Search Results

< Back Setting Precedents – Greece’s LGBTQ+ Rights Triumph and France’s Landmark for Abortion Rights By Maria Eirini Liodi March 31, 2024 Cause for celebration comes in the past months, as Greece became the first Orthodox Christian-majority country to legalize same-sex marriage and France enshrined the right to abortion within its constitution. Amid tense discussions on upcoming U.S. elections, multiple ongoing conflicts, and protests of all sorts recently setting central Europe ablaze, perhaps a moment of appreciation for these two recent ‘wins’ could be uplifting. On February 15, 2024, following months of deliberation, Greece emerged as a triumphant example of LGBTQ+ representation within the Southern European region. Despite opposition from the Orthodox Church and members of the political right, the measure was passed by the parliament with 176 voting in favor and 76 against, legalizing same-sex marriage and granting same-sex couples’ adoption rights as well. Granting the right to marriage translates into recognizing LGBTQ+ couples and children's rights on an equal footing within their familial structure. For those who remained unconvinced as to why equal marriage rights are important, various studies conducted over the years support the reality. One such example published in the National Library of Medicine, indicates that same-sex marriage constitutes an issue of public health, delineating clearly that: “ Being in a legally recognized same-sex relationship, marriage in particular, appeared to diminish mental health differentials between heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons (in the study). ” Greece has been one of the relatively liberal countries on LGBTQ+ rights in Southern Europe, considering homosexuality had long been decriminalized in 1951, and same-sex civil unions were legalized in 2015. However, given the persisting tragedies of hate crimes against members of the LGBTQ+ community, it is important to keep striving for equal rights and protection for all the country’s citizens. As notably stated by the country’s Prime Minister on X, this moment is “a milestone for human rights” in Greece. As the 16th European Union country to legalize same-sex unions, following Estonia earlier in January of this year, Greece can serve as a precedent for other countries in the region that beyond civil unions, remain more conservative on the matter. Across the continent, France marked its own historic milestone on March 4, 2024, shifting the global narrative toward progressive social change. France has become the first country to enshrine the right to abortion within their constitutional framework. Why is this significant, given that abortion has been legalized since 1975 in France? Ensuing the U.S. Supreme Court’s disruptive downturn in deciding to overturn Roe v. Wade, activists both within the U.S. and elsewhere around the world have responded in an uproar. As of January of this year, twenty-one states prohibit abortion or restrict the procedure to earlier in the pregnancy than the standards set by Roe v. Wade. Women with pregnancy complications or subjects of rape still have to illegally or unsafely deal with this issue. Abortion is a human rights issue, and France has made it clear that “guaranteed freedom” to abortion is vital. In celebration, the Eiffel Tower was lit up with the words “ mon corps mon choix”, my body my choice, clearly delineating the stance the country has taken and continues to take for women. There have been debates on why Macron’s government decided to enshrine this right within the constitution, considering the pre-existing laws safeguarding abortion in France. Is this merely a political stunt? An effort to win popular support? Whatever the case on this front, one thing remains steadfast – laws can change. Putting this right within its constitution, France is providing a long-term safeguard for its women today, tomorrow and for future generations. This step serves as a statement; one which can be an important example for other nations, especially during an era where certain countries are facing regressive shifts in reproductive policies. By codifying this essential freedom, France is challenging deeply ingrained patriarchal structures – after all, what does a state say to its female citizens today if it does not permit them bodily autonomy and protection? Amid grim news feeds, Greece and France shed light on a progressive path toward more equitable societies. Let’s hope these victories resonate globally, prompting policy change toward acceptance and autonomy.

The global energy crisis began in October 2021 with the backdrop of resurgent demand from the re-opening of economies following the Covid-19 pandemic. There is no doubt that recent energy politics has certainly provided a fair wind for both Egypt and Israel. < Back Egypt and Israel: Quiet Beneficiaries of the Energy Crisis By Noor Ahmad October 31, 2022 The global energy crisis began in October 2021 with the backdrop of resurgent demand from the re-opening of economies following the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2021, China’s post-Covid recovery led to a demand for gas that is said to have risen by 8.4 percent. Gas imports are set to increase by 20 percent to satisfy this demand, resulting in less gas available for import to many European countries from gulf countries, such as Qatar, who could not ramp up natural gas supplies to Europe, as they were committed to their long-term contracts with Asian countries. The other major event that undoubtedly catalyzed the energy crisis was the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russia supplied around 40 percent of the European Union’s gas consumption by pipeline, and the 75 percent cut to supply has significantly affected European countries which have relied on Russian gas for years. Russia started to reduce its supply of gas in 2021 on the pretext of maintenance to its major gas pipelines into Europe. This accelerated in the early part of 2022, when gas flow reduced by about 40 percent through the Nord Stream 1 pipeline, one of the major conduits of gas from Russia to Europe. By July of this year, the flow of gas through Nord Stream 1 was reduced to 20 percent of its capacity. On Sept. 30, a series of under-water explosions damaged both Nord stream 1 and 2 pipelines, most likely the result of sabotage. The union has not published its findings, but many suspect Russia to be the culprit. Amidst this chaos, two unexpected beneficiaries have been Egypt and Israel. The benefits have not only been economic but also political. Egypt, following the major discovery of offshore gas in 2015 by the Italian company ENI in the Zohr gas field, has been investing in its scope for exportation through the development of its gas liquefaction capacity. Liquefied natural gas has become a major method of transporting gas where piping gas is not possible. According to reports, Egypt now ranks in the top ten countries in the world with gas exporting capacity. Part of this success is due to its links with Israel through the Arab Gas Pipeline, which is used by Israel to export piped gas to Egypt for liquefaction and then is re-exported. Israel has become a significant gas exporter in recent years. It relies on its two major gas fields, Tamar and Leviathan, both offshore fields off its coast. Leviathan, which was discovered in 2010, has the capacity to supply Israel’s domestic needs for the next 40 years. Tamar gained significance around the same time. Most recently, in 2022, 60 billion cubic meters of gas was discovered in the Olympus Area, also in the Mediterranean. By some estimates, Israel, which currently exports 10 million cubic meters a year, has the capacity to more than double this in the coming years by investing further. For both countries, the rising price of gas and their export capacity have provided much needed hard currency to support their economies. Egypt’s economy has been severely impacted by rising commodity prices, particularly wheat, which is a mainstay for its population’s bread consumption. At the same time, sanctions on Russia have affected Egypt’s tourism industry, which relies on Russian tourists. In Israel’s case, a recent report published by the Ministry of Energy showed Israel’s profits from natural gas increased by almost 50 percent. Eleven percent of royalties from revenues from natural gas go directly to the treasury to fund state expenditure. Beyond this, Israel set up its own sovereign wealth fund, The Israeli Citizens’ Fund, to benefit from the increase in gas production; it raises its revenues from taxing excess profits. After a disappointing start, the fund, according to the Israeli Tax Authorities, was expected to collect between 300-$500 million dollars a year over the next decade. This turned out to be very conservative given that it raised 500 million dollars in less than three months in 2022. This fund will be invested for future generations, in line with how other sovereign wealth funds operate around the world. Beyond economics, the two countries’ geopolitical situations have also benefited. The European Union signed a trilateral Memorandum of Understanding between Egypt, Israel and itself in June 2022 to increase the export of Israeli gas. What has surprised many has been the union’s silence on the values it has held so dear for many years. Both Egypt and Israel have been targeted for various humanitarian issues – the Egyptian military regime’s treatment of dissenters is well documented. Moreover, the union has been historically vocal about Israel’s settlements and occupation of Palestinian territories and. It has been widely noted that the memorandum signed was the first in which the union failed to mention the Palestinian territories. A question was raised on the matter in the union’s parliament to the European Commission on the subject. A response on July 28, 2022 to the question, given by the Vice-President of the commission, Borrell Fontelles, stated that as this is a non-binding agreement, no territorial clause was deemed necessary. And while the union recommitted to abiding by United Nations Security Council resolution 2334, which calls for its member states to distinguish between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967, the omission in this instance is unusual. There is no doubt that energy politics has certainly provided a fair wind for both Egypt and Israel.

For Iran it was an illegal assassination of a national hero; For the United States a justified pre-emptive attack on a terrorist. For the millions of civilians who reside within the Gulf region, it meant fear of what could be a death sentence by two powerful states in their unending quest for hegemony. < Back Iran and the United States: Fighting for Hegemony at the Cost of Civilian Lives By Emilia Kohlmeyer January 30, 2022 For Iran it was an illegal assassination of a national hero; For the United States a justified pre-emptive attack on a terrorist. For the millions of civilians who reside within the Gulf region, it meant fear of what could be a death sentence by two powerful states in their unending quest for hegemony. For the international community, it is a painful reminder of its continuous failure to uphold international law. January 3 marked the two-year anniversary of the US-led assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani. Soleimani was commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and on a diplomatic mission in Baghdad when he was killed by a US drone strike on the 3rd January 2020. This triggered counter strikes by Iranian forces on US bases in Iraq, injuring thousands of military staff. In Iran, thousands of mourners have marched in protest to what their government deems as “military adventurism”or reckless military strategies by the United States within the region. This is accompanied by Iraqi demands for the final withdrawal of US forces from their territory. The States legally justified the strike as anticipatory self-defense, however it was immediately disputed that the danger Soleimani represented was “instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation.” They failed to provide concrete evidence of an imminent threat, in effect failing to justify the principle of self-defense. The United Nations special rapporteur for investigating extrajudicial and summary executions, Agnes Callamard, concluded, “Even at the most basic level, the U.S. did not demonstrate that striking Suleimani was ‘necessary.’” Furthermore, Iraq did not consent to the strike; therefore it concretely violated its sovereignty. Two years later, Iran’s continuous calls for action to the United Nations and Interpol sanctions on those responsible remain unanswered. International law should exist to provide a set of rules by which everyone is required to abide, despite one’s power or influence. It sets the basis for equality amongst states and their people, which is the foundation of conflict-resolution between multiple parties. When there is no consequence to the violation of said law for states which are considerably more powerful, international law fails to address its entire purpose:equal accountability. The assassination of Qasem Soleimani therefore set a dangerous precedent, highlighting that if powerful states such as the U.S. desire to bend the law according to their interests, they face no consequences. Why should other states therefore abide by the law at all? It could neither be considered fair nor necessary. This neglect of an accepted set of rules can endanger millions of civilian lives. In this particular instance, with the increasingly downright insulting rhetoric of both Iran and the States towards each other, armed conflict did not seem unlikely. Maybe Iraq would once again become the playground of the powerful – after all, strikes from both sides took place there. The ones who bear the burden of transgression from either side are innocent civilians, who are not even citizens of the perpetrating countries. They would share the same fate as Syrians, whose home is subject to a pissing contest between powerful states. The dangerous consequences of this fight for regional hegemony indicate that the current global mechanisms which are in place to protect civilians have failed to fulfill their duty. The pick-and-choose of which nation receives sanctions for its actions continues to allow a disproportionate exercise of power — often by countries that do not even lay within the region they seek to control. The guise of spreading human rights and global peace by such states can no longer serve as justification for foreign intervention. The international community cannot continue to accept it as such. Therefore, it is of increasing importance to hold officials of our own countries — and the organizations in which they participate – accountable. For too long this region has been a playground for the powerful at the expense of innocent lives. Two years have passed, and I am back in Qatar sitting in conversation with friends who have seen their homes fall victim to this power play. With the turbulence of COVID-19, many people abroad have forgotten how January 2020 felt. But we still live between 11,000 U.S. troops on the Al-Udeid base mere kilometers from our homes and our neighbor Iran, separated by a flight less than an hour. We joke about the time there was almost a war, but entrenched in our subconscious is the knowledge that any diplomatic misstep can claim our next home.

< Back Vague Policy on Concrete Issues Pracheth Sanka September 30, 2024 “We have to get a deal done.” Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, repeated this statement multiple times during a brief answer in her live CNN interview in late August. In her first real moment to explain her policies to the American people, she gave non-answers and vague responses, especially on the question of the War in Gaza, leaving viewers disappointed . Harris provided a mixed message, both stating her unequivocal support for defending the state of Israel and for the innocent Palestinian civilians impacted by the conflict, echoing her statements from the previous week’s Democratic National Convention. In addition, she—very—quickly expressed her backing for a potential two-state solution, one of the few outwardly indicated policies concerning a post-war Palestine. Chiefly, Harris aims to continue the Biden Administration policy in pursuit of a ceasefire. She showed visible frustration that negotiations between Hamas and Israeli leadership seemed to be stalling in Doha. Still, she remained adamant that a deal must be agreed upon, both to free American hostages and end the conflict. President Joe Biden and V.P. Harris have stated their belief in a ceasefire as a means to rebuild the region. However, apart from the aforementioned whispers of a two-state system, they have given little insight into what this would look like. In May of 2024, U.S. officials proposed nominating a civilian advisor in the region, tasked with peacekeeping and helping lift Gaza out of ruin. The same officials floated ideas of economic restructuring and city building, or even creating a peacekeeping alliance out of neighboring Arab states. It is unclear whether V.P. Harris plans to implement these ideas, but they are a look into the pre-existing Biden Administration plans for the “day after” scenario. Like Harris, former President, and current Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump has stayed mainly vague on the issue, sharing a similar sentiment to V.P. Harris in his unwavering support for Israel and its defense. He has also indicated support for a two-state solution, as outlined in his 2020 policy proposal, “Peace to Prosperity”, more colloquially known as the Trump peace plan. However, Trump’s support for this ideal seems to be slipping among the shifting attitudes within the Israeli government and Palestinian people. In May of 2024, Trump was recorded saying he believed a two-state solution had lost popularity and his support for the plan’s viability had waned. What is clear, though, is Trump’s steadfast promotion of Israel’s ideals to eradicate Hamas. Both Trump and Republican Vice Presidential Nominee JD Vance have espoused providing more aid to Israel, in hopes that this will allow the country to end the war as quickly as possible. Despite these seemingly unsure policies on the ongoing war in the region, many Sciences Pistes are sure of who they support in the upcoming election. For American 1A Loowit Morrison, the choice is clear. “I think that her foreign policy definitely outweighs that of Trump’s.” Morrison explained that while she disagreed with the Vice President’s actions as part of the Biden Administration, Harris’ recent shifts to serious calls for a ceasefire and outward recognition of the Palestinian lives lost makes her a stronger candidate. Morrison still holds that Harris’ foreign policy is weak at best, but Trump’s all-out refusal of a ceasefire is significantly weaker. A Lebanese 1A, who wished to remain anonymous, is likewise hoping for a Harris win in November. He believes that Trump’s wish for a complete Israeli victory is an overly simplistic outlook in a much more complex situation. For him, Israel’s success means a loss for its neighboring Arab countries, potentially destabilizing the region and leading to a prolonged conflict that could encompass the broader Middle East. “I really think Kamala Harris’ approach, advocating for both an Israeli and Palestinian state, is the most viable solution.” He also agrees with Harris’ strong position against Hamas and her support of the Palestinian people. “Kamala is not backing Hamas; she is supporting the Palestinians. People often conflate the two but they aren’t the same.” Other Sciences Pistes agree with the two-state ideal that Harris espouses. 1A Theo Hisherik, a British-Israeli, thinks that Harris’ call for a ceasefire and two-state solution is the correct position, as he states that “without a doubt, Harris is the best candidate for that.” He also believes that Harris effectively walks the line between support for Israel and Palestine. “She argues still for a defense of Israel to ensure that it can defend itself in the future, but she understands the need and the plight of the Palestinians,” he explains, solidifying his backing of Harris as a candidate. Despite outward support for Israel and its defense, Hisherik does not buy into Trump’s policies. “I think Trump’s pro-Israel sentiment is firstly a farce, I don’t think he actually really cares about Israel,” believing that Trump only says this to appeal to his Christian conservative or right-wing domestic voter base. Some Sciences Pistes don’t feel as strongly towards either of the candidates. “What we have seen is that the ‘lesser evil’ is the complete annihilation of Gaza” says an anonymous 1A from Jordan. She criticized the overwhelming view among Americans that Democrats are the so-called “lesser of two evils” when it comes to foreign policy. When speaking of the media she saw from the Gaza Strip, she said “they sent it back to the stone ages” and spoke of Israeli bombardments of refugee camps using American weaponry. “This is supposedly the lesser of two evils, so how much more evil can it get from here?” Providing 69% of Israeli weapon imports since 2019 and almost $4 billion annually, she has just one ask of the American people: “Stop providing Israel with the weaponry to kill civilians.” Her further frustration with the American political system could be summarized with a quote she had seen earlier: “You should dream bigger than seeing a black woman commit genocide.” For her, the identity politics in play of Harris’ rise to Democrat stardom means nothing if she holds little sympathy for what is happening in Gaza. “Kamala Harris supposedly being part of a minority, that she should be more considerate of what happens in the Middle East, I don’t think that has that stance that [Middle Easterners] agree with.” As the War in Gaza continues on, it will undoubtedly have an impact on the outcome of this year’s election. With nearly 80% of Arab Americans holding unfavorable opinions of Biden, coupled with protest votes , it could look bleak for the Democrats’ hopes of retaining office in November. Despite many Sciences Pistes’ belief that Harris would prove better than Trump regarding foreign policy in the Middle East, American voters seem to be more split on the candidates, especially among the candidates' seemingly hazy policy.

La politique regorge de mystères. L’un d’eux, parmi les plus importants, est l’explication d’un phénomène à l'œuvre depuis quelques décennies dans les démocraties occidentales. < Back Extrême-droite : les raisons d’une percée électorale transnationale By Jonathan Smidtas Schalita “La peur mène à la colère, la colère mène à la haine, la haine… mène à la souffrance” Maître Yoda La politique regorge de mystères. L’un d’eux, parmi les plus importants, est l’explication d’un phénomène à l'œuvre depuis quelques décennies dans les démocraties occidentales. Ce phénomène est l’entrée des partis qualifiés par leurs adversaires d’extrême-droite au centre du jeu politique. Qualifiés d'extrême-droite, mais jamais revendiqués comme tels. L’explication classique est simple : depuis la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale et les horreurs du régime nazi, le qualificatif d’extrême-droite est devenu plus que péjoratif. Refuser l’étiquette infâme ne serait alors qu’une stratégie afin de ne pas effrayer un électorat modéré. Poussé à son paroxysme, cela culminerait dans une politique de dédiabolisation consistant non seulement à refuser la qualification d’extrême-droite, mais même à adopter des positions modérées tout en gardant, au fond, un même fil directeur raciste. Mais peut-être ne sont-ce là que des idées fausses, fruit d’une vision déformée de la situation politique contemporaine. Réaliser un lien direct entre les extrêmes-droites d’hier et d’aujourd’hui serait alors une erreur. Certes, hier comme aujourd’hui, ces partis se fondent sur l’acharnement contre une population minoritaire, bouc-émissaire explicatif de tous les maux dont le plus important se trouverait être le délitement du pays. Toutefois, le degré de radicalité serait tellement différent qu’il entraînerait un changement de nature. Affirmer cela serait faire preuve d’une naïveté confondante. Ce serait oublier que l'extrême-droite ne se réduit pas au projet génocidaire hitlérien, mais constitue une famille politique plus large dont les hérauts contemporains ne font que reprendre les thèses traditionnelles. Rejet de l’étranger, projet autoritaire, opposition à la démocratie représentative, complotisme… Les racines sont les mêmes et le danger toujours présent. La majorité des électeurs français l’a compris et vote contre les représentants de l’extrême-droite. Mais ils furent toujours moins nombreux : Jacques Chirac recueillait 82% des suffrages en 2002, Emmanuel Macron 66% en 2017 et seulement 58% en 2022. La baisse représente quand même un quart des suffrages exprimés. Presque partout en Occident, un même phénomène s’observe : les digues ne s’effondrent pas toujours, mais ne cessent de s’affaiblir. Dans un contexte de marasme économique et de questionnement identitaire dans un monde plus que jamais changeant, pourquoi sommes-nous en train de reproduire les erreurs du passé ? Différentes explications ont été apportées. L’une, parmi les plus classiques et que l’auteur partageait il y a peu, est la peur — peur de l’immigration ou du déclassement économique. Pour le politologue et professeur à Sciences Po Martial Foucault, dont l’interview joue un rôle central dans la rédaction de cet article, ce n’est pas la peur mais la colère qui explique ce vote. Un ouvrage, Les origines du populisme, appuie notamment cette thèse. Dans différents pays occidentaux, les enquêtes sont formelles : le principal déterminant du vote pour les partis extrémistes est la colère. Simplement, la colère se marie avec une confiance élevée pour les électeurs d’extrême-gauche alors que cette colère s’allie avec une forte méfiance pour les électeurs d’extrême-droite. La question du déclencheur du vote pour l’extrême-droite n’est pourtant pas résolue. Si la colère est corrélée, est-elle pour autant la cause du vote ? N’y a-t-il pas une variable cachée échappant aux enquêtes statistiques ? Et si effectivement c’est la colère qui entraîne le vote, la question est de savoir ce qui déclenche cette colère. Lorsque l’on ne dispose pas de preuves empiriques de ce que l’on affirme, l’appel au bon-sens est souvent utile. Ce dernier permet de trancher la question : oui c’est évidemment la colère qui cause le vote pour l’extrême-droite car cette dernière propose un programme, justement, colérique. En colère contre la mondialisation, contre l’immigration, contre l’Europe, contre les “élites”... Mais de quoi naît cette colère ? Pour répondre, revenons à la citation du vénérable Maître Yoda “La peur mène à la colère”. Effectivement, il est raisonnable de considérer que la peur contient les germes de la colère. Si les étrangers ou la mondialisation sont la source de tant de colère, c’est avant tout car ils provoquent de la peur. Les “étrangers”, la “mondialisation”, c’est au fond très flou, très impersonnel, très inconnu. Et l’inconnu effraie. On nous objectera que nous ne faisons que déplacer la focale analytique sans répondre clairement à la question. D’accord, l’ignorance d’une chose mène à sa crainte, et la crainte constitue le lit de la colère. Mais on ne peut pas affirmer que c’est l'ignorance qui explique le vote pour l’extrême-droite. À moins d’affirmer que les sociétés occidentales sont frappées par une nouvelle épidémie d’ignorance, l’idée ne fait sens. Finalement, l’essence du vote pour l’extrême-droite, si elle existe, demeure insaisissable. Mais son fruit reste connu, car la colère mène à la haine qui, elle-même, mène à la souffrance. Nous remercions notre professeur de sciences politiques, Martial Foucault pour ses précieuses analyses sur la question du vote pour l’extrême-droite qui ont permis de nourrir cet article et à l’auteur d’affiner son opinion.

< Back Left Behind: UK Youth Moving Towards the Right Rebecca Canton September 30, 2024 We assume young people generally vote left and for green initiatives. They care for climate change, sexual liberation and free healthcare. Any young person who votes for the right is an anomaly, right? While historically such stereotypes may have held truth, the right wing throughout Europe is seeing unprecedented gains, especially from a younger demographic. In the 2023 general election in the Netherlands, the Party for Freedom, a nationalist right-wing party led by populist Geert Wilders, won 35 seats, a landslide victory. Likewise, in Germany the anti-immigration party, Alternative for Germany, won almost a third of the vote in the eastern German state of Thuringia. This political success of right-wing and far-right movements is not limited to these two countries; Italy, Finland, Hungary, to name a few, have “hard-right” governments. What is unusual for European governments is the age of the voters that support them. For example, Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing populist party, Brothers of Italy, was the most popular party among under-35s. The future generation seems to be turning their backs on their traditional parties, changing the political landscape of Europe. The United Kingdom is technically an exception to Europe’s swing towards the right. The social democratic Labour party, led by Sir Keir Starmer, defeated the Conservative party—the Tories—in the 2024 general election for the first time since 2005. This victory for the left was supported by young people, with a YouGov poll postulating that 41% of 18 to 24 year olds voted Labour. However, despite these statistics, it does not mean the United Kingdom is moving opposite to the rest of Europe. Starmer has been accused of ‘purging’ the Labour party, by prioritizing Tory votes with fiscally conservative policies. Further, another YouGov poll found that 48% of Labour voters backed Labour simply in opposition to the Conservative party. This negative cohesion perhaps does not represent true sentiments and political leanings of citizens; it also does not mean the U.K. is immune to the wave of right-wing mania sweeping Europe. On July 29, 2024, at a Taylor Swift-themed dance workshop in Southport, Merseyside, U.K., three children were fatally stabbed . Ten others were injured by 17-year-old British citizen Axel Rudakubana. Initially, no information about the attacker was released by police, and the platform “X” and other social media immediately labeled the attacker as Ali Al-Shakati, a Muslim immigrant, regardless of the fact that Rudakubana was born in Cardiff and had no established connections to Islam. On July 30, 2024, far-right protesters clashed with police in Southport, damaging a Mosque, especially due to the misinformation spread on social media platforms. In the following week, multiple towns and cities in England and Northern Ireland were swept up in riots and disorder, including arson, looting and racist attacks, in what was the largest occasion of social unrest in England since 2011. The disturbance marks a disturbing escalation in the far-right sentiment in the U.K., highlighting deep-rooted issues within the country concerning immigration and political polarization. What is particularly concerning is not just the number of rioters— 1,280 individual arrests— but also the age of those involved. Stageringly, 72 of arrests made were against those under 18, with children as young as 12 having pleaded guilty to violent disorder in relation to the riots. The far-right is not a new political movement to the U.K. with one of the first examples of facism, the British Fascisti, founded in 1923. he modern rise of extremism has links to right-wing media, with a number of riots organized through Telegram , specifically a channel called “Southport Wake Up.” The Southport riots in July and August, combined with the general increase in youth extremism, have been heavily centered around online radicalization, which has been exacerbated by the rhetoric of public media figures. One notable figure is Nigel Farage, a recently elected member of parliament and the leader of the right-wing populist Reform UK party, the third largest party by popular vote . Farage uses platforms accessible to young people e.g., TikTok—where he has almost 1 million followers—to spread his beliefs more effectively. Creators like Farage produce content of genuine social grievances, mixed with right wing conspiracy theories that resonate with many young people disillusioned by current governments. For example, he likened the landing of child migrants in Kent to an ‘invasion’ , thus creating an “us vs them” mentality, a mindset adopted by the right-wing who tend to blame economic and social problems on migration. Farage is not alone in the group of far-right influencers; figures like Paul Joseph Watson, a right-wing YouTuber with 2 million subscribers, use casual language and memes within their videos, which is specifically catered towards younger audiences through ‘Gen-Z’ references, thus amassing a younger following. Whether the media itself is to blame for violence is difficult to determine. What is not irrational is the fact that social media has provided a bridge between the far-right and youth, a bond that is unlikely to be broken anytime soon. Despite the influence of far-right figures, would the media and influencers be able to convince young people to vote right if they weren’t already disenchanted by their government? The U.K. currently faces some severe challenges to the nation’s stability. Although the U.K. came out of recession in 2021, the prevailing cost-of-living crisis affects a vast majority of the population. People cannot heat their homes, feed their families, or pay off their mortgages. Young people simply cannot afford to join the housing market. A lot of young voters do not agree with the core ideologies of the right or the far-right, but their general consensus is the same: they have been largely disregarded by the governments that preceded them. While a vast majority of voters have turned left and towards Labour, the right has placed blame on easy targets for everyday problems. Immigration has been a controversial issue in the country since the Windrush generation where Caribbean people migrated following World War II, after the British government encouraged immigration from Commonwealth countries due to losses suffered in the war. Immigrants themselves have been blamed by multiple public figures, including Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary in 2022. Condemning the concept of “others” divides the country, promoting hate and violence. The issue, as with most sensitive topics, is that it is a slippery slope and the pipeline from being disappointed with the government to right-wing radicalism is real and dangerous. It is now up to the new Labour government, a government not associated with the previous government’s failings, to close the gap between those on opposing ends of the political spectrum for both social cohesion and peace. The question remains as to how , with an answer emerging unlikely. Young people are more susceptible to online conspiracies, and until migration is not blamed for social problems, tensions are likely to continue. How can the government appease and convince the left that they stand for values of inclusion and harmony while not allowing the country to fall to right-wing violence? Is there really an answer to this pressing question?

The sufferings of Palestinians were marginalized even at COP26, where Prime Minister Shtayyeh reiterated his denouncement against the environment-threatening Israeli policies. This article aims to investigate the inherent characteristics of the Israeli occupation which aggravate climate change. < Back The Israeli Occupation of Palestinian Territories Threatens the Environment By Margherita Cordellini January 29, 2022 The 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference of Parties (COP26), which took place in Glasgow in November, was depicted by the media as a theater of — sometimes empty — promises and of implicit defeats. People expressed their indignation towards Narendra Modi’s last-minute intervention, and India was accused multiple times of prioritizing political and economic aims over the commitment to avoid a global catastrophe. Public opinion deemed this action as intolerable. However, the Glasgow Climate Conference silently witnessed the denouncement of another state that includes in its political agenda an enormous quantity of CO2 emissions: Israel. On the second day of the international conference, the prime minister of the State of Palestine, Mohammad Shtayyeh, reiterated his denouncement of the Israeli occupation defining it as the “most critical long-term threat to the Palestinian environment.” It was not the first time that worrying data concerning the issue had been presented, as it was not the first time that the situation went almost unnoticed on an international scale. For instance, in 2012 the United Nations (UN) raised the alarm by announcing that Palestine would have been inhabitable by 2020 if Israel did not radically modify its expansionary and repressive policies. The human characteristic to adapt to inhumane conditions was once again underestimated. The Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem (Arij) published several reports which clearly affirmed that, not only do the inhabitants of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) suffer from the Israeli occupation, but so does the climate. The report published in 2007, perhaps the most complete one, illustrates in detail all the consequences of the Israeli occupation, which are supported by sound scientific evidence. In 2018 another report was issued, which showed rapid escalation of the problem. Given the complex nature of the issue, this article will seek to summarize the most devastating climatic problems that Palestine is facing because of foreign occupation. Israel’s settlement project in the OPT is grounded on four main pillars: expansion, segregation, fragmentation, and resource exploitation. First of all, one of the main objectives of the Israeli occupation has been expansion, and consists of ensuring control over Area C, an administrative division following the Oslo accords, that represents 66 percent of the West Bank. The Arij report of 2007 underscores the dichotomic appearance of the Palestinian landscape. On one side, Palestinian villages are built on non-fertile soil and favor the organic development of the landscape, on the other one, Israeli settlements are scattered significantly on agricultural lands situated in strategic positions such as the Jordan Valley, in the West Bank’s western edges and the Jerusalem area. Thus, Israel’s expansion entails destruction of cultivations and deforestation: Prime Minister Shtayyeh drew attention to the fact that Israel has uprooted approximately 2.5 million Palestinian trees since 1967, 800 thousand of which were olive trees. Moreover, the settlements are typically characterized by their enormous sizes. This has a twofold aim: to attract colonists and to cover as much land as possible. Since 1967, Israel has been trying to convince the world that the solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict is the segregation of Palestinian communities. This statement is undoubtedly misguided both from a humanitarian and a climatic perspective. The main way of establishing a situation of apartheid is the development of two distinct road networks. Colonists have at their disposal an increasing number of streets, which are mostly strictly forbidden to Palestinians, so that the journey time from the settlements to Israel decreases. Furthermore, Israeli settlements are surrounded by “security streets” of thousands of square kilometers which have no purpose other than circumscribing the living area of the colonists. This further fragments the Palestinian Territories, which are already constituted by two separate land masses. The result of the apartheid regime to which Palestinians are subject is a disproportionate quantity of CO2 emissions caused by an unavoidable traffic jam. For instance, in order to go from the villages to the main cities of the OPT, local inhabitants are forced to face longer journeys in order to avoid Israeli settlements and pass checkpoints, as is now required. The former obstacle is responsible for the supplementary yearly emission of 196 thousand tons of CO2, whereas the latter, according to the Arij report of 2018, for the annual waste of 80 million liters of fuel in the West Bank. In such cases, a classical solution would be the implementation of a public transportation system. However, the fragmentation of the territory and the highly limited freedom of movement of Palestinians makes it impossible. Israel’s occupation of Palestine is also a story of exploitation. From a resources point of view, Israel parasitically avails itself of Palestinian water. For instance, Palestine is currently undergoing a severe problem of water scarcity. The Arij report of 2007 shows how Israel has been exploiting the territory’s hydric resources since the beginning of the occupation in 1967. In the area, the Jordan River System, the Coastal Aquifer and the West Bank Aquifer System are the three main water resources, and theoretically, they should be shared with Palestine. However, Israel is in control of all of them. Since the occupation, Palestinians are denied their rightful access to the Jordan River and they are compelled to give Israel more than 80 percent of the water coming from the West Bank Aquifer. As a result, the per capita share of water of West Bank inhabitants (excluding settlers) is 79.1 liters per day, whereas in the Gaza Strip, it is 79.9, much lower than the daily required standard recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), which is 100-150 liters per person. Repercussions are visible not only in the progressive decrease of Palestinians’ living standards but also in the indirect climatic impact. In fact, given the limited availability of hydric resources, Palestinians are forced to exploit the Gaza Aquifer system. Because of its over-usage, 96 percent of its water is undrinkable. Thus, a CO2-consuming purification plant is required. Without considering the impact that such measures have on the inhabitants’ daily lives, we can still evaluate the enormous environmental consequences, which originate also from the necessity of transporting the treated water. The marginalization of the Arab-Israeli question in the international political discourse can no longer be justified: it is not only a private issue, but a collective one since it is indissolubly tied to the concept of climate justice.

While many, particularly in the political arena, view the disaster as purely natural, experts point to human factors such as corruption, poor infrastructure maintenance and chronic conflicts that have left the country unprepared for events like Storm Daniel. This disaster highlights how human irresponsibility in two key areas—climate change and political instability—has compounded the crisis. < Back Libya: Victim of a Double Crisis Eleni Dimitropoulou September 30, 2024 In September 2023, Libya, a country which has been a victim of civil wars, economical crisis and governmental instability, was struck once again by an unexpected nightmare, an environmental disaster: Storm Daniel. The "Omega block", a high-pressure zone sandwiched between two zones of low pressure, with the isobars shaping like the Greek letter omega (Ω) was largely responsible for the prolonged duration of the storm. This meteorological event caused the storm system to linger over the region for an extended period, continuously pumping moist air from the Mediterranean Sea, intensifying both the storm’s duration and rainfall. The Omega block was primarily situated over Central and Northern Europe, while it created a stagnant low-pressure zone in the Ionian Sea. This resulted in several days of warm, moist air flowing from the northeast towards Libya, causing unprecedented rainfall and extreme flooding. As a result, more than 11,000 people lost their lives in the coastal city of Derna and over 30,000 were left homeless. This phenomenon is not new with the region as Derna had already experienced floods in 1941, 1959, and 1968. According to the Libyan Red Crescent, more than 11,300 people were confirmed dead after the powerful storm hit eastern Libya. The ensuing floods breached two dams in Derna, creating a torrent that swept away entire neighborhoods. The floodwaters were described as resembling a massive tsunami. Dozens of bodies were buried in mass graves, as seen in images widely circulated on online platforms. The International Organization for Migration reported that over 3,000 residents in El Beida and 2,000 in Benghazi were left homeless. Derna, which is normally connected to the rest of Libya by seven roads, is now only accessible by two, with electrical and telecommunications damage hampering rescue efforts. The scale of the disaster was exacerbated by the lack of maintenance on two critical dams on the dry Wadi river south of the city. Al Bilal Dam, with a capacity of 1.5 million cubic meters survived the storm. However, the larger Abu Mansour Dam, closer to the city which could hold 22.5 million cubic meters, collapsed. These dams were constructed using pressed clay with stone linings, materials less durable than reinforced concrete. Since 2014, Libya has been politically divided between two rival governments: one based in Tripoli in the west, recognized by the UN, and another in eastern Libya based in Benghazi, supported by Marshal Khalifa Haftar. The Tripoli-based government, led by interim Prime Minister Abdel Hamid Dabaiba, attempted to assist the eastern region despite not controlling it. Dabaiba announced the dispatch of humanitarian aid, including medicine, food, and medical personnel. A plane from Tripoli arrived in the affected area with 14 tons of aid and 80 doctors. At the same time, the government in eastern Libya, supported by Haftar, oversaw the handling of the Derna crisis. A state of emergency was announced and a crisis management team was established consisting of local officials, emergency responders, medical personnel, engineers, and logistics coordinators to manage the consequences of the disaster. In reaction, various countries such as Egypt, Turkey, and Italy provided international aid by sending rescue teams, medical supplies, and equipment. Organizations like the UN and Red Cross provided crucial humanitarian assistance, such as food, water, and technical knowledge, to aid in ongoing rescue and recovery efforts. Funding has been promised to aid in the reconstruction of the city and repair critical infrastructure The United Nations criticized Libya’s early warning system, with the head of the World Meteorological Organization, suggesting that many casualties could have been avoided if proper warnings had been issued, giving residents time to evacuate. Libya's National Meteorological Center had issued warnings 72 hours before the storm, informing authorities via email and advising precautionary measures. While many, particularly in the political arena, view the disaster as purely natural, experts point to human factors such as corruption, poor infrastructure maintenance and chronic conflicts that have left the country unprepared for events like Storm Daniel. This disaster highlights how human irresponsibility in two key areas—climate change and political instability—has compounded the crisis. Climate change, driven by human activities such as the greenhouse effect, is now striking back, with severe consequences that threaten lives. Simultaneously, political instability, the lack of consensus and ongoing conflicts have prevented both governments from investing in essential infrastructure, schools, healthcare, and housing. The ongoing political deadlock continues to prevent displaced individuals from returning home, as fair reconstruction assistance remains difficult to obtain. One year after the destroying surges in Derna, caused by violent wind Daniel on September 11, 2023, the city is still in a a slow reconstruction process. Belgacem Haftar, the child of compelling Libyan military pioneer Khalifa Haftar, is supervising the restoration endeavors. Be that as it may, Human Rights Watch has criticized the Libyan government for falling flat in supplying satisfactory stipends and support to survivors. The ongoing political deadlock continues to prevent displaced individuals from returning home, as fair reconstruction assistance remains difficult to obtain. In Derna, extensive damage remains to housing, water and sanitation networks, electricity grids, hospitals, and schools. The recovery process has been so slow that survivors’ access to essential services, such as healthcare and education, remains disrupted. Financial and government services are also limited, and thousands of victims remain unidentified or missing. Armed groups that contributed to the chaotic emergency response, hindering residents from seeking safety, have yet to be held accountable. In a similarly tragic event one year later, over 5,800 people were displaced due to flooding in the southwestern Libyan towns of Ghat and Tahala. Many are staying with relatives, while others are sheltered in temporary camps and schools. This second flooding disaster highlights the country’s continued vulnerability to extreme weather and the lack of an effective national response plan. The situation in Libya is undeniably vulnerable, and seeing no improvement in the past year is both disappointing and alarming. Both governments, as well as the global community, must take action, raise awareness about the issue and find ways to tackle it. Non-governmental organizations can serve as central points of collaboration between countries and individuals. As for the Libyan government, they must focus more on the root causes of this emergency situation rather than on the political status quo. After all, human lives are more important than power. Let us all hope that Libya, the gem of Africa, will be saved and that no more dead bodies will fill the streets. Instead, they will once again be full of life and joy.

In January 2022, the United States Supreme Court announced that it would hear two cases, one against Harvard University and one against the University of North Carolina, seeking to ban affirmative action in university admissions. The potential end of affirmative action would dramatically transform the framework of college admissions. < Back The End of Affirmative Action? By Magdelena Offenbeck March 30, 2022 In January 2022, the United States Supreme Court announced that it would hear two cases, one against Harvard University and one against the University of North Carolina, seeking to ban affirmative action in university admissions. The conservative Supreme Court majority is likely to overturn a legacy of race consideration in college admissions. The history of race as a factor in college admissions begins in the 1960s when Harvard University announced concrete measures to increase the percentage of African American students in its cohorts. Harvard’s plan of action was then adopted by many of the major institutions for higher education in the United States. Aiming to counter the inequality caused by the history of racial segregation, the policies have effectively promoted upward social mobility and diversified cohorts at US universities. Since its implementation, affirmative action has faced criticism by those who favor admission procedures that are entirely based on academic merit. In the landmark 2003 Supreme Court case Grutter v. Bollinger , the constitutionality of affirmative action was confirmed in scenarios when race is one of many factors considered in the admission process. However, in the same year, the court declared points-based admission systems that grant extra points to minority applicants unconstitutional and contrary to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourth Amendment. Both Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are now accused of discrimination by giving race overwhelming importance in admission procedures. The difference between the cases is that Harvard is charged with discrimination against Asians while the University of North Carolina is accused of favoring Black and Hispanic applicants. The plaintiff, Students for Fair Admissions,' argued that Harvard’s disproportional consideration of race violates the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The case was tried in 2018 in the state of Massachusetts but, after a 15-day bench trial in 2018, a lower court in Massachusetts found Harvard not guilty of “race balancing,” otherwise known as admission quotas for racial groups at the university. Many consider it unlikely that the Supreme Court has taken on the case to reaffirm the ruling of the state court. What would the end of affirmative action mean for university communities in the United States? Deans of Yale, Columbia, and Harvard University have spoken out against the lawsuit. In a statement released on the Columbia University website, President Lee Bollinger Broad asserted that “public awareness of the unrelenting impact of racism demands a recommitment to affirmative action, not its abandonment,” deeming affirmative action essential considering the nation’s history. He further described a ban on affirmative action as “calamitous for universities and for the ideals embodied in the Constitution.” The end of affirmative action could significantly decrease the number of Black students admitted to elite universities in the country as Black and Hispanic students have lower average standardized test scores and are subjected to structural obstacles that are not encountered by their white counterparts. However, the plaintiff argues that affirmative action comes at the expense of Asian students, who have lower chances of admission with equal or higher test scores and are consistently ranked lower on the personality scores of the admissions process. Public opinion seems to confirm the plaintiff’s view. A 2019 survey by the Pew Research Center concluded that 73% of Americans think that race should not be considered in college admissions. However, there is stratification between racial groups, with 78% of Caucasians opposed to affirmative action compared to 65% of Hispanics and 62% of Blacks. This gap persists with political leanings. While 88% of Caucasian Republicans are against the consideration of race, this number falls to 66% among Caucasian Democrats. The consideration of other factors such as legacy status, gender, or athletic ability is equally deemed inappropriate by the majority of survey participants. Therefore, the case puts into question a number of controversial admission practices, especially the elitist concept of legacy admissions. If affirmative action is found to be unconstitutional, the question of feasible alternatives arises. The benefits of diverse student cohorts in university environments and the positive effect of upward social mobility in the larger society have continually been emphasized by university administrations and the Supreme Court. Especially the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a major proponent of the policy. Yet, a similar degree of diversity could be achieved by taking into account the socio-economic background of applicants. Black and Hispanic communities are generally more socio-economically disadvantaged. According to a US government census, the median income of Black households in the United States is $28,000 and $41,000 below that of White and Asian households, respectively. The gap is slightly smaller for Hispanics. Considering household income and access to education resources would hence have similar effects on student diversity to affirmative action. This is not to deny the intersectional experience of members of the Black or Hispanic communities that face disadvantages compared to whites with a similar socioeconomic background. Rather, it acknowledges that the individuals who experience similar levels of poverty equally merit a chance in the higher education system. It further takes into consideration the racism and systemic discrimination that Asian communities are victim to, and counters stereotyping in admissions where the achievements of Asian students are not valued equally because of their ethnic background. While the official judgment will only be released in 2023, the end of affirmative action will bring changes to the framework of college admissions. However, it may not be necessary to equate this to the end of student diversity in higher education. A range of alternative tools could continue to protect the interests of socially disadvantaged students.

After 19 years of nearly continuous U.S. military presence, Iraq has limited the influence of the Islamic State, but is still experiencing domestic turmoil, a Parliamentary crisis and extreme corruption in the public and private sectors. Solutions to these challenges should be led by the Iraqi people, not a foreign power with conflicting interests and little investment in the future of Iraq. < Back Reconsidering America’s Presence in Iraq after Zainab Essam Al-Khazali’s Death By Peyton Dashiell October 31, 2022 On September 21, a 15-year-old girl was shot and killed in Baghdad, Iraq while working on her father’s farm. Despite Baghdad previously being labeled as the most dangerous city on Earth for terrorist attacks, Zainab Essam Al-Khazali was not killed by an Islamic State militant or a member of another terrorist group, but by American troops conducting a routine military drill. These are the same troops which first mobilized in 2014 to protect Iraqis from the looming terrorist threat of the Islamic State. Her tragic, senseless death raises critical questions: Why has the United States government refused to acknowledge her death in any way? Why did the American military conduct an exercise in a populous area? And, most of all, why are U.S. troops still present in Iraq after the Iraqi Parliament voted them out years ago and multiple American presidents have pledged military withdrawal? The United States has maintained a continuous military presence in Iraq since a U.S.-led coalition invaded the country in 2003 to overthrow Saddam Hussein. After a brief hiatus from 2011 to 2014, the U.S. military formally reentered Iraq in 2014 on “Operation Inherent Resolve” to fight Islamic State forces upon request from the Iraqi government. Efforts began after the Islamic State launched the Northern Iraq Offensive in August 2014. In response, the U.S. began supplying Kurdish Peshmerga forces with weapons on August 5, and began direct airstrikes three days later. The operation continued for nearly seven years, and U.S. aid to the Iraq Security Forces totaled $3.5 billion throughout the conflict, with over 189,000 officers trained. The U.S.-led coalition has been criticized for committing human rights violations during “Operation Inherent Resolve” and compounding Iraq’s existing humanitarian crisis. Poorly targeted coalition airstrikes led to many civilian casualties, and Amnesty International alleged in 2014 that the coalition kidnapped Sunni civilian men to use as forced labor in the fight against the Islamic State. Finally, U.S.-backed prisoner abuses date back to the early stages of the Iraq War in prisons like Abu Ghraib – in 2004, Amnesty International uncovered photos of U.S. troops abusing prisoners of war in the same suburb of Baghdad where Zainab lost her life. Despite the United States formally withdrawing from Iraq in December 2021, nearly 3000 military personnel remain in the country in an advisory role to provide air support and military aid. However, their presence has been contentious. In January 2020, U.S. assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani caused widespread outrage in Iraq. Major political figures called for the U.S. Embassy to be closed and diplomatic relations halted. The Iraqi military launched retaliatory airstrikes on U.S. forces in Iraq, and the Iraqi Parliament voted unanimously to expel all American troops from the country, later revising their statements to include all foreign troops. While several NATO countries withdrew their troops due to safety concerns, the Trump administration threatened Iraq with sanctions if any further action was taken against U.S. forces, thus, cementing their presence. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits the use of force except in “intervention by invitation,” when a country requests the military presence of another country. This rare case would apply to the 2014 American entry into Iraq because the Iraqi government requested help in the fight against the Islamic State. But after the vote by the Iraqi Parliament in 2020 asking U.S. troops to leave, their presence became illegitimate under this charter. However, despite a strong opposition wing within Iraq, anti-American sentiment is not universal, largely dependent on ethnic and religious identity. The vote to expel U.S. troops was led by Shia lawmakers, with most Sunni and Kurdish representatives abstaining from the vote. U.S. troops continue to train with the Iraqi military and recently signed a bilateral defense agreement with the Kurdistan Regional Government to bolster security and military training operations. Proponents of U.S. military presence in Iraq often cite reasons such as countering Iranian influence, preventing terrorist attacks, and protecting the security of Israel and other US partners in the region. However, natural resources, particularly oil, serve as another key factor. Iraq is home to oil reserves totaling over 140 billion barrels, the fifth largest proven oil supply globally, with a large portion located in the Kurdistan region. Upon entering the 2003 Iraq War, former U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz pledged to support Kurdistan’s energy sector, telling a Congressional panel that Iraq’s oil and gas resources “could bring between $50 billion and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years.” But nearly two decades later, it is evident that the Iraqi people did not benefit as foreign powers descended upon their oil reserves. While the oil-rich Kurdistan region has seen more economic development than the rest of Iraq, fraud, corruption and mismanagement have led to nearly $20 billion per year in oil revenue smuggled out of the country, with little benefit to the Kurdish residents working to source the oil. Kurdistan’s Ministry of Natural Resources has been accused of working with foreign powers to send oil money to international tax havens, flipping assets, and producing massive profits for multinational companies based in North America and Europe. While the Islamic State remains a threat in Iraq, they have no consistent territorial holds, and the Iraqi government has developed effective containment policies for terror cells. Operating with the goal of completely eradicating all Islamic State adherents and ideology will result in an indefinite U.S. presence in Iraq. Furthermore, while American troops have helped foil and respond to some Islamic State attacks in Iraq, they are increasingly being targeted by Iranian drone strikes, which have killed U.S. servicemembers as well as Iraqi citizens fighting alongside the U.S. in Kurdistan. These attacks signify a larger balance of power the U.S. seeks to maintain in the region — Iraqis are paying a violent price as the U.S. aims to counter Iranian influence. If the U.S. decides to completely withdraw troops from Iraq, lessons must be learned from its 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan. The 2021 withdrawal resulted in the Taliban seizing power from the Afghan National Army within days of the U.S. military’s departure and created an unresolved humanitarian disaster. Additionally, the withdrawal broke promises made to Afghan civilians who aided American forces — many people were left behind and susceptible to persecution by the Taliban due to past U.S. ties. If American troops leave Iraq, the U.S. must prioritize the protection of Iraqis who have fought alongside them, and ensure that any stabilization money given to the Iraqi government is used for its intended purpose — during the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Taliban seized millions of dollars in cash, gold, and weapons left behind by U.S. forces. The question of American military presence in Iraq extends far beyond a pure military partnership.Twenty-first-century Iraq has experienced immense exploitation for military, economic, and geopolitical gain, and the people and government of Iraq should decide the next steps regarding the American military. After 19 years of nearly continuous U.S. military presence, Iraq has limited the influence of the Islamic State, but is still experiencing domestic turmoil, a Parliamentary crisis and extreme corruption in the public and private sectors. Solutions to these challenges should be led by the Iraqi people, not a foreign power with conflicting interests and little investment in the future of Iraq.

< Back The Turbulent World of French Politics and How It Affects Me Stanimir Stoyanov French politics are notorious for being turbulent and complex, and in 2024 especially, France experienced some important shifts in its political landscape. In this context, many people, foreigners in particular, have had a difficult time grasping the political landscape of France. Be it the language barrier or the tongue-twisting, understanding what's happening in France is certainly a demanding task for newcomers. This has led me personally and many other Sciences Pistes to question what effect the current political situation will have on us. This article will present a brief overview of recent events and explain how these developments impact our lives as students at SciencesPo. I. What happened? In the second round of the 2022 French presidential election, Emanuel Macron won 58,55% of the votes against Marine Le Pen, with 41,45% . While still a victory for the current president, the election showcased a continued rise of support for the right-wing leader Marine Le Pen. The election was also marked by the lowest voter turnout ( 72% ) since 1969, raising questions about voter apathy. While political awareness in France remains high, a large part of the population has trouble identifying with politics and disregards their importance. The tensions kept rising as the status-quo was being more and more challenged by the opposition and in January 2024, France experienced severe political turmoil. The ruling government, led by then Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne, didn’t have a majority in parliament, making the legislative process a tougher challenge. In January as an attempt to counter the far-right’s influence, Macron backed a controversial migration law , simplifying the deportation process and making immigration to France much more difficult for non-EU foreigners. This was followed by the resignation of Elizabeth Borne on Jan. 8. Afterwards, on Jan. 9, Macron appointed Gabriel Attal as PM and organized a cabinet reshuffle. This was all in an effort to mitigate the rise of support for the opposition ahead of the 2024 EU Elections. In June 2024, French voters headed to the polls for the European Parliament Election and showcased significant support for Le Pen’s far-right party, the National Rally ( Rassemblement National), which was the front-runner with a remarkable 31,37% . This raised doubts about Macron's authority, leading him to dismiss parliament and schedule snap elections on the 30 June and 7 July. While this move is recognized as an attempt to both consolidate support and bring the attention to the public, it can also be viewed as an unprecedented political gamble. The results of the election showcased the severe social fragmentation with no party gaining a clear majority. The current division of parties in parliament is as follows: *Data compiled from French National Assembly website https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/ , as of Sept. 13 2024. As can be seen, the National Rally party has the most seats, yet no party has a majority. Further, even when looking at possible coalitions within parliament, the main coalitions Nouveau Front Populare (left-wing), and the Ensemble (Macron endorsed) also do not have a majority to form a stable government. The right-wing parties remain divided and are not likely to form a coalition. This means that France currently has a hung parliament, making forming a stable government a formidable task. II. Who is the current French Prime Minister? Following the election in July and Gabriel Attal’s resignation, President Macron had to appoint a new Prime Minister. This was a tough choice, seeing how it needed to be a figure that can gather support from allies and opposition alike. On Sept. 5 2024, Michel Barnier from the Les Republicans party was appointed as Prime Minister. The choice was controversial and followed by backlash from the left coalition NFP, which have the most seats and advocated for their candidate Lucie Castets . In his first interview as PM , Barnier presented his stances on the current situation and promised to form a government that is not just right-wing, but also compromises with the left. He has said he will attempt forming a government in the upcoming week. Should he not gather the support of parliament, the opposition can call a vote of no confidence, where parliament can vote for removing him as PM. Barnier is particularly insistent on his tough stance on migration, following Macron’s attempts to appease the right as a response to Le Pen’s momentum gains. Macron and the Ensemble alliance have always had a more lenient view towards migration, but public opinion has made them toughen their stance. III. How are foreign students studying in France affected? The political turmoil has led to many changes in French society: economic challenges, increase of political protests and violence and a more negative lookout towards migration. The situation has also led to many strikes across France including train strikes in the Côte d'Azur region in August. Such strikes are also planned for the Fall, which raises concerns for Menton students. T he migration law that was passed in January increased requirements for acquiring a visa and made it more difficult for migrants to establish work in France. As part of drafting said law, politicians from Les Republicains, supported by the far-right, succeeded in adding an amendment concerning international students, requiring them to prove every year they are enrolled in a “real and serious programme” and to deposit a sum of money returned after their graduation. These changes were not supported by Macron and were later proven unconstitutional by the Constitutional Council. In the final draft of the law there was no mention of international students. Hitherto, political conversation on the topic has shifted far away from the matter of international students. The ongoing migration legislative efforts mainly concern migrants outside the EU and streamlining of the deportation process. Impact for students is not as severe, beside stricter requirements for visa applications for those outside the EU. Still, uncertainty reigns among students who are not sure how they are affected by the puzzling world of French politics. For now there does not seem to be any imminent danger towards the status of international students seeing how such measures are seen as too controversial and unnecessary for parties on all sides of the spectrum. IV. Final words The changes happening in France now affect our daily lives mainly when it comes to price increases and heightened social tensions. Previously I was hearing many different things, including false news about the dangers that can arise from the political turmoil and it was fairly intimidating. I believe many fellow students also relate to this feeling, but after gathering more insight into the situation, I personally am now more confident as a student in France. While there is no need for us students to fear in this current status, we must remain educated on the matter and follow up with the latest developments to be better informed about the changes happening in France. The domestic political landscape is moving rapidly and is full of unexpected twists. While it might be difficult for foreigners to adjust to it, it is valuable to be well-versed in such topics, in order to know if we are affected by them. Previous Next

A whirlwind of whimsical musical comedy and delectable love triangles (quadrangles?), with a splash of poignant moments, “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” is a god amongst television productions, an exceptional set of four seasons that supersedes the comparatively mundane Netflix, Amazon Prime, or Hulu material.  < Back Crazy in Love? My (Unrequited) Romance with Rachel Bloom’s Comedy By Maia Zasler April 30, 2024 Have you ever been utterly desperate for a new show to watch? Have you ever yearned for a series that’s just long enough to hold your attention while you let the episodes run in the background of your daily life? After completing “Gossip Girl,” “Gilmore Girls,” “Big Mouth,” “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel,” “Human Resources,” “Community,” “Inside Job,” “Young Sheldon,” “The Office,” “Outlander,” “The Great,” “The Great British Baking Show,” “Bridgerton,” etc. (yes, I watch a lot of TV), I thought I exhausted my arsenal of quality shows. It’s only then that, by a stroke of pure destiny, I discovered the gem that is “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend.” A whirlwind of whimsical musical comedy and delectable love triangles (quadrangles?), with a splash of poignant moments, “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” is a god amongst television productions, an exceptional set of four seasons that supersedes the comparatively mundane Netflix, Amazon Prime, or Hulu material. Rachel Bloom stars as Rebecca Bunch, a quirky, high-strung New York lawyer who quits her job at a fancy firm in favor of moving out to West Covina, California. She makes this impulsive decision immediately after a brief run-in with her summer camp boyfriend from a decade prior, Josh Chan (but Josh just happens to live there!). Bunch is cunning and smart; the first season follows her and her bestie/enabler, Paula, as they hatch plots to wiggle into Josh’s life. Bunch will stop at nothing… unless her great love is actually with another guy, Greg, a bartender at the local sports joint with a smidge of an alcohol consumption problem. Or maybe it's with Nathaniel, the new, jaded boss at her firm in West Covina. To be determined. In each progressive episode, Bunch becomes a bit more deranged. At first, her “unraveling” is endearing; she’s just a tad overzealous, love’s #1 fan…but the audience learns that this passion, the immediateness that washes over her at seemingly random times, is part of a more pressing, pertinent mental health problem. Her struggles and missteps— occasionally crossing the line into illegal territory—are depicted realistically and respectfully. In any instance of intense love where one craves the attention and validation of another and is willing to drop everything for that person, there are often underlying issues e.g., anxiety and/or depression. The audience slowly uncovers more about Bunch’s past and how her behavior toward Josh Chan was not a one-off; she was hurt and traumatized by a previous relationship with a much older male professor during her time at undergrad. Bunch needs affirmation, someone, anyone, to tell her that she's “ okay .” She constantly pushes the limits to what the audience considers “crazy.” It’s what allows the show to masterfully balance cheekiness and an amusing self-awareness with a seriousness that accompanies a storyline of a woman who’s “falling off the side of a mountain and sort of grabbing at roots and trees and brambles,” plummeting (Bloom 2017). But Bunch is able to get the help she needs. She even gets “ a diagnosis ”! Throughout its final season, “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” contributes to the de-stigmatization dialogue that surrounds addressing mental health problems because “ anti-depressants are so not a big deal .” Bunch views her life as a musical. She makes sense of her thoughts, her feelings, and her relationships with others through melodies and performance. Her internal monologue is always on display, and so when she grows, the audience grows with her. While watching, I found myself rejoicing in her triumphs and mourning her losses. I cheered her on when she supported her friends and when she gathered the courage to follow her true calling. Perhaps most frequently, I laughed and cringed at the handful of exaggerated characters and clever, wacky songs. I can’t help but feel a sentimental compulsion to the show; maybe because I see myself in Bloom’s character, or maybe because I think that we can all relate to Rebecca Bunch; Bunch reacts to life’s trials and tribulations in an uninhibited way, reactions stripped of regulated temperament. Her intensity, palpable through a television screen, is a product of feeling intensely. We all face similar fears, anticipating rejection or feeling the sting of criticism, lacking validation. We stifle ourselves, denying ourselves the opportunity for change before we’re even told “no.” We place our happiness at some undefined point in the future, almost always with asterisks; if we’re able to complete this deadline, get a date with this person, and fit into those pants, then “ we’ll never have problems again .” Bunch and her path towards getting better is a testament to a journey we all, in some way or another, are on. On a different note, any musical or show-tune lover will be thrilled with the variety of themes and genres incorporated into “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend”’s incredible score. Some of my favorites included “Let’s Generalize About Men” (a colorful, catchy 80s inspired bop), “Remember That We Suffered” (a dizzying, addicting song set at a quintessential New York bar mitzvah celebration), “Santa Ana Winds pt. 1-5” (I can’t describe… you just have to watch), and “The Sexy Getting Ready Song” (a potential feminist commentary?). Despite receiving two Emmys (and my glowing endorsement), “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” maintained relatively low ratings throughout its run between 2015 and 2019. But it seems to be having a revival now on Netflix. And a revival is what it deserves, if not to have been lauded during its initial release. To watch “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” is to watch a labor of love. Bloom, as a lead writer and creator of the show—alongside the late Adam Schlesinger—puts so much of herself into each episode’s immersive dialogue, catchy theme songs, and bonus tunes. Giving audiences Rebecca Bunch simultaneously gives them something for which to strive: authenticity and, as corny as it may sound, self-love. Connecting with ourselves and that which makes us truly happy, rejecting (as difficult as it may be) that which we think should please ourselves or others, is the best service we can give ourselves. That and binge-watching “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend.”

Behind this revolutionary U.S.-led endeavor — expected to cost approximately $5 billion according to initial estimates — conflicting interests offer major gains for beneficiaries while putting at stake grand losses for some discontented regional and international powers. < Back IMEC: A Modernized Ancient Route By Jad Toufic Toutinji November 30, 2023 In ancient times, before Ottoman hegemony and the creation of the Suez Canal, the old world was interconnected through the Silk Road and the Red Sea Trade Route. Today, as the Chinese government expands its influence through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the heir of the ancient Silk Road, a new revival of the Red Sea Trade Route is also taking place, mainly prompted by the i2u2 – an economic and security cooperation of the US, Israel, India and UAE. In this case, the heir is the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), which was announced in the G20 summit in New Delhi in September. The IMEC has been praised by many world leaders, including President of the European Commission, Ursula Von Der Leyen, who described it as a “green and digital bridge across continents and civilizations,” and her American counterpart Joe Biden, who dubbed it as a “really big deal.” Behind this revolutionary U.S.-led endeavor — expected to cost approximately $5 billion according to initial estimates — conflicting interests offer major gains for beneficiaries while putting at stake grand losses for some discontented regional and international powers. Nevertheless, since its inception, increasing doubts have been casted amid the Middle East’s instability, especially in relation to the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Who benefits? The U.S., despite not having a direct relation to the whole project, is its main driver. The U.S. proposed the endeavor as a sign of its continuous commitment in the region amid skepticism around the Biden administration’s disinterest. It aims to send a strong message to U.S. allies in the Middle East, in particular Saudi Arabia and Israel, that the U.S. has never stopped providing support in security as well as economic matters. This is especially pertinent following recent concerns from the latter over U.S. commitment in the fight against Iranian influence. Such concerns are reflected in the Saudi, as well as Emirati, approaches with China through joining the BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Accordingly, for the U.S., this project also serves to restrengthen its waning power over the region as Chinese contestation is growing ever more powerful. As such, it aims to recover U.S. influence over the UAE and KSA while proposing a competing proposal to the Chinese BRI. Israel benefits by playing a central role in such a project through its Haifa port, especially since neither Syrian ports nor the exploded and underdeveloped Beirut port are capable of accommodating expected demands. However, Israeli interests are not only economic but also political. The trade route would require the expansion of the Abraham accords to include Saudi Arabia, the leader of the Arab initiative to defend Palestine. If such an expansion were to take place, especially with the recent talks between KSA and Israel, it would constitute a major win to the state of Israel. Israeli ambitions are expressed through Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who boasted that the project is “the largest cooperation project” in Israel’s history. As to the UAE and KSA, the neighbors’ objectives, even if in constant friendly competition, are aligned in the project. As aforementioned, the U.S. seeks to reimpose its influence on the growing independent authority of both countries, yet it does not seem as such for Riyadh or Abu Dhabi. Even though the project would entail U.S. economic and political influence and support, MBS and Sheikh Zayed only consider it as another opportunity to strengthen their geopolitical and economic independence, benefiting from the bipolarized economic cold war between the U.S. and China. Their ultimate goal is to make their respective countries focal points in world trade as potential substitutes to their economic reliance on oil and other natural resources. In addition, with regards to the Abraham Accords, which the UAE already signed in 2020, the kingdom sees a benefit in a stable, peaceful Middle East. Perceived internationally as the Arab leader of the Palestinian cause, extensive concessions would be expected if any potential accord with Israel were to take place in order to maintain Arab and Saudi approval. Nonetheless, amid the current Gaza conflict, any accords are surely halted. Furthermore, Europe will surely benefit as trade becomes cheaper and more environmentally efficient. With regards to India, the project is seen as a means to try and rebalance economic hegemony over Asia, while ensuring greater Indian influence in the world economy in sight of concerns of its exclusion from the BRI (and the inclusion of its neighbor Pakistan through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – CPEC). Who are the losers? Egypt is arguably the principle economic loser in this new proposed equation of world trade, especially because the IMEC would bypass the highly tariffed Egyptian Suez Canal. Moreover, Egypt would be excluded from the new order. In fact, two of the reasons which prompted the IMEC are to avoid any potential crises in the Suez Canal and to reduce the imposed tariffs. Iran, on the other hand, is set to be the main political loser as the trade route dodges all the potential intersection with Iran or Iranian influenced countries like Yemen, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. Indeed, the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab El-Mandeb Strait, both of which oversee a third and tenth of all the traded oil in the world, are the pivotal locations for Iranian, and Houthi, maneuvers to mitigate imposed sanctions. In other terms, the IMEC can be considered as a U.S., Israeli and Saudi counterreaction to potential threats. The Turks are also going to take a hit not only because of its exclusion, but also because in the Chinese alternative, Türkiye is promised to occupy an essential role, which would likely fade overtime amid more efficient and more rapid opportunities otherwise. This radical opposition is reflected through President Recep Erdogan’s high tone comments on the IMEC, stating that “there can be no corridor without Türkiye” and that Türkiye would “part ways with the EU.” Would China be considered a loser in this agreement? As for the Chinese, despite the BRI, which has reportedly attracted $1 trillion in investments, being largely contested, it does not look like China will be the greatest loser, but they certainly will not benefit. Evidently, certain trade opportunities along the BRI are going to shift towards the more attractive IMEC; however, the BRI is a greater project, covering larger areas over more continents, particularly in Africa. Accordingly, it is unlikely that China will reduce its investments in its intercontinental project. Instead, China might look to alternatives such as extending the IMEC route towards other excluded regions via the BRI. Optimistically, the BRI and IMEC may potentially complete each other, thus revolutionizing global trade. In such a scenario, economic players like India, UAE and KSA (all members and partners of BRICS and SCO) will have a strategic economic role. What are the consequences of the increased aggressions regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? In the marketing for and the analysis of the IMEC trade route, it is presumed that peace and stability relatively prevalent in the Middle East in the last two years will resume. In fact, it is expected that such a trade route will end the region’s incessant instability by expanding the Abraham Accords to include KSA in exchange for major compromises on behalf of Israel in the benefit of the Palestinians. However, ever since the October 7 violence, it seems unlikely that KSA will be able to achieve these compromises. As to the Abraham Accords, its attainment is inevitable, but the conflict has surely postponed it. Overall, this resurgence of violence sheds light on the predicament the IMEC, as well as the BRI, will constantly face: instability of the Middle East. Without lasting peace, no sustainable trade route can be accomplished. Finally, India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has expressed firmly, and quite optimistically, that “IMEC is for the long term” when asked about the current violence’s reality.

Music has a strange sort of power; it can outlive the moments it was originally made for. You’ll Never Walk Alone has transcended Liverpool. Celtic fans sing it in Scotland, as well as Dortmund fans in Germany. It’s been sung in times of crisis—after terrorist attacks, during the pandemic and other acts of remembrance. But it will forever belong to Hillsborough first. It is sacred in the way a national anthem can become sacred, or a funeral hymn. You’ll Never Walk Alone began as a ballad of hope and then a cry for justice.  < Back Singing through Grief – Collective Memory through Music Rebecca Canton April 30, 2025 “Walk on, walk on, with hope in your heart / And you’ll never walk alone.” Such words, sung by thousands in harmony at Anfield, the home of Liverpool Football Club, and beyond, are more than just lyrics—they are a cultural memory, a form of resistance and a promise of togetherness. Football, especially concerning fans, can be described as tribal—rooted in geography, loyalty and collective passion. Alongside this, it is also inherently musical. From the cacophony of chants of a favorite player on the stands to the quiet suspense before a penalty, football culture is a sonic landscape. These sounds create a unified identity, binding thousands of strangers into one voice. In this way, football matches resemble a form of ritual: they are repetitive, emotionally charged and have deep symbols. When tragedy strikes, it is often such rituals that remain. Nowhere can these concepts be felt more than in the context of the Hillsborough disaster of 1989, a tragedy that undoubtedly changed football but also transformed grief into music and then identity. In the wake of loss, one of the world’s greatest football anthems— You’ll Never Walk Alone— became something altogether more potent. As a Liverpool fan, Hillsborough, or the Hillsborough Disaster of Apr. 15, 1989, is the darkest day in our club’s history. Forget the infamous Steven Gerrard ‘slip’ of 2014, or the 2022 Champions League Final, Hillsborough overshadows even the most notorious incidents. Four years after the Heysel Stadium disaster, where 39 fans died in a collapse following clashes between Liverpool and Juventus supporters, another tragedy struck. On Apr. 15, 1989, 97 people died in a crowd crush at Hillsborough Stadium during an FA Cup semi-final match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest—94 on the day, with the death toll later rising to 97 by 2021 due to related complications. These people died because of a lack of stadium control. 97 died because of police errors, not because of the fans. Yet what followed the disaster was not just heartbreak, but injustice. In the days following, fans and victims were smeared by the press. The infamous The Sun article — ‘ the Scum ’ or ‘the S*n’ if you’re from Merseyside—‘ The Truth’ accused the dead of looting, drunkenness and even urinating on police officers. Such allegations were not just lies, but acts of systemic violence, designed to discredit the grieving and shift the blame away from the authorities, who let down the very people they were meant to protect. Despite such a tragedy, Liverpool didn’t stay silent. Instead, it sang. You’ll Never Walk Alone didn’t originate from Hillsborough—it’s actually from a show tune from the 1945 musical Carousel by Rodgers and Hammerstein. It was later covered by the Liverpool band Gerry and the Pacemakers in the 1960s. Before Hillsborough, it had already been adopted by Liverpool fans, yet in the wake of such a profound loss, it became something else—an anthem not just of loyalty, but of mourning. Of protest, and of survival. Singing You’ll Never Walk Alone for Liverpool fans became much more than tradition. It became an act of resistance. In a society that refused to believe they were wronged, Liverpool fans created a sound that couldn’t be ignored. Singing became a way to grieve together, but also a refusal to forget the injustices imposed upon them. There’s a sort of rhythm to football, both on and off the pitch. Whether through home and away fixtures, the same 36 matches each year, or the Saturday rituals. The same pubs, scarves, the same voices raised in unison. Football is, in many ways, religious. Stadiums become cathedrals. Chants become prayers. And at Anfield, the home of Liverpool, You’ll Never Walk Alone transformed into something more than a hymn—it became sacred. It’s undeniable that when you bring 50,000 voices together, it’s euphoric, but what gives the song its power isn’t just its melody, but the words . “When you walk through a storm, hold your head up high…” In the aftermath of Hillsborough, these lyrics no longer were a metaphor, but an instruction and reminder to walk on, even through grief. The storm was the disrespect, the interviews, even by famous figures like Wayne Rooney, blaming Liverpool fans for the deaths of their own. Likewise, “though your dreams be tossed and blown” such words speak to what was lost—the lives, the futures, the hopes and dreams of the 97. “Walk on, walk on, with hope in your heart” is a rousing call for togetherness and thousands promise that “you’ll never walk alone.” There’s a phrase often heard in Liverpool: Scouse, not English. To outsiders, it perhaps sounds exaggerated, or even cheeky. Yet it's more than regional pride—it’s defiance, a declaration of cultural independence. As someone who isn’t Scouse, I don’t think I’ll ever fully understand what it truly means to be Scouse— that is with a capital S. The phrase captures it better than anything else could: Scouse, not English. It reflects a deep-rooted identity in politics, pride and pain. Liverpool, as a city and as an identity, has long stood apart from the rest of England. With its Irish heritage and history as a working-class port city, alongside its long-term loyalty to the Labour party, the city has often been distant from Westminster, especially under Margaret Thatcher. During the 1980s, under Thatcher’s Conservative government, Liverpool was treated not only with neglect but also hostility. Deindustrialisation ravaged the city, reducing jobs and futures. Later disclosed cabinet documents showed government ministers even considered a policy of “managed decline”—effectively letting the city fall apart rather than supporting it. Any sort of neglect Liverpool suffered was not accidental, but a deliberate attempt to reduce Merseyside’s livelihood. In the face of this decline, rising unemployment, social unrest and the 1981 Toxteth riots, Thatcher’s response only increased policing and blame. Liverpool, already proud and politically stimulated, became vilified in the press as angry, dangerous and self-pitying. To be Scouse was to be othered—culturally, economically and politically. Thus, when Hillsborough occurred, and the government chose to ignore the victims, it wasn’t a shock but a confirmation. When Thatcher visited, she sided with the South Yorkshire police. When The Sun printed lies, the state stayed silent. Normally, in tragedy, people would be allowed to mourn their dead, yet Scousers were forced to defend their character instead. As such, Hillsborough is more than a tragedy for Liverpool. Instead, it's a culmination of years of being ignored and misunderstood. It’s why the song You’ll Never Walk Alone cannot be reduced to just a song of grief. It’s an anthem, a refusal to be erased, a declaration that Scousers will not be ignored. It took 23 years for an official apology. In 2012, the Hillsborough Independent Panel released a report confirming what had always been known. The police were to blame, the victims were innocent. David Cameron, the Prime Minister, issued a formal apology in Parliament. Yet apologies mean nothing and Liverpool does not forget, with the S*n being banned in all of Merseyside. This does not take back the suffering inflicted, and justice is never simple. Trials have dragged on with little to no resolution, and no senior police officers have been convicted. Despite this lack of accountability, Liverpool has stayed strong, and You’ll Never Walk Alone has continued to be sung. Every year on the anniversary, Anfield falls silent—and then erupts in one voice. The wails of this legendary song sound louder than ever, a reminder that justice does not end with headlines, but only when the truth is known. When the dead are honored as people and not just as statistics. Music has a strange sort of power; it can outlive the moments it was originally made for. You’ll Never Walk Alone has transcended Liverpool. Celtic fans sing it in Scotland, as well as Dortmund fans in Germany. It’s been sung in times of crisis—after terrorist attacks, during the pandemic and other acts of remembrance. But it will forever belong to Hillsborough first. It is sacred in the way a national anthem can become sacred, or a funeral hymn. To put it simply, it is more than music. It is a memory that cannot be erased, a resistance that cannot be silenced or reduced. You’ll Never Walk Alone began as a ballad of hope and then a cry for justice. It reminds us that grief can be public, that mourning can be political, and that justice can be demanded outside the courts. Yet above all, it shows that when people come together, they can never truly be alone. The importance of remembrance is clear. For the victims of the Heysel and the Hillsborough stadium disasters, we should not and will not forget. Victims of the Heysel Stadium Disaster, Mar. 29 1985 Rocco Acerra, 29 Bruno Balli, 50 Alfons Bos, 35 Giancarlo Bruschera, 21 Andrea Casula, 11 Giovanni Casula, 44 Nino Cerullo, 24 Willy Chielens, 41 Giuseppina Conti, 17 Dirk Daeninckx, 38 Dionisio Fabbro, 51 Jacques François, 45 Eugenio Gagliano, 35 Francesco Galli, 24 Giancarlo Gonnelli, 20 Alberto Guarini, 21 Giovacchino Landini, 50 Roberto Lorentini, 31 Barbara Lusci, 58 Franco Martelli, 22 Loris Messore, 28 Gianni Mastroiaco, 20 Sergio Bastino Mazzino, 38 Luciano Rocco Papaluca, 38 Luigi Pidone, 31 Benito Pistolato, 50 Patrick Radcliffe, 38 Domenico Ragazzi, 44 Antonio Ragnanese, 49 Claude Robert, 27 Mario Ronchi, 43 Domenico Russo, 28 Tarcisio Salvi, 49 Gianfranco Sarto, 47 Amedeo Giuseppe Spolarore, 55 Mario Spanu, 41 Tarcisio Venturin, 23 Jean Michel Walla, 32 Claudio Zavaroni, 28 Victims of the Hillsborough Stadium Disaster, Apr. 15 1989 https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2024/apr/15/hillsborough-disaster-the-97-people-whose-lives-were-cut-short Jon-Paul Gilhooley, 10 Philip Hammond, 14 Thomas Anthony Howard, 14 Paul Brian Murray, 14 Lee Nicol, 14 Adam Edward Spearritt, 14 Peter Andrew Harrison, 15 Victoria Jane Hicks, 15 Philip John Steele, 15 Kevin Tyrrell, 15 Kevin Daniel Williams, 15 Kester Roger Marcus Ball, 16 Nicholas Michael Hewitt, 16 Martin Kevin Traynor, 16 Simon Bell, 17 Carl Darren Hewitt, 17 Kevin McGrath, 17 Stephen Francis O’Neill, 17 Steven Joseph Robinson, 17 Henry Charles Rogers, 17 Stuart Paul William Thompson, 17 Graham John Wright, 17 James Gary Aspinall, 18 Carl Brown, 18 Paul Clark, 18 Christopher Barry Devonside, 18 Gary Philip Jones, 18 Carl David Lewis, 18 John McBrien, 18 Jonathon Owens, 18 Colin Mark Ashcroft, 19 Paul William Carlile, 19 Gary Christopher Church, 19 James Philip Delaney, 19 Sarah Louise Hicks, 19 David William Mather, 19 Colin Wafer, 19 Ian David Whelan, 19 Stephen Paul Copoc, 20 Ian Thomas Glover, 20 Gordon Rodney Horn, 20 Paul David Brady, 21 Thomas Steven Fox, 21 Marian Hazel McCabe, 21 Joseph Daniel McCarthy, 21 Peter McDonnell, 21 Carl William Rimmer, 21 Peter Francis Tootle, 21 David John Benson, 22 David William Birtle, 22 Tony Bland, 22 Gary Collins, 22 Tracey Elizabeth Cox, 23 William Roy Pemberton, 23 Colin Andrew Hugh William Sefton, 23 David Leonard Thomas, 23 Peter Andrew Burkett, 24 Derrick George Godwin, 24 Graham John Roberts, 24 David Steven Brown, 25 Richard Jones, 25 Barry Sidney Bennett, 26 Andrew Mark Brookes, 26 Paul Anthony Hewitson, 26 Paula Ann Smith, 26 Christopher James Traynor, 26 Barry Glover, 27 Gary Harrison, 27 Christine Anne Jones, 27 Nicholas Peter Joynes, 27 Francis Joseph McAllister, 27 Alan McGlone, 28 Joseph Clark, 29 Christopher Edwards, 29 James Robert Hennessy, 29 Alan Johnston, 29 Anthony Peter Kelly, 29 Martin Kenneth Wild, 29 Peter Reuben Thompson, 30 Stephen Francis Harrison, 31 Eric Hankin, 33 Vincent Michael Fitzsimmons, 34 Roy Harry Hamilton, 34 Patrick John Thompson, 35 Michael David Kelly, 38 Brian Christopher Mathews, 38 David George Rimmer, 38 Inger Shah, 38 David Hawley, 39 Thomas Howard, 39 Arthur Horrocks, 41 Eric George Hughes, 42 Henry Thomas Burke, 47 Raymond Thomas Chapman, 50 John Alfred Anderson, 62 Gerard Bernard Patrick Baron, 67 Keith McGrath, 17 Photo source: Mark Lowen on Wikimedia

On quitte rarement le Liban, on s’en sépare, souvent contre sa volonté. Et pourtant, dans cette séparation, une étrange alchimie se crée: plus le pays sombre dans le chaos, plus il semble s’effondrer sous les poids du temps et de la guerre, et plus l’attachement et le patriotisme de ses enfants, même à l’autre bout du monde, se fait viscéral. Ce phénomène est particulièrement visible parmi les étudiants libanais en France, pour qui ce patriotisme se nourrit de la résistance face à un contexte tendu, marqué par les tensions et les conflits internes. < Back Loin des yeux, près du coeur: les Libanais de la diaspora face au chaos Christy Ghosn December 31, 2024 « Si le Liban n’était pas mon pays, je l’aurais choisi pour pays. » Gibran n’est pas mort, il vit à travers chaque mot, chaque pensée, de ceux qui, loin de leur terre natale, l’embrassent encore dans leur âme. On quitte rarement le Liban, on s’en sépare, souvent contre sa volonté. Et pourtant, dans cette séparation, une étrange alchimie se crée: plus le pays sombre dans le chaos, plus il semble s’effondrer sous les poids du temps et de la guerre, et plus l’attachement et le patriotisme de ses enfants, même à l’autre bout du monde, se fait viscéral. Ce phénomène est particulièrement visible parmi les étudiants libanais en France, pour qui ce patriotisme se nourrit de la résistance face à un contexte tendu, marqué par les tensions et les conflits internes. Des interviews avec de jeunes expatriés ont permis de comprendre ce paradoxe et comment le patriotisme, loin des frontières du Liban, devient un acte de résistance, comme une promesse de ne jamais oublier ceux qui sont restés. Un patriotisme renforcé par la distance Avant de quitter le Liban, une grande majorité des Libanais interrogés ressentaient une relation ambivalente avec leur pays. L’amour pour leurs proches était entaché par une frustration intense face à la situation politique et économique. Quitter le pays était souvent perçu comme un soulagement, une échappatoire au danger quotidien, mais ce choix était aussi teinté de culpabilité: partir signifiait abandonner un foyer en crise et laisser derrière des proches plongés dans l’incertitude. Une fois à l’étranger, la distance géographique semble paradoxalement rapprocher émotionnellement les expatriés de leur pays d'origine. L’une des étudiantes interrogées a partagé son expérience: bien qu’étant partie très jeune, elle n’avait jamais ressenti un lien aussi fort avec le Liban qu’à la suite des récents affrontements entre le Hezbollah et Israël. Ces événements ont ravivé un sentiment d’appartenance malgré la distance, un sentiment alimenté par la solidarité partagée avec d’autres Libanais dans la même situation. Ensemble, c’est comme s’ils avaient formé une sorte groupe émotionnel de support. De plus, face à la pression d’intégrer les valeurs françaises, beaucoup ont éprouvé un besoin urgent de se rattacher à leur identité libanaise, comme une manière de se réapproprier une partie essentielle et profonde d’eux-mêmes qu’ils sentent parfois menacée. La diffusion et la promotion de la culture libanaise Ce besoin se traduit par une redécouverte de leur culture et une fierté renouvelée d’être Libanais. En effet, les étudiants libanais à l’étranger deviennent souvent des ambassadeurs de leur culture. De la poésie libanaise à Fairuz, en passant par le houmous ou la dabke, ils partagent activement leurs traditions et contribuent à façonner une image positive du Liban, malgré les crises. Cette diffusion culturelle est perçue comme un acte de résistance morale: dans un contexte où leur identité est menacée, préserver et promouvoir leur culture devient une manière de la protéger. Ce sentiment se renforce notamment à Sciences Po où, face au conflit, beaucoup ressentent la nécessité de se positionner et de défendre leurs valeurs. Comme le résume une étudiante, « Le simple fait d’exister, de vivre, devient une forme de résistance. » Des événements culturels organisés par les étudiants libanais illustrent cet engagement, suscitant souvent l’admiration de leurs camarades internationaux, qui se disent inspirés par les récits et les valeurs partagés. Alors que certains, touchés par ces portraits envisagent de visiter le Liban, d’autres, déjà influencés par le temps qu’ils passent avec leurs amis libanais, intègrent inconsciemment des éléments de cette culture dans leur quotidien, ponctuant leurs phrases de mots comme "Saraha" (Honnêtement) ou "Chou?” (Quoi?). Le rôle de la diaspora dans l’avenir du Liban La diaspora libanaise a toujours été un pilier économique et social pour le pays. En 2023, la diaspora a envoyé 6,7 milliards de dollars au Liban selon la Banque mondiale . Ces transferts représentent 30,7 % du PIB libanais, soit le troisième ratio le plus élevé au monde. Les envois d’argent soutiennent des familles entières. Cependant, il ne s’agit pas seulement de contributions économiques pour soutenir le Liban; depuis la révolution de 2019 jusqu'à aujourd'hui, la voix des expatriés libanais a permis de sensibiliser la communauté internationale à la crise libanaise. Pour les Libanais, il ne s’agit plus de se reposer sur un gouvernement, qui s’est déjà montré incapable de répondre à la crise, mais de compter sur le soutien de la communauté internationale. Toutefois, peu de Libanais vivant à l’étranger envisagent un retour au pays. L’absence d’opportunités, combinée à l’instabilité persistante, empêche beaucoup d’imaginer un avenir viable au Liban. Pourtant, ils continuent d’espérer que leur engagement culturel, intellectuel, voire même émotionnel contribuera, à long terme, à un renouveau du pays. A présent, permettez-moi de me glisser dans le rôle de ma propre interviewée, et de conclure par cette réflexion. Être un Libanais étudiant à l’étranger, c’est avant tout un mélange d’émotions: une colère sourde face à la détresse de notre pays, mais aussi une impuissance déchirante, celle de ne pouvoir rien changer—pire—de ne même pas pouvoir être là, physiquement. C’est souffrir face à cette pile incessante de nouvelles, se sentir pris au piège face à cette sensation écrasante de n’être qu’un observateur distant. Et pourtant, malgré cette distance qui déchire, vivre loin de chez soi, c’est porter chaque jour en nous une parcelle du Liban, et s’efforcer de la garder vivante.

Lauded for its clear waters and dream houses, the North Coast has gained immense popularity from Egyptian citizens and throughout the Arab world. < Back Urban Development Booms on Egypt’s North Coast By Joudi Arafa September 30, 2022 It is no surprise that pristine coasts along the Egyptian Mediterranean have undergone thorough urban transformations in recent years. It serves not only as a source of attraction for domestic and international tourists but for investors as well. The development runs precisely across Alexandria, Marsa Matrouh and the newest city of El Alamein. The longstanding interest in coastal tourism in Egypt proves to be transformational in the tourism sector. Until recently, Egypt relied on archaeological-centric tourism; nowadays, it is profiting far more from leisure attractions. In two decades, the number of visitors in the coastal region grew by an astonishing 76%. This boom can be explained by the expansion of the hotel and housing industries through furious infrastructural and architectural activity. In 2014, Egypt approved a reallocation of 2.4 million square meters of public-owned land to the New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA) to proceed with the construction of a new city in the North Coast area — El Alamein. The first phase of the project aims to house 20,000 people. Residents will be able to expect a tourism development area and a vast array of retail options. The conceptual plan is looking to incorporate industries such as logistics, agriculture, regional trade, tourism and education in hopes of attracting new investments to the fledgling coastal city. El Alamein even features skyscrapers in its layout, some of which are already completed and welcoming tourists and residents alike. Not only is all of this urban development along the North Coast bringing forth unprecedented revenues, but it is also creating employment opportunities for the growing youth population of Egypt. Serving as the most famous summer destination spot for Egyptians, the property market in the area has widened, and competition to attain a coveted seaside property, whether it be a multistory sea-view villa or a humble one-bedroom studio, has tensed. “Sahel,” as Egyptians call it, has set an image for itself as a hub for summer relaxation and family reunification. After years of saving, it is not uncommon for someone to hastily purchase a Sahel property that is either still under construction or a finished unit. They know that the return on their investment is worth the cash and that it is a destination to look forward to visiting when leaving their bustling hometowns of Cairo, Alexandria or Port Saïd. The urban distribution of the North Coast comes in the form of compounds or, more precisely, neighborhoods separated by a highway. Amwaj, Marassi, Mountain View, Golf Porto Marina, and Hacienda are just a few of the desirable development projects that can be found in Sahel. Each compound has its unique attractions — gated communities, sailing, spas, and playgrounds — to be enjoyed by residents. Lauded for its clear waters and dream houses, the North Coast has gained immense popularity from Egyptian citizens and throughout the Arab world.

Turkish prisons still do not allow open visitation for their inmates, despite the vaccination rate across prisons being higher than the general population. They are denied visits from their family and lawyers, with their phone time being increased by only 10 minutes since the beginning of the pandemic. < Back Turkey: Visitation Still Not Allowed in 82% Fully Vaccinated Prisons By Ayşe Lara Selçuker November 29, 2021 While this article was written before the government announced the return to “open visitation” on December 1, its analysis of pandemic prison policies are still valid; prisoners have been neglected across the globe. Turkish prison inmates have not been permitted “open visitation” for one year and eight months, despite the fact that the prison vaccination rate (82 percent) has surpassed that of the general population (78 percent), according to an article published by T24. For almost two years, according to DW Turkish, inmates have only had access to 20 minutes of phone calls per week, increased from 10 minutes pre-pandemic. Prisons have recently begun to allow “closed visitation,” but the Justice Department suggests that this will not change for a while, “due to pandemic reasons.” The Turkish prison system distinguishes between “open visitation” and “closed visitation” as contact visitation (where the inmate may sit in a room with their relatives or lawyer and sit at a table for a period of time) and non-contact glass-partition visitation (where the inmate and the lawyer/relative are separated by a glass partition and have to talk through a telephone.) Not only is “open visitation” banned for inmates, but also any cross-prison transfers are currently at a halt. Transferring from high security prisons (which often use solitary confinement) to lower security prisons for good behavior, once motivation for inmate reformi is no longer possible. This might even mean that some have been in solitary confinement or similarly psychologically abusive situations for as long as these pandemic rules have been instated. The contrast between the strict rules in prisons and travel for the general public is particularly striking. While Turkey has been in the process of returning to normal since about June, with lockdowns ending and restaurants, schools and hotels reopening, the fact that prisoners cannot even sit in a room with their relatives, and perhaps more importantly, their lawyers, is astonishing. A similar critique can even be made about pre-June Turkey, when its restrictions (or lack thereof) on tourists seemed incomparable to those on its citizens. While Turkey’s citizens faced a lockdown on Sundays, and earlier in the pandemic before vaccinations, for consecutive weeks, tourists were exempted from any lockdown restrictions. Prisoners have therefore been a victim of Turkey’s inconsistent COVID-19 response ever since the beginning. Many point to the fact that prisons are congregate housing facilities, with higher risks for COVID transmission at a much higher rate. Yet, the Anadolu Agency reports that Turkish nursing homes have had the right to allow visitations since around June, when the reopening period started. The Turkish government left this decision to the discretion of the nursing homes, many of which have decided to allow visitations with proof of visitors’ vaccinations and negative PCR test results. Further, there is really little reason to justify the continued isolation of inmates despite a developed vaccination scheme such as the one observed in Turkey at the moment. While Turkish citizens can now travel internationally (and foreigners can travel to Turkey) as they wish with vaccinations and test results, inmates suffer, despite prisons’ higher vaccination and lower case rates. Yet, is this a Turkey-specific issue as some would make it to be? How has the rest of the world dealt with congregate housing facilities and, particularly, prisons? The response varies, but it can be determined overall that many have unsurprisingly not prioritized prisoners in their pandemic response. With many which have had problems with prison visits, a shocking number of nations have little to no information available about their prison-visit protocols. According to Buzzfeed, prisons in California only opened their doors to in-person visits around July, following months of telephone and video visits through a platform that faced frequent and significant crashes. According to its official website, the United Kingdom government has set up a “National Framework for Prisons” by which prisons have been classified as open or closed to visits based on their current vaccination and case rights, allowing for there to be a dynamic, updated, and rational system for prisons to receive visitors. The EuroPris website, which has stated that it will be “updated every day,” posted its most recent “Prison Visits” update on its COVID-19 information page in May 2020. Concurrent with many questions surrounding the ethics of prisons in debate around the world, the pandemic has made it especially evident that prisoners are too often neglected by the government in times of crisis. The humanity of inmates are too often forgotten in policies about people who have been portrayed as criminals with no remorse. No person deserves no visits or no contact for a year and eight months, and governments across the world need to develop their schemes on including all of the nation’s public when specifying pandemic responses.

Israel has issued a new set of regulations, to be taken into effect next month, that would impose further limits on foreigners’ entry into the West Bank. < Back Israel Cracks Down on West Bank Accessibility By Ghazal Khalife September 30, 2022 Israel has issued a new set of regulations, to be taken into effect next month, that would impose further limits on foreigners’ entry into the West Bank. The restriction stirring up the most controversy is the new obligation to formally declare a romantic relationship with a Palestinian to be granted access into the area. Other seemingly arbitrary regulations, such as quotas on visas given to students and lecturers, also perplexed commentators. The original draft of this set of protocols, published by the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), stipulated that foreigners who start a serious romantic relationship with Palestinian residents of the West Bank must inform the authorities “within 30 days of the start of this relationship.” However, following criticism and condemnation from human rights activists, Palestinian legal experts and many leading figures in the international community, Israel released a revised 90-page document that omitted this clause. The revised version states that foreigners who wish to live with their spouses in the Judea and Samaria area, the biblical name for the West Bank, must apply for a visiting permit 45 days before their trip. The document also cements the ban on giving residency status to them, leaving many families under the constant stress of being denied entry and legal status. According to Part four of the revised document, “Spousal permits will be issued for a maximum term of one year each time.” Furthermore, the total period that any visitor can stay in the West Bank is 27 months (including visa extensions), after which a “cooling off” period is required. If visitors wish to re-enter the area, they must start a new application process. Not only is this process intensely bureaucratic and time-consuming, but permits are also subject to arbitrary refusals. Ultimately, the COGAT official decides whether or not the permit is approved, as seen in Clause 10: “the authorized COGAT official is the authority who decides whether to deny a foreigner entry into the Judea and Samaria area.” In addition to the public backlash against the initial draft of new protocols, Israeli human rights activists in Hamoked, Center For the Defense of the Individual, and Palestinian activists quickly denounced the protocols’ international law violations and started challenging them in court. Jessica Montell, director of Hamoked, explains that these policies are manifestations of a “belligerent occupation.” Even the American ambassador, Tom Tide, expressed his strong disappointment over the new restrictions and declared having engaged in negotiations with Israel to revise the regulations. Nonetheless, COGAT’s changes to the original rules remain largely superficial since only the contentious quotas on lecturers allowed entry and the declaration of a love-interest were removed. According to the United Nations and Palestinian legal experts, there is no solid legal basis for Israel’s past restrictions on movement or these new regulations. Israel, however, derives license to enact its restrictive policies from the Interim Peace Accords of the 1990s and “security concerns.” Furthermore, with Israel controlling most entrances to the West Bank with heavily militarized checkpoints and frequent Israeli Defense Force inspections, these regulations are likely to be reinforced strictly. The document specifies that any application for a permit needs to be accompanied by a deposit of up to 20,050 dollars that can be confiscated in the case of a breach of the permit’s conditions. These measures reaffirm the Israeli state’s insistence on following tough restrictions and consolidating years of aggressive military occupation. Perhaps the most apparent consequences of these regulations on individuals’ private lives are the tolls they take on existing family ties and the immense obstacles they create for Palestinians who want to marry people of other nationalities. The new regulations raise the question of why Israel would enforce such exhaustive measures on the partners of Palestinians. An aim could be to put pressure on Palestinian civil life and further isolate Palestinian citizens of the West Bank from the outside world. Palestinians living in the West Bank are already struggling with heavy restrictions on autonomy under a convoluted and opaque system. From long lines at checkpoints to limitations on working hours, everyday life for Palestinians in the West Bank is only getting more difficult. These new protocols also regulate business and academic activities; thus, businessmen, professors, and students are impacted. The process for obtaining a permit is often costly and time-consuming as applications need to be started at least two months in advance, and applicants must fit an extensive set of criteria and undergo detailed background checks by COGAT officials before being let into the West Bank. Restrictions on the entry of goods and skilled labor cause Palestinian businesses to struggle to expand and modernize. Bassim Khoury, CEO of Pharmacare, comments, “having to obtain a confirmation a month ahead will make it impossible for many foreign partners we have to be part of the business. The immediate effect is that we will have a harder time developing our business.” Lecturers and students must also satisfy COGAT’s list of academic credentials, age and medical insurance conditions. An especially troubling limitation for undergraduate students holding the visiting permit makes it “forbidden to seek employment in the Area.” Mariya Gabriel, head of the European Commission for research and culture, criticized these measures saying, “With Israel itself benefiting greatly from Erasmus, the Commission considers that it should facilitate and not hinder access of students to Palestinian universities.” Moreover, these restrictions do not apply to Israeli settlers, further emphasizing the apartheid policies in the occupied territories. These regulations directly serve settlers as they pose obstacles to all corners of Palestinian life and make the dream of a prosperous Palestinian state ever more elusive. Although, in reality, the prospect of a two-state solution has already been abandoned by many Palestinians who fear more evictions, fewer rights and continuing aggression. These new protocols perfectly conform to Israel’s 55-year policy toward occupied Palestinians, anchoring decades of discrimination and oppression. To understand the reasoning behind Israel’s policy in this highly contested area, it is crucial to analyze how these new regulations fit within the larger scheme of events since the Israeli occupation of the West Bank following the Six-Day War of 1967. Since then, Israel has pursued a consistent policy of sponsoring settlements and institutionalizing discrimination against Palestinians. As a result, lasting peace in the West Bank seems almost impossible. Arbitrary arrests forced evictions and bureaucratic restrictions on movement, among other manifestations of de facto annexation, make life in the West Bank turbulent. This is part of Israel’s plan to formally annex the region, a plan hindered by the COVID-19 pandemic and Donald’s Trump loss in the 2020 U.S. elections. Annexing the West Bank and finally uniting the Israeli state has been the conclusive goal for many Israeli politicians, most notably former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This final policy will subject the area to Israeli rather than international law. Israel is heading in this direction even though it violates international conduct and may be reprimanded, especially because Joe Biden has not yet given Israel the green light. Annexation or military occupation — these words serve merely as semantics for Palestinians having to face ever-deteriorating living conditions amidst an Arab and international community that is increasingly desensitized to their suffering. A quote from one of my Palestinian friends summarizes the situation rather powerfully: “They want to prevent us from spreading our culture and practicing our identity because only then will they reach their full victory.” When observing the general trend in Israeli policy in the West Bank, the new regulations and how they infringe on Palestinians’ right to privacy and freedom of movement make it seem as though it is highly unlikely for any tangible improvements to take place even in the face of international criticism, leaving Palestinians wondering how much more they still have to withstand.

Amid Erdoğan's floundering through an economic crisis and the looming threat of an upcoming election, a calamitous pair of earthquakes have begun to resemble an extended Day of Reckoning for the Turkish President's administration. The dire state of the Turkish government has led to mounting speculation on what measures it will resort to preserve its 20-year reign. < Back Commitment to Elections and Constitution Wavers After Turkey Earthquake By Yasmin Abbasoy March 31, 2023 Amid Turkish President Erdoğan's floundering through an economic crisis and the looming threat of an upcoming election, a calamitous pair of earthquakes have begun to resemble an extended Day of Reckoning for the Turkish President's administration. The dire state of the Turkish government has led to mounting speculation on what measures it will resort to preserve its 20-year reign. Fears of the most desperate measures — a postponement of the elections scheduled for this coming May — were only invigorated by a statement from a former politician known for his intimate ties with the ruling party that seemed to be an attempt to judge the lay of the land indirectly. With over 50,000 dead and the death toll still climbing, the catastrophe has quickly become Europe’s “worst natural disaster in a century,” according to the World Health Organization. Striking as the earthquakes did, late at night and in the middle of winter, necessitated a fast and efficient humanitarian response: one decidedly not delivered by the Turkish government. These adjectives do not describe the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) of recent years, defined by increasing authoritarianism and layers of financial misconduct and cronyism. Unable to rise to the occasion, the government was subject to further merciless exposure of its shortcomings in governance by a population who felt thrown to the wind. The criticism was only strengthened by existing discontent with the state of affairs in Turkey, especially when certain shortcomings in the earthquake response were widely seen as a result of the festering wounds of the longtime misgovernance of the ruling party. The immediate call for donations disseminated by the government-funded Disaster and Management Authority (AFAD) bred discontent in a population paying so-called “Earthquake Taxes” since a similarly devastating tremor in 1999. The perceived misuse of government funds refers to a familiar refrain: the government’s salient pattern of financial misconduct. Most recently, the opposition campaign demanding an explanation for the discreet sale of $128 million in reserves by the central bank resulted in one of the most popular political slogans of modern Turkish politics, What happened to the $128 million, and succeeded in highlighting this established pattern of behavior. The people were willing to give the government very little grace. The inability of the poorly funded AFAD to reach several affected provinces in the hours following the earthquake provoked further outrage among a populace habituated to the quintessential government defense, mobilized against all criticism: “We built roads!” The collapse in infrastructure, exemplified by photos of pitch-dark highways cracked open and crumbling like styrofoam, not to mention the airport runways split down the middle, rankled a party that had long prided itself on the modernization of the admittedly inferior infrastructure it inherited. Where AFAD could reach, efforts to stabilize survivors extracted from the rubble, in danger of freezing to death in below-zero temperatures, were hampered by structural damage to essential buildings such as public hospitals. The utter failure of government-funded buildings in withstanding the earthquake is yet another symptom of rampant cronyism, seeing that the meteoric rise of a group of government-supporting companies dubbed the “Gang of Five” was precipitated by the endless amount of contracts handed to them. The state of private residences was no different, with entire groups of buildings collapsing like rows of dominoes. Illegal and not-strictly-legal construction is rampant nationwide, including in the affected areas, where construction that did not follow official guidelines for earthquake-resistant design was the norm. In the days immediately following the earthquake, the government publicized its arrests of independent contractors responsible for specific buildings whose collapse led to the deaths of over 130 people in some cases. They were often caught trying to leave the country and so gleefully used by the government as sacrificial lambs to present to an increasingly angry population. This strategy was undercut as soon as the AKP’s proposed construction amnesty plan in the election year were brought to light. These amnesties, which strangely enough always correspond to election years, retroactively legalize illegal structures. They have been harshly criticized, as have been most government policies, as populist and shortsighted. Turkish people channeled their fear, rage and despair into aiding the nationwide effort to support victims. Twitter, described by then-CEO Dick Costelo in 2013 as the “global town square,” became the site of many donation campaigns and charity drives. Hoping to supplement insufficient search and rescue efforts, Twitter users shared the names of once-apartment buildings turned rubble under which they could hear people calling out, lists of necessary supplies to the affected areas and names of missing loved ones. Criticism of the government was, as always, omnipresent: photos of the controversial actions of the government were heavily circulated. Whether it be labeling tents sent by foreign countries with Turkish Red Crescent stickers or rejecting jackets with Efes Beverage Group logos due to the company’s production of alcoholic drinks, it was all on the app for all to see and judge. And people were judging, too blatantly for the Turkish government’s comfort as they blocked access to the website for at least 12 hours only three days after the earthquake. Widely considered to be a move to curb criticism and provoke a tbacklash, the extreme measure gave way to the idea that the government was in a difficult situation. While the website was eventually unblocked, authorities came down hard on criticism: A lawyer, trying in vain to extract his family from the rubble of their ruined building with his means, was arrested on charges of denigrating the state for a tweet reading simply, “Where is the state?” The new party line was echoed by the man himself, two-time President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who, in his increasingly aggressive speeches, resorted to describing detractors, most of which were victims of the earthquake, with increasingly creative insults. At the end of February, he made a dramatic one-eighty with regard to the government response, using the opportunity presented by a speech in the heavily-affected Adıyaman to ask for “hellalik” (a religious acknowledgment that one owes nothing to the other, as all previous sins have been forgiven) from the people. This alarming confluence of factors gave way to fears of a postponed election, with the ostensible goal of giving the apparatus time to recover from the failure in the earthquake response and bolster support for re-election. On Feb. 13, merely a week after the earthquake, a former political adviser notable for his close connection to Erdoğan and other leading figures in the party released a statement that would occupy the public consciousness for weeks. Bülent Arınç, a founding member of the AKP who recently retired after 20 years in the political game in a variety of positions —most significantly as the head of the Presidential High Advisory Board —published a three-page document outlining his views on the upcoming elections on his Twitter account. His statement, conveniently bolded for readability, called for unity and used religious language to rail against what he described as the inappropriate discussion of elections so soon after such a disaster: “Fear God, there are still bodies under the rubble. How is it possible to talk about elections when you can't talk about the electorate?” Reiterating that it would be best for the country to “be freed from the stress of elections as soon as possible,” he proposed two potential solutions: the first, amending the constitution, which only permits postponement in the extreme situation of war; and the second, a certain decision taken by the Supreme Court that allows the Supreme Election Council to determine that it would be impossible, due to lack of order or institutions, to hold elections at the planned date. Most alarming, however, was the justification for amending the constitution, long considered the unshakeable backbone of any democracy: “The constitution is not a spiritual document, it is a legal one.” From an increasingly Islamist party that has historically embodied a devil-may-care attitude regarding changes to the constitution, as the recent shift from a parliamentary system to a presidential one while extending executive powers illustrates, this read as a threat. The response can best be summed up as overwhelming backlash. On Twitter, disabling replies to restrict criticism was rendered useless by the sheer amount of vitriol aimed at Arınç: the tweet has received 1,270 “favorites” and more than 12,000 “quote-retweet” comments, the overwhelming majority are negative. Days later, Arınç sat down for a live televized interview, affirming that “Perception should not override facts.” He also stated that his statement was not an attempt to test the reaction of the public on behalf of anyone, and revealingly, that he believed that chaos would not break out if elections are not postponed, but rather if they are postponed in a way other than a constitutional amendment: a yet-unmentioned possibility. Opposition leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu commented that “The constitution is very clear, the election cannot be postponed. Running away from the election does no one any good.” In contrast, the government, surely aware of the massive scale of the opposition, took a reassuring tone: “The election is not postponed, the process is continuing as is. If the technical infrastructure is provided on time, the elections will take place on May 14th.” On March 6, the Supreme Election Council was presented with a preliminary report on the status of electoral and other relevant institutions in the area, which concluded that there were no obstacles to an election being held at the previously fixed date. As for the prospect of a constitutional amendment, the ruling coalition does not have the required amount of votes to push through an amendment without the support of the opposition, which perhaps accounts for the sudden and outsized emphasis on inter-party collaboration observed in the statement. The past and present of the party do not inspire much confidence in their adherence to accepted procedure, however, and the Turkish population is again left wondering about what exactly the party will do to secure their chances. On March 10, Erdoğan signed an executive order for elections to go ahead on the previously decided date, May 14. Notably, the order was not for the previously scheduled elections to go ahead but for the 2018 general elections to be renewed. This has widely been interpreted as a method of sidestepping yet another constitutional problem — the fact that one person can only be elected to the role of President twice. Having tried to defend Erdoğan’s candidacy through a convoluted argument that involved the new presidential system acting as a reset, with each candidate treated as if he had never run before, the party has now set its sights on more concrete and thus more dangerous measures. This new development is completely in line with the rhetoric and strategy of the government with regard to the option of postponement, betraying deep-set values incompatible with constitutional democracy and confirming that the party is willing to do anything to cling to power. The wide-ranging aftereffects of the earthquake have heralded a new era of cutthroat politics for the government. As eyes turn once again to the High Electoral Council for a comment on the legality of this new decision, the upcoming election will not just be a choice between political parties but a vote on the foundations of the state itself.

< Back “Mom I arrived”: Two Years Since the Tragedy of Tempi Eleni Dimitropoulou February 28, 2025 The calendar displayed the date Feb. 28, 2023, and the first news that reached the press offices around 23:40 referred to a “train derailment at Evangelismos in Larissa.” Few people immediately realized what happened, but this changed as images from the local media were transmitted throughout the country: A passenger train operated by Hellenic Train Company collided head-on with a commercial train from the same company. The passenger train IC62, scheduled to depart from Athens for Thessaloniki at 7:22 p.m., carrying approximately 350 passengers, started with a short delay. Many passengers were students returning to Thessaloniki after the three-day religious holiday— known as Clean or Green Monday . Train IC62 arrived in Larissa late due to an incident that preceded it at Palaeofarsalos station. It departed Larissa station at 23:00, incorrectly entering the descending line. Meanwhile, the freight train was going from Thessaloniki to Larissa on the same downward line. The head-on collision between the two trains took place at 23:21 on Feb. 28, 2023, on the Athens-Thessaloniki line. The area where the accident happened, 27.3 kilometers to the north of Larissa, was a double-track section, but automatic controls had been damaged and out of service by a fire in 2019, so switching was still done manually. The passenger train was traveling at a speed of 160 km/h on the left track, where the freight train was also moving in the opposite direction. The collision derailed most of the passenger train's carriages, and at the moment of the collision, there was an instantaneous explosion, which consumed the two front carriages of the passenger train. According to the regional governor of Thessaly, Konstantinos Agorastos, carriages one and two of the passenger train were completely burned , while the Thessaly Emergency Medical Service reported that two to three carriages had been crushed as a result of the collision. With the first light of day, in order to locate victims and any survivors, rescue crews began lifting the wreckage of the wagons that ended up in the field next to the railway line. According to a report given to the authorities, Hellenic Train, the company that owns the passenger train, initially estimated the number of passengers to be approximately 350. It also states in its report that, aside from the online tickets issued , there is no proper accounting of the number of passengers or even their names . According to official data, 57 people were killed in the accident, of whom 56 were identified from biological material, while in the case of one missing person, no sample was found. The identification of some victims was particularly difficult due to the high temperatures that developed during the fire, which reached 1,300 degrees Celsius inside the first carriage. 57 condemned souls—the majority of whom were students and young children— paid for the disastrous mistakes of the railway. 57 innocent souls died due to the long-term negligence of railway administrations. 57 defenseless souls paid with their lives due to the acquisition of the railway by the Italian private company, which allowed the trains to fall into disrepair. 57 wronged souls paid for the unmeritorious appointment of the ruling party's crony to a position of responsibility. 57 forsaken souls paid for the ostrichism of the responsible minister, who systematically turned a deaf ear to the union bodies of the Hellenic Railways Organisation or OSE that thundered about the dangers of the railway. This tragic accident was the beginning of exposing the problematic railway network of the country, as well as the indifference of the State. The written warnings, mobilizations and legal actions of the railway workers, regarding the understaffing, the inadequate maintenance and the lack of electronic safety systems in the trains expressways, even a few days before the "black" February 28th, seemed to have fallen into the void. The employee representative on the board of directors of Hellenic Train complained that, on this particular route, the signaling and remote control systems were not working, which would have acted as safety valves to avoid the collision. It was not only the OSE trade unionists who had warned of the many problems in the Greek railway, both with their latest letter on February 7 and with their previous announcements since the summer but also the European Commission, which had repeatedly reprimanded Greece for non-compliance with the European directive. Two weeks ago, in yet another resounding “bellwether” for our country, the Commission announced its decision to refer Greece to the European Court of Justice for “failing to fulfill its obligations under the Directive on the Single European Railway Area (2012/34/EU).” Based on this directive, “Member States had to ensure that a contractual agreement between the national competent authority and the railway infrastructure manager had been concluded by June 16, 2015, at the latest.” More importantly, in contrast to the Greek government's negligence, European authorities are conducting a parallel investigation into the case. The European Public Prosecutor's Office's case file places 23 people under scrutiny for their responsibility in the scandalous Contract 717. This contract concerns the upgrading of the signaling-telecommand system on the Greek railway network, co-financed by the EU Cohesion Fund. The indictment issued by the European Public Prosecutor's Office against 14 ERGOSE executives who handled Contract 717 between 2016 and 2021 disputes the allegations of the former Minister of Transport and nullifies the conclusion of New Democracy in the Investigative Committee, as it definitively links the non-implementation of Contract 717 to the head-on collision of trains in Tempi. The country entered a strike on February 28, the day on which it will be two years since the Tempi train tragedy. The demand for justice, in the shadow of the latest revelations and the grandiose rallies, is widespread. It has resulted in a strike uprising in recent days. ADEDY (Civil Servants' Confederation) issued an announcement for a nationwide strike, calling on federations, primary unions and workers to fight for the success of the mobilization. On Friday, January 31, students and teachers took to the streets to protest the tragedy in Tempi in more than 196 cities in Greece. In the center of Athens, the crowd far exceeded five thousand, while the Greek Police made 27 arrests. In particular, the Athens Student Coordinating Committee called on middle and high school students from all over the country to participate en masse in Friday's rallies both in the Propylaea and in the central squares of major cities in the country. The announcement stated the following: “We continue! As long as you deprive us of oxygen, our struggle will give us breath for life. As long as you lie, we will fight for truth and justice. The crime in Tempi will not be covered up. Either with profits or with life.” The surge of protest has been provoked not only by the two-year anniversary of this tragedy but also by the disclosure of new evidence. A photo taken just two minutes after the fatal collision of the passenger and commercial trains in Tempi was published. In the photo, the second wagon of Intercity 62 appears to have caught fire. Next to it, the train's transformer with the silicone oils remains unaffected by the flames. According to the experts who processed it, it is proof that the explosions were caused by undeclared cargo. As a Greek citizen, I cannot help but be haunted by the thought that this could have been us—the idea that my family, my friends and even myself could have been the ones inside this train. We could have been in Thessaloniki turning the pages of our books, or standing as a family on that train heading to the student residence as our mother held our hands toward a new life. We could have been taking the train to get our graduation certificates, or hurrying home for the holidays with the warmth of home ahead. We could have been those children whose parents never received the message, or never even heard our voices when we didn't arrive that fateful night. Ever since then, every train that leaves the station bears with it a weight of terror, darkness, and silence… Photo credits: John Perivolaris on Flickr