand euros. Silvio Berlusconi — 86 years old, face frozen by cosmetic surgery, more than 2,500 court appearances in 106 trials, including tax fraud, abuse of office, bribery, corruption of police officers, judges and politicians, collusion, defamation, extortion, false accounting, mafia, money laundering, underage prostitution influence and embezzlement — has made his newest appearance on TikTok, wooing young voters. Freeing a campaign spot for the senator of Forza Italia, a candidate for the upcoming elections, promising an income and pension for Italian housewives, further degenerates Italian politics. Forza Italia’s electoral video — which looks more like a two-and-a-half-minute teleshopping of household devices — shows the nominee next to two women, one pretending to vacuum, the other ironing as she hides a soccer ball under her vest to look pregnant. Italy prepares to welcome the Brothers of Italy as the winning party, which has gained consent by using the motto “God, homeland and family,” a slogan that the fascists employed in the 1930s. This motto logically excludes whoever does not identify as Christian, whoever was not born on Italian soil and whoever does not recognize the traditional value of family. This raises the question: when does populism become a threat to democracy? It does when it targets a particular social group. To serve “the people,” populist parties must first define everything that does not fall under this category, thus excluding vulnerable and marginalized populations, such as religious or ethnic minorities and immigrants. What can be done to counter the effects of populism? Vote! Vote for politicians and parties who make credible promises, do not simply want to shut down criticism or view their opponents as their enemies, and are committed to the democratic rules of the game.

This climate-induced Arctic conflict demonstrates that the time has come for global warming mitigation to be placed at the heart of national security strategies and defense planning across the world.  < Back The Icebreaker Putin, Biden and Jinping Are Playing By Lucy Lönnqvist for Sciences Défense October 31, 2023 The geopolitical dimension of the climate crisis involves a question of appropriation of land, sovereignty and security. The world is becoming hotter in many senses due to global warming, and in addition to melting ice caps and rising sea levels, the climate has become a threat multiplier for military spending globally. Today, this climate-driven military posture is culminating at the world’s peak, in the Arctic region. The shrinking Arctic has revealed the geopolitical battlefield of once-inaccessible shipping routes, kickstarting the race for potentially priceless minerals and oil deposits. What was once the world’s neutral ground, an undisturbed, barren white sheet of uninhabited land, has now become a hotspot for increased violence and potential conflicts between three invested powers : Russia, the United States, and China. An arms race has begun in the Arctic, and Western efforts are lagging behind. If governments cannot raise efforts to mitigate global warming for biodiversity’s sake, the question remaining is whether they will take greater action when global alliances are on the line. This climate-induced Arctic conflict demonstrates that the time has come for global warming mitigation to be placed at the heart of national security strategies and defense planning across the world. The Arctic Region encompasses eight states: Russia, the U.S., Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland, which sought to preserve the Arctic as a region of cooperation, low tension and respect for international law; an approach referred to as “High North, low tension,” one the Nordic countries were particularly partial too. However, hopes for pacificity between sovereign states in the region seem to be melting down along the ice sheets, as world powers U.S., Russia and China extend their grip on military presence in this new polar arena. Russia’s increased military presence and operations in the Arctic present one source of tension and China’s increased diplomatic and economic activities in the Arctic are another. Meanwhile, Russia’s war in Ukraine has only amplified friction in the Arctic’s competitive environment, as Russia’s exclusion from the Arctic Council incentivized the country to redirect collaboration towards China – a decision that will undoubtedly strengthen the dual powers. Russia has expanded military forces across their share of the Arctic frontier of 25,000 kilometers, amounting to 53 percent of the Arctic border. But why is the Arctic region so sought-after, and how has the region changed geographically due to climate change? Physical changes in the Arctic consist of melting permafrost, intense cyclones, warming sea ice and vegetation alterations. All of which have been driven by emissions and GHG-induced feedback loops within the atmosphere. A monitoring report conducted by the Arctic Council in 2019 concluded that “ the Arctic biophysical system is now clearly trending away from its previous state [in the 20th century] and into a period of unprecedented change, with implications not only within but also beyond the Arctic .” These changes raise questions of statehood sovereignty and national security, thereby proving the dire need for states to adopt a climate-defense portfolio in their military strategy. The melting Arctic has effectively opened a whole ocean entirely, with new navigation routes being explored for the first time in recorded history. The most highly disputed path is the Northern Sea Route , which has paved new transport circuits for containerships and Navy missions, cutting shipping distances by over 6,500 kilometers – roughly two weeks of travel time. Russia upholds its claim over the Northern Sea Route as an inland waterway that falls under its territory, whereas the U.S. defends the idea that the Northern Sea Route is an international route. For China, as the leading exporter of goods across the world, the Northern Sea Route is a pivotal passageway from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean, allowing the country to trade with enhanced efficiency. Alarmingly, Russia has already begun expanding its armed presence in the Arctic well beyond U.S. presence, through an abundance of airfields, missile systems and nuclear-powered icebreakers in the region. The new ocean demands the need to balance competing claims of sovereignty over international waters and maritime borders in the Arctic. Under current international law, the Arctic is not subject to any regulation , triggering a pressing need to determine the status of the region. The only regulation calming the Arctic waters is the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ( UNCLOS ). Currently, Denmark, Norway, Canada and Russia use UNCLOS to lodge legal claims on the Arctic Ocean, however the U.S. is not a party to this treaty, placing the country further behind in the global contest over the polar North. If the U.S. is serious about playing catch-up, signing the UNCLOS treaty would prove worthwhile. However, the prospects of this actually occurring are highly doubtful based on traditional U.S. stance towards binding itself to international law ( the U.S. has not ratified any UN treaties since 2002 in fear that tying itself to international laws would make it vulnerable to potential legal sanctions before the ICC ). As opposed to signing the UNCLOS treaty, the U.S. has elected to ramp up military presence in the Arctic, with the White House committing to "enhancing the capabilities required to defend our interests in the Arctic," as outlined in the Oct. 2022 National Strategy for the Arctic Region. Consequently, there has been a soar in U.S. spending on ships, aircrafts, infrastructure and soldiers disguised under the title of ‘climate expenditure’. It is almost ironic to see that although there has been no bipartisan support to curb emissions, there is bipartisan support for responding to Russia and China’s presence on a melting Arctic. What this ultimately demonstrates is that as we look forward, the grip that the climate now has on national security strategies is only going to grow. The seriousness of potential climate threats are imminent and must be accounted for in state defense budgets and planning. Rising sea levels, extreme weather, the scarcity of water, loss of ice cover and other climate change drivers are impacting human security today through the spread of epidemics, mass displacement of people and conflicts over receding resources – all of which require a security response. Soon enough, we may be looking at an altered map of the world, one with military competition occurring in places they never had before. The Arctic is interconnected with the rest of the world through the circulation of water, heat and carbon both in our oceans and atmosphere. Not to mention, it is connected through human systems of transport, energy and mineral production, tourism, and security. In light of this information, disputes of sovereignty over the melting Arctic and invested military powers at bay are of utmost concern for the world at large, calling on a climate defense strategy that takes our environmental crises with utmost severity.

You learn that there is likely no language with the capability for you to express how violent and dehumanizing it is to live under the weight of your realization. < Back I’m Glad I’m American By Abhiram Masam December 31, 2023 You remember that the train stopped for a while, long enough for you to notice but not long enough to think much of it. Then you see an angry, portly woman storm the length of the traincar, as if she was looking for something. She stops at your seat, demanding papers. Her badge and holster reveal that she is a police officer, something she forgets to tell you. You calmly explain that you don’t have papers– you’re a student traveling within the country. Her eyebrows remain furrowed; her face disbelieving. You offer her your student ID, and you watch as the creases of her face deflate as she reads “Sciences Po” on the flimsy plastic. She continues on with her search for another ten minutes before the train starts moving again. You remember being the only person on that train car who was asked for papers. You remember feeling deeply unnerved, a feeling you couldn’t shake for days afterwards. You’ve become paranoid, so you carry pictures of your passport, French student visa, and student ID with you wherever you go. Just in case someone else doesn’t believe that you are a student, who lives in France legally. You remember the bus stopping the same way the train did. You avoid crossing the border between France and Italy because you know what might happen. But the bus is filled with students, all exhausted after the end-of-year gala, so you believe that you’ll be fine. How naïve. Your eyelids grow heavy; the stillness of the bus begins to lull you to sleep. But you’ll never forget how hard the harsh light made you wince. Looking through the window, you see a border guard shining a flashlight on you. She looks at you, points at you as though she’s seen a spider on a wall, and then motions for her supervisor. Together, they glare. They’ve decided that you are a problem. The guard with the flashlight climbs the bus, and makes a beeline for you. You know why she is asking you, and only you, for your passport. So you dance the dance, hand her your passport. You watch her face. You tell her you’re American, and she looks at you as if you’ve told her pigs have finally figured out how to fly. She returns my passport and signals for the bus to return to Menton. You remember your face feeling uncomfortably hot. Every single person on the bus watched as you were humiliated, helpless. You remember that same deeply unnerving feeling, knowing you were the only one on that bus who was asked to present a passport. People come up to you; they offer you pity. They mean well, but you resent them for it. You resent the other people on the bus for not having been asked for their passports, too. Their words feel empty to you. You know why you were singled out, but you wouldn’t dare call it for what it is. No one wants to be around someone who’s being difficult. No one likes to talk about this sort of thing, so you don’t either. You wouldn’t want to be an imposition. You feel the stares from passersby everyday. They look at you with judgment and disgust. You wish you had the endurance to cuss them all out, to get them all to leave you alone. But you don’t. So you sport sunglasses to pretend you can’t see them, even when the sun hides behind the clouds. You try to dismiss the sinking feeling that arises when the cashiers at Carrefour ask to search your bags – they suspect you of stealing. You try to forget knowing that you are the only person in the store to have been searched. So you avoid Carrefour as best you can. Every encounter has made you think you aren’t supposed to exist here. Two years of your undergraduate studies in the South of France feel like a criminal sentence. You keep this all to yourself to the best of your ability, because you’d rather feel like shit all the time than burden anyone else with your issues. But that seal on your lips, it will break. It happened after you were on a routine run along the sea. You remember that It was dark, but you’ve never once felt unsafe being out at night. Uncomfortable, sure, but never in danger. Your route is one you have done countless times over: to the border, then back towards the end of Cap Martin, and then back to your apartment. You turn around right before the border crossing, so as to avoid the border guards – something you’ve done countless times over. You don’t hear the border guard chase after you because the music in your earbuds is too loud. He is screaming at you; his wrist now wrapped around yours. You freeze from shock; you don’t dare take another breath. He is demanding papers. You stumble over your words in French: you plead with him to let go, that you are American, and that you have pictures of all of your documents. You feel your eyes pushing against the contours of your face, widened with unadulterated fear. When he relinquishes your hand, you surrender your phone to him. He zooms in on every picture, doubtful that the brown man before him is a student at Sciences Po, that this brown man could be a part of l’élite de la nation . You are dumbfounded by the way every border guard and police officer you encounter cannot conceptualize that you are both brown and American. The border guard returns your phone to you, defeated. But you don’t leave. Your fear has fermented to anger. You scold and scowl at him as you defend yourself and your humanity. You did nothing wrong by going on a run, nothing to warrant his suspicion of you. You inform him that you never even crossed the actual border, so you never would have needed a passport in the first place. You are alone, in the dark, face to face with a border guard and no one is around to see. You fight back because you have nothing to lose. He becomes furious with you for speaking back. How dare you question his authority? How dare you disrespect him, when he never treated you with a shred of respect to begin with? He scolds you back, instructing you to behave as if you’re some insolent child throwing an irrational temper tantrum. When you are demanded of your papers, he lectures, you are to present them with politeness and without delay. To him, it is irrelevant that the only reason you’d be asked for papers is if your humanity is called into question and documents are required to justify your existence. As if speaking to a child, he mocks that once a border guard verifies your papers, you are to bid him a gracious “ bonsoir” and carry on. Fuck that. You want to curse him out. You want to scream “fuck you,” and all the vile words you only reserve for the people you truly despise. But you don’t. Because you can’t. Your command of the French language is weak; you can’t convey how angry you truly are. You don’t even believe that there are enough words in the English language to verbalize this feeling. You are angry, but also scared, alone, and vulnerable. A second border guard has joined you, standing behind you to prevent you from fleeing. You concede to his speech and he lets you leave. You don’t remember his face. You will never forget the shade of purple that will stain the bruise on your wrist for the following week. Even after the bruise fades, you will never forget his grip. You feel it every time you wear a bracelet, and you only just started getting into wearing jewelry. What a damn shame. For the first time, you start thinking about your experiences. You are certain you are not wanted here. You always thought that people would age out of hate and bigotry, as they experienced the world around them. But the border guard who stopped you on your run couldn’t have been more than a few years older than you. You become haunted with the realization that this border guard will continue to harass the black and brown people he’ll see for as long as he’s a border guard. He will not remember the number of people he inflicts his violence upon, because to him they are not human to begin with. You were subhuman to him. How dare he take your humanity away from you, you thought. Even if for fifteen minutes, he should never have had that power in the first place. In the days following your encounter with the border guard, you watch as everyone around you continues to be enamored with this idyllic town with its idyllic old buildings, idyllic beaches, the idyllic ocean, and the idyll of the French Riviera captured by pictures and posts for all to see. And with every picture you feel your resentment growing. You resent their oblivion. You resent them because you will never be able to truly enjoy living here. How can you, when you know you are thought to be less than human here. You can never say that sometimes you hate living here, though. Because then you would be ungrateful. God forbid it. You know that your feelings are multifaceted, because there are moments where you love living here. There are times when you feel like you are a part of the fantasy, too. But these moments are always short lived. They are always marred by the reality of living here. All you can do, all you have the agency to do, is worry: you fear that all this resentment will turn you into a permanently bitter person. And who wants to be around someone like that? You learn that there is likely no language with the capability for you to express how violent and dehumanizing it is to live under the weight of your realization. All that the condolences offered by those around you will do is make you feel hollow. Because, you think, they don’t really give a fuck about you, or your experiences. Why would they, it’s not like it affects them. They don’t deal with it on a daily basis like you do. Some of them will make racially insensitive jokes in front of you. But you mustn't make a scene, you mustn’t be so sensitive. You are still more concerned with being thought of as difficult, as the person who talks about the things that no one likes to talk about. And any fear I’ve ever felt while facing a border guard is dwarfed by the fear of being a burden, and being disliked. You will consider raising your concerns with the administration. You have your apprehensions, as the administration has a reputation for making students one of their last priorities. When the opportunity arises, you are told that you are irrational. That you must trust the people of this town. That there are good and bad people everywhere, that there is racism everywhere. They will make you feel like an idiot, and that it is your fault for feeling affected by the racist border guards and police. They talk to you as if you didn’t trust the people of this town when you first moved here. As if you weren’t a student once filled with optimism. As if you weren’t someone thrilled at the chance to live and study in France, and in one of the most coveted regions of the country no less. But of course, those who tell you these things have not had the pleasure of wearing a bruised wrist for a week like a scarlet letter. And they too don’t really give a fuck. You will feel isolated. You never want to be a burden to anyone. That’s why you didn’t call anyone when you ran back from the border. It was late at night, probably best that you didn’t bother them on a weeknight. What’s worse, is that they might be deterred by the emotional weight that you are forced to carry. You cannot call your parents. They mean well, but they will question why you were running at night, why you were running to the border knowing how they look at you, and they will frustrate you with their perfectly valid concerns. They live an ocean away, and telling them will only make them worry. You try calling your closest friend. She will listen, and she will care, and you will never find the words to thank her for it. But she is there, on a separate continent with the same ocean that separates you from your parents. You are here. You are completely and totally alone. But despite all of it, you will soon recognize the immensity of your privilege. Because the night after your encounter at the border, you go for another run. At night, too. You are stubborn, and the decision you've made is likely a stupid one, but you don’t care. This time, as you run towards the border crossing, you see two refugees scaling the rocks below the promenade. They duck from the lights that could expose them to the border guards. They duck from the waves, threatening to pull them into the sea. You turn away, so as to avoid bringing attention to them if someone else was looking. Your anger suddenly feels silly. Because my American passport will always protect me in ways those refugees’ passports will not. No matter how angry you feel, you will always be spared from the brunt of racial violence. Because in America, you are Indian. You are not Ahmaud Arbery, a Black man who was fatally shot while on a run in the same way you were. In France, you are American. Your passport will protect you in a state where racial violence took the life of Nahel Merzouk, the seventeen year old fatally shot by French police in Nanterre. Your shoulders perk up, anxious, every time you see a police car drive by. But no matter what, you know that your life will never be taken from you. There truly is no greater privilege than that. *** This reflection of my privilege is just that – a reflection. Nothing more, nothing less. It is my account of my experience living here. I know that this is not some grandiose thinkpiece on the violence of racism; I don’t want it to be. I do not have enough lived experience with racism to speak with that kind of authority. I do not care to make myself, my experiences, and my feelings digestible or palatable to an audience. I’m certain there are countless scholars and activists who have written about what I’ve attempted to say with this reflection far more eloquently than I could. I have no ulterior motive in writing this reflection other than that I am simply sick and tired of dealing with this shit on a daily basis. I’m glad I’m American. A jarring confession, I know, seeing as though being American is seen as a bit of a joke. You jest about the flaws of America: gun violence, Trump, car dependency, and trademark American stupidity. I see these flaws, and I often laugh with you. I’ll be the first to admit that America is a deeply flawed place. I know that living here makes me long to go back home, to a place that offers me refuge from the violence from the racism I experience here. But I also know that it’s a place that systematically criminalizes black people – racism is a central tenet of American society. I feel guilty for wanting to exist in such a place. But make no mistake, I will always recognize my privilege in being American; in holding an American passport. Because that privilege will always protect me. I would like to thank you for reading this, and listening to what it is that I have to say. It took me over a year to find my words, because I really wanted to avoid dealing with it altogether. But I ask that you do not offer me any condolences. I am not grieving. Do not commend my courage. I have none. I am not miraculously superhuman for having dealt with racism. And I am certainly not the first person to do it. Do not offer feedback on the mechanics of my writing. I did not write this to demonstrate my way with words, or how I can communicate my ideas. These are feelings and emotions no person should ever have to make sense of – to cope with. I did nothing to deserve to feel this way. At nineteen, no less. I am not interested in finding a more poetic way to say that I’m really fucking angry almost all the time. If this reflection in any way offends you, I don’t give a shit. All I can hope in writing this reflection is that you have listened to me. And for me, that’s enough. I wish I never felt compelled to say anything in the first place. But I owe it to myself to process what I am feeling, and to warn other students of visible color about the realities of living here. If you are someone who has experienced something similar, and if ever you need someone to talk to about it, please do reach out. Aside from that, I feel like there’s not much else I can do. Writing this reflection is some sort of a triumph. There’s really nothing you and I can do or say to prevent this from happening to me or anyone else. Where do I go from here?

Just months ago, famed campus dweller, Ollie, was your average street dog in Greece. No longer. Ollie is better traveled than most of his human counterparts. From Greece, he made his way to the sunny Côte d’Azur. He spends his days lazing about the illustrious Sciences Po Menton campus — a university that, with a less than 20% acceptance rate, many of us struggled to get into. But Sciences Po is just a temporary stop on Ollie’s journey to New York City, where he will ultimately reside. < Back From the Streets of Greece to the Côte d’Azur: A Canine Success Story By Celeste Abourjeili and Ata Tezel April 30, 2022 Just months ago, famed campus dweller, Ollie, was your average street dog in Greece. No longer. Ollie is better traveled than most of his human counterparts. From Greece, he made his way to the sunny Côte d’Azur. He spends his days lazing about the illustrious Sciences Po Menton campus — a university that, with a less than 20% acceptance rate, many of us struggled to get into. But Sciences Po is just a temporary stop on Ollie’s journey to New York City, where he will ultimately reside. Ollie is many things: he is a chronic gnawer, a frequent park-goer, a champion hide-and-seeker, and a people person — though he’s still shy around other dogs. But these skills are not just any canine hobbies, according to his owner, professor Daniel Traficonte. These tendencies stem from the survival skills Ollie developed living on the streets and were essential to his escape. “He used his cuteness to survive in the streets and get fed by locals,” said Traficonte. One part of the strategy is that Ollie never barks and is tame around people. Anyone kind enough to pet him may even bear witness to his go-to two-legged dance move. Though Ollie refused to comment on this, Traficonte asserts that a main cause of Ollie’s success had to do with his breed and size. “He’s small enough to fit easily on a plane but also looks big enough to give a big dog vibe,” said Traficonte, describing the compromise he had to make with his wife to meet their differing desires in a dog. In fact, the couple had to do an intensive internet search to find a dog fitting this vision. The Kokoni, a native Greek breed, was the solution they found on an obscure Facebook group. They journeyed to Greece. The rest is history. “I want to breed these in New York,” said Traficonte, arguing that if Americans knew about these perfect house dogs, everyone would own one. Though Traficonte’s career as a future dog breeder is up in the air with his wife opposing the career choice, one thing is certain: Ollie is going to love New York, and New York is going to love him back. “We haven’t told [Ollie] yet,” Traficonte said regarding the family’s eventual move to the Big Apple. There, Traficonte will commute upstate to work as a tenured professor at Syracuse University one season per year.. Nevertheless, we asked Ollie whether he was excited for New York. He answered with an inquisitive stare, eyes wide open and tail rapidly wagging — a fitting response for the Odysseus of dogs. With a brand new chapter on the horizon for Ollie, the Mentonese are bittersweet about his upcoming departure. “It’s tough to see him leaving just as we became so close,” said one emotional Sciences Piste. “Nonetheless, it will be incredible to watch him live the American Dream!” Only time will tell what Ollie will achieve in New York, but for now, he wishes for nothing but friends and trips.

After the European Union High Foreign Affairs Representative Josep Borrell delivered one of the worst diplomatic speeches of recent years, the international community is left to wonder about how Europe plans to face the increasing challenges of modernity in a time where once again, war, violence and division are on the rise. < Back No, Mr. Borrell, This Is Not the Image We Want the EU to Project! By Pau Carbonell November 30, 2022 Things are not going well for the European Union High Foreign Affairs Representative Josep Borrell. After delivering one of the worst diplomatic speeches of recent years, Borrell remained stoic amid the flurry of criticism that has fallen upon him in the European Parliament. On Oct. 13, Borrell made Eurocentric and inauspicious statements during his inauguration of the new European Diplomatic Academy in Brussels. His opening speech was supposed to encourage European diplomats to act with humility and respect towards global denizens. Instead, he communicated the opposite message: “Europe is a garden… Most of the rest of the world is a jungle, and the jungle could invade the garden… Keep the garden, be good gardeners. But your duty will not be to take care of the garden itself but [of] the jungle outside… they will not protect the garden by building walls. A nice small garden surrounded by high walls in order to prevent the jungle from coming in is not going to be a solution. Because the jungle has a strong growth capacity, and the wall will never be high enough in order to protect the garden.” Even as Borrell was delivering his speech tinged with racist and imperialist overtones, people in the audience felt uncomfortable, realizing how such a metaphor would damage European diplomacy. The fact is that his remarks mirror the age-old distinction between European “civilization” and the “barbaric” lands beyond. Since the 19th and 20th centuries, the garden analogy has been used by writers like John Stuart Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville to justify global European colonization and temper resistance to expansionist sentiment. The danger of Borrell’s speech lies in the reappearance of neo-colonial rhetoric in a century wherein Europe’s foreign policy is officially committed to aiding postcolonial economies and institutions. The implications of this speech are not and should not be diminished in the scope of their importance. In the modern world, people and nations are constantly listening and Borrell’s words have been heard worldwide. Apart from harsh criticisms of the speech spouted by politicians, journalists and columnists globally, Borrell has alienated European allies and strengthened its enemies. The United Arab Emirates summoned the interim head of the European Union mission in the country, Emil Paulsen, to discuss the “racist” inauguration and Russia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov said that “the garden Borrell talks about was built by plundering the jungle of the rest of the world during the colonial regime.” A piece in The New York Times has best summarized the gravity of the situation. Matina Stevis-Gridneff reported that Josep Borrell’s comments opened colonial wounds at a time when the European Union was working on ameliorating its legacy internationally. But this new scandal should not surprise those knowledgeable about European affairs — Borrell, who has served in his role since December 2019, has been involved in numerous diplomatic scandals during his tenure. Yet, this was a new low. With an ever-expanding divergence between the Central European and Eastern European member states, tense global multipolar outlooks and, in particular, Russia’s Ukrainian invasion, European policy cannot afford this type of discourse. Borrell’s paternalistic smugness, vainness, conceit and supremacism will hinder Europe from reinforcing old alliances or forging new ones. In her work “The European Union, Foreign Policy in a Changing World,” London School of Economics professor Karen E. Smith asserts that the European Union should pursue three foreign policy objectives if it wants to remain a global superpower. Firstly it must encourage regional cooperation and integration. Secondly, it should promote human rights. Thirdly, the union ought to bolster democracy and good governance. According to Smith, these factors are important since they all legitimize the European Union’s instruments to leverage in future international economic, diplomatic or military relations. Niccolò Machiavelli’s quote, “politics have no relation to morals,” does not seem to resonate with 21st-century European foreign policy — at least not nominally. Europe can only operate so long as it remains legitimate in the eyes of the governed. The notions of cooperation, integration, democracy, good governance and human rights included in the 1993 Maastricht Treaty demonstrate how union leaders have embraced the issues that its citizens seem to find important. That is precisely why Borrell’s speech is surprising — it is not only the type of discourse that Europe has been feverishly trying to avoid since the advent of unipolarity in the post-Cold War era, but because it was the face of European Foreign Policy, who said it. This blunder is representative of two situations that could be surfacing in the department of European Foreign Affairs. On the one hand, one could hypothetically consider this statement as merely the personal opinion of Josep Borrell. On the other hand, one could interpret it as a damning glimpse into the ideological core of European foreign policy. I hope that reality is closer to the former of the two explanations. Borrell’s garden allegory adds to a lengthening laundry list of statements showcasing the unmodern outlooks of European foreign policy movers and shakers. It is indicative of the growing feeling of wonder and uncertainty as to how Europe plans to face the increasing challenges of modernity in a time where once again, war, violence and division are on the rise.

Le cas Carl Schmitt est troublant car lire ses livres et en discuter, c’est faire entrer un nazi enthousiaste dans le panthéon des grands auteurs. Carl Schmitt questionne nos croyances par ses écrits mais aussi par sa vie; sa vie montre la porosité de la philosophie et du droit avec le pire et l’inanité de séparer les Hommes en deux. Le génie et la monstruosité sont souvent une seule et même chose. < Back Carl Schmitt: le nazi avec de bonnes idées? Lubin Parisien February 28, 2025 « Sachons être suspect » clamait Julien Freund en 1971 dans sa préface de la réédition française de La notion de politique de Carl Schmitt. Suspect, Carl Schmitt l’est assurément pour son engagement public en faveur d’Hitler et pour la caution juridique qu’il apporte à l’antisémitisme d’Etat du IIIème Reich. Suspect, Carl Schmitt l’est aussi au vu de ses ardents défenseurs: Alain de Benoist, tête de pont du mouvement intellectuel ‘ethnopluraliste’ de la « Nouvelle droite, » fait la part belle à sa vision de la pensée schmittienne dans les travaux du GRECE (Groupement de recherches et d’études pour la civilisation européenne). Le GRECE fut d’ailleurs un des grands pourvoyeurs idéologiques de l’extrême-droite raciste française aujourd’hui incarnée principalement par le Rassemblement national (RN). Julien Freund, qui célébrait ceux qui savent être « suspects, » a participé à des colloques du GRECE et s’inscrit donc bien dans la mouvance intellectualisante de l’extrême-droite française. Etre nazi et être soutenu par des ethnonationalistes ou autres ‘ethnopluralistes’ est un mauvais départ; Carl Schmitt pourrait sembler voué aux égoûts de la pensée européenne. Néanmoins, son œuvre est toujours discutée et débattue, des personnalités plutôt marquées à gauche comme Agamben fondent leurs discours sur les outils intellectuels schmittiens. L’influence de la pensée de Carl Schmitt est un défi lancé à des sociétés européennes libérales et reconstruites apparemment en opposition aux crimes nazis. C’est un pied-de-nez au confort intellectuel que procureraient les figures rassurantes de grands hommes. Une brillante carrière dans le droit et dans le nazisme Carl Schmitt est né en 1888 à Plettenberg , dans le jeune Empire allemand. Il participe comme beaucoup de sa génération à la Grande Guerre, mais pas aux combats, il est affecté à un poste administratif dans l’arrière. Il est issu d’une famille catholique et sa formation universitaire est celle d’un juriste: il obtient son doctorat en 1915 à Strasbourg. Carl Schmitt montre son talent comme juriste et philosophe du droit et du politique. Les années 1920 sont un grand moment de production intellectuelle pour Carl Schmitt; citons pêle-mêle La dictature en 1921 sur la question de l'État d’exception, La notion de politique et Légalité et légitimité en 1932. Dans ce dernier ouvrage, analysant la Constitution de Weimar et ses faiblesses, il estime que l’interdiction du parti nazi est une nécéssité pour proteger un Etat démocratique comme celui de Weimar, le NSDAP étant, au sens fort et existentiel du terme, un ennemi de l’Etat. Les interprétations divergent sur ce point: certains décrivent un Carl Schmitt fossoyeur de Weimar, les autres le dépeignent comme un opportuniste qui n’était pas fondamentalement nazi, position qui a de quoi nous laisser perplexe. Il n’empêche que la suite de l’histoire est troublante: Carl Schmitt rejoint le parti nazi dès juin 1933. Olivier Beaud estime que les termes du débat sont faussés: Schmitt méprisait Weimar mais louait l’Etat allemand: « Ainsi, loin d’être une doctrine républicaine, la thèse de l’interdiction des partis politiques révèle une croyance bien peu républicaine en la toute-puissance d’un chef charismatique. » En outre, en voulant interdire des partis, Schmitt veut surtout interdire le KPD, le parti communiste allemand, suppression dont se chargera Hitler dès les premiers mois de son accession au pouvoir. Carl Schmitt, grâce à ses amitiés et ses réseaux nazis, réussit à devenir conseiller d’Etat de la Prusse. Le grand juriste du nazisme Hans Frank—qui fut à la tête du Gouvernement général en Pologne après l’invasion du pays—a restructuré les associations corporatives; ainsi, « le 1er novembre [1933], était officiellement installé le Groupe spécialisé des enseignants des établissements du supérieur ( Fachgruppe Hochschullehrer ) ainsi que son Fachgruppenleiter [son président], le professeur Carl Schmitt ». Le juriste allemand participe à plein régime à la justification du programme nazi. 1936 constitue une grande année pour Carl Schmitt: il participe à un colloque sur « la judéité dans les sciences du droit », un grand raout antisémite dans lequel Carl Schmitt propose de mettre tous les livres écrits par des juifs dans une catégorie d’oeuvres soi-disantes juives. Certains prétendent que Carl Schmitt cessa ses activités nazies en 1936: il n’en est rien, ses amitiés avec Hans Frank et Goering lui ont permis de maintenir sa position jusqu’à la fin de la guerre bien qu’il ne soit plus le grand juriste officiel. Carl Schmitt n’est que très peu inquiété par la dénazification, il continue sa vie d’intellectuel en publiant en 1950 Le Nomos de la Terre , un ouvrage sur le droit international qui a construit l’aura du juriste. Pendant ce temps, dans le Glossarium , Carl Schmitt n’a rien abandonné de son antisémitisme viscérale, il déclare que « les Juifs restent toujours des Juifs. Tandis que le Communiste peut s’améliorer et changer. Cela n’a rien à voir avec la race nordique, etc. Le Juif assimilé est précisément le vrai ennemi. » Carl Schmitt meurt en 1985, laissant derrière lui des héritiers encombrants, le premier desquels Alain de Benoist en France. Des trésors de mauvaise foi sont déployés par l’idéologue de la Nouvelle Droite: « ces petits esprits ne réalisent pas qu’en dénonçant le “nazi Carl Schmitt” ils emploient eux-mêmes des méthodes diffamatoires typiquement nazies. » L’influence de Schmitt dépasse néanmoins ce caniveau, Arendt discute de l'œuvre de Schmitt bien que ce soit pour la confronter, notamment sur la question de la Révolution française. Carl Schmitt a donc une étonnante postérité à gauche, il est cité par Agamben sur la question de l'État d’exception, par Etienne Baliba r et bien d’autres. Ce plot twist inattendu pour un nazi est dû à la capacité de son oeuvre à questionner les fondamentaux de notre conception de la politique et de l’ordre international. n ne peut pas comprendre l’enjeu de la figure de Carl Schmitt sans entrevoir brièvement la richesse de son oeuvre. L’ennemi au politique Pour Carl Schmitt, la politique est fondamentalement agonistique, c’est-à-dire qu’elle est fondée sur la lutte face à l’ennemi; la politique consiste en la distinction des amis et des ennemis. Dans La notion de politique , en 1932, le juriste explique son mépris pour le libéralisme en démontrant que celui-ci essaie de se soustraire à la dialectique agonistique en masquant la lutte par l’idée de concurrence, en ne proposant pas de politique « sui generis . » La formule courante consiste à dire que « l’ennemi est la figure de notre propre question. » L’ennemi est l’altérité radicale, une altérité construite par le jeu des intérêts notamment territoriaux. Carl Schmitt n’appelle pas à anéantir l’ennemi car sa présence est une nécessité quasi-existentielle pour Schmitt—c’est lui qui nous donne du relief et nous défie. Sur la politique internationale, avec La théorie du partisan en 1963 et quelques écrits antérieurs, Carl Schmitt dénonce ‘l’ordre de Genève’ et de Versailles. En effet, la condamnation morale de l’Allemagne et de l’ennemi géopolitique, en général, permet à chacun des camps de se targuer de représenter l’Humanité face à l’inhumanité; face à l’immoral et à l’inhumain, la totalisation de la guerre et la volonté d’exterminer est la suite logique. De plus, Carl Schmitt critique le biais induit par les définitions classiques de guerre et de paix, l’une étant toujours définie par l’absence de l’autre. Avec la moralisation indue du concept de politique et l’exclusion théorique de la possibilité d'alternatives à cette binarité, Carl Schmitt pointe du doigt des contradictions en faveur toujours du vainqueur, comme l’occupation de la Ruhr en 1923 décrite comme nécessaire à la paix, alors que c’est l’acte hostile par excellence. On pourrait également penser, anachroniquement, que les guerres contre le terrorisme ou celle du Golfe relèvent du même type de contradictions. La moralisation du politique et son hypocrisie n’apparaissent pas ainsi comme un progrès. C’est au contraire un danger pour la paix effective et pas seulement théorique. La pensée de Schmitt est un pied-de-nez à notre acception classique du politique, vu comme l’espace de régulation des conflits et du compromis. Carl Schmitt est certes radioactif par ses engagements nazis, mais il l’est plus encore par sa pensée critique qui pose des questions pertinentes; c’est la dissonance avec son parcours nazi qui met à l’aise. En outre, les convictions idéologiques de Carl Schmitt se retrouvent dans sa pensée. Ainsi, si sa critique du libéralisme porte également dans des milieux de gauche—et a sans doute de l’intérêt—il ne faut pas occulter que dans certains textes et articles, il dénonce le libéralisme comme tête de pont d’un « formalisme » juif. Son admiration pour Hitler, opportune ou non, n’est pas sans rappeler la fascination de Carl Schmitt pour la figure du chef comme celle du président du Reich sous Weimar. Cela s’inscrit dans ce qu’on a appelé le décisionnisme . Selon Jean-Louis Schlegel, cela consiste à affirmer que « c'est la décision individuelle qui redonne sens au droit, ou qui le réinvente, dans des situations sans issue. » Dans une situation d’exception et face à la constante inimitié, l’acte même de trancher—de distinguer l’ami de l’ennemi notamment—est l’acte premier du politique, plus que le fond de la décision. A la lumière de son engagement nazi, on ne saurait ne pas tirer le fil liant les deux facettes de Carl Schmitt. Le nazi crasseux et le juriste brillant sont manifestement une seule et même personne, le dédoublement est une réponse trop facile au problème que pose Carl Schmitt au débat intellectuel. Des vraies œuvres ou des documents du nazisme? La production de Carl Schmitt est donc porteuse de critiques pertinentes, mais aussi d’un dangereux poison antisémite. L’opportunité de lire et d’éditer Carl Schmitt est très débattue. Le professeur de philosophie Charles Yves Zarka, dans un article du Monde en 2002 réagissant à la réédition d’un livre de Schmitt et à sa préface, propose de distinguer une oeuvre à part entière et un document à prendre comme le témoignage de certaines idées: « On doit éditer Schmitt, mais comme on édite les textes d'autres nazis, c'est-à-dire comme des documents, non comme des œuvres, et encore moins des œuvres philosophiques qu'on discute comme telles. » Le philosophe rappelle bien tous les mensonges qui ont été diffusés pour dédouaner Schmitt de ses responsabilités—notamment sur sa soi-disant disgrâce en 1936. Charles Yves Zarka prévient aussi que l’ensemble de la production intellectuel schmittien et ses engagements concrets durant tout le régime nazi sont les deux faces de la même pièce. La question du rapport de Carl Schmitt au nazisme fait néanmoins encore débat. Alain de Benoist remplit son rôle d’intellectuel raciste, certains comme Etienne Balibar dépeignent ‘l’expérience’ nazie de Schmitt comme une mésaventure regrettable dans la vie d’un brillant juriste. Une approche plus fine existe; l’historien du nazisme Johann Chapoutot décrit un Carl Schmitt qui voulait sincèrement être le grand juriste du IIIème Reich mais qui a échoué. Dans un colloque à l’Académie royale de Belgique en 2019, il démontre bien la participation enthousiaste de Schmitt à la dictature nazie, tout en nuançant le portrait qui est parfois fait de Schmitt comme le juriste nazi par excellence. Antisémite catholique virulent, Carl Schmitt n’est pas à la pointe de la ‘pensée’ nazie. Pour Chapoutot, Carl Schmitt ne fut pas la grand juriste nazi car il n’est pas allé jusqu’à une biologisation du politique, d’autres l’ont fait: Schmitt a été doublé à sa droite. En parlant de Grossraum (un territoire plus grand), Carl Schmitt n’est pas dans une ‘avant-garde’ qui parle de Lebensraum , qui contient une idée d’un supposé biotope pour la race aryenne. Schmitt reste fondamentalement classique, ce qui explique pourquoi il est lisible aujourd’hui par d’autres que des nazis. Le grand lecteur de Carl Schmitt en France aujourd’hui est Jean-François Kervégan, dont les travaux ont irrigué cet article. En 2011, il a publié un livre précisément sur la question de l’utilisation de Carl Schmitt, Que faire de Carl Schmitt . Sa formule pour résumer sa thèse est la suivante: il faut « partir de Carl Schmitt . » D’une part, il reconnaît la grande pertinence des outils théoriques schmittiens pour comprendre et le monde et ses évolutions. Il faut puiser dans sa pensée des outils, mais pas son idéologie. D’autre part, cette formule résume bien aussi la nécessité de s’éloigner de Schmitt et de lire ses œuvres en sourcillant. Il ne faut pas prendre pour argent comptant tout ce qu’il dit car il s’en sert à certains moments pour justifier le nazisme. C’est donc une position d’équilibrisme que Jean-François Kervégan assume pour pouvoir puiser intelligemment et avec prudence dans le trésor schmittien. Le cas Carl Schmitt est troublant car lire ses livres et en discuter, c’est faire entrer un nazi enthousiaste dans le panthéon des grands auteurs. Carl Schmitt questionne nos croyances par ses écrits mais aussi par sa vie; sa vie montre la porosité de la philosophie et du droit avec le pire et l’inanité de séparer les Hommes en deux. Le génie et la monstruosité sont souvent une seule et même chose. Photo credits: Ludwig Hohlwein on Wikimedia Commons

The renowned Egyptian novelist Ahmed Khaled Tawfik, in his novel Utopia, offered an unfortunate vision of Cairo’s future: “They will leave the old capital to burn with its people, to fade away in oppression, poverty, and disease, while they move to their new capital, sparing their eyes from witnessing all that destruction.” Expanding on his words, it is clear that without intentional intervention in Cairo, Egypt is on the verge of a divided reality—a city burdened with poverty and decay on one side, and on the other, an astonishing new capital established with skyscrapers and lush green spaces. This is the future that hangs in the balance and only decisive change can prevent such a strife. < Back Cairo in a Yellow Filter Marwan Shawwara for Environnementon October 31, 2024 While the government implemented an energy blackout project during one of Cairo’s hottest summers—leaving some of the city’s most densely populated districts without power for up to four hours—residents were shocked by a simultaneous new wave of aggressive tree uprooting across the city. The removal of green spaces, particularly in historic districts, appeared neither reasonable nor explained by authorities. By June 2024, the destruction of these green areas had become a widely discussed topic, trending on social media, covered by talk shows and drawing concern from environmental activists and NGOs. Many sought answers from the government, raising concerns that in Egypt, it is not only the humans, but also trees are facing ongoing hardship. Over the past decade, statistics and visual observations of Cairo’s public parks reveal a systematic reduction in green spaces, driven by the regime’s push for urbanization projects. According to Green Forest Watch, the government cleared over one million and six hundred thousand square meters of trees between 2013 and 2023 to make way for wider streets, bridges and commercial developments. However, the destruction is not always linked to specific urban projects: In neighborhoods like El Zamalek, where no new projects have been announced and tree removal continues unabated, raising questions about the government’s intentions. This wave of uprooting in June sparked widespread speculation. Many activists on social media started wondering where the trees were going, given that no new construction projects were announced in several areas. Some speculated that the government was selling the wood to Israel—there has been increased demand in Israel as, especially after Colombia stopped its wood exports to Israel in protest of the ongoing genocide in Gaza. However, Dr. Reham El Morally, Assistant Professor of Public Policy and Administration at the American University in Cairo, offers a different perspective. She described that the government has a clear strategy to shrink public spaces where people can gather and mobilize. And the new urbanization projects are a “new form of public control.” Without the shade of trees and the cooling effect of green spaces, Cairo’s streets become unbearable in the summer heat, effectively discouraging public activity. With average temperatures reaching 45°C and little to no tree cover, the city’s ten million residents are left to endure an environment that lacks basic amenities like oxygen-rich air. Consequently, the public health situation consequences are also becoming dire. Ibrahim El Meligy, a consultant at Helwan Fever Hospital, links the increase in lung fibrosis, respiratory allergies and pulmonary diseases—particularly among children and non-smokers—to the loss of oxygen-producing trees. He explained that many children in densely populated areas now require nebulizers and oxygen therapy and are at higher risk of asthma and poisoning due to elevated levels of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Yet, not everyone is impacted equally. The government’s urban development projects, such as the Green River Park and New Central Park in the New Administrative Capital, demonstrate their ability to create green spaces. According to Dar , the official partner of these projects, these parks will cover an area twice the size of New York’s Central Park, totaling 6,200 acres. However, these green spaces are being developed in gated communities, accessible only to a privileged minority—those who can afford to live in high-end developments targeting exclusively the upper and middle-upper classes. The government’s “Egypt Vision 2030” project, announced in 2018, promised that by 2020 Egypt would offer an average of one square meter of urban green space per capita. This figure was expected to increase to three square meters by 2030, but the vision remains largely unfulfilled. Similarly, the “Go Green” initiative, launched by the Ministry of Environment in 2022, appears to have little practical impact. As electricity blackouts began in the summer of 2023, residents became even more vulnerable, struggling with the lack of natural cooling sources like trees and green spaces, making the situation increasingly unbearable. Egyptians took to social media to share before-and-after images of green spaces near their homes, highlighting the ongoing destruction of the city’s already limited green areas. The uprooting of trees is not only an indicator of the broader environmental and public health crises that the government must urgently address, but also raises a critical question: to what extent should a citizen’s socioeconomic status determine their access to a natural public good like green spaces and trees? The renowned Egyptian novelist Ahmed Khaled Tawfik, in his novel Utopia, offered an unfortunate vision of Cairo’s future: “They will leave the old capital to burn with its people, to fade away in oppression, poverty, and disease, while they move to their new capital, sparing their eyes from witnessing all that destruction.” Expanding on his words, it is clear that without intentional intervention in Cairo, Egypt is on the verge of a divided reality—a city burdened with poverty and decay on one side, and on the other, an astonishing new capital established with skyscrapers and lush green spaces. This is the future that hangs in the balance and only decisive change can prevent such a strife.

These past ten years have been a time of unprecedented challenges for the Alliance. < Back Speculations Abound as NATO Awaits New Chief By Michał Barszczak for European Society March 31, 2024 The head of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is the Secretary General – a chief civil servant responsible for directing the organization. NATO chose its Secretary General for the first time in 1952, after long negotiations leading to the appointment of a British official. Since then, twelve distinct diplomats have officially held the position, representing eight countries in total. Among them, three chiefs were from the United Kingdom, three from the Netherlands, two from Belgium, and one from Italy, Germany, Spain, Denmark, and Norway. Since 2014, this position has been held by Jens Stoltenberg, a former Norwegian prime minister. Even though the usual term of office lasts four years, he has been at the top of NATO for almost a decade. Last July, member states again agreed to prolong his presidency, this time only for one year. We shall then know the name of the next Secretary General by Oct. 1, 2024 when Stoltenberg officially should step down as chief. These past ten years have been a time of unprecedented challenges for the Alliance. One of them is the ongoing armed conflicts in the Middle East, where the U.S. plays a crucial role. Other challenges include the detachment from the possibility of engaging in war shared across the continent and confusing and worrying communication coming from the former POTUS Donald Trump, who is today more than ever likely to make a big return to the White House after the November election. Trump’s statements and social media activity neatly show that there are reasons to be worried about NATO’s future and integrity. Those should raise concerns, especially while there is ongoing Russian bloodshed at the borders of NATO in Ukraine. Furthermore, Donald Trump is known for his rather friendly approach to Putin. Nevertheless, it may be hard to demand from American society, never directly touched by the bombs and war, to fully see a threat coming from the Kremlin and cordial relations with Putin’s Russia. What is surprising is that there is no official procedure regulated in treaties concerning the appointment of the next Secretary General — usually, it’s done through hours of multilateral negotiations. As of today, Mark Rutte, an outgoing Dutch prime minister and the president of the Democrats66, is leading the race, held behind closed doors with unwritten rules. However, even though favored by most of the Western European governments, Rutte is not the only contestant. Many names have been mentioned, only to withdraw from the race later. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and former U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace reportedly even discussed his candidacy with U.S. President Joe Biden. However, both subsequently withdrew from consideration without providing any explanation. For now, there are two other candidates openly expressing their willingness to run NATO, apart from Rutte, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, currently wanted by Russian officials; and Latvian Foreign Minister Krisjanis Karins. In the unwritten procedure, there is no specified set of qualities required to become the next Secretary General. As Rutte is considered a more stable and ‘safer’ choice for the alliance, it rightly raises the question of state equality in NATO. Rutte is the second longest serving Prime Minister in Europe (right after Viktor Orbàn in Hungary). However, his years in office are not even close to being described as stable for Dutch politics, as the public had expressed it in the last parliamentary elections, giving the biggest number of chairs to Geert Wilders’ right-wing, populist Party for Freedom. Rightly, Rutte’s assumed appointment raised questions of the equality and balance of powers in the Alliance – are the Baltic States, Poland, or any other country that joined NATO after the fall of the Iron Curtain equal in the race, after more than 20 years of partaking in its existence? When asked by journalists if there still is a desire to participate in the race, Kallas without a moment of hesitation responded with one word: “Yes.” She explained that she believes the next chief of NATO should be somebody whose country has spent two percent (or more) of its GDP on defence, as required by the North Atlantic Treaty. She also said it would be beneficial to see a woman in the role. While Estonia is spending more than three percent of its GDP on defense, the Netherlands is not quite close to hitting the two percent target. Kallas has been Estonia’s Prime Minister for more than three years now. She leads the Reform Party and served twice as a member of the parliament ( Rigikogu ) and was a member of the European Parliament. Upon the conclusion of her term, Politico recognized her as one of the forty most influential MEPs and one of the most influential women in Brussels. Already as an acting Prime Minister, she was recongized as a leading voice in international support for Ukraine attacked by Russia, for which The Statesman called her the ‘Europe’s New Iron Lady’. Regarding this conflict, Kallas rejects any possibility of a peace deal that would cede part of the Ukrainian territories to the aggressor and hold onto strong and unconditional support for Ukraine. She, as most of the Eastern European and Baltic leaders, sees Russia not only as an invader in Ukraine but as an existential threat to their state and nationhood. After last year’s elections in which Kallas led her party to another victory, she formed a coalition with the Social Democratic Party and Estonia 200. One of the first bills passed in the new parliament legalized same-sex marriage and secured the right to adoption for same-sex couples, making Estonia the first post-Soviet, and Baltic country to do so. In February, Russian officials announced that Kallas had been included in the Russian interior ministry's list of individuals wanted on criminal charges. Allegedly, the charges were linked to the removal of Soviet World War II monuments in Estonia, however, she dismissed the warrant as a ‘scare tactic’ of the Kremlin. If it will not be for the next NATO chief, her candidature to replace Josep Borrell, the European Union’s high representative for foreign affairs, is discussed behind closed doors with a strong expectation she would be supported in that race by Emmanuel Macron. However, as Politico points out, that topic remains sensitive in a few EU capitals, as not every member regards an aggressive anti-Russian approach as the right way to handle today’s geopolitics. Despite the obvious consensus arising, Rutte’s candidature may be headed to clash with clear opposition coming from the Hungarian prime minister, as it is not a secret that the Dutch politician has not quite been on the same page as Budapest’s Orbàn. There is a strong possibility of a new candidate appearing out of nowhere which would completely change the rules of the game. Unless something is surely decided, every other thing uninterruptedly remains an option. What is expected of the next Secretary General? Keeping the peace in Europe, which may be harder than at any time in history before (and hopefully reaching agreements ending the war in Ukraine) and, of course, making sure the U.S. stays on board. It will be a time of a hazardous game, with opportunities of great gain and loss placed on two opposite sides of the balance scale. And rightfully so – ill-considered and irresponsible decisions could redefine the trajectory of European geopolitics.