Il faut à tout prix entreprendre les efforts visant à sauver la sphère publique pour s’engager lentement, mais sûrement, vers la reconstruction d'un État pour ensuite reconstruire un pays. < Back Liban, la prochaine « République des ONG » ? Christy Ghosn Selon la Banque Mondiale, « la crise économique libanaise représente l’un des dix, voire des trois effondrements économiques les plus graves que le monde ait connus depuis 1850 » . Entre un PIB du pays qui chute , en passant de 52 milliards de dollars en 2019 à seulement 21,8 milliards de dollars en 2021, et une dépréciation de la livre libanaise de 211% par rapport au dollar, la situation libanaise a laissé une grande partie de la population plongée dans la détresse économique, tandis que loin des ruines, dans les bars animés de Gemmayzeh, ou encore aux soirées chics sur les plages de Batroun, une élite privilégiée continuer de baigner dans l’opulence. Le constat est amer: dix pour cent de la population détient plus de 70% des richesses. Cette situation humanitaire n'est pas causée par une guerre ou une catastrophe naturelle, mais bien par l'indifférence de la caste politique corrompue au pouvoir. Dans ce contexte, les donateurs et les ONG jouent un rôle crucial dans la lutte contre les inégalités socio-économiques et la reconstruction du pays suite à l'inefficacité et la défaillance de l’Etat . Cependant, leur omniprésence soulève des questions fondamentales: La délégation totale de la reconstruction libanaise aux ONG constitue-t-elle un scénario viable? Les ONG devraient-elle réellement écarter la classe politique libanaise? Le Liban devrait-il basculer vers une « République des ONG » afin de lutter contre sa crise et l’aggravation de ses inégalités? Des inégalités socio-économiques persistantes… Avec un indice Gini de 50.7 en 2017, le pays se classe parmi les plus inégalitaires au monde en termes de répartition de la richesse ; des inégalités renforcées notamment depuis la crise économique. Ces inégalités s’observent dans de multiples secteurs. Par exemple, la perte de revenus a fortement affecté l’accès à une éducation de qualité et a ainsi anéanti la capacité de nomb reux parents à envoyer leurs enfants dans les écoles de leur choix, en particulier privées. Résultat: les inscriptions dans les écoles publiques sont passées d’environ 30% à 47% à l’échelle nationale en 2018-2019 . Or, la qualité de l’enseignement public est extrêmement faible et les écoles publiques sont au bord de l'effondrement. En 2020, moins de deux pour cent du PIB du pays a été consacré à l’éducation, alors que le minimum recommandé est de quatre à six pour cent. Le cas de l'éducation n’est qu’un ca s parmi tant d’autres; il en est de même pour le secteur de la santé par exemple. Environ 44 % de la population libanaise ne dispose d’aucune forme d’assurance maladie. Des ONG efficaces pour pallier à la défaillance de l’Etat Classé en 2023 au 149e rang sur les 180 pays étudiés par l'indice de perception de la corruption de Transparency International , le Liban a non seulement perdu la confiance de ses citoyens mais aussi celle des bailleurs de fonds inte rnationaux. Comment accorder la reconstruction du Liban à un Etat corrompu, qui profiterait de cette reconstruction pour s’enrichir davantage? Pire encore, comment l’Etat ferait-il pour mener cette reconstruction alors qu’il ne dispose même pas des fonds nécessaires et crou le sous une dette publique qui représentait 181% du PIB en 2021 et 280% du PIB en 2022? L’Etat libanais s’effondre ainsi progressivement…Or, qu'elles soient internationales ou loca les, les ONG sont les seules à intervenir et tenir à bout de bras le pays, noyé dans une crise économique et sociale. Après l’explosion du port de Beyrouth notamment, elles ont joué les tout premiers rôles alors que l’Etat était aux abonnés absents. En effet, les ONG sont souvent obligées de combler les lacunes du secteur public: c’est le cas de Rebirth Beirut, qui, en allumant 105 rues, neuf avenues, quatre places, et deux escaliers, ainsi qu'en rétablissant les feux tricolores , a redonné vie aux quartiers de la capitale libanaise après plusieurs années d'obscurité, et a apporté une solution concrète à un problème crucial. Une solution insuffisante Même si les ONG semblent efficaces pour pallier aux défaillances de l’Etat, force est de constater que leurs actions posent des questions en termes de légitimité et de transparence. En effet, le paysage des ONG au Liban est hétérogène, de nombreuses associations étant directement ou indirectement affiliées à des partis politiques et/ou à des communautés religieuses. Une étude du Beirut Urban Lab a examiné les cas de 135 acteurs locaux et internationaux qui ont participé aux efforts de secours post-explosion. Résultat: 39% d’entre eux ont des affiliations religieuses et/ou politiques, tandis que les 61% restants se définissent comme indépendants. Ces types d’organisations sont ainsi susceptibles de baser la distribution de l’aide sur certains profils au lieu de proposer une aide inclusive. Il est par ailleurs difficile d'étudier la manière dont les dons reçus sont utilisés par les ONG suite au secret bancaire qui empêche toute autorité de vérifier les comptes d'une association. Plus inquiétant encore pour l’avenir: en juin 2021, l’agence de presse Reuters a révélé que sur 1,5 milliard de dollars injectés dans l’humanitaire au Liban en 2020, au moins 250 millions avaient été « avalés » par les banques du pays. Cette disparition est attribuée à la conversion des dollars en livres libanaises par les établissements bancair es, qui auraient appliqué un taux de change peu avantageux par rapport au taux du marché noir, constituant ainsi une perte significative de ressources pour l'aide humanitaire. Dans ce contexte, il est alors clair que le Liban ne peut pas se reposer uniquement sur les ONG pour sa reconstruction. Un partenariat nécessaire entre les ONG et l’Etat libanais Il en découle que l’aide, essentielle des ONG, n'est efficace qu’à court terme. Il s'agit alors de trouver des solutions à moyen et long terme. En effet, à court terme, recevoir l’aide des ONG dans le cadre d’un mécanisme transparent et correctement contrôlé semble être le seul moyen d’apporter une réponse relativement rapide au bénéfice des plus précaires. Cependant, pour la reconstruction et le relèvement à moyen et long terme, il serait nécessaire d'impliquer le gouvernement libanais et d’adopter un cadre de partenariat qui rassemble les différents acteurs pour la création d’un système solide et pérenne. Une quasi-saturation d'ONG au Liban pourrait s'avérer contre-productive car elle dédouane l'État de toutes ses responsabilités. Cette délégation totale des ONG pourrait ainsi saper toute véritable possibilité d'émergence de collectifs politiques capables de prendre leurs affaires en main. Il faut à tout prix entreprendre les efforts visant à sauver la sphère publique pour s’engager lentement, mais sûrement, vers la reconstruction d'un État pour ensuite reconstruire un pays.

To my fellow 2As, I suggest we have the most care free, amazing, and crazy semester yet. To the 1As, I encourage you to take a look at the spirit and culture of this town passed down by many before us, to keep the MENA soul of this student body alive, and to get ready for a party filled semester. < Back Three Down, One to Go: The 2A’s Fear the End of Their Time in Menton By Lilinaz Hakimi January 30, 2022 When 1As ask, “how was it coming back and being a 2A?” The answer differs from one Mentonese SciencesPiste to another. Although we all share a common identity as members of the same tiny campus family, we also have different personal relationships and experiences. Despite this, we all adjust one way or another. The transition from 1A to 2A, from freshman to senior, is so stark and comes as a quick hit that no one can truly prepare for. But this is not the only transition we endured from 1A to 2A. From Zoom to in-person classes, from no association events to three to four a week, and from nothing but house parties to clubbing in Nice and Monaco on the weekends, we are learning alongside 1As, much like our 2As were learning alongside us during the age of COVID. Now a semester has gone by, and as the resilient, overly opinionated, and loud political science students we are, we have adapted and enjoyed some of these changes. Looking back at our third semester in Menton, I would like to bring to light different assessments from 2As I heard throughout the semester, and explore what it may be like to head into our final semester in this beautiful and surreal town. Coming to Menton, we knew we were on borrowed time. Unlike the four years we get in high school, these two years end with the departure of all our peers from this small town. People come and go, but experiences seem forged in one as we pace our tiny town with views that, as many have said before, make us feel like we are on a movie set. Upon entering their second year, some students struggled with the overwhelming nature of running the show. Some contended with the departure of their own 2As. Others tried hard to remind themselves not to take these views for granted. Many others loved and cherished this semester, for the reunions, the in-person education, and, of course, the parties. In the end, I think most would agree that it flew by. What is more worrying is the speed with which this following semester will come and go. It is a common fact that when you are having fun, time escapes you. So now, we are all settled into our new roles, our town in this new light, and have made bonds with our new arrivals. Like 2A Markus Vaher, I hope we all are ready to “have life coursing through our veins for the next half a year.” And as it does, let us take moments to take it all in as each day goes by. This semester, 2As took on associations fearlessly and led in positions they were not trained for. They struggled with what the identity of the Ummah should be, as some traditions were never truly passed down. We dealt with our administration as it attempted to make this transition to having students and events on site. It was all a mess, but one that we endured together through the partying, clubbing, beach meetups, and brunches. A semester of rebuilding our identity on a personal level or exploring new (and old) friendships. Now that we have adapted and the overwhelming nature of becoming a 2A day has subsided, we are left with these beautiful remaining months together. Menton has been the most eye opening and amazing home for the past year and half. Many have their reservations about this place. But I will say I am sure we all have a small dread in our hearts to leave the friends we love so dearly, the community that embraces everyone’s culture so strongly, and a town so beautiful our eyes sometimes need to adjust. So, to my fellow 2As, I suggest we have the most care free, amazing, and crazy semester yet. To the 1As, I encourage you to take a look at the spirit and culture of this town passed down by many before us, to keep the MENA soul of this student body alive, and to get ready for a party filled semester. Below I have written an ode to this town. I hope it sits well with you as we take on one final go in this remarkable reality, we get to call the final semester at this university. And that is enough of me overly romanticizing this little town on the Riviera. An ode to 06500: What defines something as heaven? Is a utopia something we build or live in? What luck have we to come upon the sea? To see a bell tower ring so randomly? Who am I to have such luck? To meet students from every nook and muck? Ummah embraces its new arrivals Year in and year out with its disciples Memories made in rocky beaches and Sablettes sands With an administration that makes us rip our hair into our hands Not enough time to soak up all the perfect imperfections And all the time to criticize and rebuild our affections So 2As hearts quack as we approach the end Knowing our memories will always extend A smile on our faces, a bond we will keep Mentonese know this loss will make us weep From cold to warm, from Jan to May Let's put away the drama, worry and dismay To have a blast every damn day Singing our songs and dancing away Grab your favorite ghalibaya And scream proudly, Mentoniya Mentoniya

Society that carries out capital punishment must think very carefully about the policy’s potential consequences. Taking an innocent person’s life is a grave enough reason to put someone to death, but shouldn’t there be accountability for those who sentence innocent people to the death penalty? < Back Execution in Missouri and the Death Penalty Ema Nevřelová October 31, 2024 My mother grew up in communist Czechoslovakia. She would often tell me the story of her first official act of free will. During the first months of 1990, Amnesty International was collecting signatures to petition for the abolition of the death penalty in the former Czechoslovakia and, at the age of 18, my mother signed it. For my mother, freedom lies in the ability to act and to stand up for what you believe in. In her view, the value of a person’s life is too high to risk the possibility of executing someone innocent—she would feel partially complicit if she did not protest. Three months later, in May 1990, former Czechoslovak President Václav Havel pressured the government and the death penalty was abolished. U.S. citizens have not unilaterally pushed the abolishment of the death penalty; support for capital punishment has historically fluctuated. A recent Gallup poll demonstrated that only 53% of Americans favor the death penalty. In Gallup’s research from 2022, there is an even greater disparity between Democrat and Republican party members: 35% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans were in favor of the death penalty. Unsurprisingly, typically “red” states such as Texas, South Carolina, Alabama, Idaho and many more have the death penalty, although it is not exclusive to states supporting Republicans. Meanwhile, California, a “Blue” state, still has not abolished it. But the current Governor of California, Gavin Newsom has put a hold on executions. There is no federal mandate on the capital punishment, meaning that the employment of the death penalty in the U.S. is determined at the state level. The State Attorney General has the final say, and if a prisoner wants to appeal outside of state, their only option is the U.S. Supreme Court of Justice—which does not review many death penalty cases. The death penalty also is also influenced by the forces at the federal level; it became infamous during Donald Trump’s presidency, during which a total of 13 executions were carried out—the highest number since 1896. However, apart from Trump’s presidency the federal death penalty is rarely carried out. The Gallup research helps to step out of the narrative that the supporters of the death penalty have some inherent characteristics or evil traits. While there is a trend among different political parties, there is no consistent definition of a person favoring the death penalty. However, the indisputable fact of procedural and systematic issues make scrutiny over the death penalty all the more important, especially given the irreversibility in case of wrongful conviction. Recent news about executions of Travis Mullis, Emmanuel Littlejohn, Alan Miller, Freddie Owens and Marcellus “Khalifah” Williams in the span of a week brought such discussions to the forefront of the U.S. social media discourse. Being Czech, I was surprised that 5 executions in one week are in fact not the everyday reality of the U.S., as it last happened in 2003. The execution of Marcellus “Khalifah” Williams was publicly opposed, as some people believed him to be innocent in the murder of Felicia Gayle, for which he was convicted. His case highlights two key issues with the death penalty: the closure myth and systemic racism. The closure myth is a commonly held belief that by executing the murderer, the family of the victim will get a closure. Surely, some families do, however the process of a murderer receiving a death sentence is lengthy and there is a lack of mental health and financial support. Often, it leaves the families of the victims struggling even after the execution, delaying the process of closure. In this case, Governor of Missouri Michael L. Parson, who appealed on certainty, indirectly used the closure myth by stating : “Withdrawing the order allows the process to proceed within the judicial system, and, once the due process of law has been exhausted, everyone will receive certainty.” Given the external factors influencing the family (financial and health issues) it is not surprising that a study by Eaton and Christensen from 2014 concluded that co-victims (family members of the victim) “expressed their views on closure in various ways’’ and those “who did mention closure were evenly divided on whether they felt the execution provided closure or not.’’ This deconstructs the narrative that execution is the only way to provide closure for co-victims and while it can put their minds to rest there are more usually aspects preventing them from doing so. However, the family of Felicia Gayle, the murder victim, approved , together with the court, for Williams to enter an Alford plea , a plea where a defendant can maintain innocence while accepting a plea bargain and allowing Williams to be re-sentenced to life in prison. However, the state attorney general’s office opposed and blocked the decision by appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court. Presumably, when it comes to closure and justice for the family, it is not the family who decides, but rather the system does it for them without even taking the family’s position into account. The second issue arising during Williams’ process of appealing the death penalty was the selection of a jury. In an emergency appeal made to the U.S. Supreme Court before the execution of Williams, his attorney declared : “Of the seven Black venirepersons (out of 131 in total), the trial prosecutor [St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office] used peremptory strikes against six of them. His reasoning for excluding one of those venirepersons, Venireperson 64, was that he “reminded” him of Mr. Williams. He thought the men looked similar and that boy had ‘piercing eyes’ (App. 89a).” Later, the Supreme Court of Missouri found this reasoning to be race-neutral. A parallel can be drawn between the reasoning given by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office of “piercing eyes”and of some white people complimenting black women’s hair while touching them without consent. On the surface it may seem innocent and “race-neutral,” but upon the addition of astriking imbalance of power, it becomes awfully clear that there are not many things in life that are race, gender or otherwise neutral . The selection process of jury pools is often based on registered voter lists or on driving licence holders, although other factors may apply. There is, however, no obligation to adapt mechanisms to achieve an equal representation of the community that the jury represents. Looking at the American justice system and racism in general, a 1990 study on Death Penalty Sentencing concluded that a “synthesis of the 28 studies shows a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty […].” Furthermore, this study suggests that if a victim is white, the likelihood of the defendant receiving the death penalty is higher. This is disturbing on several levels including the fact that it implies the lives of Black people have lesser value when it comes to the severity of the penalty. The Innocence database is run by the Death Penalty Information Center, which records cases of people who have been sentenced to death but have been exonerated before the execution. Out of the 200 recorded cases, 108 wrongfully convicted people were Black, 21 were either Native Americans, Alaska Natives, Latinos or Asians. But these people are far away from being just numbers. This becomes evident in the case of Timothy Howard and Gary James, who spent 26 years in prison for bank robbery and murder as they were convicted in 1976 and freed only in 2003. On average, there is at least one person wrongfully convicted every year. It is true that the list of wrongful convictions ends in 2014, but it would be naïve to expect that it is because judges suddenly became infallible from then on. The Innocent database does not include people who have already been executed but could potentially be innocent. The Death Penalty Information Center provides a list of people who were executed and are now believed to be innocent, although according to the Center: “Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead.” These statistics and the real human beings behind them tell heart-wrenching stories of a system failure that is irreparable. Even if we look at the cases of people who have been convicted because they were truly guilty, there are still aspects to the death penalty that make it morally questionable. Firstly, in the U.S., it is illegal to sentence a person with intellectual disabilities to death, yet mental illness is not included even though the American Bar Association states the following: “In short, the ABA finds that individuals with severe mental illnesses or disabilities present at the time of the crime should not be subject to capital punishment.” This is an unsurprising reflection of how U.S. society still views mental health. Mental health issues are weaponized when convenient—in the U.S. context, young school shooters are often portrayed as anomalies to a perfectly functioning system of gun control, without considering or acknowledging the dire situation of mental health struggles among young people. There is also this narrow-minded approach leading some to believe that mental illness is only used as an excuse, where in reality living with mental illness can be challenging to a level that people who have never experienced it can hardly imagine. The second problem is with the execution itself, as the preferred method of execution in the U.S. is death by lethal injection. There are recorded instances where the needle was administered incorrectly or the person executed was struggling to breath for tens of minutes to an hour before dying. Coming from the Czech Republic, a country which abolished capital punishment almost 35 years ago, the faulty procedures seem as vengeance, close to torture. Should society’s goal be to follow Hammurabi’s law “eye for an eye,” or should we let murderers sit with the horrors of their actions while not risking an execution of innocent people? Williams’s case should be a reminder that the death penalty is not a punishment standing on its own, rather there are external factors such as racism, lack of focus on mental health and the potential for false conviction. Society that carries out capital punishment must think very carefully about the policy’s potential consequences. Taking an innocent person’s life is a grave enough reason to put someone to death, but shouldn’t there be accountability for those who sentence innocent people to the death penalty? The answer is not simple and even if the U.S. were to abolish capital punishment, it does not put an end to the debate about it. Circling back to the example of the Czech Republic, although capital punishment has been abolished, we have only recently (in 2023) gotten to a point where the percentage of people opposing capital punishment is higher than that of its supporters. Yet, support for the death penalty is at 42 % and had we not had the constellation in which the capital punishment was abolished, Czech people might have had to face the same moral dilemma the Americans are facing today. And while my mother does live in a society without capital punishment and does not have to battle her conscience, the polarization on the topic has not vanished.

It is no secret that the OGC Nice vs. Maccabi Tel Aviv football match caused considerable controversy on our campus and in the region, but how did a solidarity protest lead to threats of halting the subsidized cafeteria project in Menton? < Back From Protesting a Match to Antisemitism Accusations: How Did a Student Initiative Cause Such Regional Controversy? By Ghazal Khalife September 30, 2022 Editor’s note: Objectivity is of paramount importance to The Menton Times. As such, the September 2022 issue of the publication features a variety of stances that students took amid the controversial Integration Week boycott. It is no secret that the OGC Nice vs. Maccabi Tel Aviv football match caused considerable controversy on our campus and in the region , but how did a solidarity protest lead to threats of halting the subsidized cafeteria project in Menton? This issue started when the Bureau des Élèves announced that OGC Nice would play against Maccabi Tel Aviv, the football match scheduled during Integration Week. The bureau clearly stated that the organization of this sporting event does not reflect a political stand, highlighting the student organization’s “apolitical” nature. The bureau endorsed “any (student) association wishing to express an opinion.” Sciences Palestine immediately responded with a call to boycott the match and began organizing a protest in solidarity with the Palestinian people. Sciences Palestine’s prompt call to action sparked a heated debate on the “Rising 1As” group chat. Many Sciences Pistes supported the protest, while others dismissed it as unjustified and inappropriate. However, the boycott was warranted. The match was a mere few weeks after the Israeli state bombed Gaza, killing 49 Palestinians and injuring 80, among them children and students. When asked why she wanted to organize the protest, the Co-president of Sciences Palestine, who asked to remain anonymous, responded: “Three weeks after Israeli bombardments ravaged Gaza once again, leaving its population on the brink of total despair, I just did not think it was right for people to attend a match where a team from the country that orchestrated the attacks was playing without knowing at all what was going on. Our plan was not to make attendees accountable or condemn the Israeli team... We did not want people to forget the atrocities that are being committed by the command of the state where the football team belonged. We wanted to take this opportunity to raise awareness and educate people about a situation that needs our urgent attention.” In light of our campus’s impressive diversity , it is no surprise that this protest elicited a wide range of reactions ranging from enthusiasm to harsh criticism. The dividing issue was whether a football match could be considered an apolitical event. Because Maccabi Tel Aviv was founded in 1906, before the establishment of the Israeli state, many argued that the football club has no formal ties to the nation. However, the aforementioned reason is insufficient to fully isolate the football team from Israel’s regime and depoliticize it, especially considering that it has strong historical and political links to the mainstream Zionist movement. Maccabi athletic organization was founded in Eastern Europe by Zionists before the first Jewish settlements were established in Palestine. However, in modern-day Israel, the Maccabi football team is still politicized because it has the power to evoke strong nationalist and regional sentiments. Regardless of whether one is critical of Israel’s actions, demonstrating the match may not have been an effective means of showing solidarity with Palestine. The protest could easily be misunderstood as condemning the attendees and the players on both teams or associating them with a preconceived political stance. This misconception became widespread when Nice’s mayor, Christian Estrosi, accused the organizers of the protest of antisemitism. Mr. Estrosi called for the prohibition of this protest claiming in a tweet that “anti-zionism often hides antisemitism.” Contrary to what Mr. Estrosi believes, anti-Zionism does not have to coincide with antisemitism; protesting a Zionist state’s actions does not mean protesting against the Jewish people. Antisemitism is an issue of utmost significance, and the term should not be thrown around to slander someone. None of the comments made by the organizer implied antisemitic sentiment but rather a condemnation of the Israeli state’s aggressive policies towards a downtrodden people. Comments like this show how polarizing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be and how quickly extreme claims can be made in the face of such a complex and sensitive topic. The co-president of Sciences Palestine responded to these accusations, saying: “I think they (accusations of antisemitism) are completely unfounded and strategically utilized to discredit any attempt by Palestinian solidarity organizations to expose the truth… I think it is quite clear that the target we are criticizing is a State and, most importantly, a specific and ongoing colonial project.” The backlash against the protest escalated into threats to shut down the project to open a cafeteria on our campus, which is not only an excessive reaction but also a reflection of the limits to freedom of expression and assembly. The protest was, in effect, abandoned, yet the controversy remained, and the hypocrisy behind the mayor’s logic was exposed. How could an apolitical project such as building a cafeteria be used to pressure students to stop a protest? Fortunately, many influential voices in the region still persist in their Palestinian activism. Another protest was declared in partnership with the Association France Palestine Solidrité Saturday, Sept. 3rd, after a relatively recent Amnesty International report (March 2022) explored the various elements of apartheid and human rights violations committed by Israel. This protest emphasized the sincere Palestinian spirit: a spirit of pride, unity and infinite resistance. The football match-protest controversy proved to be expository of regional representatives’ divisive and antagonizing tone. On a more positive note, it also highlighted the robust spirit of debate in our SciencesPo campus and the vibrant engagement in social and political affairs in the French Riviera.

Les Etats-Unis présentés comme terre mère de la démocratie et du libéralisme politique et économique sont aussi un état-continent appliquant toujours la peine de mort sur leur sol. < Back L'exécution de Kenneth Smith: une rupture dans l'application de la peine de mort aux Etats-Unis By Salomé Greffier Les Etats-Unis présentés comme terre mère de la démocratie et du libéralisme politique et économique sont aussi un état-continent appliquant toujours la peine de mort sur leur sol. Un pays, considéré comme la première puissance mondiale, qui laisse en effet vingt deux de ces états fédéraux condamner des criminels à la peine capitale. Un paradoxe soulevant des questions socio-politiques qui, malgré les interpellations, ne semblent guère faire agir la communauté internationale. Alors que 1 583 exécutions ont été répertoriées depuis 1977 sur l’ensemble du territoire, le 25 janvier dernier marque un tournant dans l’application de la peine de mort sur le sol étasunien. L’Alabama, état défenseur de la mise en vigueur de cette sentence, exécute Kenneth Smith par inhalation d’azote. Ce meurtrier âgé de 58 ans avait été condamné par le juge en charge de l’affaire à la peine capitale pour avoir commis le meurtre commandité d’Elizabeth Sennett en mars 1988. Kenneth Smith avait été payé par le mari de la victime, Charles Sennett Sr., pasteur et propriétaire du criminel, pour perpétrer l’assassinat. Suite à une tentative avortée d’application de sa peine, en novembre 2022, le condamné s’est vu imposer une exécution par une méthode non testée auparavant: l’hypoxie à l’azote. La Cour suprême avait en outre autorisé le procédé malgré l’objection de ses trois juges libéraux et les inquiétudes des opposants à la peine de mort, estimant que cette méthode pourrait potentiellement infliger des souffrances au condamné. Le procureur général de l’Alabama aurait, quant à lui, affirmé que l’azote gazeux “provoquerait une perte de conscience en quelques secondes et causerait la mort en quelques minutes”, rapporte l’agence Associated Press. Pourtant, la durée de l’exécution semble avoir donné raison aux préoccupations des libéraux et activistes luttant contre la peine de mort. Selon des témoins, la pénitence aurait en effet duré vingt deux minutes, entre le moment où le masque fut apposé sur la figure de Kenneth Smith et la déclaration de sa mort. Un délai également dénoncé par le conseiller spirituel du condamné, Jeff Hood, interrogé par la chaîne de télévision CNN. Il confie en ce sens qu’il n’avait jamais assisté à une telle exécution et qu’elle s’élèverait, d’après lui, au rang de la torture. (“I have never, ever seen anything like that [...] That was torture”) Par conséquent, l’essai de cette nouvelle méthode d’exécution, consistant à étouffer la personne à l’aide d’un gaz, soulève des questions morales et éthiques au delà du politique. Le problème dans ce cas n’est plus de savoir si la personne doit mourir pour le crime qu’elle a commis mais si celle-ci mérite d’être tuée en souffrant. L’histoire de la peine de mort aux Etats-Unis est à ce sens parsemée de condamnations ayant intenté à l’intégrité physique du condamné à cause d’aléas techniques. L’exemple de l’exécution de William Kemmler à la chaise électrique en août 1890 demeure dès lors significatif. Le condamné, après s’être vu infliger près de vingt secondes de courant électrique haute tension, perdit seulement connaissance, forçant les gardiens à réitérer l’opération malgré la souffrance de William Kemmler. Il en va de même pour toutes les innovations de techniques de mise à mort telles que la chambre à gaz ou l’injection létale. Chacune d’entre elles a été expérimentée sur un humain, un cobaye, au mépris du respect de la dignité et de l’intégrité humaine. Ainsi, la technique développée par l’Alabama semble nier les principes fondamentaux qui régissent le droit international relatif aux prisonniers. Volker Turk, le haut commissaire des Nations Unies aux droits de l’homme s’est alors emparé de la controverse en déclarant que l’étouffement par azote gazeux pourrait s’apparenter à de la torture ou à un traitement cruel et dégradant ( “I deeply regret the execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith in Alabama despite serious concerns this novel and untested method of suffocation by nitrogen gas may amount to torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”) Malgré cette dénonciation, il sera intéressant de se pencher sur les actions et condamnations possibles envers l’Etat de l’Alabama ou les Etats-Unis en général, de la part de la communauté internationale. Aux portes du couloir de la mort, les derniers mots prononcés par Kenneth Smith résument finalement tout l’enjeu soulevé par sa condamnation et méritent réflexion : “Tonight, Alabama caused humanity to take a step backward.” ( “Ce soir, l’Alabama a fait reculer l’humanité”).

“In each newspaper, you encounter accounts of incredible queerness. For our writers these occurrences are fantastical, and Their Lords do not even want to take them into consideration, whilst they are the reality in itself, because they consist of random events. Who would want to observe, to elucidate and to register them? Events as such are consumed continuously, day by day, and are not exceptions. All of the reality passes us incessantly.” < Back News: Informative or Desensitizing? Amer El Ibrahim February 28, 2025 News. They are everywhere. Opening up our phones, news inundates us immediately. Watching the TV has become a sine qua non means to propagate news intensely, perpetually, with no rest or response. Relatives and loved ones get together in this ridiculous and quite tragic game, filling the void of the silences one always encounters in day-to-day inter-human relationships with some novelty that has happened somewhere: “Have you heard that…?” One really ought to wonder whether these reported occurrences should actually be disseminated or not and whether their spread affects our means to reason and feel in a positive or negative manner. News, as in the reported occurrences distributed by newspapers, social media, TV and so forth, could be well regarded as a means to a greater end. After all, one can know through trusted sources about the atrocities of the Israelis in Gaza, the genocides in Myanmar, the fall of the Boeing plane in South Korea, the casualties and evolution of the war in Ukraine, and the list goes on endlessly. On a more microcosmic level, one is deemed to find out about the local murderer/rapist/pedophile of the country or region one lives in, along with a thorough exploration of their psyche by verified “experts”. Indeed, this showcase of evil, decay, misery, death and injustice, may alight in some the desire to fight against this aesthetic of ugliness type of spectacle (graced by Baudelaire). And on a grander level, it is exactly this news that indirectly creates associations and NGOs that fight the darkness of this world—a rare case of nobility being born out of despair and suffering. However, to my naked eye, this category of noble warriors is or seems an outright minority. For the rest of us mortals, negative news provides a blessed opportunity for morbid entertainment. One feels a type of fear and trembling when one hears about a terrible train accident near one’s city, but, simultaneously, one also feels a certain delight that they were not on that train, that they survived and the others did not. Moreover, the majority of news conveys tragic events, not because of higher ideals but because that is what the public demands . The negativity bias is not an appendage of the pessimist, but a real phenomenon that affects all of us. We are, indeed, much more moved by death rather than the blooming of a flower. Adding to this propensity for negativity which is very much indulged by the rule of supply and demand, the pervasiveness of news in our lives not only entertains us but desensitizes us to the spectacle that life offers us daily. How could one be moved intrinsically by the bleak and silent suffering of the poor pensioner, the next-corner beggar, the lone mother or the common orphan in times when we hear constantly about the piles of corpses gathered in Palestine and Ukraine, the deaths of thousands in floods and earthquakes and the genocides that sporadically occur in Africa or Asia? This is the perfect recipe for bleakness through over-shadowing events. So much death and suffering, yet one remains completely detached from this debacle. Then the following question must be asked: How does one benefit from being a third-party witness to such atrocities? The grandiosity of all these major events that usually happen somewhere far away adds another dimension: magical realism. Through their distance from us, they become almost fabulous events that seem to be spurned out of the fantasy of an imaginative child rather than from the outside reality. Such events are the reality in all of its randomness, cruelty and fugitive play, not a dream-like theater of forces outside of our grasp. This prevalence of negative news has developed and enhanced a spiritual organ or mechanism with which we have already been endowed. This organ acts to rebut such events from our consciousness, which, by the rule of chance and luck, could have regarded us in their course, but which have not. Thus, to achieve this, this organ places such events in the land of the fabulous and magical, even though they might seem to the helpless reason as real as they can get. The heart, as Pascal would say, has a completely different reasoning. This organ also allows a steady march through life, as it diminishes the effect the surrounding human suffering has on us. It is as if one is gently tased, but no more than what someone with an auditive prosthesis could hear. This probl é matique posed by news has been identified since its beginnings almost 200 years ago, by writers such as Dostoyevski or Flaubert. A quote by the former is edifying in this sense: “In each newspaper, you encounter accounts of incredible queerness. For our writers these occurrences are fantastical, and Their Lords do not even want to take them into consideration, whilst they are the reality in itself, because they consist of random events. Who would want to observe, to elucidate and to register them? Events as such are consumed continuously, day by day, and are not exceptions. All of the reality passes us incessantly.” On an ending note, there is no clear path to take regarding news. Out of the pendulum of either/or presented above, a middle way seems to prevail: moderation in the consumption of news. Elimination is impossible, while overindulging is mental and sentimental castration. And one more thing: let us see reality through our own eyes and in itself (as much as one can, thanks Kant!), not through the lens of statistics, assertions or real but miraculous occurrences. Photo credits: Miguel Ángel Arreguin Padilla, 2022

Ayant vécu toute mon enfance en Argentine, je n'avais jamais entendu l'expression « les Américains » pour désigner les ressortissants des Etats-Unis jusqu'à mon arrivée à Sciences Po. < Back Nique l'Amérique (attendez, les États-Unis ou le continent) By Amalia Heide March 30, 2024 Ayant vécu toute mon enfance en Argentine, je n'avais jamais entendu l'expression « les Américains » pour désigner les ressortissants des Etats-Unis jusqu'à mon arrivée à Sciences Po. Je pense que cet usage particulier de l’ethnonyme a été l'un des chocs culturels les plus importants que j'ai vécus en France. Ce qui m'a le plus surpris, cependant, c'est de découvrir que même les professeurs et les universitaires se réfèrent aux États-Unis en tant qu'« Amérique » et aux États-uniens en tant qu'« américains ». Cette expérience, si troublante et étrangère à mes oreilles, m'a amené à réfléchir profondément à l'importance des nomenclatures dans les identités collectives. Je précise que je ne cherche pas, dans cet article, à porter un jugement de valeur sur les citoyens états-uniens qui utilisent le terme « américain » pour désigner leur identité nationale. Je comprends qu'il s'agit d'une coutume, d'un processus d'apprentissage social qui est souvent dénué de toute malveillance à l'égard des habitants du continent. Au contraire, mon intention est d'offrir une perspective alternative à l'approche prédominante sur les campus en explorant la compréhension de ce phénomène d'attribution d'identité. Pour réfléchir à cette question, je trouve intéressant de commencer par comprendre l'importance des mots. Comme le dit Locke, « les mots sont les signes des idées ». Les idées sont des représentations mentales qui dépendent dans une certaine mesure de la subjectivité de l'individu. Par conséquent, les mots sont les symboles de notre subjectivité. En ce sens, les mots ne DESIGNENT pas de manière neutre mais SIGNIFIENT. L'exemple de l'utilisation des ethnonymes « Palestine » et « Israël » est illustratif. Il ne s'agit pas de noms propres neutres, bien qu'ils désignent parfois la même zone géographique. Leurs significations diffèrent, impliquant des tensions socio-économiques et politiques. Dans ce cas, les tensions sont évidentes, je n'ai pas besoin de les expliciter. Elles ne sont pas aussi évidentes dans le cas qui nous intéresse ici : Qu'implique l'utilisation de l'ethnonyme "Amérique" pour désigner l'État-nation des États-Unis d'Amérique ? Tout d'abord, le double usage du mot "américain" pour désigner les habitants d'un État et les habitants d'un continent pose des problèmes concernant l'identification : à laquelle des deux entités faisons-nous référence dans son utilisation ? Le mot perd ainsi sa fonction principale de désignation et de repérage. C'est pourquoi la Real Academia Española, l'équivalent de l'Académie française, préconise d' « éviter l'emploi d'Américain pour désigner exclusivement les habitants des États-Unis, emploi abusif (...) Il ne faut pas oublier que l'Amérique est le nom du continent tout entier, et que tous ceux qui y vivent sont des Américains . » Cependant, cette confusion entre l'État-nation et le continent ne peut être interprétée UNIQUEMENT comme la conséquence d'un abus de langage. La langue, outil fondamental d'expression et de communication des idées, reflète les perceptions et les conceptions qu'une société a d'elle-même et de sa relation au monde qui l'entoure. Quelle est la relation entre les Etats-Unis et le continent en termes d'identité ? La création de l'État-nation implique la définition d'un territoire administratif fixe. Depuis la déclaration d'indépendance, l'aire géographique des États-Unis d'Amérique s'est progressivement étendue sur un demi-siècle. Cet prolongation de la frontière vers l'ouest est une première manifestation de ce que les treize premières colonies envisageaient pour les États-Unis : un État expansionniste ayant pour but « d'accroître sa domination économique et politique dans un autre espace géographique » (définition du terme "expansionnisme"). C'est une première indication du rapport des Étasuniens au continent américain : en réalité, il n'y avait pas de démarcation nette, permanente et définie entre les deux entités, puisque les frontières n'étaient pas figées et la volonté politique était qu'elles ne soient pas immuables dès sa fondation. De même, le colonialisme d'outre-mer initié par les États-Unis confirme et approfondit cette ligne de distinction opaque entre l' « Amérique » en tant que continent et en tant qu'État-nation. En effet, après la guerre avec l'Espagne sur le territoire cubain en 1898, les États-Unis ont non seulement annexé les colonies espagnoles des Philippines, de Porto Rico et de Guam, mais aussi les territoires non espagnols d'Hawaï et des Samoa américaines. En outre, nous pouvons observer sur la deuxième carte comment les États-Unis sont intervenus dans les autres pays souverains du continent américain au cours du 20e siècle. Si l'expansion directe par l'annexion de territoires est une forme évidente d'expansionnisme, l'interventionnisme est une stratégie plus subtile mais tout aussi efficace pour étendre la portée de l’influence de l'Etat-nation états-unien. Ayant une politique expansionniste depuis leur fondation, « les États-Unis », « l'Union », « la République » étaient des noms propres qui désignaient mais n'exprimaient pas l'essence de la perception de soi et de la perception extérieure de l'identité nationale des " gringos ". Ainsi, l' « Amérique » est un concept linguistique qui agit comme un miroir de cette ambiguïté conceptuelle, contribuant à la construction d'une identité nationale qui se présente comme la représentation même d'une région géographique entière. Dans ce contexte, la doctrine Monroe et son slogan « l'Amérique aux Américains » peuvent être interprétés comme « le continent aux États-Unis. » Je ne souhaiterais pas que mon propos soit mal compris : je ne rejette pas entièrement les autres raisons historiques pour lesquelles les Étasuniens se désignent eux-mêmes comme des «Américains». En effet, cette utilisation du terme a été introduite par les Britanniques pendant la guerre d'indépendance. Petite réflexion curieuse : ironiquement, l'attribution de l'ethnonyme "américain" aux treize premières colonies des États-Unis peut être attribuée au colonialisme. Cependant, si l'ethnonyme était courant depuis l'indépendance en 1776 pour désigner l'identité nationale des Etats-Unis auprès de la société civile, il n'était pas employé de manière systématique. Le problème est de comprendre que la systématisation de cet usage répond à une instrumentalisation politique. En effet, le premier président à prendre ses fonctions après la guerre hispano-américaine fut Teddy Roosevelt. Impérialiste convaincu, il systématise l'usage de " America " avec des slogans tels que " God Bless America ". Le slogan " Make America Great Again ", au 21e siècle, suit la même dynamique. En tant qu'étudiants en sciences politiques, nous savons qu'un slogan ou la formalisation d'un terme sont rarement le fruit du hasard. Ils répondent à un projet politico-identitaire, et dans ce cas, cela est un synonyme d’comme nous l'avons déjà vu, un projet impérialiste. En guise de conclusion, je dois admettre que l'instrumentalisation de l'ethnonyme "Amérique" était une idée brillante. Cette stratégie constitue aujourd'hui un exemple de soft power . Pourquoi dis-je cela ? L' « Amérique » joue un rôle crucial dans la perception des États-Unis par les populations situées en dehors des Amériques. Il y a une fusion plus ou moins volontaire de ces deux termes qui aboutit à l'amplification de l'image des États-Unis et, en même temps, à l'invisibilisation ou à l'occultation d'une identité collective régionale, continentale et/ou nationale. Pour illustrer mon propos, nous pouvons nous tourner vers le continent européen comme un parallèle utile. Imaginons que les Allemands se nomment eux-mêmes « Européens ». Cela signifie que lorsque l'on dit « les Européens », on peut faire référence à la fois aux habitants du continent dans son ensemble et exclusivement à la nationalité allemande. Par exemple, si quelqu'un dit « les Européens ont subi un tremblement de terre », comment savoir de qui on parle ? De même, lorsque nous entendons « nouvelles d'Europe », s'agit-il d'événements survenus dans un pays particulier ou dans la région en général ? En outre, il est clair qu'indirectement, notre esprit aura tendance à associer l'« Europe » d'abord à l'Allemagne plutôt qu'aux 50 autres États souverains du continent. Il peut en résulter une amplification de l'importance de l'Allemagne et une diminution de la pertinence des 50 autres États. Dans les relations internationales, cette dimension identitaire et la représentation qu'elle implique peuvent peser lourd dans l'équilibre des forces. Cela plairait-il aux français par exemple que les Allemands s'approprient exclusivement le terme “européen” ? Ne se sentiraient-ils pas exclus si la plupart des personnes non-françaises associaient les Européens exclusivement aux Allemands ? Ici, je n'ai donné l'exemple de l’Allemagne, un État membre de l'UE. Cependant, l'Union européenne a tendance à s'approprier du terme ‘européen’ souvent au détriment des États qui n'en sont pas membres, ce qui pose également problème. Enfin, tout ce blabla pour expliquer pourquoi il peut être gênant pour un habitant du continent américain d'entendre comment les États-Unis ont triomphé dans leur appropriation de ce gentilé avec tant de connotations et de problèmes politiques, géostratégiques et identitaires. Il est difficile de s'habituer à comprendre comment, en Europe, il est devenu si normalisé d'appeler un Yankee « Américain. » À cela, on pourrait me dire (et on me l'a déjà dit sur ce campus) qu'en tant qu'Argentine, je suis « latino-américaine » et non « américaine ». Je pense qu'il est important de réaliser que, premièrement, le terme "latino-américain" a été introduit par l'Europe. Deuxièmement, le fait d'être latino-américain ne signifie pas que je ne suis pas américaine. Ces deux identités ne s'excluent pas mutuellement. Tout comme un Italien peut être à la fois européen et méditerranéen. Je vous laisse avec un couplet de l'emblématique chanteuse argentine Mercedes Sosa : « L'Amérique attend Et le siècle devient bleu Pampas, rivières et montagnes Libèrent leur propre lumière La copla n'a pas de propriétaire Les motifs ne commandent plus La guitare américaine En se battant, elle a appris à chanter. » -- Chanson pour mon Amérique

Considering the war between Israel and Hamas, we have often heard about antisemitism and anti-Zionism. Their definitions, and extent to which they overlap, are often subject to debate and ambiguity. < Back Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism: The Crucial Nuances We Are Losing Considering the war between Israel and Hamas, we have often heard about antisemitism and anti-Zionism. Their definitions, and extent to which they overlap, are often subject to debate and ambiguity. However, blurry distinctions and the inability to see the difference between the two only makes communication more difficult and divisive. In order to examine these differences, we can use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism: “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of Anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” The definition of anti-Zionism is much less agreed upon, but it is largely seen as an opposition to the Zionist movement to create a Jewish state in the Middle East, roughly corresponding to the historical land of Israel, and this support for this modern state. The first clear point that comes out of these definitions is that within the definition of antisemitism, nothing indicates anti-Zionism as one of its forms. This is crucial because, in my view, this indicates that you can criticize the existence of the state of Israel without being antisemitic. However, the nuance needed here is the basis for this criticism. Indeed, if the reasoning for why Israel is not legitimate uses the argument of religion, it can become antisemitism. Moreover, a factor that is largely understated is the fact that word choice matters and certain phrases have become symbolic of surface Anti-Zionism turning into antisemitism. This notably includes referring to Israel and Israelis as “the Jews'' and “the Zionists.” This is an important point to make as it is not necessarily intuitive in regards to the term “Zionist.” The reason for this is not that the term is in and of itself problematic but rather that it has often been used interchangeably with the term “Jew,” which has lost much of its original meaning. A further distinction to be made is that not all Jewish people support Israel blindly, and not all Jewish people are even Zionists. Support for the existence of Israel does not inherently mean that people support the current government or actions of Israel. Holding all Jewish people responsible for the actions of Israel is antisemitic because it essentializes Jewish people rather than acknowledging individual experiences and perspectives. This is important as a rise of antisemitism has been a clear result of the war in Israel, with over 1,059 antisemitic acts having been reported since October 7 in France alone. Importantly, there are also Jewish people who identify as anti-Zionist. In this regard, we can note that organizations such as Jewish Voice for Peace have been denouncing Israel for years. Depth should also be applied in regards to the Israeli population which does not have a singular vision. In fact, a majority of the population currently wants Netanyahu to resign, clearly indicating that the manner in which the war is being conducted is not universally accepted amongst Israelis themselves. Moreover, peace movements such as Women Wage Peace have been audible critiques of Israeli policies, bringing together Israeli and Palestinian women around a common critique of the cyclically violent nature of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. In the context we are living in, it is important that many realize that though somebody may not be antisemitic, they may relay messages with underlying antisemitic messages. The fact that Pro-Palestinian protests have been often linked to the idea of antisemitism is not a fatality. Each of us can make an effort to promote sensitive messages in order to make peace protests, which should be a universal cause, a welcoming environment for all. Making peace protests unwelcoming is just another way of creating an unnecessary division and an ‘us’ against ‘them’ environment which pushes each side to extreme narratives and lack of communication. The angle of protesting is therefore extremely important to the cause of peace. It also leads to the wider question of the importance of word choice and paying attention to the messages we spread. Though this is not targeted to the Sciences Po student body, the message is still valuable to our community, especially on this campus, where many deeply care about the matter, and just a bit more tact and nuance can allow for far more productive conversations.

War is war. No matter when it starts, where it is or who ends up carrying its weight. I’m usually the first to argue that suffering should never be compared, but in the cases of Sudan and Yemen, comparison becomes almost unavoidable. Not to decide who suffers more nor to rank tragedies, but to confront the world’s selective outrage and the chilling apathetic silence that allows some wars to disappear from collective memory. < Back The Invisible Wars: Yemen, Sudan, and the Selective Outrage of the World Amena Elkayal February 11, 2026 War is war. No matter when it starts, where it is or who ends up carrying its weight. I’m usually the first to argue that suffering should never be compared, but in the cases of Sudan and Yemen, comparison becomes almost unavoidable. Not to decide who suffers more nor to rank tragedies, but to confront the world’s selective outrage and the chilling apathetic silence that allows some wars to disappear from collective memory. Some conflicts dominate global headlines for months, shape foreign policy debates, saturate our screens and even household conversations. Others, equally brutal and equally tragic, barely surface. Yemen and Sudan stand among the world’s worst humanitarian disasters of our time, yet they remain trapped on the margins of global attention. Their absence reflects a deeper hierarchy of suffering, one where geopolitical interest, emotional convenience and media priorities determine whose suffering is worthier of visibility. When wars are not seen, they are unfelt. And when they are unfelt, they are abandoned. Since April 2023, Sudan has recorded more than 20,000 deaths and 4.9 million displaced people. That is besides 25 milions facing hunger and at least 36 women and girls raped only between April 2023 and October 2024. Yemen, meanwhile, has seen at least 1,742 civilians killed since late 2022, alongside 4.8 million internally displaced people and 17.1 million people living in acute food insecurity. Despite these figures you could count on one hand the number of times you’ve stumbled upon these crises in global headlines—especially when measured against the omnipresent coverage of Gaza or Ukraine. The inequality of attention becomes impossible to ignore. To readers around the world, Sudan and Yemen’s violence often feels distant, confusing, or inaccessible—and that is partly by design. These conflicts are frequently described as “invisible wars”, a label rooted in the chronic absence of sustained human-centered coverage. Yemen, for example, receives consistently low global media attention. This pattern is documented by outlets such as the BBC, who examined why the country’s humanitarian catastrophe fails to appear in headlines. Humanitarian agencies operating in both countries have long warned that donor fatigue, shrinking aid budgets and the near-impossibility of accessing active conflict zones make it difficult to draw global attention to unfolding crises. Doctors Without Borders note that in Sudan, warring factions regularly restrict the movement of aid workers and journalists Further, they frequently cut communications, diminishing visibility in international media. The result is that these wars become “uncoverable,” and therefore, unseen. By contrast, conflicts like in Ukraine and Palestine receive sustained attention, while Sudan and Yemen fall into a blind spot shaped by power dynamics rather than humanitarian urgency. This is not because the former conflicts are inherently “more tragic”, but because they benefit from clearer political narratives, stronger advocacy networks and direct Western involvement. Wars that intersect with Western foreign policy priorities are more likely to receive sustained attention and sympathy than those unfolding in regions perceived as geopolitically peripheral. Coverage follows power. Outrage follows proximity. And empathy follows the stories people are given the chance to see. Analyses of global news patterns repeatedly show how conflicts tied to Western interests remain amplified, while others quietly fade into the background, marked by a general feeling of less humanitarian urgency. The imbalance is staggering. Media monitoring platform Meltware found that between Jan. 1 and Sep. 30, 2022, Ukraine received five times more media coverage than all ten of the most dangerous conflict zones for children combined. Sudan— now considered the world’s worst humanitarian crisis—occupies only a narrow and fragile space in international news reporting. This isn’t just a media gap; it’s a moral one. Emotional engagement itself is greatly shaped by the narratives people encounter. An article by Prismreports.org points out how the public’s capacity to care is directly influenced by the stories they are offered: when journalists don’t cover these wars, audiences don’t feel them. And when audiences don’t feel them, governments don’t act. Silence becomes distance. Distance breeds apathy. The consequences are not abstract. They are fatal. In Sudan, most hospitals in active conflict zones have collapsed or shut down, leaving entire cities without medical care. In Yemen, famine, cholera outbreaks, and widespread infrastructure collapse continue unabated, as detailed by the U.N.’s humanitarian updates. Despite the severity of these crises, the flow of aid remains insufficient and inconsistent—an outcome that might result from their invisibility . The disparity becomes even more glaring through the legal and humanitarian lens presented by Opinio Juris . Their analysis shows that Sudan’s civil war, which resumed in April 2023, has resulted in more than 150,000 deaths, displaced over 12 million people and left nearly half of its population facing famine. Across the African continent, over 45 million people were displaced by conflict in 2024 alone—an astonishing 14% increase from the previous year—yet these crises rarely dominate international headlines. This selective attention creates a “hierarchy of suffering,” where victims of high-profile wars are perceived as more deserving of empathy than those trapped in the invisible conflicts of the global south . Data from the 2025 Global Peace Index confirms these patterns. Vision of Humanity report that civil conflicts—like those in Yemen and Sudan— receive dramatically less coverage than interstate wars. On average, interstate conflicts generate roughly 870 news articles per civilian death, while intrastate conflicts (which make up the majority of global wars) generate only 37. The least visible are internationalised intrastate conflicts, at just 18 articles per civilian death. Notably, even when comparing 2014 coverage, the Gaza war and the Russian-Ukrainian conflict received far more attention than the Central African Republic’s civil war, despite the latter experiencing higher mortality rates. This disparity does not arise in a vacuum. While the imbalance is stark, it is also shaped by the geographic and political orientation of major news organisations: the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as a European war, directly implicates European security, economies, and populations—the primary audience these outlets serve. The pattern nonetheless endures: attention follows geopolitical proximity and interest more readily than human need. The report also highlights rising negativity in news consumption, audience fatigue from long-term crises, and a growing tendency to avoid emotionally draining topics—all of which contribute to the systematic erasure of certain wars from public consciousness. Addressing this erasure requires far more than fleeting sympathy. Humanitarian groups like CARE note that sustaining global attention demands innovative media strategies. For example, local partnerships, long-form reporting and storytelling rooted in lived experience rather than abstract geopolitics. Coverage that prioritizes people over politics can counter public fatigue, a point echoed across reports from NPR, showing how individual narratives can revive empathy. Similarly, analyses by the International Crisis Group call for increased foreign aid, renewed focus on forgotten conflicts, and diplomatic pressure tied to civilian protection. Media watchdogs such as the Committee to Protect Journalists urge deeper investigative work and collaboration with local reporters who can safely document realities on the ground. Advocacy organizations including Human Rights Watch add that supporting grassroots campaigns and independent digital platforms—especially those operating from within Sudan and Yemen—is essential to bypass censorship and ensure these wars are not erased simply because they fall outside geopolitical priorities. Because at its core, selective outrage isn’t just a failure of the press. It is a failure of our shared moral imagination. Yemen and Sudan are not invisible because their people are less worthy of empathy. They are invisible because the world has chosen to look elsewhere. If international law, governments, the media and global institutions are to retain integrity and maintain any moral consistency, they must dismantle the hierarchy of suffering that governs which lives are seen and which are allowed to simply fade into silence. Every war demands to be witnessed. Every victim deserves to be mourned. Until all human suffering is met with equal urgency, justice will remain uneven and peace will remain painfully out of reach. The world cannot claim ignorance. It can claim only silence. And silence, in these wars, kills . Photo Source: UNMISS, Flickr

From Khuzestan to Tehran, we hear the phrase “زن، زندگی، آزادی” being chanted in streets by hundreds of Iranians. From Tehran to Paris, we see it take the form “femme, vie, liberté”; in New York and London we hear “women, life, freedom.” This central phrase of the protests exemplifies the basic values Iranians are fighting for — but what are they really related to and where do they stem from? < Back “Women. Life. Freedom” — What are the Iran protests fighting for? By Anonymous October 31, 2022 From Khuzestan to Tehran, we hear the phrase “زن، زندگی، آزادی” being chanted in streets by hundreds of Iranians. From Tehran to Paris, we see it take the form “femme, vie, liberté”; in New York and London we hear “women, life, freedom.” This central phrase of the protests exemplifies the basic values Iranians are fighting for — but what are they really related to and where do they stem from? On Sept. 16, 2022, the news of the murder of Zhina Mahsa Amini — a 22-year-old Kurdish woman who was visiting Tehran — by Iran’s morality police broke out. They brutally attacked Amini for wearing an “improper hijab,” causing a traumatic brain injury that put her in a three-day coma prior to her death. In an attempt to dodge accountability, Iranian officials claimed her death was due to pre-existing heart conditions. However, her family denied these allegations, confirming that she had no serious health problems prior to this event. This shocking report instigated a wave of visceral reactions, predominantly nationally but also internationally. People were outraged at the human rights abuses taking place, the systemic oppression against women and the extent to which the regime devalues the lives of their population. What started as women cutting off their hair on social media snowballed into Iranian women courageously unveiling themselves and burning their hijab in public, and has now transformed into the population taking to the streets of Iran and demanding their rights. To better understand this social movement, let us try to dissect its central slogan and its implications. Women As the first word of our phrase and the catalyst of the protests, Iranian women are central to this cause. Women’s rights (or lack thereof) in Iran takes several dimensions; nonetheless, a detail that gives a glimpse into the injustices they have to submit to is the imposition of the hijab and the existence of the morality police. The latter is a branch of the security force that ensures that women are abiding by the Islamic Republic’s strict dress code which forces all women, regardless of belief or religion, to wear the hijab and dress “modestly” through loose clothes and minimal to no makeup. Consequently, wearing an “improper” hijab or not wearing one at all, tight clothing or showing a little bit of skin is penalized. This general concept has existed since the 1979 revolution, but has been reshaped and taken its current institutionalized form during the Ahmadinejad presidency. The morality police operate as a patrol team in a van, generally including two to three women who lure in the victims and at least two men who may use force if she resists, as they did with Amini. They situate themselves in crowded areas of cities and their actions can range from a simple warning or a fine to taking women to the “center of education and commitment,” punishing those who resist, and occasionally arresting victims. The morality police’s abuse of power through the unjustifiable use of violence raises infinite distrust about their legitimacy. Furthermore, the police’s omnipresence shines a light on the ceaseless mistreatment of Iranian women who fear for their lives due to clothing further underscores their objectification by the regime as they are being obliged to cover up. The enforcement of the hijab strips women of their choice, acting as an instrument to control their bodies. Said instrument — this mere piece of fabric — symbolizes their oppression, informing Iranian women’s decision to burn it. After all, the hijab loses all meaning once imposed. By cutting their hair, Iranian women broadcast the tragic reduction of their existence to these few strands. This is not said to orientalize and pity Iranian women. As the face of the movement, their strength, bravery, and grace are to admire and undoubtedly to defend. Life The right to life should not be subject to negotiation because it is an essential and fundamental human right. Yet, it is clear that the regime values the lives of some over others’. This is epitomized by the discrimination against the Kurdish-Iranian population, illustrated through the murder of Zhina Mahsa Amini, who is believed by some to have provoked officials by speaking with a Kurdish accent. Amini’s choice to go by her Persian name (Mahsa) as opposed to her Kurdish birth name (Zhina) further confirms this perennial fear of ethnic intolerance. On a larger scale, Iran’s bombing of Iraqi Kurdistan on Sept. 26, accusing them of the protests happening in the country, displays the Iranian government’s hostility towards the Kurdish population. It goes without saying that the regime targets protestors, as the death count stemming from these protests has reached (at the time of writing this article) over 150 people. Let us turn to the Islamic Republic’s treatment of students — the future of their nation. How much does the government value a demographic that most would assume it would prioritize? How does it treat their “élite de la nation”? Even here, we find that students’ lives are practically worthless to the authorities who recently attacked Sharif University in Tehran, Iran’s highest-ranking engineering academy. They locked the entrances and exits, trapping the students, and started shooting, students even compared it to a “war zone”. Their identities no longer mattered — not whether they were innocent or guilty, nor whether they stayed longer to study or to talk with their friends. At this moment, they were all a threat, voices to be silenced, an existence that no longer served the government. One by one, with each bullet, another name, and another bright future was permanently crossed off the attendance list. Freedom The intense restrictions on freedom extend across almost every aspect of Iranian life, yet one kind of right — freedom of speech — is particularly endangered. I am sure, as Sciences Pistes, you have all seen the Fariba Adelkhah posters plastered in the corridors and amphitheater of campus. This Iranian Sciences Po Academic, this colleague of our professors and administration, was detained in 2019 simply for speaking against the regime. This fear lives within virtually every Iranian — extreme censorship is a pillar of the republic’s tight grip on power. The censorship ranges from day-to-day inconveniences, such as needing a VPN to access certain social media platforms, to fearing exile, arrest and even death for expressing one’s views. The magnitude of the repressive situation is highlighted throughout these protests as the government has shut down (or slowed) the internet for almost two weeks, so news cannot reach the electronics of everyday Iranians covering the process stays quiet. Moreover, countless journalists and political activists have been detained. As goes another slogan stated in the protests, “Evin has become a university and Tehran a prison.” “Evin” relates to a notorious prison in Tehran that incarcerates political prisoners. This same prison was recently set on fire by the regime, killing and injuring its prisoners often consisting of students, activists or protestors. This chilling reality is precisely the reason that it is vital that we, as the international community who can talk about this issue, do not cease to be the voice of Iranians living in Iran. The Iranian people depend on our efforts to spread the movement and prevent the dialogue from fading away. “Women. Life. Freedom.” A simple expression embodying a myriad of grievous realities that Iranians resist daily. The Iranian people are putting their lives on the line to be heard. From Rue Longue to Bastion, it is now our turn to show support. It is time for these three powerful words to resound through the Menton’s streets.

La pensée de Gramsci n’a rien d’une abstraite bataille des idées. , Iil s’agit tout au contraire de permettre la réalisation effective de la révolution et de l’émancipation en balisant son parcours. Aujourd’hui, plus que la vieille révolution prolétarienne dont on connaît les dérives possibles—c’est un euphémisme—il faut retenir de Gramsci son souci de préparer le changement radical. < Back Gramsci: la politique est une guerre de position Lubin Parisien April 30, 2025 « C’est l’écrivain communiste italien Gramsci qui écrit: les victoires idéologiques précèdent les victoires électorales » déclare Jean-Marie Le Pen le 1er mai 2007. La nécessité de gagner la bataille des idées est devenue une banalité des commentaires politiques notamment quand il s’agit d’expliquer la prééminence des thèmes de l’extrême-droite pour diffuser son racisme. Antonio Gramsci serait le créateur de cette vulgate des idées. Antonio Gramsci est pourtant un homme politique et un intellectuel qui peut nourrir d’une façon singulièrement plus heureuse la gauche et son projet émancipateur dans un contexte de montée de l’extrême-droite. Antonio Gramsci est un penseur de cette adversité, mais surtout de la stratégie pour changer en profondeur la société. De Turin à Moscou, un communiste original Né à Ales en Sardaigne en 1891, Antonio Gramsci « appartient à une famille de petits fonctionnaires ruinés » rapporte Hugues Portelli dans l’article consacré à Gramsci dans l’encyclopédie Universalis. La révolution russe de 1917 est un tournant pour Gramsci car elle suscite dans toute l’Europe des événements que certains ont cru pouvoir être le prélude de la révolution du prolétariat tant attendue. Dans le Nord industriel de l’Italie—à Turin notamment—commence le Biennio rosso , une période d’instabilité après la Première Guerre mondiale où les mouvements ouvriers s’organisent pour demander des droits, et font des grèves et des occupations pour reprendre le contrôle de la production. A Turin, Gramsci est le grand défenseur des conseils ouvriers et du conseillisme avec son journal Ordine Nuovo , ce qui consiste en la reprise en main de l’appareil de production par les travailleurs qui décident collectivement de l’allocation des fruits du travail sans le corporatisme syndical dont Gramsci se méfiait. Le Parti socialiste italien (PSI) ne soutient pas l’expérience qui échoue à terme et la rupture est consommée en 1921 avec la fondation du Parti communiste italien (PCI ) par Bordiga et Gramsci notamment. Le moment du Biennio rosso est perçu par Antonio Gramsci comme précédant soit la révolution soit un moment réactionnaire particulièrement violent: Gramsci prend très vite conscience du danger du fascisme de Mussolini qui monte auprès des élites désireuses du retour à l’ordre ancien grâce à la violence des chemises noires. De fait, après la Marche sur Rome des fascistes et l’accord entre les élites libérales et Mussolini, le PCI est interdit en 1923 et devient clandestin, les arrestations sont nombreuses et Gramsci est menacé. Il bénéficie du soutien de Moscou malgré des divergences progressives de fond, notamment au vu de la bureaucratisation du régime bolchevique. Arrêté et écroué, Gramsci ne peut que constater avec dégoût le tournant encore plus autoritariste et rigide de l’URSS de Staline—même s’il l’avait soutenu face à Trotsky. C’est en prison qu’il écrit ses Quaderni , ses Cahiers de prison où il fait le bilan du début des années 1920 en en tirant les leçons pour le mouvement communiste. Quatre jours après être sorti de prison, Antonio Gramsci meurt en 1937 suite à ses mauvaises conditions de détention. Le procureur fasciste ayant envoyé Gramsci en prison voulait « empêcher ce cerveau de fonctionner pendant vingt ans » a donné à son insu du temps à Gramsci pour approfondir une pensée qui n’a pas perdu de sa pertinence. Où est l’hégémonie ? L’idée gramscienne la plus connue est sans doute celle d’hégémonie culturelle, mais, c’est sans doute, aussi son idée la plus manipulée par l’extrême-droite. Il ne s’agit pas en effet d’un matraquage idéologique afin d’imposer partout sa ‘conception du monde.’, Ll’hégémonie résulte plutôt d’une guerre politique de position où il s’agit de rendre commun sa ‘conception du monde’ dans tous les lieux et instances de la vie sociale: dans l’entreprise et la politique, mais aussi dans les associations. En effet, la présence en Europe de l’Ouest d’une forte société civile avec ses Églises et ses œuvres de charité nécessite un travail plus patient pour les révolutionnaires occidentaux que pour les Russes. Dans un article du Monde diplomatique , Razmig Keucheyan explique que pour Gramsci, la société civile « détient une part importante de la somme totale du pouvoir, si bien qu’il ne suffit pas de s’emparer de l’Etat. » Pour résumer, les bonnes œuvres, au lieu d’afficher la fausse bienveillance des bourgeois, devraient dénoncer en parallèle de leurs activités les méfaits de ces bourgeois qui rendent la charité nécessaire. Nicolas Truong dans un article du Monde précise bien que l’idée d’hégémonie dans les mouvements communistes recouvrent concrètement et principalement « l’alliance des classes paysannes et ouvrières sous l’égide du prolétariat. » Gramsci a justement beaucoup travaillé sur la question dite méridionale, c’est-à-dire l’inclusion des paysans pauvres du Sud de l’Italie dans la lutte des ouvriers du Nord du pays. Ce n’est donc pas forcément la voie express vers le totalitarisme malgré la connotation du mot hégémonie. L’hégémonie est avant tout un travail de « persua[sion] permanente » où il faut susciter le consentement de la société en faisant émerger un « sens commun » réellement émancipateur. Pour cela, il ne faut pas partir de zéro mais plutôt s’appuyer sur les opinions banales du moment pour les canaliser et en extirper la dimension aliénante. Jean-Claude Zancarini, qui a beaucoup écrit sur Antonio Gramsci, résume l’idée en ces termes « le prolétariat, pour être hégémonique, doit se comporter en classe dirigeante, (qui montre le chemin, la direction à suivre,) et non en classe dominante qui impose ses points de vue. » Ce n’est pas un matraquage, car il y a une exigence de souplesse que doit satisfaire le mouvement révolutionnaire cherchant son succès: il ne faut pas imposer une idéologie préconçue. Gramsci applique cette grille de lecture pour analyser l’échec du Biennio rosso . La situation des capitalistes est chancelante mais les partis communistes et socialistes échouent car, selon Gramsci, ils ont méprisé la spontanéité populaire et ont laissé le mouvement couler entre leurs doigts. En face, la bourgeoisie s’abandonne aux fascistes, c’est-à-dire, toujours selon Gramsci, qu’elle renonce à être la « classe dirigeante » pour rester la « classe dominante » grâce à la propriété des moyens de production. Pour gagner la guerre de position, Mussolini incorpore les ouvriers dans le fascisme dans des corporations et des mouvements de jeunesse; c’est ainsi qu’il avance ses positions et garantit son hégémonie. Il y a quelque chose d’assez autoritaire dans la vision de l’action pré-révolutionnaire de Gramsci dans la mesure où les intellectuels doivent transformer le ‘sens commun’ pour le rendre émancipateur. Gramsci a conscience de ce biais en promouvant un rapport entre ces intellectuels et les ouvriers différent de celui entre le professeur et l’élève, il propose quelque chose de plus horizontal où, selon une comparaison revenant souvent, les intellectuels sont comme Machiavel conseillant le prince qu’est le prolétariat. Dans un entretien accordé à L’Humanité , Jean-Claude Zancarini affirme que « le parti bolchevique [tel que conçu par Gramsci] est un parti de révolutionnaires professionnels. Le parti, selon Gramsci, se situe entre la spontanéité des masses et le travail politique. » Il ne faut donc pas de coupures avec la base et la politique demeure une pratique nourrie par la réflexivité—et non pas une pratique justifiée après coup par une idéologie forcément implacable comme en URSS. Et de fait, c’est seulement dans les geôles de Mussolini que Gramsci se décide enfin à se distancer effectivement du bolchevisme Staliniste. Gramsci n’est pas mort On ne peut pas nier la liberté intellectuelle dont Gramsci a su se saisir face au PSI et même vis-à-vis d’une IIIème Internationale à laquelle il s’est pourtant rallié. Aujourd’hui, la complexité de sa pensée que nous avons effleuré est souvent réduite à une vague conquête—idée en soi problématique et peu gramscienne—du pouvoir par les idées—comme si les idées avaient une force en soi à laquelle Gramsci n’a jamais cru. Pourtant, la gauche, si elle veut être ambitieuse, ferait bien de relire Gramsci sans passer par l’intermédiaire de Jean-Marie Le Pen pour en retenir trois leçons. D’abord, il faut retenir de Gramsci l’idée d’une guerre de position. L, la victoire ne passe par l’acceptation de la tiédeur de la société face à un changement radical et par la modération de son propos mais plutôt par la diffusion de ses idées dans le ‘sens commun,’ en s’appuyant sur les structures en place pour faire ce changement radical. Les soutiens du mouvement #metoo , en manifestant, en communiquant sur les réseaux sociaux ou en utilisant des tribunaux connus pour leur mansuétude face aux délits et crimes sexistes, ont utilisé les méthodes et les canaux déjà existants pour insuffler dans l’espace publique et privé un souffle émancipateur pour les femmes, qui reste certes chancelant face aux attaques réactionnaires. A l’inverse, le naufrage électoral du mandat social-libéral du Président Hollande entre 2012 et 2017 où le PS a courtisé le patronat illustre l’inanité et l’inefficacité d’une volonté de recentrage politique au prix du mépris de la défense des intérêts des travailleurs. La seconde leçon consiste à ne pas délaisser le travail de fond idéologique que doit effectuer une gauche qui se veut ambitieuse, notamment en posant la question du système économique et en réfléchissant aux alternatives. Le travail des intellectuels est conçu par Gramsci comme une condition pour l’élévation des travailleurs et leur transformation en une classe dirigeante—et non pas dominante comme nous l’avons déjà fait remarquer. Le plein exercice de la démocratie par tous les citoyens devrait donc passer avant par ce moment de réflexion sur tous les espaces échappant à cette démocratie, en premier lieu l’entreprise et le travail. Enfin, Antonio Gramsci a une conception « jacobine » du parti qui doit mener la révolution, le parti reste une ‘centrale’ pour coordonner et ordonner tout le mouvement social. Avant de réfléchir à un parti unique pour la gauche, il faut plutôt retenir la nécessité de l’union des gauches dont le NFP est le dernier rejeton. La réflexion gramscienne sur le lien à nouer entre les paysans méridionaux et ouvriers du Nord rappelle la difficulté contemporaine à concrétiser la convergence des luttes en une seule lutte commune. L’unité est le problème majeur dans le parcours de Gramsci, notamment dans le rapport entre intellectuels et ouvriers en évitant que les premiers aient un ascendant sur les seconds. La division artificielle entre le social et le sociétal, ou les élucubrations de Fabien Roussel sur le racisme anti-blanc, menacent ainsi la cohérence du combat politique émancipateur que doit porter la gauche en acceptant le cadrage et le ‘sens commun’ faisant le lit au mieux des libéraux, au pire des vrais racistes. La pensée de Gramsci n’a rien d’une abstraite bataille des idées. , Iil s’agit tout au contraire de permettre la réalisation effective de la révolution et de l’émancipation en balisant son parcours. Aujourd’hui, plus que la vieille révolution prolétarienne dont on connaît les dérives possibles—c’est un euphémisme—il faut retenir de Gramsci son souci de préparer le changement radical. Fa ce aux arcs et autres figures géométriques républicaines, il faut construire concrètement une liberté pour tous, une égalité effective et une fraternité non-négociable et faire avancer partout où on le peut ces boussoles morales et politiques, sans craindre de reprendre la société à ceux qui jouissent de son iniquité et s’inquiètent à juste titre pour leurs positions et leurs privilèges. Photo source: Wikimedia commons

The pervasive use of historical analogy has not always had quite the same stranglehold over public discourse as it does today. These analogies have not always been used as a central axis in massively polarizing issues e.g., Israel-Palestine and U.S. domestic politics. In light of the growing use and misuse of historical comparisons, when should they be used or avoided? < Back The Use and Misuse of Historical Analogy in Contemporary Discourse Niccolo Gentile You’ve probably heard historical analogies deployed to describe contentious events: the Russo-Ukrainian War compared to World War II or Vietnam; the Jan. 6th, 2021 Capitol Building riots in the United States paralleled the burning of the Reichstag; Vladimir Putin likened to Adolf Hitler or the War in Gaza to the Holocaust. These links have become a typical element of political discourse for millions and a rhetorical tool levied to argue opposing cases in these conflicts. However, the pervasive use of historical analogy has not always had quite the same stranglehold over public discourse as it does today. These analogies have not always been used as a central axis in massively polarizing issues e.g., Israel-Palestine and U.S. domestic politics. In light of the growing use and misuse of historical comparisons, when should they be used or avoided? Linguists have long examined the use of analogy as a whole and how it can enhance the popular understanding of the present. In everyday communication, the use of rhetorical tricks like simile, metaphor and analogy all enhance one’s ability to understand and relate to the experiences of others. It is no surprise then that the comprehension of contemporary political matters, especially those taking place half a world away, often attracts comparisons with well-known past events. It is an innate element of the human condition that we confound the unknown with the knowable. The specific use of analogy in regard to history complicates matters. In relation to the history of these analogies, Professor Denis Charbit, specialist of the history of ideas at Sciences Po, argues that these comparisons emerged from the “crisis of modernity, of time” that occurred around the '60s and ‘70s. Hitherto, under the sway of modernism, humanity’s point of reference was placed firmly in the future, whether that be a proletarian revolution or a homogenous ethnostate. This is not to say that historical analogy emerged, contextless from a virgin birth, in the middle of the 20th century. Doubtlessly, it was employed far before this to relate like event to like event. The inundation of this method, however, in the popular imagination seems to be a phenomenon which can be roughly dated, traced and followed in its swell of use over the past few decades. From the historian’s perspective, analogy is a dangerously sweeping tool only to be used in the most damning of circumstances. As Dr. Augusto Petter, lecturer at Sciences Po Menton and expert in the philosophy of history, explained to me, the use of analogy in academic work is generally frowned upon today. Of course, a core element of the historian’s work is to compare events in the past. But drawing an actual link in the form of an analogy or metaphor necessitates an overwhelming, impossible burden of proof so as to make even rhetorical tricks practically absent from the field. Additionally, these analogies have the ability to imbue arguments with immense ethos, pathos and logos, often through cheap or inaccurate means. To quote Kenneth Minogue on the discourse analysis of Quentin Skinner, ‘historical’ analogies “are historical in the popular sense of referring to the past, but not historical in the sense of being contributions to the academic problem of attempting to understand some passage of events in a properly historical manner.” The historian’s highly restrictive and critical view cannot be expected of the wider public, nor should it be sought. To apply the same rigor to popular discourse would cripple any chance such discussion has of producing productive understanding and inspiring the action needed to keep democratic institutions functioning, which discourse should inculcate. To further illuminate the point of criticism here, take one prime example of this discourse and its accuracy in some of the issues from the past few years. What I’ve chosen to examine is not the most current events but one with relevance, some temporal removal and well-established facts from which to base this analysis. Today, commentators and politicians compare Western policy towards Russia with the policy of appeasement that much of Europe took towards Nazi Germany in the years preceding WWII. At a glance, this would seem like a cogent topic to bring into the discourse. Benoît Bréville takes a different position, stating that harkening back to events like the Munich Conference and the invasion of Poland only serves to aggravate tensions that should be soothed to bring an end to the bloodshed. Moreover, these connections simply do not stand up to deeper inquiry. For example, the war in Ukraine is isolated to one country and has dragged on for years whereas Munich and Poland were but brief glimpses of the global conflict to come—one which modern-day Russia is clearly not able to persecute given its performance in Ukraine. This is not to take away from the often rightful case made by these arguments but to encourage a greater level of discernment when choosing one’s evidence so that it holds up beyond our ephemeral present. A couple of caveats should be mentioned. One key difference that Professor Charbit argued for is the difference between using historical analogy and collective memory. This might take the form of an Israeli comparing something to the Holocaust or a Palestinian drawing a connection to the Nakba. However, heed care even here, for as Ada Yurman formulates , such terminology can be used “by those who do not grasp the dimensions of the catastrophe.” Another is to keep in mind the difference between drawing a sweeping analogy and a specific, evidence-based comparison. Though it is ridiculous to compare contemporary French government coordination with private industry to Italian fascism’s corporatism, particular elements can indeed be likened to one another to argue a broader point. The world is a fraught place where meaning seems increasingly intangible, even as the bonds linking our societies to the past are frayed or twisted. We are watching a large-scale military engagement take place around Kursk and Volgograd (formerly Stalingrad) while far-right parties are sweeping European elections in Germany, Italy and Hungary, and multipolarity is pushing most countries into two great blocs or into a position of non-alignment. It is nigh impossible to refute the importance of recalling the past and comparing its causes and outcomes to the present. Alongside this, though, a more critical examination of how and why we use these terms to describe the present and whether they are unjustly coloring our view of current events is due to better engage with both the past and the present.

Domenico Lucano was the mayor of the small Italian town, Riace. Now he is facing up to 13 years and 2 months in prison and a €700,000 fine for his lifelong devotion to the integration of migrants and refugees. < Back ‘If Humanity and Solidarity Have Become Crimes, He Is Guilty’: The Case of Dominico Luciano By Viola Luraschi November 29, 2021 On October 1, Maurizio Zavaglia started a message to his friends with “ti rispondo ora perché non ho più lacrime da cacciare fuori” — I am only answering now because I no longer have any tears in me . This message came following the events that took place in the small town of Riace, a commune of the city of Reggio Calabria, south of Italy. Since 1998 the community of Riace has been practicing what has come to be called “l’ospitalitá diffusa,” or widespread and spontaneous hospitality . The term describes the system of inclusion and integration that the community has implemented with regards to migrants and refugees; the hosting of families and individuals in the infrastructures available. In fact, one afternoon in 1988, the arrival of a boat overcrowded with Kurdish refugees first mobilized the town. The community made itself available to host the people who had abruptly arrived. For this reason, the concept of hospitality was not seen as a choice but rather as part of daily life in the town of Riace and its neighboring area. This initiative was led by Padre Giancarlo Maria Bregantini, who built all possible housing structures, and allowed Mimmo Lucano to start volunteering as a child. Zavaglia then refers to the period that followed as a time during which “no ci si é farmati” — they couldn’t stop — and for many years until 2004, they practiced “l’ospitalitá diffusa,” not only through housing but also through craft workshops that gave the refugees and migrants a chance to become involved in the community with a form of employment. Migrants and refugees were making glass utensils, ceramics, clay and textiles, and people started using Riace as a travel destination, making the town grow in numbers. In 2004, Riace became part of the system of accoglienza (hospitality) of the state, the same year Mimmo Lucano became mayor. Riace experienced a turnaround: it went from a town at a very high risk of being underpopulated, to a town that was full of life. In fact, in Riace and the contouring areas, the ‘ndragheta (organized crime specific to the region of Reggio Calabria), “il malaffare” ( ill deal ) and violence had been causing young people to flee towards other areas of Italy. As the years passed, more migrants as opposed to refugees started arriving in Riace, and with the integration of young people into the town, the school — previously at risk of being closed — was kept open. Schools and shops became areas of local development. The more Riace became known as “il luogo dell’anima e dello spirito,” or the place of the soul and the spirit , the more the place, which was previously depopulating, had a growing population of young people working for the local economy. For many, Riace stood as a symbol of hope, and potentially a new and improved life. The town became a place that housed more migrants than local citizens, and Maurizio described the older citizens coming back out onto the streets to sit and interact as a community. Statistics showed the rates of robberies, and general violence to have decreased, and the word “tranquilitá” ( tranquility ) was the one used by Maurizio to describe the town. It was not long before Riace had attracted national attention that, according to Maurizio, it started bothering some because it did not adhere to the notion that “gli immigranti rubano il lavoro,” or that migrants steal jobs ; the attacks against Riace and Mimmo Lucano began. The judiciary case that has been ongoing since 2016, when Mimmo was first arrested, came to a decision in September of this year when the sentence of 13 years and two months, along with 700,000 euros, was announced. The first degree sentence came as a shock to many as 13 years was seven more than the prosecution had asked for from the court. Judges within Italy have also disagreed with the sentence imposed on Mimmo Lucano, and it is a shared belief that the sentence was too harsh. In fact, the prosecution had asked for seven years less than what was given in the final sentence, creating dispute on the fairness of the judges and the judicial system in Italy. Journalists, magistrates and the public were all shocked by the sentence awarded. The sentence claimed that Mimmo misused public resources, these resources being 35€ awarded by the state, daily, per migrant. Mimmo believed this amount to be too much and said that hospitality could have been granted with a lot less money. Therefore, part of this budget was used for projects that he believed would better lead to the inclusion of migrants, including artisanal shops, collection of recycling, and fattorie didattiche, which is an educational program which attempts to promote a connection between the city and countryside. With this money, an oil sanctuary was also realized, and Maurizio said that, “i soldi sono stati usati per includere, no separate” — the money was used to unite, not separate . Mimmo was also accused of organizing a marriage of convenience between an Italian citizen and a refugee woman in order to help her obtain citizenship. Furthermore the accusations included a belief that he gave a four year-old an identity card. Maurizio describes Mimmo as “una persona che ha dedicato la sua vita agli altri, ai piu deboli, a chi non ha voce, a chi arriva dalle guerra, fame, poverta, a chi scappa da situazioni terribili rischiando la loro vita in mare, povera gente,” or a person who has dedicated his life to others, to those weaker, to those who have no voice, to those who come from war, hunger, poverty, to those running from terrible situations risking their life at sea, poor people . To Maurizio, Mimmo is a person who “ha dedicato la sua vita in termini di stabilità del suo nucleo familiare” — has dedicated his life in terms of familial stability . Maurizio says that Mimmo lives a spartanic lifestyle, at the limit of poverty but “é un idealista, una persona che ha sempre inseguito i valori della pace, del’egualianza, lui non ha mai commesso reati; l’unico reato commesso è il reato del’umanita” ( he is an idealist, a person who has always followed the values of peace, of equality, he has never committed any crime; the only crime committed is the crime of humanity ). Today, Riace is a community which has been bent but which wants to react, said Maurizio. Riace is not to be spoken of in the past tense, Riace is a part of the present and future. The current idea that holds the 60 people who decided to stay in Riace is that of not letting hope die. Maurizio finished the interview with this message: “Se l’umanitá e la solidarietá diventano un reato, lui è colpevole" — If humanity and solidarity have become crimes, he is guilty .

With the United States experiencing its highest level of inflation since 1981 and Europe following closely, inflation, a phenomenon that many economists claimed was long gone, seems to be back. How worried should we be? < Back Global Inflation: Is the Fairy Tale Beast Back to Haunting us? By Ata Tezel April 29, 2022 If you are a regular at Brioche Dorée, the recent 10% price increase of the student deal might have been catastrophic news. In fact, a double-digit inflation rate is becoming a reality in the developed world, with the Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OECD) average annual rate reaching 7.7 percent in March 2022. With the United States experiencing its highest level of inflation since 1981 and Europe following closely, inflation, a phenomenon that many economists claimed was long gone, seems to be back. But how worried should we be? Why is inflation back? The rise in inflation caught many economists and central banks off guard – as a matter of fact, nearly none of the central bank inflation forecasts in the developed world were accurate for 2021. This is surprising, as the recovery from the economic downturn of the pandemic signaled increased pressure on both the demand and supply sides of economies. Simply put, today’s inflation is the result of too much money chasing too few goods: an inevitable outcome of the economic policies of the pandemic era. The demand-side inflation (also known as demand-pull inflation) is, in large part, related to the drastic aggregate demand recovery fueled by the stimulus packages distributed by governments during the pandemic alongside the overall global employment recovery. The US federal government passed stimulus packages that injected more than 4.5 trillion dollars into the economy, with the EU following up with a package of 2 trillion euros. With many investing their stimulus money on mid- to long-term assets - such as government bonds, stocks, gold, and real estate - demand-side pressures increased prices for these highly attractive assets. In fact, all American indices have passed far beyond their pre-pandemic levels, signaling an unprecedented demand recovery from the pandemic. As the economy on the demand side is stronger than ever, theories suggest inflation should be expected. Though one might then ask: “how has the developed world grown at a stable rate for years while keeping inflation at bay and maintaining low unemployment and minimal monetary intervention?” The difference this time is that the pressure is on the supply-side. The impact of the pandemic was more drastic on the supply-side compared to demand-side simply because short to mid-term adjustments in supply tend to be more inelastic than demand-side adjustments. For example, the ongoing electronic chip shortage can be partly attributed to the automakers’ decision to slash orders during the early stages of the pandemic which led chipmakers to switch their products to fit the surging demand for consumer electronics. As the aggregate demand recovered, the supply of cars is now drastically halted due to the chipmakers' unwillingness and inability to switch their supply back to the automotive sector. This caused a spillover demand for substitutes, resulting in a 20 percent price increase in the second-hand car market in the US. Moreover, disruptions to supply chains triggered by the pandemic are now exacerbated by political tensions spurred by the Ukrainian war. The increase in energy prices has reached, on average, 27 percent in OECD due to the political tensions surrounding oil and natural gas supply. This cost-push inflation is only aggravated by the cutting of government subsidies to many sectors – subsidies that were instrumental in the survival of many businesses during the economic fallout of the pandemic. What to expect now? While the dramatic increase in inflation is worrying for many, central banks have been cautious in implementing monetary policy to combat rising inflation. Throughout 2021, the consensus among the developed world was that the increase in global inflation was temporary and would eventually fade out as market forces settle around pre-pandemic levels. The higher-than-usual inflation rates could also be attributed to the unusually low commodity prices in 2020 caused by the demand fallout which would have given rise to unnatural inflation once demand and prices returned to pre-pandemic levels. However, recent political developments in commodity markets are forcing central banks to take action. The US Federal Reserve had already started tapering its quantitative easing policy by the end of 2021, effectively increasing real interest rates without changing their near-zero policy rate. Leading emerging markets have also responded to inflation throughout the year, with many increasing policy interest rates by couple hundred basis points - a move that the developed world resisted to take. Nevertheless, by March 2022, the Federal Reserve was forced to increase its policy rate for the first time since 2018, an action soon replicated by the Bank of England. The Fed also signaled further increases in the policy rates up to 3.5 percent, citing the dangers of high inflation. Central banks around the developed world now hope to raise rates rapidly to avoid a “hard landing.” However, many are skeptical about central banks’ ability to use monetary policy effectively without causing a recession. Considering the track record of the Fed, recession risks are no doubt elevated, creating a low morale in the world of economics. As inflation is affected by expectations as much as by market forces (if not more), pessimism and distrust in the market could be the biggest worry of all. With the European Central Bank also signaling a potential switch from its zero-interest policy, the future is more unclear than ever. The question is, can the West curb its inflation as successfully as Japan or is it leading to a catastrophic fallout like Turkey? The answer, as with everything else, will probably lie somewhere in between.

“Les valeurs de la masculinité sont reniées par les féministes”, déclare un groupe d’hommes se définissant comme “masculinistes” à la journaliste Mélanie Gourarier dans un article paru dans Le Monde en 2017. < Back Le mouvement masculiniste: qu’est-ce que c’est, et pourquoi s’en méfier? By Calista Cellerier April 30, 2024 “Les valeurs de la masculinité sont reniées par les féministes”, déclare un groupe d’hommes se définissant comme “masculinistes” à la journaliste Mélanie Gourarier dans un article paru dans Le Monde en 2017. Vous avez sûrement déjà entendu sur les réseaux sociaux comme Instagram ou TikTok des discours similaires, clamant que la place des hommes dans la société est menacée par le mouvement féministe, considéré comme une forme de militantisme extrémiste. Depuis plusieurs années, ce discours monte en flèche partout dans le monde, et beaucoup s'inquiètent d’un retour en arrière pour l'égalité des genres. Alors, qu’est-ce que le mouvement masculiniste ? Il s'agit d'une idéologie, un mouvement social souvent vu comme réactionnaire et antiféministe. Parmi ses valeurs figurent la masculinité “conventionnelle”, la réaffirmation et la promotion des différences hommes-femmes, la défense des privilèges masculins et enfin la lutte contre les féministes. Il s’agit avant tout d’affirmer les “droits des hommes” sur certains points, tels que des positions favorables quant au divorce, les différences de rôle plus traditionnels entre hommes et femmes et même la demande d’un système de codécision en matière d’avortement. Un autre terme est aussi utilisé, celui “d’hoministe”, par des défenseurs masculinistes trouvant ce terme trop dépréciatif. Il y a de nombreux différents groupes plus ou moins nuancés s’identifiant à ce mouvement. Les moins extrême, tels que SOS Papa , SOS misandrie en France ou dans les pays anglo-saxons le groupe Father 4 justice déclarent qu’une nouvelle société matriarcale s’installe au détriment des hommes, et s’engagent pour les hommes victimes de violence sexuelle et les intérêts des hommes lors des divorces. Ils s'intéressent notamment à la fin des obligations matérielles telles que la pension alimentaire ou le partage des biens. En 2009, un ex-membre de l’association SOS Papa , aidé par 4 autres membres, a écopé de 6 ans de prison pour avoir kidnappé son enfant et tenté d’assassiner la mère. Plongeant plus profondément dans l'extrême, la communauté incels (ou hommes célibataires involontairement) dénonce les femmes comme responsables de leur célibat et de leur frustration sexuelle. Urban Dictionary définie les hommes incels comme : « persuadés que les femmes doivent leur offrir du sexe ». La communauté est présente surtout sur Reddit et 4Chan, et certains internautes peuvent aller jusqu’a demander un “droit de viol” ou l’appel au meurtre. Notamment, la tuerie de Toronto en 2018 avait été commise par un jeune homme membre de la communauté incels déclarant détester les femmes pour leur rejet de ses avances, menant à la mort de 8 femmes et 2 hommes. De nombreux autres groupes, tels que les MGTOW ou les Hommen , font la promotion de la prostitution, de la fin du mariage en faveur des relations à court terme, déclarant les femmes comme des fardeaux financiers, ou s’opposent au mariage homosexuel. Comme mentionné, ce mouvement s’exprime surtout à travers les réseaux sociaux, des associations et des forums de discussion dans des groupes appelés la “manosphère”. Vous les avez sûrement déjà vu, ces hommes se déclarant comme virils, comme hommes “alphas” promouvant une perspective conservatrice et traditionnelle du rôle des femmes et des hommes, allant à l'encontre du mouvement féministe. Nombre d’entre eux parviennent à influencer des millions de jeunes garçons et jeunes hommes sur Internet. En 2023, 37% des hommes en France considèrent que le mouvement féministe est une menace à leur place dans la société, selon le journal La Croix . A l’international, et sur TikTok surtout, des personnalités masculinistes, ou “alpha male” tels que Andrew Tate ou les membres du podcast Red Pills , sont en vogue, déclarant être en dehors du système, en dehors de la “Matrix” et pouvoir aider les autres hommes et garçons à séduire et retrouver leur place en tant qu’hommes dominants (et riches). Et cette tendance à renier les valeurs modernes de l’égalité homme-femme ne se limite pas aux hommes. Leur alter-ego féminins sont aussi en hausse, notamment sur TikTok pour promouvoir un style de vie “traditionnel”, déclarant que le mouvement féministe aujourd’hui ne sert plus à rien et qu’il faut retourner aux valeurs basées sur les rôles “biologiques” des femmes, sur la famille de l’homme comme gagne-pain et des femmes comme simples compagnes. Nous pouvons citer à l’international l’internaute sous le pseudonyme de Pearl ou en France Thais D’Escufon, clamant que les femmes sont manipulées par la société pour rejeter les hommes et se ralliant au mouvement masculiniste et incel . De nombreux membres de ces mouvements proposent d’ailleurs des formations en ligne, payantes, pour devenir des hommes et des femmes de “qualité” et sortir de la “matrix” pour contrôler le système sociétaire et leur futur. Dans le journal Le Monde , une journaliste explique que ce mouvement est en propagation dans le monde, et mène au renforcement des normes patriarcales. En effet, elle explique que plusieurs membres de ce mouvement déclare des “excès” de féminisme, se sentent rabaissés par le terme “porc” dans le #balancetonporc . Le mouvement masculiniste serait menacé par les mouvement tels que #MeToo , comme le clament haut et fort ces slogans “Not all men !”. Alors, il semble évident que de nombreux experts s’interrogent quant aux implications de la montée en flèche d’un tel mode de pensée. Nombreux sont ceux qui craignent pour le futur des femmes en société, allant jusqu'à considérer le masculinisme comme un mouvement terroriste. Si il est encore trop tôt pour étudier les effets de ce mouvement sur le féminisme et le combat pour l'égalité, beaucoup commencent à s’engager sur Internet pour adresser cette pensée montante, notamment en tentant d’éduquer de manière plus nuancée sur ce que signifie être un homme ou une femme. Par exemple, le compte Instagram Tu Bandes , tenu par un homme de 26 ans, prend en main la “masculinité bienveillante”, ou une perspective du monde visant à intégrer les hommes de manière saine et égalitaire dans les discussions, tout en éduquant sur la sexualité, le consentement et les stéréotypes. Si la liberté d’expression est un principe clé au 21eme siècle, l’incitation à la haine et la violence ne doit pas être tolérée. Ainsi , il est toujours bon de rappeler que le féminisme n’est pas la supériorité de la femme sur l’homme, mais bien l’égalité des genres dans notre société, et que les mouvements extrémistes peuvent et doivent être combattu avec bienveillance, éducation et discussions !

The political co-opting of the hijab has a long and violent history. As the French governmental and social domains continue to politicize Muslim head-coverings, it is vital to examine it. < Back The Hijab Is a Hot Political Topic for Islamists… but Also the Secular West By Ghazal Khalife November 30, 2022 Hijab is an Arabic word that translates to “curtain” or “covering.” It is now commonly used to refer to the headcovers sometimes worn by Muslim women. A lot of questions surround the hijab: Why is it worn? Is it a sign of oppression — an archaic symbol of patriarchal traditions? Does it fit in modern societies? What should we do about it? The fact that the hijab has become such a controversy shows how it has long left the private realm and become a matter of public debate and politicization. In Iran: From a symbol of protest to a symbol of oppression In its modern history, Iran has had a complicated relationship with its religious identity and, thus, the role of the hijab. Reza Shah Pahlavi, who ruled Iran from 1925 to 1941, to abandon backwardness and tradition and promote modernization, issued the decree, “Kashef-e Hijab,” which banned all head coverings for women as well as the “chador,” a full-body Iranian covering. Unsurprisingly, this decision, which was swiftly and strongly enforced across the country, was not received well by the more conservative population. The ban restricted women’s freedom of movement, as many stayed at home or came out at night when they could hide from police, who were instructed to resort to physical violence to unveil hijabi women forcibly. The shah’s decree adhered to the premise that the hijab is antithetical to modernity and women’s integration into society, a view that resonates to this day. During the ceremony in which the shah announced “Kashef-e Hijab,” he stated that women “should stand out in society the same way they stand out in their homes.” Fast forward to the years leading up to the Islamic Revolution, the hijab resurged in the social and political spheres as a sign of protest against westernization and the Pahlavi dynasty’s attempt to repress Iran’s cultural and religious identity. It is worth noting, however, that at that point, wearing the veil was a choice, an expression of disenchantment with a regime that dictated women’s clothing. After the Islamic republic was established, veiling became mandatory and violently enforced by the morality police. Post-Revolution leader Ruhollah Khomeini described women who did not veil as “naked.” Consequently, the veil became a symbol of the resurrection of Islamic values and strict interpretation of the Quran. Women have been protesting the hijab mandate for decades in Iran — a movement that culminated in the recent and ongoing protests . The hijab is simply another manifestation of the Islamic state’s political oppression; it is a reminder that the Islamic Republic can and will dictate the public’s life choices, that it does not tolerate diversion from its interpretation of religion and that its version of society is the right one. The affiliation of the hijab with a political movement is not exclusive to Iran, however. The idea of the hijab was also politicized in post-colonial Arab liberation movements and their competing ideologies, most notably the Muslim Brotherhood. During the early period of decolonization (1930s-40s), Muslim women wore the hijab to reaffirm their pride in their heritage and Islamic identity, especially since European colonial soldiers unveiled indigenous women during “civilizing missions.” In Algeria, the veil became a focal point of the War of Independence as there was strong resentment against the French for their unveiling and sexualization of Algerian women. Unveiling ceremonies were popular, but the obsession with the hijab took on an even more sinister undertone. To many, it hid mysterious sexual objects cloaked beneath a layer of modesty, begging to be seen by the male gaze. This is epitomized by the school of French photographers who took photos of unveiled women and hypersexualized them; some of these images were even used in French postal cards. In France: The symbol of a struggle with religious diversity In contemporary France, the hijab remains a contentious topic in government and public realms. Despite being worn by less than 2% of France’s population, the hijab dominates political discussions about secularism, immigration and Islam. Under the pretext that it violates France’s sacred principle of “laicité,” a specific interpretation of secularism that guides French society, many lawmakers, even those affiliated with the centrist party, have fervently supported strict regulations on veiling. These include banning the headscarf in public schools and prohibiting citizens working in the public sector from wearing it. In February 2022, the French senate voted 160-143 in favor of banning the wearing of the hijab: “an ostentatious religious symbol” in sports competitions. How do these regulations fit into the larger context of French politics? The prevalent argument is that the hijab is an “ostentatious” religious symbol and, hence, incompatible with “laicité.” Many hijabis have countered this assertion by pointing out that the hijab is a religious obligation and a commitment to modesty as opposed to being an inherent symbol of faith. As such, the rhetoric in support of restricting the hijab in favor of laïcité minimizes its significance for hijabi women and is sometimes used to emphasize the “otherness” of France’s Muslim population. France, like many Western countries, has undoubtedly struggled with its increasing diversity in the post-colonial context, especially with recent migratory waves from predominantly Muslim countries. Since hijabi women are easily identifiable as Muslim, they have been subject to the most scrutiny and discrimination. When asked how wearing the hijab changed people’s perceptions about her in France, an anonymous Menton first-year answered that “people’s perceptions definitely changed towards me as I started wearing the hijab because I was no longer seen as (who I am), but as ‘the hijabi girl.’ I particularly noticed (this) when people confused me for another hijabi girl or when the first interaction I had with a stranger would be regarding my hijab.” Another angle from which to examine this issue is a more subtle extension of the “civilizing mission” justification in which the hijab is considered a symbol of patriarchal oppression and incompatible with modern society. This may also be interpreted as an argument that encourages Muslim women to abandon a potentially important element of their identity in order to be accepted into French society. The fundamental problem with this “savior complex” narrative is that it assumes that all women are forced or even conditioned into wearing the hijab and not wearing it out of their own free will. While this unfortunately, can be the case in many Muslim communities, it cannot be generalized. Moreover, instead of empowering women, banning the headscarf could inhibit many Muslim women from integrating productively into society since many civic and educational doors would be slammed shut for them. The hijab: An individual experience Ultimately, politicizing the hijab reduces women’s bodies to social matters; it risks ridding them of their bodily autonomy, as observed in both extremes of hijab regulations. Every Muslim woman experiences the hijab differently, and while it is normal and even vital to discuss the motivations behind wearing the hijab, employing it as a political tool to control women, garner votes or advance a political agenda constricts not only Muslim women but also distorts the deeply personal nature of this religious practice.

Now that I know two different worlds – an “elite” institution like Sciences Po and a “regular” public university like Heidelberg University – I have gained a whole new perspective on the academic and student life of Sciences Po. < Back Former Menton Student, Philipp Frank, Offers an Insider’s Outsider Perspective By Philipp Frank December 30, 2021 Questioning your past choices and worrying about the future are fundamental human traits. They are particularly prevalent among us young, adolescent students still trying to figure out how we want to live our lives. Studying at a university – especially if it is an international, multicultural and world-renowned institution like Sciences Po – is both exciting and stressful. However, it is first and foremost an unbelievably formative time that each and every one of us should try to get the most out of. As some (I hope not too few) of the current 2As know, I was a 1A student at the Sciences Po Paris Menton campus last year. I dropped out at the end of summer to begin studying law at Heidelberg University in Germany this winter. Now that I know two different worlds – an “elite” institution like Sciences Po and a “regular” public university like Heidelberg University – I have gained a whole new perspective on the academic and student life of Sciences Po. I believe that sharing this experience can give 2As some fresh insight and 1As – especially those among you still trying to figure out how to fit in or whether Sciences Po is the right choice for you – a different idea of what to expect. The academic life The educational system of Sciences Po is largely based on suffocating students with work. Whether it is presentations, exams, research papers, homework or simply revising lecture material – you are made to work a lot. There is some form of assessment that will influence your end-of-semester “relevé de notes” almost every week. There is free time, of course: days when you are free for a trip to Monaco or a swim at Sablettes. Moreover, all the work in the world will thankfully not stop people from going out and partying anyways. Nevertheless, no student can claim that Sciences Po does not significantly predetermine their daily and weekly schedule or that it leaves much room for them to manage their time themselves. Hence, the Sciences Po system is applying artificial pressure by making important decisions for you and requiring you to work long, hard and disciplined hours. This is training your physical and intellectual strength, resilience, and endurance to work successfully and effectively under pressure for a long time. Furthermore, you learn how to confront, analyze and summarize a lot of material and break it down to its essentials in the very short amount of time that is allocated to single tasks. In short, Sciences Po is aiming to transform you into a highly effective working machine – a very important trait to have personally and later in your career. However, there is a flipside to the Sciences Po system, for which the German language offers a wonderful word: “ verschulung .” Verschulung is negatively connotated. It means the implementation of educational methods from high school in educational programs that do not take place at high school (such as a university degree) and for which different educational methods are preferable. These educational methods include largely predetermined curricula, mandatory attendance, and dull knowledge transfer and retrieval — sound familiar? The consequence of verschulung at the university level is, in my opinion, that the ability to learn to work on your own and take personal responsibility falls short. To illustrate this problem, take the system of my current university: there is no mandatory attendance for any course, not even for the main ones. No professor or other lecturer checks or cares whether you come to class. There are no presentations, no oral contributions, no homework. Only exams and research papers count, which take place once during and in between semesters – and you do not have to take most of them right away. In short, everything is voluntary and, in theory, you do not have to work at all. This can be very liberating, but it puts a different kind of pressure on you because upon receiving your exam grades, you are confronted with reality. You see how well prepared you were and to what degree you lied to yourself. The university does not directly make you study; your motivation and your discipline have to come from yourself. Thus, in the long term, you learn to assess yourself, the limits of your knowledge and your intellectual capabilities, and how to make decisions based on that. You decide whether it is worth going to a lecture. You decide whether you have revised a topic enough or not. You decide whether you want to take one day off or maybe even four. Nothing is forced on you, everything lies in your hands, and at the end of the semester, you get what you deserve. This is not to say that Sciences Po students do not have or cannot learn these skills. However, having studied both at Sciences Po and Heidelberg University, I can confirm that the latter has challenged my discipline and motivation to study for the better. The tightness of the Sciences Po system has another consequence: the fact that there is only one degree for all students means that everyone is trained in more or less the same way of thinking. Regardless of where the people you meet come from, they are all social scientists in the making, hearing the same lectures, writing the same papers, learning the same logical methods. While I could not possibly claim that Sciences Po students generally have the same opinion (in fact, it is quite the opposite), I simply want to recommend to everyone to use the time abroad during your third year or your master’s degree to get to know people from a different academic background. I am a member of a debating club in Heidelberg and I cannot emphasize enough how fascinating it is to see students of law, maths, biology, and German literature debate each other and approach the same topic from four completely different perspectives. Social life My Heidelberg debating experience reminded me of another Sciences Po asset: the campus as a melting-pot of internationality and multiculturalism. Its importance and influence on personal development cannot be understated enough. The intercultural exchange taking place at Sciences Po comes in so many forms, whether it is language, food, associations, all forms of habit, or simple conversations. It might be boring to sit with six students of social sciences, but it can equally be exciting to sit with six students from six different countries and cultures. However, everyone living and cherishing this experience every day is well aware of this asset, so I have kept it short here. Much more interesting at this point is the nature of the social life of such a small campus as Menton. Here, everyone knows everyone, more or less. This has several implications, the first being that getting to know people and finding friends is much easier. A small campus and a well-connected student community in which various associations stage events for everyone to come to on an almost daily basis makes it easy to talk to new people, network to promote the new association that you founded, or look for a running buddy. This is in stark contrast to Heidelberg University, where lecture halls can be crammed with up to 400-600 people - try finding someone particular you met during Integration Week there… The small size of the campus has another implication though, as it makes social life in Menton much more personal, whilst leaving students with much less anonymity. This can be stressful and frightening in certain situations – gossip spreads much faster. Yet, overall, it gives the student community the chance and responsibility to integrate everyone. It is difficult to be lonely at Menton, because certain “student institutions'' hold the community together and, if needed, somewhat accountable. I am particularly thinking of the Feminist Union in this case, whose work and effort to raise awareness for sexual assault and educate about consent and sexual health I deeply admire, even more so now in retrospect after having left Menton and seeing that such associations are much needed elsewhere. Life at Sciences Po is hard-working, vibrant, and exciting. It is very formative because you are thrown into a stressful, multicultural melting-pot for only two short years. Time flies, especially at Menton, which is why – regardless of whether you like the system or how long you stay – you should dive all in and make the most of it.

Cancel culture is a movement denoted by the accountability of celebrities and people with platforms; however, it has more recently progressed into a worldwide attempt to exercise justice through online discourse. < Back Cancel Culture: The Delivery of Justice? By Rozy Betrosian “Ashton Kutcher fears being cancelled for sex trafficking scandal.” Kutcher is a public figure predominantly associated with the comedic series “That ‘70’s Show” and his inaugural organisation against sex trafficking. Recently, his co-star Danny Masterson was convicted of the sexual assault and rape of two women, rendering him sentenced to thirty years in prison. Danny Masterson's connection to Ashton Kutcher put him in the spotlight for Masterson’s transgression. Kutcher is a board member of Thorn: Digital Defenders of Children (i.e., Kutcher's and Moore’s sex trafficking organisation); therefore, fans expected a response to Masterson’s transgression. Kutcher provided a legal deposition for Masterson, including characterizations such as “dedicated and loyal [husband]” and “excellent role model” alluding to the support for Masterson. As the founder of an anti-sex trafficking organisation, Kutcher was scrutinised for his allegiance to his former cast member, and his punishment included reassigning his organisation to new leadership. Was the scrutinization of Kutcher efficient in promoting justice? Cancel culture is a movement denoted by the accountability of celebrities and people with platforms; however, it has more recently progressed into a worldwide attempt to exercise justice through online discourse. Believers of cancel culture argue that it resembles the public sphere– a means of democratic and open discourse, and “being cancelled” is the sheer and unavoidable consequence for people who have wronged, thereby violating the quest for social justice. Furthermore, fervent advocates for cancel culture have an imperative significance in holding celebrities with far reaching platforms accountable for harm to communities and minorities. However, further contemplation on cancel culture and counter-arguments to the movement highlight that it has degenerated into mass media bullying and revoking the right to free speech. The primary question of the efficacy of cancel culture lies on the legitimacy of the “enforcers of justice.” Are internet users legible social justice advisors? Criticising in an impersonal forum empowers people to become more vicious and spiteful, legitimising verbal violence. Hateful commentary against public figures enables and fuels the crowd, signalling an attack on an individual. This potent and overwhelming reception of negative and disapproving evaluation of behaviour, inevitably results in “cancelling.” It is understood that cancel culture is not serving its purpose of serving justice on the internet but rather initiates debate on the application of democracy online and the limitations of free speech. A common phenomenon is retrospective cancellation; this requires the inspection of a person’s past and questions problematic behaviour in the public arena. Common examples include the lead singer of The Smiths, Steven Patrick Morrissey. Morrissey has been outspoken about his extremist views that align with far-right ideology in Britain, he has been characterized as xenophobic and racist as he has claimed that “the gates of England are flooded [by foreigners].” His statement from 2010 has been reviewed under the cancel culture lens, with heavy media scrutiny of Morrissey and widespread boycotts of his music. Regardless of the reprehensibility of his statements, the artist is merely expressing his political ideas. One could argue that he is just acting upon his right to freedom of speech. Moreover, it is interesting how former claims and “problematic” behaviour resurfaces for the sole purpose of scrutiny. Overall, critics of retrospective cancel culture argue that it risks erasing the nuances of history and failing to acknowledge the context of past eras and diverse opinions. They suggest that judging figures solely based on contemporary values may oversimplify complex historical narratives and hinder the understanding of societal progress and transformation over time. Specifically, in the case of The Smiths singer, the question of whether cancel culture has been efficient, rematerialized. Is Morrissey’s cancellation stopping fans from listening to The Smiths? This brings about another debate known as separating the art from the artist dilemma. Cancel culture has brought the longstanding debate surrounding the separation of art from the artist into sharper focus, a phenomenon exemplified by the intense scrutiny directed at acclaimed author J.K. Rowling. Widely revered for her monumental contributions to literature, particularly through the globally cherished Harry Potter series, Rowling faced substantial backlash due to her contentious statements on matters related to gender identity and transgender rights. This provoked an intricate discussion concerning the balance between celebrating her literary achievements and critiquing her personal convictions – presenting a challenge to the concept of separating the artist from their art. While her literary works continue to resonate deeply with audiences worldwide, her vocal stance on issues related to transgender rights prompted a reevaluation of her public persona and creative legacy. As cancel culture advocates for the decisive reprimand of objectionable behavior, supporters of Rowling's work grappled with reconciling their appreciation for her literary contributions with their disapproval of her personal views. In the face of dynamic sociocultural shifts, her case reflects the ongoing challenges of navigating the relation of an artist's creations and their personal beliefs. The debate revolving around J.K. Rowling underscores the inherent tension between the desire to preserve an artist's creative legacy and the need to hold them accountable for their personal beliefs and actions Cancel culture, initially an emblem of accountability, has transformed into a global instrument for justice in the online sphere. Advocates contend that it represents a form of social justice, imposing repercussions for those who have caused harm, especially to marginalized communities. However, it has drawn censure for descending into mass media bullying, hindering free speech, and lacking a structured system of justice.The question of the legitimacy of online "justice enforcers" becomes inevitable. Impersonal criticisms often fuel online attacks, legitimizing verbal violence and leading to cancellations. This prevalent culture of "cancelling" frequently falls short of delivering online justice, prompting reflection on the boundaries of free speech and the application of democratic principles in the digital sphere.

When Luffy’s Jolly Roger was hoisted from Nepal’s Singha Durbar palace, it instantly became a symbol of something larger. Over the past few months, a wind of protests has swept across the globe. From Nepal to Madagascar, Kenya to Peru, Indonesia, the Philippines and Morocco: the youth, unwilling to inherit a broken system, have taken to the streets to prove that their future is daring and won’t be silenced. < Back #GenZ 212 Ibtissem Remdane November 13, 2025 When Luffy’s Jolly Roger was hoisted from Nepal’s Singha Durbar palace, it instantly became a symbol of something larger. Over the past few months, a wind of protests has swept across the globe. From Nepal to Madagascar, Kenya to Peru, Indonesia, the Philippines and Morocco: the youth, unwilling to inherit a broken system, have taken to the streets to prove that their future is daring and won’t be silenced. Nepalese Gen Z protesters in front of Bharatpur Mahanagarpalika Office हिमाल सुवेदी, Wikimedia Commons Unlike previous waves of political mobilization, the Gen Z protests distinguish themselves through their decentralized organization, digital coordination, and symbolic creativity. Simultaneously emerging across several regions of the world, they reflect a generational response to deep structural crises like economic precarity, political disillusionment or the distrust in traditional institutions. What really makes them Gen Z though, is the fact that these movements are enabled and amplified through social media platforms such as TikTok or Instagram, where humor becomes a political language. By September 2025, these protests became a transnational phenomenon. Although each local movement addresses specific national issues such as political corruption in Kenya or the restriction of free speech in the Philippines, they all share a common logic: the rejection of hierarchical authority and the demand for accountability in governance. Something else they have in common, is the means of transmitting symbolic messages. Young women protesting the increase of period products in the #RejectFinanceBill2024 in Nairobi, Kenya author:, Egotieno, Wikimeda commons Gen z’s the first generation to grow up fully online and has had a worldview shaped by an infinite access to information. Unlike previous generations, I believe our political awakening did not occur only through party affiliations or ideological schools but through our feeds. Many before now have witnessed global tragedies through media – from the TV broadcast of the Resistance War Against America in Vietnam to seeing 9/11 live in their living room. What differs for Gen Z is not exposure itself, but the proximity, the pace of it, and the line between those watching and those living the events becomes thinner. The result of this hyper-connected daily-life isn’t simply “more exposure to suffering,” but a system where this very suffering is always available to be seen, directly, at all times: close enough to tap into, and just as close enough to scroll past. For some this information overload fosters apathy, and to some extent, really does numb us to violence. But for some others it sparks indignation, because what this really means is injustice is never distant; it’s chronically always in our pockets. Since these movements are leaderless, they are also difficult to suppress. There is no single figure to arrest, no headquarters to shut down. Their anonymity democratizes participation: anyone with a smartphone can join. Only it is not without consequences, as governments, along with the protesters, have adapted. Affiliation alone can become grounds for punishment, such as in the US where supporting the Palestinian cause publicly has led students to face disciplinary action, surveillance or even barriers like visa denials. Still, this particular humor Gen Z has adopted online disarms power, and it transforms fear into creativity: because beneath the irony does lie a sharp moral core. Again, the memes are not just jokes; they are tools of political literacy. The use of images drawn from pop culture such as animes like One Piece, where a young pirate challenges the authority of the corrupt Marine Forces, or movies like The Hunger Games truly demonstrate Gen Z’s ability to merge digital culture with political activism. This led to the creation of a shared dissident language, and a sense of community despite the geographical distance. Within this wave, Morocco’s Gen Z #FreeKoulchi movement stands out as one of the most relentless. The word koulchi means “everything” in Arabic, which all of it then means “Free Everything.” Born after the tragedy at Hassan II Hospital in Agadir, where eight women died in childbirth after failed C-sections, what began as outrage over poor healthcare quickly evolved into a broader social movement. By the end of September of this year, Moroccan cities saw the emergence of a decentralized protest network. In a statement published on its official accounts and Discord server, the movement calls on “all Moroccan youth, as well as all citizens,” to gather “in large numbers.” while emphasizing the nonviolent nature of the demonstrations: “The protests are peaceful and civilized. Order and responsibility must be maintained.” The movement had no formal leaders or party affiliations, yet its organization was remarkably efficient. Teenagers and university students used TikTok, Instagram, and Discord to coordinate marches, share safety tips, and amplify testimonies of hardship. The digital sphere became both a meeting place and megaphone. Protests in Rabat Mounir Neddi, Mounir Neddi, Wikimedia commons The initial grievances were clear, such as collapsing public services or youth unemployment exceeding 25%. Later on, it gradually broadened to challenge the fact that national wealth was concentrated in the hands of a few. Many criticized the government’s investment in grand infrastructure projects for the Africa World Cup, AFCON, while hospitals and schools struggled to function. Phrases like “No World Cup, health comes first" and "We want hospitals not football stadiums" could be heard in the streets. Later, as the movement progressed and protesters were being massively repressed, arrested and prosecuted by the Moroccan police, the phrase “Free Koulchi” appeared. It called for the release of the peaceful protesters who exercised their right by coming to the streets. It thus became not only a slogan but a diagnosis, everyone and everything needs to be freed because everything feels trapped. Emotionally, the movement was fueled by hogra : a dialectal Arabic term used to describe humiliation and injustice. It’s the feeling of being ignored, of existing within a context that perpetuates oppression. For many young Moroccans, hogra had become a national condition. As a response to the uprisings, the Moroccan government, accustomed to containing dissent through a mix of reform and restraint, initially downplayed the protests. But as #FreeKoulchi gained visibility and international attention, the official rhetoric shifted. On 10 October 2025, King Mohammed VI delivered a rare televised address urging his administration to act “with greater speed” on healthcare, education, and youth employment. Days later, Prime Minister Aziz Akhannouch’s government announced a package of social reforms: investment in hospitals, teacher recruitment programs, and targeted job creation schemes. Finance Minister Nadia Fettah Alaoui promised to redirect budget funds from luxury projects toward essential services. Yet these promises were met with skepticism. Many activists viewed them as performative gestures from Akhannouch aimed at cooling tensions rather than systemic change. The AMDH (Moroccan Association for Human Rights) reports around 2,068 arrests, intimidation, and police violence continued to surface, prompting condemnation from organizations such as Amnesty International. So while the government’s reformist language was conciliatory, its security practices remained repressive, a dual strategy that seems to have long characterized Moroccan governance. Still, the movement achieved something significant: it disrupted the narrative of Moroccan youth apathy. It revealed that beneath apparent stability lies a generation increasingly unwilling to accept a political order that limits them to symbolic participation. GenZ 212 demonstrations in Rabat , Mounir Neddi, flickr #FreeKoulchi encapsulates many features of Gen Z activism worldwide: decentralization, digital organization, and moral clarity. It demands dignity, opportunity and concrete actions. What sets Morocco apart is how these universal frustrations intersect with local realities: a constitutional monarchy balancing modernization with control, a rapidly urbanizing youth population, and stark inequalities between coastal elites and rural communities. The AFCON preparations have also exacerbated these disparities, making many Moroccans feel the government’s priorities are misplaced . The protest thus reflects both a national crisis and a generational awakening. For Moroccan youth, #FreeKoulchi is not only and solely about policy failure; it’s about belonging. Although the movement initially focused on social and economic rights rather than challenging the political system itself, it was later associated with broader democratic aspirations. It asserts their right to shape the country’s future rather than merely inherit it. In that sense, Morocco’s movement joins a larger global pattern: the rise of “connected dissent”, where young people mobilize simultaneously as citizens of their nations and participants in a transnational digital public sphere. Yet, the power of digital protest contains its own contradictions. The same algorithms that connect youth also fragment their attention. Sustaining momentum beyond the viral moment remains a challenge, one that many Gen Z movements from #M66 in Togo to #MilkTeaAlliance in Asia, have confronted. Indeed in Morocco too, sustaining #FreeKoulchi beyond the online moment remains a challenge. Without formal organization or negotiation structures, translating demands into policy becomes difficult. But its legacy may not lie in immediate reform; it may lie in the cultural and psychological shift it triggered. Milk Tea Alliance: Group called Humanity Beyond Borders distributes free Tiananmen cookies author: Prachatai, flickr The #FreeKoulchi movement in Morocco is both a symptom and a signal. For thousands of young Moroccans, protest is no longer taboo. It is part of civic life. Today, our generation does not seek revolution in the old sense. It seeks renewal of trust, of accountability, even of hope. Its politics are not about overthrowing systems but about demanding that they finally work, that the citizens can be heard. In Morocco and beyond, these protests announce a truth that governments keep on ignoring– not without cost– the youth are not the future, we’re the present. #FreeKoulchi

Tandis que les élections européennes approchent, l’Union européenne a décidé dans la nuit du 20 mars de réinstaurer des droits de douane sur certains produits agricoles ukrainiens. < Back Terres fertiles et défis amers : L’Union européenne et l’agriculture ukrainienne By Jonathan Smidtas March 30, 2024 Bon sens paysan ou trahison ? Tandis que les élections européennes approchent, l’Union européenne a décidé dans la nuit du 20 mars de réinstaurer des droits de douane sur certains produits agricoles ukrainiens. Le pays, un des principaux producteurs mondiaux, avait vu ses exportations vers l’Union européenne grimper en flèche à la suite de l’invasion du pays par la Russie car les taxes sur les importations agricoles ukrainiennes imposées par l’Union européenne avaient alors été supprimées. Depuis, la colère des agriculteurs européens dénonçant une concurrence insoutenable a marqué l’actualité. Alors que l’invasion à grande échelle de l’Ukraine a commencé il y a plus de deux ans, il semble de plus en plus clair qu’aucun camp n’est en mesure de l’emporter militairement, sauf retournement de situation majeur. L’on parle déjà de l’après-guerre, de la reconstruction de l’Ukraine et de son intégration à l’Union européenne. Alors que pendant des années les capitales européennes se sont opposées à l‘entrée de l’Ukraine au sein de l’UE, généralement en invoquant la faiblesse de l’état de droit et la corruption qui minent ce pays, une autre raison émerge aujourd’hui : l’agriculture. Des terres exceptionnelles Depuis des siècles, l’Ukraine a été surnommée le grenier à blé de l’Europe. Grâce à sa concentration en humus très élevées, les “terres noires” ukrainiennes sont extrêmement fertiles. Aucun pays au monde ne dispose de sols cultivables aussi productifs. Cela constitue un avantage comparatif certain pour ce pays, mais n’a pas été sans tragiques conséquences tout au long de son histoire. L’Ukraine a ainsi été conquise tantôt par les polonais, les autrichiens et les russes souhaitant, entre autres, assurer leur sécurité alimentaire grâce à l’Ukraine. Le pays était avant guerre le premier producteur mondial de tournesol, et dans le top dix pour ce qui est du blé, du maïs, de l’orge et du colza. Des salaires bas En comparaison avec les pays de l’Union européenne, l’Ukraine est un pays très pauvre. En dépit de l’héritage industriel de l’époque soviétique, le salaire moyen y est inférieur à 400 euros, sept fois plus faible qu’en France et encore trois fois moins important qu’en Pologne. Les coûts de la main-d'œuvre très faibles permettent à l’Ukraine de proposer des prix agricoles très intéressants sur le marché mondial. Un potentiel L’intégration de l’Ukraine dans l’UE permettrait d’assurer la sécurité alimentaire de cette dernière. Les capitaux et technologies des pays riches transférés en Ukraine entraîneront une hausse de la productivité des terres en dépit des normes environnementales européennes qui devront s’appliquer. La concurrence accrue sur le marché européen causera une baisse des prix de l’alimentation et augmentera le pouvoir d’achat des consommateurs européens. Les investissements d’entreprises agricoles européennes en Ukraine permettront de relancer l’économie du pays après la guerre et la pression exercée sur le marché de l’emploi poussera les salaires à la hausse. Les craintes Qu’adviendra-t-il des agriculteurs des autres pays européens ? Ils dénoncent déjà une concurrence insoutenable et craignent d’être les grands oubliés de l’entrée de l’Ukraine dans l’Union européenne. Après l’expérience de la désindustrialisation qui a entraîné une hausse du chômage dans les pays de l’Ouest et déstabilisé les sociétés, l’idée de voir le même schéma s’appliquer dans le domaine agricole est effrayante. De plus, concentrer la production agricole en Ukraine, c’est s’exposer à une vulnérabilité si la Russie décidait un jour d’attaquer de nouveau. Espoirs Il faudra donc assurer à l’Ukraine des garanties de sécurité afin de pouvoir sereinement y investir. Une démilitarisation de la Russie semblant irréaliste, l’intégration à l’OTAN et le stationnement de troupes occidentales nombreuses sur le sol ukrainien pourraient être une solution. L’agriculture des autres pays européens devra monter en gamme afin de pouvoir faire face à une nouvelle concurrence. La réduction du nombre d’agriculteurs, dont beaucoup ne parviendront vraisemblablement pas à demeurer compétitifs, implique la nécessité de penser dès maintenant aux solutions politiques afin d’éviter une catastrophe sociale. La formation semble être une des clés, alors que les subventions ne feront que créer une distorsion de concurrence inefficace. L’entrée future de l’Ukraine dans l’Union européenne représente un risque existentiel pour notre modèle agricole actuel. Transformer ce risque en opportunité est possible, mais nécessitera une implication forte des pouvoirs publics afin de repenser l’agriculture européenne. C’est bien plus facile à dire qu’à faire et cela explique pourquoi l’entrée de l’Ukraine dans l’UE ne semble pas être pour demain. Cette entrée soulève de véritables dilemmes. Certains suggèrent d’exclure initialement l’agriculture ukrainienne du libre marché et de progressivement abaisser les droits de douane. Ce serait une façon d’intégrer l’Ukraine dans l’Union en évitant un choc fatal aux agricultures européennes. Néanmoins, assumer de créer une Europe à différents niveaux c’est ouvrir la boîte de pandore. Quant à faire patienter trop longtemps l’Ukraine hors de l’UE, c’est la priver du développement économique qu’a entraîné l’UE pour ses États-membres. Il est dans l’intérêt des démocraties européennes d’avoir une Ukraine développée et prospère à ses frontières afin de contribuer à la stabilité et la paix de la région. Ne ratons pas le coche.