Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marcel Plichta, PhD Candidate in the School of International Relations, University of St Andrews
Russia launched its largest single drone attack of the war against Ukraine’s cities on June 1. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that they faced 472 unmanned one-way attack (OWA) drones overnight.
The record may not stand for long. The prior record was on May 26, when Moscow launched some 355 drones. The day before Russia had set a record with 298 Shaheds, which itself surpassed the May 18 tally.
Russia’s enormous OWA drone attacks came as a surprise to politicians and the general public, but it’s the culmination of years of work by the Russia military. Initially purchased from Iran, Russia began building factories in 2023 to assemble and then manufacture Shaheds (Iranian-designed unmanned drones) in Russia. Greater control over production gave Russia the opportunity to expand the number of Shaheds quickly.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
It also helps them gradually upgrade their drones. Investigations into downed Shaheds show that Russia has been coating the drones in carbon, which resists detection by radar by absorbing incoming waves instead of reflecting them back. They have also been adding SIM cards to transmit data back to Russia through mobile networks.
Shaheds also had their warheads upgraded. On May 20 the Ukrainian media reported that Shaheds were using newer incendiary and fragmentation warheads which start fires and spread large volumes of shrapnel respectively to increase their effectiveness.
Russia hit Kyiv with its biggest ever drone strike a few days ago.
These upgrades were simple in order to keep the cost of the drone, its major advantage over a missile, under control. These drones are both inexpensive and long-range.
This means that an attacker such as Russia can launch hundreds every month at targets across Ukraine with little concern about how many are lost along the way. Meanwhile, the defender is stuck figuring out how to shoot all incoming drones down at a reasonable cost indefinitely.
The problem is made even more complicated by the fact that air defence systems are sorely needed at the front line to shoot down hostile aircraft, making it a difficult trade-off.
Adding to the problem is the recent production of decoy Shaheds. While they carry no warhead and pose little threat by themselves, Ukrainian air defence cannot always tell the decoy from the real thing and still need to shoot them down. In late May, Ukrainian officials told the media that up to 40% of incoming Shaheds were decoys.
Consequently, Russia’s 472-drone attack reflects all of Russia’s innovations so far. These have improved the number of drones that survive, increased lethality, while using decoys alongside armed drones to ensure as many as possible reach their target.
What are the challenges for Ukraine?
Ukraine shoots most incoming Shaheds down. Even the 472-drone attack still had 382 claimed interceptions, a rate of 81%. However, the relatively high interception rate disguises the Shahed’s benefits for Russia.
Shaheds are cheap by military standards, so launching constant attacks is a disproportionate burden for Ukrainian air defence units. Kyiv has mobilised an enormous amount of resources to protect its cities, from mobile units in trucks to counter-Shahed drones that function like a cheaper anti-aircraft missile.
That said, these systems often have short ranges, which means that the savings per interception are somewhat offset by the need to maintain many hundreds of systems across a country as large as Ukraine. Ukraine also has the option of trying to strike Russia’s Shahed factories, which they have attempted a few times.
Despite Ukraine’s evolving air defence, Russia still sees military benefits to constant Shahed attacks. In a study I contributed to last year, we found that Russia’s initial OWA drone strategy in 2022 and 2023 did little to force Ukraine to negotiate an end to the war on terms favourable to Russia.
That may still be the case now, but the volume of drones and the high tempo of attacks means that Russian strategy could well be aimed at systematically exhausting Ukrainian air defence.
As Ukraine grapples with unpredictable US military support, Kyiv is more vulnerable to running out of ammunition for its more advanced air defence systems. This means that constant Shahed attacks make it more difficult for Ukraine to stop incoming missiles, which carry much larger warheads.
Ukraine’s drone strike this week.
Of course, Ukraine has its own versions of the Shahed, which it uses to routinely launch strikes against Russian military and oil facilities. Less is known about Ukraine’s OWA drones, but they often use many similar features to Shaheds such as satellite navigation.
For Russia’s Vladimir Putin, using Shaheds is not all about military benefit. Politically, he has increasingly used Shahed attacks to project a sense of power to his domestic audiences. On May 9, Russia paraded Shaheds through Moscow’s streets as part of its annual Victory Day celebrations, which had not been done in years past.
Ukraine has begun employing its own OWA drones as part of the “Spiderweb” operation to attack military and oil infrastructure across Russia.
Russia’s 472-drone attack is unlikely to remain its largest attack for long. Putin has shown a determination to expand the scale and tempo of its drone campaign and resist Ukaine’s calls for a permanent “ceasefire in the sky”, but this week Ukraine’s drone strategy has shown that prolonging the drone war can also have serious and unexpected effects for Moscow.
So long as the conflict continues, Ukraine’s defenders will find themselves facing more, and better, drones aimed at their cities. But increasingly it looks like Russia must worry about Ukraine’s drone capabilities too.
Marcel Plichta works for Grey Dynamics Ltd. as an intelligence instructor.
Children no longer play freely in driveways, on their streets or in urban parks and courtyards. In many places, children’s freedom to roam has been diminishing for generations, but the pandemic has hastened the decline of this free play.
Since the pandemic, children’s physical activity has become ever more structured. It now mostly happens in after-school or sports clubs, while informal, child-led play continues to decline.
In many cases, children don’t have easy access to purpose-built spaces like playgrounds. They need adults to get them there. Without the use of more informal spaces to spend time with other children, this means they often lack daily opportunities for play.
Unstructured play happens when children are given the opportunity to behave freely in spaces with other children. They will often need support from adults – such as through supervision – to help them play safely.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Play – and especially unstructured opportunities for play – is essential for children. Beyond providing opportunities for physical activity, play is good for children’s development. It helps them to push boundaries, find ways of exploring friendships and resolving conflicts, and to stretch their imagination and creativity.
Schools are important for encouraging play. They can, for instance, combine play with potential benefits for physical activity levels, and with compassion for the environment and an interest in climate change and biodiversity.
But they are not the sole solution. Supporting play needs to reach beyond the school gates.
Urban play
The charity Playing Out has been working in Bristol, where we are based, and in many other cities across the UK to champion community-led “play streets”. Residents apply to their local council for temporary road closures, which allows them to let their children play on the street without fearing passing cars. Parents and carers supervise resident children to play outside their houses.
Finding ways to encourage children to play in places such as driveways, courtyards, and on their streets can also help with their independence in the outdoors. The three of us have worked on a variety of research projects on children’s interaction with the urban environment.
Lydia is involved with children and families living in an urban area of Bristol, exploring how to get children to play in these urban pockets of space. The “OK to play” project intends to create a toolkit to help families enhance these small threshold areas, such as driveways, into play spaces.
The experience of COVID lockdowns worldwide emphasised the importance of green spaces and nature for all of us in maintaining good levels of physical and mental health. This was often particularly challenging for children who lived in cities without easy access to gardens or green spaces.
Debbie has worked with artists and primary-aged children on the “What does nature mean to me” project. The children explored green spaces in Bristol, collecting natural materials for collages as well as painting, drawing and taking photographs.
The children were fascinated to see that nature resides even in the most urban places. Making art as well as spending time freely in natural spaces gave the children opportunities to explore big ideas: their hopes and fears for the future and what their role might be in the climate crisis.
Helping play happen
Adults have a crucial role in making being outside safer for children’s play. What the projects we’ve worked on have in common is willing adults who see the value of unstructured play, who can enthuse children, put in place structures to make being outside safer and support each other in enabling more children to engage in their right to play.
If you’re a parent or carer, you can take action. You could start by considering how you prioritise how your children spend their time. This might mean signing up to one less activity class, and instead using that regular time to supervise your children – and perhaps offering to supervise friends or neighbours’ children, too – as they play freely in your driveway, courtyard or other urban pocket.
Damien Hirst is never far from scandal. Perhaps best known for immersing animal corpses into formaldehyde and selling them as art, the “enfant terrible” of the 1990s Young British Artists (YBA) movement seems to court controversy for a living – and has made an extraordinary amount of money in the process. Reputedly worth around £700 million, this working-class lad “easily” topped a recent list of the world’s richest artists.
Money is at the root of a lot of the questions that hover around Hirst’s legacy to the art world as he reaches his 60th birthday. Few artists have stress-tested the question of artistic value (and price) more than him – not least in his 2007 work For The Love of God: a platinum cast of a human skull encrusted with thousands of flawless diamonds.
Last year, Hirst’s money-related motives were called into question again in an investigation by the Guardian which revealed he had backdated three formaldehyde sculptures to the 1990s when they were, in fact, made in 2017. The report also found he had backdated some of the 10,000 original spot paintings from his NFT project The Currency to 2016, despite them being made between 2018 and 2019.
Hirst’s company, Science Ltd, defended the artist by reminding critics that his art is conceptual – and that he has always been clear that what matters is “not the physical making of the object or the renewal of its parts, but rather the intention and the idea behind the artwork”. His lawyers pointed out:
The dating of artworks, and particularly conceptual artworks, is not controlled by any industry standard. Artists are perfectly entitled to be (and often are) inconsistent in their dating of works.
But some of the art world did not respond kindly to this approach. Writing about Hirst’s “backdating scandal”, New York’s Rehs Galleries asked not only if Hirst could be sued by buyers and investors, but whether he was in creative decline. And Jones accused Hirst of being stuck in the past, calling the Guardian’s findings a “betrayal” for the artist’s admirers which could “threaten to poison Hirst’s whole artistic biography”.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Ever since Hirst burst on the art scene in the 1990s with his macabre readymades (or “objets trouvé”) of dead animals in vitrines, he has divided art critics and the public alike. He has faced – and denied – multiple allegations of plagiarism and been censored by animal rights activists, while also being acclaimed as a “genius” and one of the leading global artists of the 20th and 21st centuries. Amid all the eye-watering auction sales, he has donatedartworks to numerous charities throughout his career.
So, was the backdating incident another instance of Hirst mastering the art of the concept – and even offering a sly critique of consumerism and the art world machine, of which he is such a large cog? Or was it really just a big lie by a multi-millionaire artist seeking even more financial gain?
As philosophers of art, we think our discipline can shed light on these complex questions by exploring the nature of conceptual art, aesthetic deception and the ethics of the art market. As we contemplate the legacy of Hirst at 60, we ask: must artists always be truthful?
What only the best art can attain
Hirst had a humble upbringing. Born in the English port city of Bristol in 1959, he was raised in Leeds by his Irish mother, who encouraged him to draw. He never met his father and got in trouble with the police on a few occasions in his youth. His early artistic education was rocky too: he got a grade E in art A-Level and was rejected a handful of times by art schools.
But as a teenager, he had fallen in love with Francis Bacon’s paintings, later explaining that he admired their visceral expressions of the horror of the fragile body, and that he “went into sculpture directly in reaction … to Bacon’s work”. Hirst would also use his work experience in a morgue to hone his anatomical drawing skills.
His love of conceptual art blossomed when he began studying fine art at London’s Goldsmiths University in 1986 – taught by art world legends such as Michael Craig-Martin and catching the attention of collector and businessman Charles Saatchi. Craig-Martin had risen to fame for his conceptual artwork An Oak tree (1973), consisting of a glass of water on a pristine shelf with a text asserting that the glass was, in fact, an oak tree. Hirst has described this artwork as “the greatest piece of conceptual sculpture – I still can’t get it out of my head”.
Hirst’s fascination with death culminated in his most notorious work of art, The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living (1991) – a dead tiger shark, caught off the coast of Queensland in Australia, preserved in formaldehyde in a glass vitrine.
We encountered the work, separately and ten years apart, in London and New York. We both felt inclined to dislike and dismiss it. Instead, we were simply overwhelmed. By forcing us to stare death in the face, literally, the work put everything on its edge – awe-inspiring and horrifying, life-affirming and fatal, in your face yet somehow apart and absent.
Like it or not, Hirst’s shark achieved what only the best art can: jolting us out of our everyday registers – making us confront mortality, the value of life, and the human condition.
Video: Khan Academy.
Not everyone agreed, of course. After it was exhibited in the first YBA show at the Saatchi Gallery in 1992, there was a swarm of hate. According to the Stuckist Art Group (an anti-conceptual art movement), a dead shark isn’t art. Of Hirst’s entire oeuvre, the group’s co-founders have said: “They’re bright and they’re zany – but there’s fuck all there at the end of the day.”
After Hirst won the Turner Prize in 1995 for Mother and Child, Divided (a bisected cow and calf in glass tanks) Conservative politician Norman Tebbit asked whether the art world had “gone stark raving mad”. Art critic Brian Sewell exclaimed that Hirst’s work is “no more interesting than a stuffed pike over a pub door”.
But Hirst never seemed to care about such criticism as he tackled controversial themes ranging from death, science and religion to the unrelenting power of capitalism. Along the way, he has used his power to criticise the very art world of which he forms such an important part, and from which he has gained such enormous riches.
You might say his art reached a logical endpoint with The Currency in 2021 – a conceptual experiment in which 10,000 unique, hand-painted spot paintings were reduced to money itself, as they corresponded to 10,000 non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Buyers were given the choice of keeping either the physical or the digital version, while the other would be destroyed. Speaking to the actor and art enthusiast Stephen Fry, Hirst said of these paintings:
What if I made these and treated them like money? … I’ve never really understood money. All these things – art, money, commerce – they’re all ethereal. It relies not on notebooks or pieces of paper but belief, trust.
How Hirst makes his art
It’s not just what Hirst’s art supposedly means that sometimes rocks the boat, but how he makes it.
While he began his career by personally making and manipulating his chosen artistic materials – from paint and canvas to flies and maggots – he now unapologetically relies on a studio populated by numerous assistants to produce the works that bear his name. It is largely these studio workers who pour the paint on spinning canvases, handle the formaldehyde, construct the glass boxes, and source the dead animals.
Hirst has fully endorsed the conceptual artist’s mantra of “the art is the idea”. If the artwork is the idea rather than the material object, then it should suffice merely for the artist to think or conceptualise the objects for them to count as his works of art. According to this perspective, exactly who makes the objects which are exhibited, sold and debated in the media is entirely unimportant.
But to some, this adds to the ways in which they feel deceived or “had” by Hirst. After all, at least in the western artistic tradition, the connection between artist and artwork has for hundreds of years been considered unique, sacred even. If an artist doesn’t actually make the art any more, to what extent can they really be said to be an artist at all?
Except that, in this respect, Hirst is not particularly unusual. Outsourcing the physical act of making an artwork is almost standard among contemporary artists such as Anish Kapoor, Rachel Whiteread and Jeff Koons – all of whom have long relied on trainee artists, engineers, architects, constructors and more to build their large structural works.
And while Andy Warhol was the trendsetter in this regard from the early 1960s – calling his studio The Factory for its assembly line-style of production – the practice predates even him by hundreds of years. The great masters of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, having acquired sufficient fame and fortune, were rarely the sole creators of their masterpieces.
The 17th-century Flemish artist Rubens, for example, would often leave the painting of less central or prominent features in his works to his studio assistants – many of whom, including Anthony van Dyck and Jacob Jordaens, went on to highly successful artistic careers of their own. Even 14-year-old Leonardo da Vinci started out as a studio apprentice in the workshop of the Italian sculptor and painter Andrea del Verrocchio.
Unlike Rubens, however, Hirst now only rarely makes any kind of material contribution to his works, beyond adding his signature. The Currency series involved Hirst merely adding a watermark and signature to the thousands of handmade spot paintings.
Video: HENI.
Also, Hirst’s works make no formal recognition of this studio input, whereas for Rubens, the arrangement was fairly transparent. Indeed, the division of labour was sometimes even negotiated with the painting’s buyer – the more a buyer was willing to pay, the more Rubens would paint himself.
But Hirst makes no secret of his lack of physical involvement in the material process, explaining:
You have to look at it as if the artist is an architect – we don’t have a problem that great architects don’t actually build the houses … Every single spot painting contains my eye, my hand and my heart.
Hirst’s social media pages often show the artist arriving at his studio while his team are busy at work. And clearly, not all potential buyers care about his “hands-off approach” – a large part of what they value is, precisely, the signature. In 2020, Hirst told The Idler magazine’s editor Tom Hodgkinson:
If I couldn’t delegate, I wouldn’t make any work … If I want to paint a spot painting but don’t know how I want it to look, I can go to an assistant … When they ask how you want it to look, you can say: ‘I don’t know, just do it.’ It gives you something to kick against or work against.
In the past decade, though, Hirst says he has scaled back his studio, admitting his art life felt like it was out of control:
You start by thinking you’ll get one assistant and before you know it, you’ve got biographers, fire eaters, jugglers, fucking minstrels and lyre players all wandering around.
The product of a specific place and time
Hirst disrupts our beliefs about art to an extent matched by few of his contemporaries. Always in the business of fragmenting the already vague expectations of the art market – and wider general public – he continues the trajectory outlined by fellow experimental conceptual artists such as Marcel Duchamp, Joseph Beuys, Adrian Piper, Sol LeWitt, Joseph Kosuth and Yoko Ono – now well over 50 years ago.
When the making of art moves into this level of abstraction, a historical fact like the precise inception date seems harder to pin down – and it becomes much less clear which aspects of the creative process should determine when the work was “made”.
Of course, the same question arises outside the confines of this artistic genre. How should we deal with performative arts such as theatre, jazz or opera? Is it all that important to date John Coltrane’s Blue Train to its first recording in 1957, rather than any of the other dates on which the American jazz legend performed it? Surely some aesthetic and artistic qualities are added on each occasion?
However, art in general, be it Blue Train or one of Hirst’s spot paintings, is always the product of a specific place and time. It is undoubtedly a significant fact about Hirst’s Cain and Abel (1994) – one of the artworks highlighted by the Guardian misdating investigation – that it was “made” in the YBA boom of the 1990s.
Can we engage with these pieces without bringing knowledge of this fact into our experience of them? Yes. Can we grasp at least some of their wider meaning? Almost certainly. But can we fully appreciate them as cultural objects – defining a precise moment in the evolution of art and society at large, perhaps foreseeing a certain shift in our larger value systems including what art means to us? Maybe not.
But there is another possibility we need to consider – one that touches on the worries of some of Hirst’s critics. What if Hirst intentionally misled the public for financial and commercial gain, and that the dating debacle has nothing to do with his cunning conceptual practice?
Jon Sharples, senior associate at London-based law firm Howard Kennedy – one of the first UK practices to advise on art and cultural property law – observed a few reasons why an artist might deliberately fudge or mislead on the origin of their art:
The potential for commercial pressure to do so is obvious. If works from a certain period achieve higher market prices than works from other periods, there is a clear incentive to increase the supply of such works to meet the demand for them.
Another reason Sharples offered is an art-historical one – to make the artist appear more radical: “In the linear, western conception of art history – in which ‘originality’ is often elevated above all other artistic virtues, and great store is placed in being the ‘first’ artist to arrive at a particular development – artists have sometimes been given to tampering with the historical record.”
Here, Sharples referenced the famous example of “the father of abstraction”, Russian artist Kazimir Malevich, backdating the first version of his Black Square by two years.
So, has Hirst just told a big fib about the origins of some of his art?
Philosophers largely agree that lying involves asserting something you believe to be untrue; speaking seriously but not telling the truth. And most of the time, we all assume that people around us abide by the norm that everyone ought to speak truthfully to each other. If we didn’t believe this, we would barely be able to communicate with one another. Lying involves violating this “truth norm”.
Yet, the case of art seems to stand in stark contrast to this. When we ask whether an artist has lied as part of their artistic practice, it is often not clear that there is a straightforward truth norm in the art world to be violated: it’s not clear that the artist is speaking ‘seriously’ in the first place.
I (Daisy) have researched in depth the reasons why lying in the art world is such a tricky business. In many exhibitions, it is the aesthetic experience that is of primary value. If what matters is creating beauty, then straightforward truth is not the point.
Moreover, even in cases where the art is designed to convey a specific message, it’s tricky to say in what sense they ought to tell “the truth”. Many artworks represent fictional scenarios which needn’t be fully accurate.
For instance, it was quite acceptable in the 16th century for painters of religious paintings to give central biblical figures inaccurate clothing – and for portrait artists not to paint their sitter’s flaws and blemishes. And in the perplexing art world of the 21st century, many post-1960 artforms are designed to challenge and critique the very nature of truth itself.
All of which means straightforward “truth games” do not operate as smoothly in the art world as they do in the ordinary world. With its self-reflective and self-critical structure, the art world of today offers a space to think open-endedly and creatively. Do you expect everything you see in an art gallery, or even speeches by conceptual artists, to be straightforwardly “true”? We don’t think so.
The art world is hardly renowned for its straightforwardly communicated messages. To accuse Hirst of lying assumes he is playing the truth game that the rest of us are signed up to in the first place. And it’s not clear he is.
Hirst might be closer to a novelist or actor who plays with and explores the very nature of truth and falsehood. In this way, he’s maybe at most a “bullshitter” who doesn’t play – or care for – the truth game at all.
The real problem?
But this fascination with Hirst’s dating practices may overlook the more important – if equally complex – problem of how his art works were made, rather than when. Are the ethical concerns about the production of Hirst’s enormous oeuvre the real issue in assessing his legacy as an artist?
For instance, Hirst has been criticised for treating his staff as “disposable”. During the peak of the COVID pandemic, he laid off 63 of his studio assistants even though his company had reportedly received £15 million of emergency loans from the UK government.
And while Hirst’s lawyers insist his studios always adhere to health-and-safety regulations, some of the “factory line” workers producing artworks for The Currency were allegedly left with repetitive strain injuries. One artist described their year-long toil as “very, very tedious”. Another commented on the work tables being at a low level, forcing them to constantly bend down.
Hirst has publicly praised assistants such as the artist Rachel Howard, who he described as “the best person who ever painted spots for me”. Likewise, Howard described working with Hirst as “a very good symbiotic” relationship.
Hirst is famous for exhibiting slain animals … and for the use of thousands of butterflies whose wings are torn and glued on various objects. Death and the taste of the macabre serve to attract attention. Then wealthy collectors such as Saatchi and even the prestigious Sotheby’s artificially inflate the prices of Hirst’s junk. It’s a squalid commercial operation based on death and contempt for living and sentient beings.
Video: Channel 4 News.
Indeed, some of Hirst’s macabre formaldehyde pieces are known for rotting a little too much. The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living originally deteriorated due to an improper preservation technique, and had to be replaced by another shark caught off the same Australian coast. It’s not clear how many sharks have now been killed – or will need to be killed in the future – to preserve this masterpiece.
Further concerns have been raised about the environmental ethics of Hirst’s art, including that The Currency project incurred a hefty carbon footprint because of its reliance on blockchain technology. While Hirst used a more environmentally-friendly sidechain to release his NFTs, he still received payment via bitcoin, which has a far higher energy consumption.
Traditionally, art historians, critics and investors have championed an artwork’s meaning over any of its moral flaws in its production. But the ethics of artmaking are now being questioned by philosophers such as ourselves, as well as by many influential figures in the art world. Artworks that incur large carbon footprints, cause damage to ecosystems, or use and kill animals, are now considered morally flawed in these ways.
Philosophers such as Ted Nannicelli argue that these ethical defects can actually diminish the artistic value of the work of art. Meanwhile, artists such as Angela Singer and Ben Rubin and Jen Thorp use their art for animal and eco-activism, while doing no harm to creatures or the ecosystem in the process.
As we both acknowledge, Hirst’s shark expressed a laudable meaning in an arresting way. But is this enough to excuse the (repeated) killing of this awesome animal? Do we become complicit in its death by praising it as art? It is a question anybody who was impressed by its sheer aesthetic presence all those years ago should ask themselves.
In this and many other ways, Hirst’s work continues to raise fundamental questions about art – long after it was created, or dated. If nothing else, surely this confirms his enduring position in the British art establishment.
Damien Hirst’s representatives were contacted about the criticisms of Hirst that are highlighted in this article, but they did not respond by the time of publication.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Elisabeth Schellekens has received funding from Vetenskapsrådet (Swedish Funding Council) as Principal Investigator for research into Aesthetic Perception and Aesthetic Cognition (2019-22), and an AHRC Innovation Award on Perception and Conceptual Art with Peter Goldie (2003).
Daisy Dixon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Masaya Llavaneras Blanco, Assistant Professor of Development Studies, Huron University College, Western University
On May 9, Lourdia Jean-Pierre, a 32-year-old Haitian migrant woman, died after giving birth in her rural home in El Ceibo, Dominican Republic. The cause of death was a postpartum hemorrhage, according to a news report in The Haitian Times.
Despite needing medical attention, Jean-Pierre was reportedly afraid to go to the hospital. Why? She feared being deported.
Last October, the Dominican government initiated a new wave of mass deportations as President Luis Abinader ordered a quota of 10,000 Haitians deported per week. On April 6, he announced new extraordinary measures to control immigration.
The rollout of this policy began on April 21. Migration officials were assigned to work in hospitals and required migrants to show their documents before receiving medical care or face deportation.
The new protocol does not specify pregnant and breastfeeding women. However, it effectively targets them in hospitals. Evidence of this is the fact that the policy was immediately implemented in the 33 hospitals “that report the largest number of pregnant migrant women — mainly those of Haitian origin.”
The targeting of pregnant women is not new
The targeting of pregnant migrants in the DR isn’t new. In September 2021, the Ministry of the Interior and Police announced a protocol to limit pregnant migrant women’s access to health care in the DR.
Dozens of deportation raids were carried out in maternity wards in the capital and other large urban centres. According to immigration officials, attendance at pre-natal appointments fell by 80 per cent by the end of 2021.
Deportation raids in maternity wards slowed down between 2022 and 2024, but women were still afraid to go for their check-up appointments. Pre-natal care is essential in preventing maternal deaths.
This happened to Mirryam Ferdinad who, according to community reports, went to a hospital for a programmed Caesarean section and was instead detained in Haina, the country’s largest migrant detention centre. Ferdinad was released one week on Saturday May 31st. Is it possible to add that update with this link? https://www.instagram.com/p/DKWAD44N_N7/?igsh=cXY5a21xY2pud2tp
Elena Lorac, co-founder of Reconocido, an advocacy group of denationalized Dominicans of Haitian descent, said the situation is exacerbated by structural racism.
In contrast, DR’s nationalist groups, such as the Antigua Orden Dominicana, emphasize their colonial Spanish roots.
Reproductive health rights under attack
Haitian pregnant women are between a rock and a hard place. Hemorrhages and unsafe abortions are among the main causes of maternal mortality. Most of these cases are preventable if pregnant people have access to health services.
Maternal mortality in the DR is lower. But its mistreatment of pregnant migrants, and its criminalization of abortion in all circumstances, pose significant risks for women.
Haiti: A country in humanitarian crisis
Deported migrants usually have no family or social networks in the locations they are deported at. And they have limited to no access to health services and social services.
Dominican-Haitians also get deported because they have no legal documents despite having lived there their whole lives. They often have never been to Haiti, and barely speak Haitian Creole.
Droughts are becoming more severe and widespread across the globe. But it’s not just changing rainfall patterns that are to blame. The atmosphere is also getting thirstier.
In a new study published in Nature, my colleagues and I show that this rising “atmospheric thirst” – also known as atmospheric evaporative demand (AED) – is responsible for about 40% of the increase in drought severity over the last four decades (1981-2022).
Imagine rainfall as income and AED as spending. Even if your income (rainfall) stays the same, your balance goes into deficit if your spending (AED) increases. That’s exactly what’s happening with drought: the atmosphere is demanding more water than the land can afford to lose.
As the planet warms, this demand grows – drawing more moisture from soils, rivers, lakes, and even plants. With this growing thirst, droughts are getting more severe even where rain hasn’t significantly declined.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
The process of AED describes how much water the atmosphere wants from the surface. The hotter, sunnier, windier and drier the air is, the more water it requires – even if there isn’t less rain.
So even in places where rainfall hasn’t changed much, we’re still seeing worsening droughts. This thirstier atmosphere is drying things out faster and more intensely and introducing more stress when this water is not available.
Our new analysis reveals that AED doesn’t just make existing droughts worse – it expands the areas affected by drought. From 2018 to 2022, the global land area experiencing drought rose by 74%, and 58% of that expansion was due to increased AED.
Our study highlights that the year 2022 stood out as the most drought-stricken year in over four decades. More than 30% of the world’s land experienced moderate to extreme drought conditions. In both Europe and east Africa, the drought was especially severe in 2022 – this was driven largely by a sharp increase in AED, which intensified drying even where rainfall hadn’t dropped significantly.
In Europe alone, widespread drying had major consequences: reduced river flows hindered hydropower generation, crop yields suffered due to water stress, plus many cities faced water shortages. This put unprecedented pressure on water supply, agriculture and energy sectors, threatening livelihoods and economic stability.
My team’s new research brings clarity to the dynamics of drought. We used high-quality global climate data, including temperature, wind speed, humidity and solar radiation – these are the key meteorological variables that influence how much water the atmosphere can draw from the land and vegetation. The team combined all these ingredients to measure AED – essentially, how “thirsty” the air is.
Then, using a widely recognised drought index that includes both rainfall and this atmospheric thirst, we could track when, where and why droughts are getting more severe. With this metric, we can calculate how much of that worsening is due to the atmosphere’s growing thirst.
The future implications of this increasing atmospheric thirst are huge, especially for regions already vulnerable to drought such as western and eastern Africa, western and south Australia, and the southwestern US where AED was responsible for more than 60% of drought severity over the past two decades.
Without factoring in AED during drought monitoring and planning, governments and communities may underestimate the true risk they face. With global temperatures expected to rise further, we can expect even more frequent and severe droughts. We need to prepare. That involves understanding and planning for this growing atmospheric thirst.
Driving drought
Knowing what is causing droughts in each specific location enables smarter climate adaptation. AED must be a central part of how we monitor, model and plan for drought.
Identifying the specific drivers of drought is essential for tailoring effective ways to cope with drought. If droughts are mainly due to declining rainfall, then the focus should be on water storage and conservation. But if AED is the main driver – as it is in many places now – then strategies must address evaporative loss (i.e. the amount of water lost from the surface and plants to the atmosphere) and plant water stress. This might involve planting drought-resistant crops, constructing irrigation systems that use water more efficiently, improving soil health or restoring habitats to keep moisture in the land.
As our research shows, rising AED – driven by global warming – is intensifying drought severity even where rainfall hasn’t declined. Ignoring it means underestimating risk.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Solomon Gebrechorkos receives funding from the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO; grant no. 201880) and the UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC; grant no. NE/S017380/1).
Source: The Conversation – France – By Kevin Parthenay, Professeur des Universités en science politique, membre de l’Institut Universitaire de France (IUF), Université de Tours
The United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC 3) will open in Nice, France, on June 9, 2025. It is the third conference of its kind, following events in New York in 2017 and Lisbon in 2022. Co-hosted by France and Costa Rica, the conference will bring together 150 countries and nearly 30,000 individuals to discuss the sustainable management of our planet’s oceans.
This event is presented as a pivotal moment, but it is actually part of a significant shift in marine governance that has been going on for decades. While ocean governance was once designed to protect the marine interests of states, nowadays it must also address the numerous climate and environmental challenges facing the oceans.
Media coverage of this “political moment” however should not overshadow the urgent need to reform the international law applicable to the oceans. Failing that, this summit will risk being nothing more than another platform for vacuous rhetoric.
To understand what is at stake, it is helpful to begin with a brief historical overview of marine governance.
The meaning of ocean governance
Ocean governance changed radically over the past few decades. The focus shifted from the interests of states and the corresponding body of international law, solidified in the 1980s, to a multilateral approach initiated at the end of the Cold War, involving a wide range of actors (international organizations, NGOs, businesses, etc.).
This governance has gradually moved from a system of obligations pertaining to different marine areas and regimes of sovereignty associated to them (territorial seas, exclusive economic zones (EEZs), and the high seas) to a system that takes into consideration the “health of the oceans.” The aim of this new system is to manage the oceans in line with the sustainable development goals.
Understanding how this shift occurred can help us grasp what is at stake in Nice. The 1990s were marked by declarations, summits and other global initiatives. However, as evidenced below, the success of these numerous initiatives has so far been limited. This explains why we are now seeing a return to an approach more firmly rooted in international law, as evidenced by the negotiations on the international treaty on plastic pollution, for example.
UNOC 3 is a direct offshoot of this convention: discussions on sustainable ocean management stem from the limitations of this founding text, often referred to as the “Constitution of the Seas”.
UNCLOS was adopted in December 1982 at the Montego Bay Convention in Jamaica and came into force in November 1994, following a lengthy process of international negotiations that resulted in 60 states ratifying the text. At the outset, the discussions focused on the interests of developing countries, especially those located along the coast, in the midst of a crisis in multilateralism. The United States managed to exert its influence in this arena without ever officially adopting the Convention. Since then, the convention has been a pillar of marine governance.
It established new institutions, including the International Seabed Authority, entrusted with the responsibility of regulating the exploitation of mineral resources on the seabed in areas that fall outside the scope of national jurisdiction. UNCLOS is the source of nearly all international case law on the subject.
Although the convention did define maritime areas and regulate their exploitation, new challenges quickly emerged: on the one hand, the Convention was essentially rendered meaningless by the eleven-year delay between its adoption and implementation. On the other hand, the text also became obsolete due to new developments in the use of the seas, particularly technological advances in fishing and seabed exploitation.
The early 1990s marked a turning point in the traditional maritime legal order. The management of the seas and oceans came to be viewed within an environmental perspective, a process that was driven by major international conferences and declarations such as the Rio Declaration (1992), the Millennium Declaration (2005), and the Rio+20 Summit (2012). These resulted in the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the UN’s 17 goals aimed at protecting the planet (with SDG 14, “Life Below Water”, directly addressing issues related to the oceans) and the world’s population by 2030.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED, or Earth Summit), held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, ushered in the era of “sustainable development” and, thanks to scientific discoveries made in the previous decade, helped link environmental and maritime issues.
From 2008 to 2015, environmental issues became more important as evidenced by the regular adoption of environmental and climate resolutions.
A shift in UN language
Biodiversity and the sustainable use of the oceans (SDG 14) are the two core themes that became recurring topics in the international agenda since 2015, with ocean-related issues now including items like acidification, plastic pollution and the decline of marine biodiversity.
The United Nations General Assembly resolution on oceans and the law of the seas (LOS is a particularly useful tool to acknowledge this evolution: drafted annually since 1984, the resolution has covered all aspects of the United Nations maritime regime while reflecting new issues and concerns.
Some environmental terms were initially absent from the text but have become more prevalent since the 2000s.
This evolution is also reflected in the choice of words.
While LOS resolutions from 1984 to 1995 focused mainly on the implementation of the treaty and the economic exploitation of marine resources, more recent resolutions have used terms related to sustainability, ecosystems, and maritime issues.
Toward a new law of the oceans?
As awareness of the issues surrounding the oceans and their link to climate change has grown, the oceans gradually became a global “final frontier” in terms of knowledge.
The types of stakeholders involved in ocean issues have also changed. The expansion of the ocean agenda has been driven by a more “environmentalist” orientation, with scientific communities and environmental NGOs standing at the forefront of this battle. This approach, which represents a shift away from a monopoly held by international law and legal practitioners, clearly is a positive development.
However, marine governance has so far relied mainly on non-binding declaratory measures (such as the SDGs) and remains ineffective. A cycle of legal consolidation toward a “new law of the oceans” therefore appears to be underway and the challenge is now to supplement international maritime law with a new set of measures. These include:
the negotiation of a treaty on marine plastic pollution, still in progress and not finalized yet;
the agreement on fisheries subsidies adopted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) to preserve fish stocks, which so far has failed to be fully implemented;
lastly, the Seabed Authority’s Mining Code, designed to regulate seabed mining.
Of these agreements, the BBNJ is arguably the most ambitious: since 2004, negotiators have been working toward filling the gaps of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by creating an instrument on marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
The agreement addresses two major concerns for states: sovereignty and the equitable distribution of resources.
Adopted in 2023, this historic agreement has yet to enter into force. For this to happen, sixty ratifications are required and to date, only 29 states have ratified the treaty (including France in February 2025, editor’s note).
The BBNJ process is therefore at a crossroads and the priority today is not to make new commitments or waste time on complicated high-level declarations, but to address concrete and urgent issues of ocean management, such as the frantic quest for critical minerals launched in the context of the Sino-American rivalry, and exemplified by Donald Trump’s signing of a presidential decree in April 2025 allowing seabed mining – a decision that violates the International Seabed Authority’s well established rules on the exploitation of these deep-sea resources.
At a time when U.S. unilateralism is leading to a policy of fait accompli, the UNOC 3 should, more than anything and within the framework of multilateralism, consolidate the existing obligations regarding the protection and sustainability of the oceans.
Kevin Parthenay is a member of the Institut Universitaire de France (IUF).
Rafael Mesquita ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Richard Calland, Emeritus Associate Professor in Public Law, UCT. Visiting Adjunct Professor, WITS School of Governance; Director, Africa Programme, University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, University of Cambridge
But there is an opportunity to recast development finance as strategic investment: “country platforms”.
Country platforms are government-led, nationally owned mechanisms that bring together a country’s climate priorities, investment needs and reform agenda, and align them with the interests of development partners, private investors and implementing agencies. They function as a strategic hub: convening actors, coordinating funding, and curating pipelines of projects for investment.
Think of them as the opposite of donor-driven fragmentation. Instead of dozens of disconnected projects driven by external priorities, a country platform enables governments to set the agenda and direct finance to where it is needed most. That could be renewable energy, climate-smart agriculture, resilient infrastructure, or nature-based solutions.
The Independent High Level Expert Group on Climate Finance, on which I serve, is striving to find new ways to ramp up finance – both public and private – in quality and quantity. I agree with those who argue that country platforms could be the innovation that unlocks the capital urgently needed to tackle climate overshoot and buttress economic development.
The model is already being tested. More than ten countries have launched their platforms, and more are in the pipeline.
For African countries, the opportunity could not be more timely. African governments are racing to deliver their Nationally Determined Contributions. These are the commitments they’ve made to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as part of climate change mitigation targets set out in the Paris Agreement. Implementing these plans is often being done under severe fiscal constraints.
At the same time global capital is looking for investment opportunities. But it needs to be convinced that the rewards will outweigh the risks.
Where it’s being tested
In Africa, South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Partnership has demonstrated both the potential and the complexity of a country platform. Egypt and Senegal also have country platforms at different stages of implementation. Kenya and Nigeria are exploring similar mechanisms. The African Union’s Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy calls for country platforms across the continent.
New entrants can learn from countries that started first.
But country platforms come in different shapes and sizes according to the context.
Another promising example is emerging through Mission 300, an initiative of the World Bank and African Development Bank, working with partners like The Rockefeller Foundation, Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet, and Sustainable Energy for All. It aims to connect 300 million people to clean electricity by 2030.
Central to this initiative are Compact Delivery and Monitoring Units. These are essentially country platforms anchored in electrification. They reflect how a well-structured country platform can make an impact. Twelve African countries are already moving in this direction. All announced their Mission 300 compacts at the Africa Heads of State Summit in Tanzania.
This growing cohort reflects a continental commitment to putting energy-driven country platforms at the heart of Africa’s development architecture.
Why now – and why Africa?
A well-functioning country platform can help in a number of ways.
Firstly, it can give the political and economic leadership a clear goal. The platform can survive elections and show stability, certainty and transparency to the investment world.
Secondly, national ownership and strategic alignment can reduce risk and build confidence. That would encourage investment.
Thirdly, it builds trust among development partners and investors through clear priorities, transparency, and national ownership.
Fourthly, it moves beyond isolated pilot projects to system-level transformation – meaning structural change. The transition in one sector, energy for example, creates new value chains that create more, better and safer jobs. Country platforms put African governments in charge of their own economic development, not as passive recipients of climate finance.
The country sets its investment priorities and then the match-making with international climate finance can begin.
Making it work: what’s needed
Developing the data on which a country bases its investment and development plans, and blending those with the fiscal, climate and nature data, is complex. For this reason country platforms require investment in institutional capacity, cross-ministerial collaboration, and strong coordination between finance ministries, environment agencies and economic planners. And especially, in leadership capability.
African countries must take charge of this capacity and capability acceleration.
Second, development partners can respond by providing money as well as supporting African leadership, aligning with national strategies, and being willing to co-design mechanisms that meet both investor expectations and local realities.
Capacity is especially crucial given the scale of Africa’s needs. According to the African Development Bank, Africa will require over US$200 billion annually by 2030 to meet its climate goals. Donor aid will provide only a fraction of this. It will require smart, coordinated investment and careful debt management. Country platforms provide the structure to govern the process.
Seizing the opportunity
Country platforms represent one of the most promising innovations in climate and development finance architecture. Properly designed and led, they offer African countries the opportunity to take ownership of their climate and development futures – on their own terms.
Country platforms could be the “buckle” that finally enables the supply and demand sides of climate finance to come together. It will require commitment, strategic and technical capability, and, above all, smart leadership.
Richard Calland works for the University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership. He is also an Emeritus Associate Professor at the University of Cape Town and an Adjunct Visiting Professor at the University of Witwatersrand School of Governance. He serves on the Advisory Council of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution, Chairs of the Board of Sustainability Education and is a member of the Board of Chapter Zero Southern Africa.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By John Nielsen-Gammon, Regents Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M University
Hail can be destructive, yet the cost of the damage often isn’t publicly tracked.NOAA/NSSL
On Jan. 5, 2025, at about 2:35 in the afternoon, the first severe hailstorm of the season dropped quarter-size hail in Chatham, Mississippi. According to the federal storm events database, there were no injuries, but it caused $10,000 in property damage.
How do we know the storm caused $10,000 in damage? We don’t.
That estimate is probably a best guess from someone whose primary job is weather forecasting. Yet these guesses, and thousands like them, form the foundation for publicly available tallies of the costs of severe weather.
If the damage estimates from hailstorms are consistently lower in one county than the next, potential property buyers might think it’s because there’s less risk of hailstorms. Instead, it might just be because different people are making the estimates.
We are atmosphericscientists at Texas A&M University who lead the Office of the Texas State Climatologist. Through our involvement in state-level planning for weather-related disasters, we have seen county-scale patterns of storm damage over the past 20 years that just didn’t make sense. So, we decided to dig deeper.
We looked at storm event reports for a mix of seven urban and rural counties in southeast Texas, with populations ranging from 50,000 to 5 million. We included all reported types of extreme weather. We also talked with people from the two National Weather Service offices that cover the area.
Storm damage investigations vary widely
Typically, two specific types of extreme weather receive special attention.
After a tornado, the National Weather Service conducts an on-site damage survey, examining its track and destruction. That survey forms the basis for the official estimate of a tornado’s strength on the enhanced Fujita scale. Weather Service staff are able to make decent damage cost estimates from knowledge of home values in the area.
They also investigate flash flood damage in detail, and loss information is available from the National Flood Insurance Program, the main source of flood insurance for U.S. homes.
Tornadoes in May 2025 destroyed homes in communities in several states, including London, Ky. AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley
Most other losses from extreme weather are privately insured, if they’re insured at all.
Insured loss information is collected by reinsurance companies – the companies that insure the insurance companies – and gets tabulated for major events. Insurance companies use their own detailed information to try to make better decisions on rates than their competitors do, so event-based loss data by county from insurance companies isn’t readily available.
Losing billion-dollar disaster data
There’s one big window into how disaster damage has changed over the years in the U.S.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, compiled information for major disasters, including insured losses by state. Bulk data won’t tell communities or counties about their specific risk, but it enabled NOAA to calculate overall damage estimates, which it released as its billion-dollar disasters list.
From that program, we know that the number and cost of billion-dollar disasters in the United States has increased dramatically in recent years. News articles and even scientific papers often point to climate change as the primary culprit, but a much larger driver has been the increasing number and value of buildings and other types of infrastructure, particularly along hurricane-prone coasts.
Previous estimates can still be retrieved from NOAA’s online data archive, but by shutting down that program, the window into current and future disaster losses and insurance claims is now closed.
Emergency managers at the county level also make local damage estimates, but the resources they have available vary widely. They may estimate damages only when the total might be large enough to trigger a disaster declaration that makes relief funds available from the federal government.
Patching together very rough estimates
Without insurance data or county estimates, the local offices of the National Weather Service are on their own to estimate losses.
There is no standard operating procedure that every office must follow. One office might choose to simply not provide damage estimates for any hailstorms because the staff doesn’t see how it could come up with accurate values. Others may make estimates, but with varying methods.
The result is a patchwork of damage estimates. Accurate values are more likely for rare events that cause extensive damage. Loss estimates from more frequent events that don’t reach a high damage threshold are generally far less reliable.
The number of severe hail reports in southeast Texas listed in the National Centers for Environmental Information’s storm events database is strongly correlated with population. The county with the most reports and greatest detail in those reports is home to Houston. Hailstorms in the three easternmost counties are rarely associated with damage estimates. John Nielsen-Gammon and B.J. Baule
Do you want to look at local damage trends? Forget about it. For most extreme weather events, estimation methods vary over time and are not documented.
Do you want to direct funding to help communities improve resilience to natural disasters where the need is greatest? Forget about it. The places experiencing the largest per capita damages depend not just on actual damages but on the different practices of local National Weather Service offices.
Are you moving to a location that might be vulnerable to extreme weather? Companies are starting to provide localized risk estimates through real estate websites, but the algorithms tend to be proprietary, and there’s no independent validation.
4 steps to improve disaster data
We believe a few fixes could make NOAA’s storm events database and the corresponding values in the larger SHELDUS database, managed by Arizona State University, more reliable. Both databases include county-level disasters and loss estimates for some of those disasters.
First, the National Weather Service could develop standard procedures for local offices for estimating disaster damages.
Second, additional state support could encourage local emergency managers to make concrete damage estimates from individual events and share them with the National Weather Service. The local emergency manager generally knows the extent of damage much better than a forecaster sitting in an office a few counties away.
Third, state or federal governments and insurance companies can agree to make public the aggregate loss information at the county level or other scale that doesn’t jeopardize the privacy of their policyholders. If all companies provide this data, there is no competitive disadvantage for doing so.
Fourth, NOAA could create a small “tiger team” of damage specialists to make well-informed, consistent damage estimates of larger events and train local offices on how to handle the smaller stuff.
With these processes in place, the U.S. wouldn’t need a billion-dollar disasters program anymore. We’d have reliable information on all the disasters.
John Nielsen-Gammon receives funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the State of Texas.
William Baule receives funding from NOAA, the State of Texas, & the Austin Community Foundation.
Some Edmonton Oilers fans are pinning their Stanley Cup hopes on captain Connor McDavid.AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell
Déjà vu is a common occurrence in the world of sports, and the Edmonton Oilers are no strangers to repeat matchups. The Canadian team faced off against the New York Islanders in both 1983 and ’84 for hockey’s biggest prize, the Stanley Cup. In this year’s National Hockey League finals, the Oilers will try to avenge their Game 7 loss to the Florida Panthers in 2024.
Edmontonians who have been “loyal to the oil,” as fans say, have been waiting for redemption ever since. The Trump administration’s threats toward its northern neighbor has fueled a wave of nationalism, making even more fans eager for a Canadian team to win the Stanley Cup – which has not happened since 1993. With hopes pinned to Edmonton, the finals also brings renewed attention to some of Canada’s biggest exports: hockey and oil.
The Oilers also evoke another aspect of Canadian society that, for some, has almost religious importance: resource extraction. In American and Canadian culture, oil has long been entangled with religion. It’s a national blessing from God, in some people’s eyes, and a means to the “good life” for those who persevere to find it. For many people in communities whose economies center around resource extraction, the possibility of success is valued above its environmental risks.
We are scholars of religion who study sports and how oil shapes society, or petro-cultures. The Edmonton Oilers showcase a worldview in which triumph, luck and rugged work pay off – beliefs at home on the ice or in the oil field. The Stanley Cup Final offers a glimpse into how the oil industry has helped shaped the religious fervor around Canada’s favorite sport.
Edmonton Oilers fan Dale Steil’s boots before the team’s playoff game against the Los Angeles Kings on April 26, 2024. AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez
Boomtown
Edmonton is the capital of Alberta, a province known for its massive oil, gas and oil sands reserves. With five refineries producing an average of 3.8 million barrels a day, oil and gas is Alberta’s biggest industry – and a way of life.
This is especially true in Edmonton, known as the “Oil Capital of Canada.” Here, oil not only structures the local economy, but it also shapes identities, architecture and everyday experiences.
Visit the West Edmonton Mall, for example, and you’ll see a statue of three oil workers drilling, reminding shoppers that petroleum is the bedrock of their commerce. Visit the Canadian Energy Museum to learn how oil and gas have remade the region since the late 1940s, and glimpse items such as engraved hard hats and the “Oil Patch Kid,” a spin on the iconic “Cabbage Patch Kids” toys. Tour the Greater Edmonton area and see how pump jacks dot the horizon. Oil is everywhere, shaping futures, fortunes and possibility.
Set against this backdrop, the Oilers’ name is unsurprising. It is not uncommon, after all, to name teams after local industries. Football’s Pittsburgh Steelers pay homage to the steel mills that once employed much of the team’s fan base. The Tennessee Oilers were originally the Houston Oilers, prompting other Texas teams such as the XFL’s Roughnecks to follow suit. Further north, the name of basketball’s Detroit Pistons references car manufacturing.
Teams with industry-inspired names play double duty, venerating both a place and a trade. Some fans are not only cheering for the home team, but also cheering for themselves – affirming that their industry and their labor matter.
Ales Hemsky of the Edmonton Oilers skates out from under the oil derrick for a game at Rexall Place in 2008 in Edmonton, Alberta. Andy Devlin/NHLI via Getty Images
In a TikTok video from last year’s Stanley Cups playoffs, a man overcome with joy at the Oilers’ victory over the Dallas Stars claps his hands and hops around his living room. The caption reads, “My first-generation immigrant oil rig working Filipino father who has never played a second of hockey in his life … happily cheering for the Oilers advancing in the playoffs. Better Bring that cup home for him oily boys.” He appears to be cheering for the Oilers not because they are a hockey team, but because they are an oil team.
And indeed, the Oilers are an oily team. The Oilers’ Oilfield Network, for example, describes itself as “exclusively promot[ing] companies in the Oil and Gas industry,” allowing leaders to connect “through the power of Oilers hockey.”
The Oilers’ connection with industry is further underscored by their logos. The current one features a simple drop of oil, but past designs featured machinery gears and an oil worker pulling a lever shaped like a hockey stick.
Simply put, “Edmonton is all oil,” Oilers goaltender Stuart Skinner shared after defeating the Dallas Stars to win the 2025 Western Conference Final.
After the British North America Act founded Canada in 1867, the new nation searched for a distinctive identity through sport and other cultural forms.
Enter hockey. The winter game evolved in Canada from the Gaelic game of “shinty” and the First Nations’ game of lacrosse and soon became part of the glue holding the nation together.
Ever since, media, politicians, sports groups and major industries have helped fuel fan fervor and promoted hockey as integral to Canada’s rugged frontiersman character.
In 1936, Imperial Oil, one of Canada’s largest petroleum companies, began sponsoring Hockey Night in Canada, a national radio show that reached millions each week. Several years later, Imperial Oil played a major role in bringing the show to television, where the Imperial Oil Choir sang the theme song. Imperial Oil and its gas stations, Esso, also sponsored youth hockey programs across the nation. In 2019, Imperial inked a deal to be the NHL’s “official retail fuel” in Canada.
Striking it rich
Connections between hockey and industry in Alberta’s oil country aren’t just about sponsorships. Central to both cultures is the idea of luck – historically, one of the many things it takes to extract fossil fuels. “Striking it rich” in the oil fields has become entangled with the idea of divine providence, especially among the many Christian laborers.
A Canadian oil worker kisses his wife and daughter goodbye as he sets off to work in northern Alberta in the 1950s. John Chillingworth/Getty Images
Oil represents fortune, and who wouldn’t want to borrow a bit of that for their team? Sports are thrilling because sometimes talent, team chemistry and the home-field advantage still lose to a stroke of good luck. Oil culture pairs the idea of divine favor with an insistence on rough-and-tumble endurance, similar to hockey.
Sometimes if you don’t strike it rich the first time, you have to keep on drilling. The next well may be the one to bring wealth. Oil prospectors know this, but so do sports fans who maintain hope season to season.
Soon fans from around the world will join Edmonton locals in rooting for the Oilers. They’ll throw their hands up in despair if captain Connor McDavid enters the “sin bin” – the penalty box – or dance in celebration to the Oilers’ theme, “La Bamba.” Some of them will be cheering, too, for oil.
This is an updated version of an article originally published on June 19, 2024.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In his first general audience in Rome, Pope Leo XIV referred to Vincent van Gogh’s painting “Sower at Sunset” and called it a symbol of hope. A brilliant setting sun illuminates a field as a farmer walks toward the right, sowing seeds.
Leo referred to Christ’s Parable of the Sower, a story in the Gospel that speaks to the need to do good works. “Every word of the Gospel is like a seed sown in the soil of our lives,” he said, and highlighted that the soil is not only our heart, “but also the world, the community, the church.”
He noted that “behind the sower, van Gogh painted the grain already ripe,” and Leo called it an image of hope which shows that somehow the seed has borne fruit.
Van Gogh painted “Sower at Sunset” in 1888, when he was living in Arles in southern France. At the time, he was creating art alongside his friend Paul Gauguin and feeling very happy about the future. The painting reflects his optimism.
Van Gogh’s inspiration
In November 1888, van Gogh wrote to his brother Theo, in whom he frequently confided, about “Sower at Sunset.” He described its beautiful colors: “Immense lemon-yellow disc for the sun. Green-yellow sky with pink clouds. The field is violet, the sower and the tree Prussian Blue.”
Van Gogh’s painting was inspired by French artist Jean-Francois Millet’s 1860 painting, “The Sower.” But he transformed Millet’s composition, in which a dark, isolated figure dominates, and deliberately set the sower in the midst of a landscape transformed by the sun.
Other artists, including the Norwegian Emanuel Vigeland, explicitly depicted the Parable of the Sower. Vigeland’s series of stained-glass windows in an Oslo church explains each passage’s meaning. As the sower works, some seeds fall by the wayside and the birds immediately eat them, indicating those who hear the word of God but do not listen.
Norwegian artist Emanuel Vigeland’s ‘Parable of the Sower,’ 1917-19, Lutheran church of Borgestad, near Oslo, Norway. Virginia Raguin
Some seeds fall on stony ground and cannot take root, a symbol of those with little tenacity. Others fall among thorns and are choked. Vigeland juxtaposed a dramatic image of a miser counting piles of money, indicating how the man’s life has become choked by desire for material gain.
The final passage of the parable states that some seeds fell on good ground and yielded a hundredfold. Vigeland’s depiction shows an image of an abundant harvest of grain next to a man seated on the ground and cradling a child in his lap.
What it says about Leo
Van Gogh’s painting corresponds to many of the ideas the new pope expressed in the first days of his papacy. Leo observed: “In the center of the painting is the sun, not the sower, [which reminds us that] it is God who moves history, even if he sometimes seems absent or distant. It is the sun that warms the clods of the earth and ripens the seed.”
The theme of the dignity of labor is also inherent in the image of the sower being deeply engrossed in physical labor, which relates to the pope’s choice of his name. The pope stated that he took on the name Leo XIV “mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic encyclical Rerum Novarum addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution.” Leo XIII was referring to the social question of economic injustice in the meager rewards for workers even as owners made great profits from the Industrial Revolution.
The pope saw Van Gogh’s image of the sower, like Vigeland’s, as a message of hope. That message, to him, fits with the theme of hope of The Jubilee Year proclaimed by Leo’s predecessor, Francis. Leo also expressed hope that humans listening to God would embrace service to others.
Virginia Raguin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
People often imagine childhood as a time when the body functions at its best, but about 25% of children experience chronic pain. I was one of them: Starting in elementary school, migraines incapacitated me for hours at a stretch with excruciating pain that made it impossible to go to school, much less talk to friends or have fun.
Chronic pain in children is not only widespread but also persistent. Many continue to experience symptoms for years on end. For example, one-third of children with abdominal pain experience symptoms that last into adulthood. Children with chronic pain are also more likely to come from families that have less income, have greater health care barriers, report more safety concerns about their environment and experience greater exposure to violence than those without chronic pain.
The most studied and perhaps most effective approach for treating chronic pain in children is cognitive behavioral therapy. This modality involves teaching children how pain works in the brain, and also training them on problem solving, relaxation methods such as deep breathing, challenging negative thoughts about pain, and pacing activities to avoid pain flares. Unlike pain medications, which wear off after a few hours, research suggests that cognitive behavioral therapy can have a lasting effect. Kids can get back to doing things they need and want to do, and they often feel better too over the long term.
To be sure, providing interventions in the form of web-based tools or apps can improve access for children who can’t see a provider. However, we have found that children and their families are more likely to complete the course of treatment with a provider, and that automated self-management tools can complement but not replace care delivered by a provider. In fact, when cognitive behavioral therapy for children’s chronic pain is delivered exclusively through an online tool, only a third of children complete treatment.
How community providers can fill the gap
Despite the proven benefits of psychological therapies for children’s pain, few providers are trained to use them. That’s one of the most common barriers to care.
One potentially untapped resource is school nurses and other specialists who are often the first point of contact for a child with chronic pain, such as social workers and school counselors. Programs already exist to train school providers, including school nurses, in managing children’s mental health, but few of them address chronic pain.
To fill this gap, my colleagues and I have developed a program to train school nurses and other community health experts to teach children cognitive and behavioral strategies to manage their chronic pain. So far, we have trained approximately 100 school providers across Michigan, who report that the training improves pain symptoms and helps keep children in school. We are also expanding the project to address trauma and other mental health symptoms that commonly occur with chronic pain, and to support providers in discouraging substance use to manage pain in these children.
Our work suggests that this approach can empower providers to reach children in rural communities and other settings that lack access to care. By training more boots on the ground, we hope to provide children with the pain management tools they need to grow into healthy and thriving adults.
Natoshia R. Cunningham receives grant funding from the US Department of Defense, the Michigan Health Endowment Fund, and the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance-Arthritis Foundation. She was previously funded by the National Institutes of Health, and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation of Michigan.
Whether you’re streaming a show, paying bills online or sending an email, each of these actions relies on computer programs that run behind the scenes. The process of writing computer programs is known as coding. Until recently, most computer code was written, at least originally, by human beings. But with the advent of generative artificial intelligence, that has begun to change.
Now, just as you can ask ChatGPT to spin up a recipe for a favorite dish or write a sonnet in the style of Lord Byron, you can now ask generative AI tools to write computer code for you. Andrej Karpathy, an OpenAI co-founder who previously led AI efforts at Tesla, recently termed this “vibe coding.”
For complete beginners or nontechnical dreamers, writing code based on vibes – feelings rather than explicitly defined information – could feel like a superpower. You don’t need to master programming languages or complex data structures. A simple natural language prompt will do the trick.
How it works
Vibe coding leans on standard patterns of technical language, which AI systems use to piece together original code from their training data. Any beginner can use an AI assistant such as GitHub Copilot or Cursor Chat, put in a few prompts, and let the system get to work. Here’s an example:
“Create a lively and interactive visual experience that reacts to music, user interaction or real-time data. Your animation should include smooth transitions and colorful and lively visuals with an engaging flow in the experience. The animation should feel organic and responsive to the music, user interaction or live data and facilitate an experience that is immersive and captivating. Complete this project using JavaScript or React, and allow for easy customization to set the mood for other experiences.”
But AI tools do this without any real grasp of specific rules, edge cases or security requirements for the software in question. This is a far cry from the processes behind developing production-grade software, which must balance trade-offs between product requirements, speed, scalability, sustainability and security. Skilled engineers write and review the code, run tests and establish safety barriers before going live.
But while the lack of a structured process saves time and lowers the skills required to code, there are trade-offs. With vibe coding, most of these stress-testing practices go out the window, leaving systems vulnerable to malicious attacks and leaks of personal data.
And there’s no easy fix: If you don’t understand every – or any – line of code that your AI agent writes, you can’t repair the code when it breaks. Or worse, as some experts have pointed out, you won’t notice when it’s silently failing.
The AI itself is not equipped to carry out this analysis either. It recognizes what “working” code usually looks like, but it cannot necessarily diagnose or fix deeper problems that the code might cause or exacerbate.
IBM computer scientist Martin Keen explains the difference between AI programming and traditional programming.
Why it matters
Vibe coding could be just a flash-in-the-pan phenomenon that will fizzle before long, but it may also find deeper applications with seasoned programmers. The practice could help skilled software engineers and developers more quickly turn an idea into a viable prototype. It could also enable novice programmers or even amateur coders to experience the power of AI, perhaps motivating them to pursue the discipline more deeply.
Vibe coding also may signal a shift that could make natural language a more viable tool for developing some computer programs. If so, it would echo early website editing systems known as WYSIWYG editors that promised designers “what you see is what you get,” or “drag-and-drop” website builders that made it easy for anyone with basic computer skills to launch a blog.
For now, I don’t believe that vibe coding will replace experienced software engineers, developers or computer scientists. The discipline and the art are much more nuanced than what AI can handle, and the risks of passing off “vibe code” as legitimate software are too great.
But as AI models improve and become more adept at incorporating context and accounting for risk, practices like vibe coding might cause the boundary between AI and human programmer to blur further.
Chetan Jaiswal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Your brain breaks apart fleeting streams of acoustic information into parallel channels – linguistic, emotional and musical – and acts as a biological multicore processor. Although scientists have recognized this division of cognitive labor for over 160 years, the mechanisms underpinning it remain poorly understood.
Researchers know that distinct subgroups of neurons must be tuned to different frequencies and timing of sound. In recent decades, studies onanimal models, especially in rodents, have confirmed that splitting sound processing across the brain is not uniquely human, opening the door to more closely dissecting how this occurs.
Yet a central puzzle persists: What makes near-identical regions in opposite hemispheres of the brain process different types of information?
Answering that question promises broader insight into how experience sculpts neural circuits during critical periods of early development, and why that process is disrupted in neurodevelopmental disorders.
Timing is everything
Sensory processing of sounds begins in the cochlea, a part of the inner ear where sound frequencies are converted into electricity and forwarded to the auditory cortex of the brain. Researchers believe that the division of labor across brain hemispheres required to recognize sound patterns begins in this region.
For more than a decade, my work as a neuroscientist has focused on the auditory cortex. My lab has shown that mice process sound differently in the left and right hemispheres of their brains, and we have worked to tease apart the underlying circuitry.
For example, we’ve found the left side of the brain has more focused, specialized connections that may help detect key features of speech, such as distinguishing one word from another. Meanwhile, the right side is more broadly connected, suited for processing melodies and the intonation of speech.
We tracked how neural circuits in the left and right auditory cortex develop from early life to adulthood. To do this, we recorded electrical signals in mouse brains to observe how the auditory cortex matures and to see how sound experiences shape its structure.
Surprisingly, we found that the right hemisphere consistently outpaced the left in development, showing more rapid growth and refinement. This suggests there are critical windows of development – brief periods when the brain is especially adaptive and sensitive to environmental sound – specific to each hemisphere that occur at different times.
To test the consequences of this asynchrony, we exposed young mice to specific tones during these sensitive periods. In adulthood, we found that where sound is processed in their brains was permanently skewed. Animals that heard tones during the right hemisphere’s earlier critical window had an overrepresentation of those frequencies mapped in the right auditory cortex.
Adding yet another layer of complexity, we found that these critical windows vary by sex. The right hemisphere critical window opens earlier in female mice, and the left hemisphere window opens just days later. In contrast, male mice had a very sensitive right hemisphere critical window, but no detectable window on the left. This points to the elusive role sex may play in brain plasticity.
Our findings provide a new way to understand how different hemispheres of the brain process sound and why this might vary for different people. They also provide evidence that parallel areas of the brain are not interchangeable: the brain can encode the same sound in radically different ways, depending on when it occurs and which hemisphere is primed to receive it.
Speech and neurodevelopment
The division of labor between brain hemispheres is a hallmark of many human cognitive functions, especially language. This is often disrupted in neuropsychiatric conditions such as autism and schizophrenia.
Reduced language information encoding in the left hemisphere is a strong indication of auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia. And a shift from left- to right-hemisphere language processing is characteristic of autism, where language development is often impaired.
Strikingly, the right hemisphere of people with autism seems to respond earlier to sound than the left hemisphere, echoing the accelerated right-side maturation we saw in our study on mice. Our findings suggest that this early dominance of the right hemisphere in encoding sound information might amplify its control of auditory processing, deepening the imbalance between hemispheres.
These insights deepen our understanding of how language-related areas in the brain typically develop and can help scientists design earlier and more targeted treatments to support early speech, especially for children with neurodevelopmental language disorders.
Everyday human behavior is guided and shaped by the search for rewards. This includes eating tasty meals, drinking something refreshing, sexual activity and nurturing children. Many of these behaviors are needed for survival. But in some instances, this search for rewards can pose a significant threat to survival.
People rely on memories of rewards to function and survive. Associated with positive experiences, these memories provide context for evaluating present and future choices. For example, if foods high in sugar are associated with a positive experience, this can reinforce the behavior of eating the food that provided the reward. Similarly, a flavorful meal at a specific restaurant increases the likelihood you’ll become a returning costumer.
A deeper understanding of how reward memories work and interact with each other is critical to informing the choices you make and to treating disorders where seeking rewards has become problematic. Eliminating all reward seeking would negatively affect behaviors essential for survival, such as eating and reproducing. But if you can specifically target reward memories linked to different drugs, this could help reduce their abuse.
I am a behavioral neuroscientist studying addiction, and my team is interested in how reward memories are formed and processed in the brain. We study how memories linked to natural rewards such as food, water and sex differ from those linked with rewards from drugs such as fentanyl and cocaine.
Understanding the differences between these types of rewards and how memories of different drugs interact may lead to more effective treatments for addiction.
What is memory?
To study reward memories, it is important to understand the neurobiology of memory, or how the brain remembers things.
In 1904, evolutionary zoologist Richard Semon introduced the term engram to describe the physical representation of a memory – also called its trace – that forms in the brain after an experience. Later, psychologist Donald Hebb hypothesized that interconnected brain cells that are active at the same time during an experience form a physical ensemble that make up a memory.
In the past decade, neuroscientists have developed new tools that support the idea that neuronal ensembles, or small populations of brain cells that are activated at the same time, are likely the physical representation of memory. How new memories recruit neurons into ensembles is not fully understood, but the plasticity of neurons – their ability to change their connections with each other – seems to play a major role.
Memories are physically stored in your brain.
Research on neuronal ensembles has transformed how scientists understand learning and memory. Researchers can now createartificial memories, activate positive memories to counteract negative feelings, and alter how memories are linked. All these experiments on altering memory have been conducted on animal models, since the technology required to apply these techniques to humans is not yet available.
To create artificial memories, for instance, researchers can mark a neuronal ensemble associated with a specific environment A in genetically modified mice. They can then activate those neurons when exposing the mice to a foot shock in a different environment B. Later, the mice showed increased freezing behavior in environment A, though they never received a shock in that space. By activating the memory of environment A during the foot shock, mice created a false memory that the foot shock was associated with that space.
Treating substance use disorders
Neuronal ensembles hold untapped promise for the study and treatment of substance use disorders and other reward-related disorders. These include those involving a deficit in their ability to experience reward, such as gambling disorder, eating disorders and depression.
Natural rewards – food, water, sex and nurturing – induce pleasurable feelings that reinforce the behavior that elicits that reward. This is known as positive reinforcement, a strategy often used in everyday life; think training a dog with treats, or using sticker charts for potty training.
Research has linked positive and negative experiences with neuronal ensembles: exploratory and socialbehaviors, fear, and feeding. In substance use disorders, a drug can induce both pleasant and unpleasant feelings. For example, cocaine induces an intense rush or high, but the crash induced by the drug wearing off causes irritability and lethargy. These feelings reinforce drug use at the expense of essential behaviors that ensure survival, such as eating, sleeping or maintaining social networks and relationships.
Similarly to how any memory is stored in the brain as a neuronal ensemble, drug memories are carried in specific neuronal ensembles and activated during drug-related behaviors.
Fundamental questions remain about how neuronal ensembles encode drug-related memories. Because the processing centers for drug rewards and natural rewards mostly overlap in the brain, it is challenging to develop treatments that target only drug reward seeking. Emerging treatments for addiction, such as certain types of brain stimulation, are not specific enough to differentiate between drug or natural reward pathways.
Discovering how particular drugs of abuse affect genes, cells and neuronal circuits can help researchers develop new treatments for substance use disorders without altering the natural reward-seeking behaviors essential for survival.
The reward of drug use can be hard to disentangle from the rewards of eating, drinking and other activities necessary for survivial. Kseniya Ovchinnikova/Moment via Getty Images
For example, about 72% of people suffering from substance use disorders report usingmultiple substances, frequently together. To better understand how polysubstance use affects the brain, my team tags neurons active during drug-related behaviors in genetically modified mice. This allows us to map and compare the neurons carrying reward-related memories for one drug with the neurons associated with another drug. In this way, we can study how the brain represents and stores memories when mice are exposed to cocaine and fentanyl – two substances people in the U.S. are increasingly taking together – and how different brain regions communicate this information with each other.
To dissect exactly how drugs of abuse hijack the brain’s natural reward system, my team is comparing how seeking different types of rewards changes the neurons carrying reward memories. For example, we have previously shown that the network of cells carrying the memory of seeking cocaine are mostly distinct from those linked to seeking sugar.
Based on this work, we are currently using fruit fly models to analyze the genetic activity of the neuronal ensemble linked to seeking cocaine. This will allow us to better identify which genes could be potential targets to reduce the activity of that neuronal ensemble and treat substance use disorder.
Psychedelics and addiction
Drug-related intrusive thoughts and fixed behavioral patterns – meaning actions that are repeatedly taken regardless of negative consequences – are common symptoms of substance abuse that lead to the formation of harmful neural pathways in the brain. Psychedelics may be able to help reformthese pathways by triggering an overall “system reboot” of the brain.
Several clinical trials point to the potential of psychedelics to treat tobacco, alcohol and opioid use disorders, with early results showing increased abstinence and reduced drug cravings.
My lab is currently examining how psilocin – the active metabolite of the psychedelic psilocybin – affects the drug-related memories of mice. Our research focuses on two questions. First, can psilocin alter drug seeking and intake in fentanyl addiction? And second, what type of memory does psilocin create in the brain, and could it alter prior cocaine memories?
Reward memories both help people survive and lead to substance use disorders. Delving into the intricate mechanisms of how the brain remembers rewards at the cellular and genetic levels can help researchers and doctors better treat addiction without altering the reward pathways needed for survival.
Ana Clara Bobadilla receives funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Brain & Behavior Research Foundation.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alessandro Marcon, Senior Research Associate at the Health Law Institute, University of Alberta
Online searches for health information can pull up misleading ads.(S. Ghassimi), CC BY
More than 80 per cent of online searches are now performed with Google. But there’s an insidious element to the world’s most popular search engine. As companies compete for the advertising spaces that accompany search query results, users seeking critical health information can be exposed to dangerous and exploitative misinformation.
In 2024, North Americans overwhelmingly used Google for news and information on politics, celebrities, entertainment and topical events like natural disasters. Health-related queries are also popular: nearly 70 per cent of the Canadian public use online searches for health information.
Google is the world’s most popular search engine. (Shutterstock)
Online searches
The phrases or questions contained in online searches serve as valuable data. They can inform epidemiological surveillance and provide insight into popular global and regional trends.
These data also hold immense value for online marketing teams, tracking who is searching for what, where and when. In addition to search tracking, however, queries now are used for online advertising. It’s a reality that raises serious ethical, regulatory and public health issues.
Before the internet, key advertising spaces existed in magazines and newspapers, on highway billboards and time slots between radio and television programming. Advertising is so lucrative that a 30-second time slot during the Super Bowl now costs upwards of US$8 million.
Online, fixed slots have now been replaced by targeted advertisements to accompany search results, determined by search queries entered by users.
Highly coveted spots
Like a Super Bowl ad, advertising on Google’s first page results is highly coveted.
Obtaining the rights to these space requires companies to outbid one another to win the ads spaces determined by search terms — an advertiser can purchase ad space from Google associated with a specific phrase or keyword.
Companies with snack products, for example, may compete for their sponsored content to appear when individuals search for “Super Bowl party snacks,” “new chip flavours” or “chip and dip ideas.”
As harmless and obvious — and perhaps even inevitable — as this marketing approach may seem, the practice is problematic when industry targets personal, sensitive and critical health terms — which is exactly what our research uncovered.
Searches for cancer, exploitative ads
Using the AI-driven marketing platform SemRush, we analyzed the search terms purchased for advertising by notorious alternative cancer clinics in Tijuana, Mexico and Arizona. We determined what queries were targeted and how much was spent on acquiring the advertising space matching these queries.
We also assessed whether this spending increased traffic to their clinic websites. Our results showed that over roughly one decade, these clinics paid over an estimated US$15 million to purchase the ad spaces for thousands of search words and phrases.
These search queries related to cancer prognosis and diagnosis, treatment options including alternative treatments and cancer types including late-stage cancer. In sum, the advertising strategy generated more than 6.5 million website visits for alternative cancer clinics.
Alternative cancer treatments can interfere with the success of medical treatments. (Shutterstock)
Negative health impacts
Unfortunately, the success of these alternative clinics’ marketing strategies is nothing short of a disaster for the public’s health and well-being. Alternative cancer treatments are associated with an increased risk of death and offer false hope for those suffering from end-stage cancer.
Google is therefore enabling an advertising option that contributes to the harmful spread of inaccurate and damaging cancer misinformation that can directly lead to detrimental health-related actions.
Protection from deception
Our research focused entirely on the cancer context and analyzed the targeted search query approach of problematic clinics in two specific locations. It is imaginable — indeed very probable — that this approach is deployed in other health contexts and beyond.
Google does have and enforce policies to protect users from deceptive advertising content. But there is little oversight regarding how advertisers may exploit its keyword ad matching features.
It’s imperative that Google take action to restrict its ads mechanism from being used in this exploitative manner. Search results could give prominence only to websites supported by accurate scientific evidence. Google could prohibit the advertising purchase of ostensibly controversial search terms. This would include personal, sensitive queries from vulnerable groups, including patients suffering from cancer and other life-threatening ailments.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jolanta Burke, Associate Professor, Centre for Positive Health Sciences, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences
Birthdays are typically seen as joyful events, filled with celebration, laughter and gifts. Yet it’s not uncommon, particularly if you are approaching a milestone age, to feel sad on your birthday.
Birthdays can trigger painful emotions for anyone who may feel neglected, lonely, or disappointed about how their lives turned out to be. They are also reminders of ageing and mortality, and may bring feelings of grief for lost time or fear about the future.
Milestone birthdays, such as turning 30 or 40, are even associated with particularly high instances of suicide, according to research from Japan. More people also die of stroke and a heart attack around their birthdays than on other days.
All of these negative feelings, whether extreme depression or just feeling a bit disappointed, make up what’s sometimes known as the “birthday blues”.
One important factor influencing whether you will get the birthday blues is how satisfied you are with your life. Life satisfaction is the degree to which you feel your life aligns with your expectations, and whether you have met, exceeded or fallen short of your life goals.
If you’re approaching a big birthday, you may feel susceptible to the comparison trap of social media, or feel self-conscious about where you are in life. Birthdays are an often unwelcome benchmark by which to measure how well we are doing at any given age.
No one’s 20s and 30s look the same. You might be saving for a mortgage or just struggling to pay rent. You could be swiping dating apps, or trying to understand childcare. No matter your current challenges, our Quarter Life series has articles to share in the group chat, or just to remind you that you’re not alone.
Another important factor is whether you have a clear sense of meaning in your life. A clear sense of meaning is associated with greater wellbeing, while ongoing search for meaning is associated with mental health challenges.
Milestone birthdays often prompt people to re-evaluate their meaning in life. This introspection may result in emotional distress, a decline in wellbeing or even suicidal thoughts – or, it can be a positive step into a new decade.
Rewriting your birthday
You might imagine what you would like your milestone birthday celebration to look like, but sometimes reality does not match up. Perhaps you imagined a big party, only to realise you don’t have the social circle to make it happen, or that friends are busy with work and other commitments. You may long for a quiet birthday with a partner and children, yet find yourself still living with your parents, or without a partner or family of your own.
Here are some practical steps you can take to have a more positive approach to your birthday.
1. Envision your best possible self
My colleague and I once worked with a small group of women aged over 55 who struggled to look forward to their retirement. For many, their future felt uncertain, even frightening. To help them shift their mindset, we introduced an activity “Best Possible Self”.
We encouraged participants to re-imagine their future, focusing on what could go well for them and setting up goals to make their vision come true. After three months, even those who dreaded talking about the future noted a significant increase in hopefulness. The activity reminded them that good times could still come.
Writing about your best possible self for just 20 minutes a day over a few days, especially around your birthday, could help you re-imagine your future and nurture a sense of hope, no matter what stage of life you are in.
2. Pick an alternative birthday setting or an activity
Birthdays don’t have to be a big night out. Plan an activity or visit a place you genuinely enjoy and which brings you happiness or comfort. This could be a walk in a park, attending a theatre performance, or a cosy day at home.
Instead of just going through the motions, focus on enhancing the emotional quality of the experience. Pick a park that holds a special meaning or memories for you, or plan some home-based activities that energise you, such as cooking your favourite meal, creating art or watching a movie you love.
3. Practice mindful awareness
Notice the sounds, smells and other sensations as you go through your day. Pay attention to the emotions that arise, whether it is joy, nostalgia or hope.
Reflect on how your thoughts have changed as a result of this experience. Perhaps think about what you are grateful for, what you’ve achieved in the last year, how far you have come from more challenging times in the past or what your hopeful vision is towards the future.
4. Express and reinforce your positive experiences
Find meaningful ways to express yourself and record your birthday. This might be by writing an entry in a journal, calling someone and sharing your insights, or creating something, like a playlist, photo collage, or drawing to capture this moment.
Fear of ageing is also about fear of the unknown. We can combat this by cultivating hope – recognising what is going well for us in life and believing in the possibility of better days ahead.
To ease the pressure of having a “happy birthday”, it might help to aim instead for a more compassionate “hopeful birthday”. This mindset acknowledges the complexity of ageing, and leaves room for both celebration and vulnerability. In a world that demands constant positivity, where we’re expected to keep smiling, stay positive and suppress discomfort, it offers us a break to be ourselves.
The risk of suicide around birthdays is particularly high for those who have depression or autism. If you are feeling upset about your birthday or belong to a vulnerable group, reach out to a helpline, counsellor, therapist, family member or a friend and ask for support during this challenging time. It is easier to tackle the birthday blues together, than do it on your own.
In the UK: Samaritans are available by phone, for free, at 116 123, or by email at jo@samaritans.org. Further resources can also be found here.
Jolanta Burke does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Climate change is already happening. But 36% of the world’s population still disputes the realities of its origins and impacts. When the science is clear but public understanding lags, more lives and livelihoods are put at risk.
The media can act as a bridge between climate solutions and public understanding. A global analysis by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism found that the news media remain the primary source of climate change information, with 31% of people getting it from television and 24% from websites and social media platforms.
Despite all of this, the mainstream media around the world is not doing enough to shoulder the responsibility of preparing the public for the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation. Research indicates that climate change coverage spikes around UN climate summits (Cops) and events like World Water Day, but drops off in between.
That means the stories being told about the environment get the most attention during certain months and consistently less coverage throughout the rest of the year.
I study how the media reports on climate change in authoritarian countries like Iran and across the Middle East and north Africa, a region where heat indices surpass 55°C and severe water shortages persist.
As part of my PhD research, I found that international media reporting of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations is sporadic, with coverage often increasing around political and environmental events.
Reporting on environmental issues in countries facing conflict, war and political tensions is challenging, as the topic often falls low on the media’s list of priorities.
When it comes to Iran, most of the news making headlines is focused on its nuclear development programme, problems with the west and violations of human rights. The fact that thousands of Iranians die each year from thirst, air pollution and heatwaves rarely makes it into international media, and when it does, it’s usually tied to a political event like protests or US economic sanctions.
For the past few years, I have been researching and writing for news outlets about the Iranian government’s failure to take action towards mitigating climate change. While discussing the issue with climate scientists, I learned that Iran is among the top ten countries globally contributing to carbon emissions.
I also learned that, along with Yemen and Libya, Iran is the only country left to ratify the Paris agreement, a treaty that aims to keep global temperatures to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial times.
However, when I analysed the media coverage, there was not nearly enough mention of this throughout the year. Most articles were published in November, around the time the UN usually holds its annual climate summits, like the UN climate summit, Cop29, hosted by Azerbaijan last year.
This is a trend I’ve realised through my research and reporting. When the media only covers environmental issues in countries like Iran during political upheavals or climate summits, the world remains largely unaware of these ongoing challenges the rest of the time.
Here’s the problem: just in the past few months, millions of Iranians across the country have been suffering through crippling sand and dust storms, drought and land subsidence, issues that have been exacerbated by climate change.
My PhD research into how the media covers the environment in authoritarian regimes is supported by other studies. I found that articles about water and climate issues in Iran and the Middle East tend to peak around environmental protests and UN climate change summits.
My study shows that Iran received the highest amount of environmental coverage during the 2021 protests in the southwestern province of Khuzestan concerning the lack of water and drought.
The bigger picture
When journalists, editors and media outlets delay reporting on the impact of climate change in countries like Iran, we miss the full scale of the damage. As a result, there’s less pressure on authorities to change policies or prepare the public for the growing environmental challenges like forced migration, hunger, and conflict.
If these countries are more vulnerable to climate change and their governments are doing little to solve the problem, this urgency must be reflected in the media.
This can be achieved if news organisations publish more stories that explore the root causes of environmental problems and include insights from experts who can offer solutions.
If even one story can help save a lake, river or wetland from drying up, that’s a pretty powerful effect.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Sanam Mahoozi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
For many, a visit to the dentist brings fear, anxiety, or memories of uncomfortable experiences. But dentistry is changing – and it’s becoming much kinder.
Today, needle-free and drill-free approaches are helping manage tooth decay in ways that are more comfortable, especially for children, anxious patients and those with special healthcare needs. Three of the most promising techniques are silver diamine fluoride (SDF), atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and the Hall technique.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many dental clinics sought out non-aerosol-generating procedures (those that don’t spray water or create mist), to reduce viral transmission. SDF and ART became essential treatment approaches during that period – and their popularity has continued to grow. These techniques don’t just make dentistry more acceptable – they challenge the traditional belief that every cavity needs to be drilled and filled.
Tooth decay is caused by bacteria in dental plaque that feed on sugars and produce acids, gradually wearing away the tooth’s surface when tooth brushing isn’t good.
Traditional treatment ordinarily involves numbing a tooth by injection of local anaesthetic followed by removal of the decayed part of the tooth with a drill. The hole (or cavity) left is then then restored or “filled” with a filling material, for example dental composite. While effective, this method can be painful or frightening, especially for younger or vulnerable patients.
But we now understand that not all cavities need to be restored immediately, and that stabilising disease and preventing progression can be just as important.
Parents are often surprised – and relieved – to learn that their child’s cavity might not need an injection or a filling at all. Sometimes, especially for small cavities in baby teeth close to falling out naturally, just monitoring or applying SDF may be enough.
Equally, there’s a growing recognition that patient comfort and trust are essential parts of long-term oral health and quality of life. A traumatic dental experience early in life can deter someone from seeking care for years, making problems worse down the line.
Silver diamine fluoride offers a radically different approach. It is a clear liquid applied directly into a cavity using a small brush. It takes only seconds and requires no drilling, no needles or costly, complicated equipment.
SDF works in two ways. The silver has antibacterial properties that kill the bacteria causing the decay, while the fluoride helps harden the remaining tooth structure. It’s particularly effective for shallow cavities and can stop decay in its tracks. Several studies have found that SDF stopped decay in about 80% of treated cases.
Silver diamine fluoride application.
It’s not a perfect solution. One side effect is that the treated area turns black, which can be an aesthetic concern, especially for front teeth. But for back teeth, or for children who cannot tolerate other options, this may be an acceptable alternative for avoiding needles and drilling or costly treatment under general anaesthetic.
Filling teeth with hand tools, not drills
Atraumatic restorative treatment is another gentle approach. Originally developed for use in areas with limited access to dental equipment, it’s now widely used as a patient-friendly option.
ART involves removing soft, decayed tooth tissue using hand instruments – no noisy drills or anaesthetic injections needed. Once the decay tissue is removed, the cavity is filled with a material called glass ionomer cement. This special material sticks to the tooth, releases fluoride over time, and helps prevent further decay.
The process is quiet, minimally invasive and usually takes less time than conventional treatments. It can often be done with the patient sitting upright, which is particularly helpful for very young children or those with special needs. This treatment doesn’t require a dental chair or power source so it can be done anywhere – from schools to nursing homes.
Crowns without drilling
Another gentle and increasingly popular option for managing decay in children’s teeth is the Hall technique.
Unlike traditional treatments that involve drilling or removing decay, the Hall technique works by sealing the decayed tissue in, rather than taking it out. It uses a preformed metal crown – often called a “stainless steel crown” – that is simply placed over the decayed baby tooth without any drilling, injections, or removal of tooth tissue.
The Hall technique.
Here’s how it works: after checking that the tooth is suitable (usually with an x-ray), the dentist uses small orthodontic separators between the child’s teeth for a few days to create space. Then, in a quick and painless appointment, the crown is gently pushed onto the tooth and held in place with special dental cement. That’s it – no needles, no drill and no discomfort.
By sealing the cavity in this way, the bacteria inside are cut off from the sugars they need to keep causing damage. Over time, the decay becomes inactive, and the crown protects the baby tooth until it naturally falls out.
Parents are often amazed by how well children cope with this approach. In fact, studies show that children who have had the Hall technique often experience less discomfort, fewer dental visits, and better long-term outcomes than those who undergo traditional drilling and
filling.
The future of kinder dentistry
Of course, the best (and kindest) way to avoid needles, drilling and filling is to prevent tooth decay in the first place. But when treatment is needed, the options above are changing the game – and they’re here to stay.
Silver diamine fluoride, atraumatic restorative treatment and the Hall technique aren’t right for every situation, but they’re safe, backed by evidence and a powerful reminder that dental care doesn’t have to be painful to be effective.
For anxious patients, nervous kids, or anyone who’s put off going to the dentist because of fear, these gentler approaches can be the difference between avoiding care and finally getting it.
Dentistry is changing – and it’s time our expectations caught up.
Paul Leavy is currently undertaking his PhD at the Trinity College Dublin (TCD) Centre for Health Policy and Management. Paul Leavy receives funding from the Health Research Board (HRB) as a PhD Scholar under the SPHeRE Programme (2018-1).
Isabel Olegário does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Liberal candidate Lee Jae-myung has won South Korea’s snap presidential election with a clear lead. With all of the ballots counted, Lee won almost 50% of the vote, ahead of his conservative rival Kim Moon-soo on 41%. He takes over a country that is deeply divided along gender lines.
Lee’s campaign effectively channelled voter anger. He focused on resetting South Korea’s politics after impeached former president Yoon Suk Yeol, who was from the same party as Kim, unleashed chaos by declaring martial law in December 2024.
However, gender conflict has continued, subtly but powerfully, to shape voter behaviour, campaign strategies and the national debate about who is to blame for the lack of opportunities in South Korea for young men.
The election took place three years after Yoon pipped Lee to the presidency by just a quarter of a million votes – the closest margin in the country’s history. Yoon’s victory was, as has been noted by researcher Kyungja Jung, “the epitome of the utilisation of gender wars”.
A key part of Yoon’s strategy was fostering a sense among young Korean men that it was now them, rather than women, who were the victims of discrimination. He secured 59% of the vote from men in their 20s and 53% from men in their 30s. Just 34% of women in their 20s supported him.
In the latest election, gender was everywhere and nowhere all at once. On the one hand, not a single candidate put forward a meaningful policy to address structural gender discrimination in the workplace, domestic violence or public sexual harassment.
None even mentioned the gaping absence of women candidates, despite thousands of mostly young women having filled the streets demanding democracy after Yoon’s martial law declaration. It was the first time in nearly 20 years that not a single woman stood among the contenders for the highest role in the country.
Lee, positioning himself as the consensus candidate, attempted to neutralise gender as a campaign issue. When reporters asked him whether he would announce any women-related pledges, he said: “Why do you keep dividing men and women? They are all Koreans.”
His remark may sound inclusive. But it signals a strategy to declare the gender issue off-limits for the sake of the greater good, thus sidestepping the specific inequalities that continue to divide the country. It’s a form of unity by erasure.
Lee Jun-seok of the right-wing Reform party, on the other hand, tried to resurrect the same playbook that delivered Yoon to power in 2022. He attempted to provoke, polarise and win the loyalty of disaffected young men.
As Yoon had done three years ago, he called for the abolition of the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. And during a televised debate, he asked: “If someone says they want to stick chopsticks into women’s genitals, would that count as misogyny?” The question was a nod to a controversial online remark Lee Jae-myung’s son had made years earlier.
Lee Jun-seok’s comment drew widespread condemnation and, ultimately, he only scraped about 7.7% of the total vote. This included over 37% of men in their 20s, while 58% of women in the same age group backed Lee Jae-myung. Gender is a highly political matter in South Korea whichever way you look at it.
Gender wars
This gender divide is now one of the most consistent features of South Korean politics. Women are vocal and visible in public to safeguard not just their own rights, but also South Korea’s democracy.
Yet populist politicians have cultivated a perception among young men – squeezed by stagnant wages, fierce competition over jobs and social expectations – that their diminishing opportunities are due to policies they see as favouring women.
This has resulted in many young South Korean men seeing feminism not as a movement for equality but as an obstacle to their own progress. In reality, their struggle has less to do with gender and more to do with structural inequalities in income and opportunity for all young Koreans.
As Kyungja Jung observed in a paper from 2024: “Misogyny becomes an outlet for their [South Korean men’s] frustration and masculinity crisis as they search for a scapegoat for their struggles in neoliberal society. They blame women rather than the neoliberal economy.”
Young people even from the best universities in Korea feel they cannot compete in the job market no matter what they do. South Korea now has one of the highest rates of young people not in education, employment or training among the OECD countries. This has given rise to the so-called “N-Po” generation, who feel so disadvantaged that they have given up on all future dreams of marriage, family and a career.
South Korea isn’t alone in mobilising backlash against feminism and gender equality. Around the globe, gender has become one of the major fault lines in politics. In the November 2024 US election, Donald Trump led among young men by 14 points, while Kamala Harris had an 18-point edge with young women.
Meanwhile, self-described misogynist Andrew Tate continues to shape young male attitudes online. And in Italy, Giorgia Meloni rose to power on a far-right platform that, despite being a woman herself, reduces women to their roles as mothers and homemakers.
Young women played a key role in the protests against Yoon’s martial law declaration. Icelander / Shutterstock
One model for change in South Korea could be to introduce quotas for women in politics to make their voices heard. Women only occupy around 20% of the 300 seats in South Korea’s National Assembly, trailing well behind the global (27.2%) and Asian (22.1%) averages. If women are not in politics making decisions about themselves, then their voices will not be heard beyond the streets.
Lee Jae-myung’s win has given South Korea a moment to breathe. But the fault lines remain. When an entire demographic, be it young men or women, feels systematically unheard or structurally discriminated against, opportunistic voices can move in to fill the void.
Gender is political. Ignoring it may be just as risky as confronting it head-on.
Ming Gao receives funding from the Swedish Research Council. This research was produced with support from the Swedish Research Council grant “Moved Apart” (nr. 2022-01864). Ming Gao is a member of Lund University Profile Area: Human Rights.
Joanna Elfving-Hwang receives funding from the Academy of Korean Studies. This research was supported by the Core University Program for Korean Studies through the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and Korean Studies Promotion Service of the Academy of Korean Studies (AKS-2022-OLU-2250005).
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Shelley Galpin, Lecturer in Culture, Media and Creative Industries, King’s College London
Announcing its new six-part adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, Netflix quoted screenwriter Dolly Alderton as saying: “Once in a generation, a group of people get to retell this wonderful story.” In the 250th anniversary of her birth, it would seem that every new generation wants its own adaptation of Jane Austen’s perennial classic.
It’s 30 years since Colin Firth’s Darcy decided that the only remedy for unrequited love was a dip in a muddy lake. And 20 since Matthew Macfadyen’s Darcy strode across a chilly field at sunrise to declare that Keira Knightley’s Lizzie had “bewitched me body and soul”. And, erm, almost 10 years since Lily James’s Lizzie fell for Darcy while simultaneously battling zombie hordes in Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Netflix’s (zombie-free) adaptation has, at time of writing, announced that Emma Corrin will play Lizzie opposite Jack Lowden’s Darcy, with Olivia Colman set to play Lizzie’s mother, Mrs Bennet. So with another retelling of the iconic love story on the horizon, what makes it such a attractive novel to adapt for screen?
The clue is partly in the name. The characters are deeply flawed; Darcy is proud, Lizzie is prejudiced against him after she feels slighted at their first meeting. Both need to learn to “get over themselves” to achieve their happy ending. This makes for a highly satisfying character arc. It is difficult to imagine the love story between Lizzie’s “oh-so-perfect” sister Jane and the amiable Mr Bingley having quite the same draw.
It is satisfying when these two destined-to-be-together characters finally find their happy ending. But the scheming of Bingley’s snobbish sister and the misguided loyalty of Darcy that interrupt the progress of their budding romance do not present the same dramatic tension as Lizzie and Darcy’s own internal battles.
In one of the most iconic lines, upon learning of an error of judgement, Austen’s Lizzie ruefully acknowledges that, “Till this moment I never knew myself”. It is this internalised process of self-reflection and growth that makes for such compelling and relatable characterisation.
While creating flawed characters, though, Austen reserved her most acidic barbs for the more powerful members of society. Recently, White Lotus star Aimee Lou Wood called out her cruel portrayal in a Saturday Night Live skit, wisely drawing attention to the difference between punching up at the more powerful and punching down at easy targets with less social capital.
Austen’s work is defined by her keen sense of class hierarchies, and she skilfully maintains a warmly humorous tone by gently mocking the human foibles of her characters, while never treating them with contempt.
However, in the same way that the hit show Succession delighted audiences with the opportunity to recoil at the vulgarities of the rich, in Pride and Prejudice Austen punches up by reserving her most mocking behaviour for the privileged.
Rich matriarch Lady Catherine de Bourgh delights in lecturing others about the correct way to behave, only to turn up at the Bennet household in the middle of the night with the sole intention of berating Lizzie. And the ridiculous Mr Collins, heir apparent to the Bennet family home, appears almost delusional in his belief that he is God’s gift to the Bennet sisters.
These supporting roles have given a range of great actors the chance to lean into Austen’s social satire by emphasising the abhorrent nature of the characters, and by extension, revealing the stifling nature of the social system that the characters exist within.
Society isn’t the only thing stifling the characters however. Perhaps one of the most appealing aspects of Pride and Prejudice is its situating of Lizzie within the best and the worst of what family has to offer, allowing for a colourful cast of supporting characters.
Embarrassing family members such as the meddling mother and the no-filter youngest sister have a universal relatability that can be easily moulded to contemporary sensibilities.
Mrs Bennet in particular, played for laughs with exaggerated hysteria by Alison Steadman for the BBC in 1995, was reimagined in a rather more sympathetic light in Joe Wright’s 2005 film adaptation, when the very real perils facing her and her daughters upon the death of her husband were more sensitively explored.
With the highly acclaimed Olivia Colman – so skilled at conveying emotional complexities – now cast in the role, it is likely that this more nuanced take on the character will continue, particularly in the light of more recent high-profile explorations of gendered power dynamics.
Family life is not all bad for Lizzie though. In Jane Bennet, Austen creates the perfect older sister. Not only does she provide adaptations with an ideal subplot through her romance with Bingley, but the intimacy between the sisters also allows for useful scenes in which the characters discuss their innermost feelings.
Through their private conversations, the sisters confide in each other, while also lying to each other and themselves about their true feelings, as the audience holds its breath through the highs and lows and waits for the inevitable happy ending to arrive.
Because, ultimately, it’s all about the love story. While many literary critics have observed the fallacy of ending a romance with marriage, when this is really just the beginning, the fairytale structure of Austen’s novel, with its movement through burgeoning emotions, frustration and despair, arriving finally at self-knowledge and love, has proven a winning formula for centuries.
Lizzie and Darcy will keep finding each other, generation after generation. Wet shirts and zombies, optional.
Shelley Galpin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
According to a recent report, the UK rail industry is a relatively safe environment for both passengers and workers. The findings, from the Rail Accident Investigation Branch, came from data on railway accidents for 2024.
But it also showed that there remain areas of concern in the industry. Specifically, it found examples of “not learning” from accidents and incidents. And alarmingly, there has also been a “lack or loss” of learning from historic tragedies.
So how and where can the sector recover that experience and insight in order to learn the lessons? The report findings imply the knowledge exists, but has been forgotten. It may be that, rather than looking back over the previous 12 months, the industry should cast its gaze back 100 or 150 years.
For the rail workforce, a major new historical dataset is being released that might offer some answers. The Railway Work, Life & Death project has added nearly 70,000 cases of worker accidents in England and Wales to its database of staff accidents from before 1939.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Until now the records have been available only in hard copy. But digital access via the project website will mean insights from accidents – some dating to the 1850s – can be used to improve rail workforce safety in the present day.
Examples from the project include the case of North Eastern Railway office cleaner Mary Ramsey. She was run over by a train in 1859 at South Shields while taking out the ashes from the station fireplaces. Ivor Richards, who worked for the Rhymney Railway in Cardiff, was just 14 when he was killed crossing the lines in 1916.
These, and the tens of thousands of other historic cases, can be used to explore issues that resonate today. The online dataset offers a platform for people to access knowledge freely and learn from the past. No living person or current organisation is singled out. This means people in the rail industry now can use the records to draw parallels between past and present, and use it as a way into frank discussions about safety today.
The utility of this approach and the value of the data is recognised by the industry. From within the rail sector, accident investigators, health and safety managers and trade union officers will be attending the dataset launch on June 5, at The National Archives of the UK, at Kew, London.
Though the industry has changed radically over the last 200 years, some issues still exist that would have been equally recognisable to workers more than 100 years ago. From working at height, through slips, trips and falls, to working on and around railway lines, the essence of some railway work – and the dangers – remain consistent.
Both used historic examples to address contemporary issues – demonstrating the value of a “useable past” and the potential for this new dataset.
The examples of Mary Ramsey and Ivor Richards might be used to discuss things like safe walking routes, or safety training and certification for going on or near working railway lines. They can start conversations about the mitigations that might have been put in place to prevent an accident, or “safe systems of work”. Even though concepts like safety certification and safe walking routes are anachronistic, they allow a space in which discussion can borrow from the past to focus on the present.
The dataset also has benefits for people beyond the rail industry. This year is being marked as Railway 200 – 200 years since the Stockton and Darlington Railway was launched. This is seen as the birth of the modern system. For historians, we can use the dataset to see the people who kept the railway system running.
There’s a risk that the version of the past that is portrayed is a straightforward one, and railways (particularly steam railways) are seen through rose-tinted spectacles. That view obscures how hard, dirty and dangerous working on the railways was for many people.
Narratives about the railways’ past should challenge people – and acknowledge the difficult bits. This newly released dataset can do exactly that. It documents working conditions, wages, practices and, of course, dangers from working on the railways. It allows anyone to find out more about the past, making research easier and more accessible.
And the dataset lets people tell more diverse stories about who was included in the rail industry.
For example, we can see how disability as a result of a workplace accident was experienced and managed. William Parry was employed as a signalman in south Wales following a 1907 accident on the railways that cost him his leg.
Giving more prominence to under-represented groups – while showing their long-standing presence in the rail industry – has significant social value. It can help support those currently in the industry, as well as show those contemplating a railway career that the workplace is for them. It meshes with the work of groups like Women in Rail and Ethnicity and Race in Rail to encourage greater representation in the industry.
Having spent nearly ten years co-leading the Railway Work, Life & Death project, I sometimes ask myself why I do it – not least given the inherent sadness in many of the cases. But then I see the people behind the statistics, their wider lives, their families and communities, and the window the records gives into life on the railways. That personal connection drives me – alongside the conviction that it can make a difference to today’s industry.
Railway workers from the past and the accidents they often suffered have been largely forgotten, precisely because the industry is now relatively safe. Employee accidents are nowhere near as commonplace or visible as they once were. But there is room for improvement. Remembering the people of the early railway era and learning from their experiences is once again possible through the Railway Work, Life & Death project.
Mike Esbester does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is using sovereignty sentiments in Alberta as a kind of implied threat to get a better deal for the province.
In a letter to Mark Carney in the run-up to the recent first ministers conference in Saskatoon, Smith told the prime minister that failure to build additional pipelines for Alberta oil would “send an unwelcome signal to Albertans concerned about Ottawa’s commitment to national unity.”
Accordingly, it’s worth asking: what would happen if Alberta did vote to leave?
Two historical touch points are the 1995 sovereignty referendum in Québec and the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom in 2016. In different ways, both examples drive home one inevitable point: in the event of a vote to pursue sovereignty, the future of Alberta would have to be negotiated one painful and uncertain step at a time.
International lawlessness
Sovereignty is an assertion of independent governmental authority, notably including a monopoly over the legitimate use of force over a defined people and territory. Unlike provinces in a country like Canada, sovereign countries co-operate with each other if — and only if — it’s in their interests to do so.
Some proponents of separatism have argued that an independent Alberta could rely on international law to secure continued access to tidewater through Canada. The idea seems to form the basis of Smith’s assertions that one nation cannot “landlock” another under international law. But that’s not the case.
What’s more, international law — even if it does apply in theory — doesn’t always hold in practice. That’s because between countries, formal anarchy prevails: no one has the responsibility to enforce international law on their own. If one country breaks international law, it’s up to other countries to respond. If that doesn’t happen, then it just doesn’t happen.
Simply put, if Alberta were to leave Canada, it would lose all enforceable rights and protections offered by the Canadian Constitution and enforced by the institutions and courts. In their place, Alberta would get exactly — and only — what it can bargain for.
The Québec example
The Québec independence saga has in many ways clarified and refined the path to potential secession for provinces in Canada, and hints at what can happen in the aftermath of a sovereignty referendum.
In the wake of the near miss that was the 1995 referendum — when those wanting to remain in Canada defeated those who voted to separate with the narrowest of margins — Jean Chretien’s Liberal government took rapid steps to respond.
Another course of action, known as Plan B, defined the path to secession.
The federal government asked the Supreme Court of Canada for a clarification on the legality of sovereignty. It then passed the Clarity Act, which enshrined into law Ottawa’s understanding of the court’s answer. The reference and act both made clear that any secession attempt could be triggered only by a “clear majority” on a “clear question.”
The act also illuminated the stakes of secession. The preamble of the legislation, for instance, spells out that provincial sovereignty would mean the end of guaranteed Canadian citizenship for departing provincial residents.
The act also lays out some of the points to be negotiated in the event of secession, “including the division of assets and liabilities, any changes to the borders of the province, the rights, interests and territorial claims of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, and the protection of minority rights.”
Simply put, everything would be on the table if Albertans opted to separate.
You Brexit, you bought it
Brexit provides an example of just how painful that process can be. After voting to leave the European Union, the U.K. found itself bogged down in a difficult negotiation process that continues to this day.
The U.K. is dealing with these challenges even though it was already a sovereign state. Alberta is not. Everything between a sovereign Alberta and its neighbours would be subject to difficult negotiations, both in the initial days of an independent Albertan state and any subsequent discussions.
Alberta would have little leverage
Once independent, Alberta would be a landlocked, oil-exporting nation.
It would be negotiating with Canada — and the United States, its neighbour to the south — over every aspect of its new relationship.
Its borders with other provinces and territories would need be negotiated, as would the status of marginalized populations and Indigenous Peoples within Alberta. The status of lands subject to treaty — in other words, most of the province — would have to be negotiated.
After all, if Canada is divisible, so is Alberta. A new republic has no automatic claims to territory with respect to Indigenous Peoples and treaty lands.
Once borders were settled, Alberta would have little leverage and would need a lot of help as a country of about 4.5 million negotiating with neighbours of 35 million in Canada and 350 million in the U.S. Who would be its allies?
Nothing would be guaranteed, not Alberta’s admission to the United Nations, the establishment of an Albertan currency and exchange rates, national and continental defence, the management of shared borders and citizenship rules or the terms of cross-border trade and investment.
Access to Canadian ports would be at Canada’s discretion, negotiated on terms Canada considered in its interests. Alberta could no more force a pipeline through Canada than through the United States.
Puerto Rico North?
Of course, a republic of Alberta would be free to pursue deeper relations with the American republic to its south. The U.S president, however, has already made clear what would be the likely terms for free trade: accession.
Here, too, there would be no guarantees. Alberta could just as easily become an American territory, with limited representation, as it could a 51st state. “Puerto Rico North” is as possible as “Alaska South.”
Gone too would be any claims to share collective goods. Alberta’s neighbours would have no incentive, for instance, to help with the inevitable post-oil clean-up, estimated in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
Simply put, if Alberta were to vote to leave Canada, it would truly be on its own.
Stewart Prest does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University
The drone attacks by Ukrainian Operation Spider’s Web forces on Russian airfields have called into question Russia’s supposed military strength.
Russian authorities have acknowledged damage from the June 1 attacks — an unusual admission that suggests the strikes were probably effective, given Russia’s usual pattern of downplaying or denying the success of Ukrainian operations.
The operation’s most significant target was the Belaya air base, north of Mongolia. Belaya, like the other bases targeted, is a critical component in the Russian Air Force’s strategic strike capabilities because it houses planes capable of long-range nuclear and conventional strikes.
It’s also in Irkutsk, approximately 4,500 kilometres from the front lines in Ukraine.
Ukraine’s ability to successfully strike Belaya — an attempted strike at the even more distant Ukrainka air base failed — probably won’t have much of a military impact on the war. But along with successful attacks on other Russian airfields and the strike at the Kerch Bridge in Crimea, Operation Spider Web’s successes could play a strategic role in the conflict.
These attacks could shift what has become increasingly negative media coverage and public perception about Ukraine’s chances in the war over the last year. In a war of attrition, which the conflict in Ukraine has become, establishing a belief in victory is a pre-condition for success.
Explosions hit the Kerch Bridge in Russia on June 3, 2025. (The Independent)
Increased pessimism
Policymakers and pundits, instead of recognizing their expectations of a Ukrainian victory in 2023 were unrealistic, have often declared that the war is unwinnable for Ukraine.
This perspective was even more prevalent following United States President Donald Trump’s resumption of power in January 2025. In the Oval Office spat Trump had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in late February, he declared Ukraine did not “have the cards” to defeat Russia.
This turned out to be false. Ukraine’s army may possess significantly less military hardware and fewer soldiers than Russia’s, but war is often a continuation of politics. Politically, Russia faces several issues that could derail its war efforts.
Russian vulnerabilities
Russia’s military capabilities are important to Russian nationalists, who make up Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s core constituency. Russian military forces have advanced along nearly all fronts in Ukraine over the last year.
These advances, however, have largely been insignificant. Furthermore, they have emphasized Russia’s military weakness, which is an ongoing affront to Russian nationalists.
Not only have Russian military advances over the last year not changed the war in a strictly military sense, but the pace of advance has been incredibly slow. Over the last year, Russian forces have captured 5,107 square kilometres of Ukrainian territory. This territory represents less than one per cent of Ukraine’s pre-war territory.
In exchange for what amounts to negligible gains, Russian armed forces have suffered significant casualties.
Both Russia and Ukraine carefully guard the number of casualties their forces have suffered in the war. The British Ministry of Defence, however, estimates that Russia will have suffered more than a million casualties in the war by the end of this month. The Russian casualty rate is also accelerating, with an estimated 160,000 casualties in the first four months of 2025.
Russia attempts to compensate for this battlefield devastation in two ways.
First, it’s isolated Ukraine by manipulating Trump’s desire for political wins and business deals. Russia, in appearing to seek an end to the conflict while offering no concessions, has stoked tensions between Zelenskyy and Trump, where there was little love lost between the two to begin with.
Second, Russia has increased its attacks on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. Large-scale bombing does little to help Russia on the battlefield. The attacks, in fact, put its forces at a disadvantage by redirecting munitions from military targets.
Attacks on civilians
The attacks on civilian infrastructure, however, are more about instilling fear in the Ukrainian population and demonstrating American impotence to a Russian audience.
Russia’s attacks on Ukrainian cities also highlight Russia’s trump card: nuclear weapons. Russia, and specifically former Russian president Dimitry Medvedev, has repeatedlythreatened nuclear war in an attempt to dissuade Ukraine’s supporters.
By bombing Ukrainian cities, albeit with conventional munitions, Russia seeks to demonstrate its ability to deploy even more destructive weapons should the situation call for it.
These Russian military missteps, combined with a Russian economy that is structurally unsound, means that Russia’s war effort is increasingly fragile.
Weakening Asian alliances
Ukraine’s attack on Belaya also signals Russian weakness to its nominal allies in Asia.
Since the start of hostilities, Russia has relied on the tacit consent of China. This support has taken the form of China purchasing Russian crude oil to maintain the Russian economy and Chinese citizens unofficially fighting for Russia.
Belaya has been a vital element of Russia’s deterrence strategy in Asia, which has come to rely more heavily on the Russian strategic nuclear threat. The inability of Russia to protect one of its key strategic assets from a Ukrainian drone attack, combined with the weakness of Russian conventional forces in Ukraine, erodes its ability to position itself as a key ally to China.
In fact, some Russian authorities continue to view China as a major threat.
At the same time, Operation Spider’s Web gives hope to the Ukrainian people. It may also cause Trump — who prefers to back winners — to ponder whether it’s Putin, not Zelenskyy, who lacks the cards to win the war.
James Horncastle does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The decades-long Chagos islands dispute has finally entered a new chapter. The UK officially agreed to return the sovereignty of the archipelago to Mauritius.
The Indian Ocean islands are strategically situated near key shipping lanes and regional power hubs.
Mauritius was granted independence from British colonial rule in 1968. But not the Chagos islands, which had been part of Mauritius but became a new colonial territory. The residents of the largest island in the archipelago, Diego Garcia, were forced off the land. This was used as a base to support US military operations.
Now Mauritius has regained control over the islands while leasing Diego Garcia to the UK for a 99-year period for US$136 million a year. This gives the UK (and its ally the US) access to a vital maritime corridor for global trade and power projection.
But now that the deal has been signed, there’s a more pressing question. Can Mauritius use it as the foundation for justice and economic progress?
As scholarsof strategic economic development we often focus on Africa and Mauritius in particular. We believe the agreement marks an important geopolitical moment. It rights a colonial wrong, honours international justice and cements Mauritius’s global standing.
It also presents an opportunity to fund inclusive development and sustainability initiatives for Mauritius. It could boost investments in education, health and infrastructure. It could also support the resettlement of displaced Chagossians, and advance marine conservation, renewable energy and climate resilience programmes in the archipelago.
Aerial view of Diego Garcia and the Chagos archipelago. NASA/Wikimedia Commons
The real challenge facing the Mauritian government is how to turn a diplomatic triumph into tangible national progress. We argue that what’s needed is a forward looking and inclusive strategy.
The development challenge
Reparations can offer short-term financial relief. But without visionary planning, there’s a risk of these funds being absorbed into recurrent government spending. Or used for symbolic programmes with limited structural and socio-economic impact.
The real value lies in what Mauritius does next. Investment in strategic sectors such as the blue economy, renewable energy, digital infrastructure and sustainable tourism is the key.
Investment should strengthen partnerships with regional neighbours, international donors, and strategic allies like the US, China and India. Mauritius must position itself as a forward-looking state with global relevance.
The reparations should be treated as seed funding to invest in its own future. This means using the funds to drive bold, long-term transformation. The country needs to build a more resilient, innovative and globally competitive economy.
Mauritius is heavily reliant on offshore services and short-term fiscal gains. It is vulnerable to slow diversification, rising youth unemployment, climate-related risks, lagging digital and technological progress, and growing global scrutiny of its financial sector.
To remain competitive in the current volatile global context, the country must develop more broadly.
3 steps to take
1. Investment
Mauritius has historically relied on external financial inflows like tourism revenue, offshore finance and foreign aid. By channelling funds into capacity-building, skills development and innovation ecosystems, the country can cultivate a self-sustaining economy. This would position it better to seize opportunities in the green economy, digital transformation and knowledge-intensive industries.
More specifically, it needs to:
secure investment in green energy, AI-digital infrastructure and high-tech manufacturing
offer tax incentives and streamlined regulatory processes to attract foreign direct investment in these sectors
establish public-private partnerships to develop innovation hubs and research centres focused on emerging technologies
2. Economic diplomacy, alliances and regional leverage
The government should forge stronger partnerships with the UK and the US. Key areas include defence, cybersecurity, climate and sustainability innovations and regional logistics infrastructure.
It needs strong ties as power blocs shift and competition over strategic resources and trade routes grows.
Joint military exercises and intelligence sharing could improve forces’ ability to help each other. Investing in advanced cyber defence capabilities, for instance, can help counter emerging digital threats, such as data breaches affecting financial services and e-governance systems.
These steps would bolster national security and reinforce Mauritius’ position as a reliable partner.
The resolution of the Chagos dispute provides an opportunity for Mauritius to use its geopolitical position. It could expand trade, diplomatic influence and strategic partnerships across Africa, Asia and beyond.
Being located between Africa, the Middle East, South Asia and Southeast Asia places it along major maritime trade routes.
Mauritius enjoys political stability, democratic governance and strong legal framework. It is well placed to help resolve regional disputes over maritime boundary conflicts, fishing rights, and freedom of navigation. These involve countries like India, Sri Lanka and Madagascar, and even China and the US.
It can also lead in developing shared logistics and resupply hubs to support regional trade, disaster response and maritime security operations.
3. Chagossian justice
Mauritius must make the Chagossian community part of its next national success story. Including them in economic plans is a legal, moral and strategic necessity.
Steps should include:
incorporating Chagos representatives in economic discussions and decision-making processes
establishing programmes for Chagossian cultural preservation and economic development
giving Chagossians a voice in shaping the future of their ancestral lands.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrive at the Elysee Palace in Paris in 2019.Ian Langsdon/Pool Photo via AP
Delegations from Ukraine and Russia met for a second time in Istanbul in a month on June 2, 2025. Missing, again, were the country’s two leaders.
For a fleeting moment ahead of the first meeting in mid-May 2025, there existed the faintest prospect that Presidents Vladimir Putin of Russia and Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine would join, sitting down in the same room for face-to-face talks.
But it didn’t happen; few expected it would. On that occasion, Putin refused Zelenskyy’s offer of face-to-face talks in Istanbul.
Even though neither leader met in the Istanbul summits, they have met before.
The talks continued periodically until 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Until that point, most of the discussion was framed by two deals, the Minsk accords of 2014 and 2015, which set out the terms for a ceasefire between Kyiv and the Moscow-armed rebel groups and the conditions for elections in Donetsk and Luhansk.
By the time of the sixth meeting in December 2019, the only time Zelenkyy and Putin have met in person, some still hoped that the Minsk accords could form a framework for peace.
His electoral campaign had centered on the promise of putting an end to the unrest in Donbas, which had been rumbling on for years. The increasing role of Russia in the conflict, through supporting rebels financially and with volunteer Russian soldiers, had complicated and escalated fighting, and many Ukrainians were weary of the impact of internally displaced people that it caused.
By all accounts, Zelenskyy went into Paris believing that he could make a deal with Putin.
“I want to return with concrete results,” Zelenskyy said just days before meeting Putin. By then, the Ukrainian president’s only contact with Putin had been over the phone. “I want to see the person and I want to bring from Normandy understanding and feeling that everybody really wants gradually to finish this tragic war,” Zelenskyy said, adding, “I can feel it for sure only at the table.”
But the Russian president also wanted to keep Russia’s smaller neighbor under its influence. Ukraine gained independence after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. But in the early years of the new century, Russia began to exert increasing influence over the politics of its neighbor. This ended in 2014, when a popular revolution ousted pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and ushered in a pro-Western government.
Those desires – Ukraine’s to end the war in Donbas, and Russia’s to curb the West’s involvement in Ukraine – formed the parameters for the Normandy talks.
And for some time, there appeared to be momentum to find compromise. French President Emmanuel Macron said that the 2019 Paris talks had broken years of stalemate and relaunched the peace process. Putin’s assessment was that the peace process was “developing in the right direction.” Zelenskyy’s view was a little less enthusisastic: “Let’s say for now it’s a draw.”
Talking past each other
Yet the Putin-Zelenskyy meeting in 2019 ultimately ended in failure. In retrospect, both sides were talking past each other and could not reach agreement on the sequencing of key parts of the peace plan.
Zelenskyy wanted the security provisions of the Minsk accords, including a lasting ceasefire and the securing of Ukraine’s border with Russia, in place before proceeding with regional elections on devolving autonomy to the regions. Putin was adamant that the elections come first.
The success of the Normandy talks were also hindered by Putin’s refusal to acknowledge that Russia was a party to the conflict. Rather, he framed the Donbas conflict as a civil war between the Ukrainian government and the rebels. Russia’s role was simply to push the rebels to the negotiating table in this take – a view that was greeted with skepticism by Ukraine and the West.
As a result, the Normandy talks stalled. And then in February 2022, Russian launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Way forward today?
The nascent negotiations between Ukraine and Russia that began in Istanbul in May 2025 represent the first real attempt to bring high-level delegations of both sides together since 2019.
Many of the same challenges remain. The talks still revolve around the issues of security, the status of Donetsk and Luhansk, and prisoner exchanges – that last point being the only one in which common ground appears to be found, both in 2019and now.
But there are major differences – not least, three years of actual direct war. Russia can no longer deny that it is a party of the conflict, even if Moscow frames the war as a special military operation to “denazify” and demilitarize Ukraine.
And three years of war have changed how the questions of Crimea and the Donbas are framed.
In the Normandy talks, there was no talk of recognizing Russian control over any Ukrainian territory. But recent U.S. efforts to negotiate peace have included a “de-jure” U.S. recognition of Russian control in Crimea, plus “de-facto recognition” of Russia’s occupation of nearly all of Luhansk oblast and the occupied portions of Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.
Another major difference between the negotiation process then and now is who is mediating.
The Normandy negotiations were led by European leaders – German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Macron of France. Throughout the whole Normandy talks process, only Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia were involved as active participants.
Today, it is the United States taking the lead.
And this suits Putin. A constant issue for Putin of the Normandy talks was that Germany and France were never neutral mediators.
In President Donald Trump, Putin has found a U.S. leader who, at least at first, appeared eager to take on the mantle from Europe.
But like the Europeans involved in the Normandy talks, Trump too is encountering similar barriers to any meaningful progress.
The Istanbul negotiations on May 16, 2025, were less productive than many people hoped. A proposed 30-day ceasefire agreement didn’t come to fruition; instead the parties agreed on a prisoner-exchange deal. Follow-up talks on June 2 ended after barely an hour, according to Turkish officials. Again, one point agreed on was a prisoner swap.
The Paris peace talks, too, led to a prisoner exchange – but little more. It appears that getting the leaders of Ukraine and Russia to agree on anything more ambitious is as elusive now as it was when Putin and Zelenskyy met in 2019.
The views expressed in this article represent the personal views of the author and are not necessarily the views of the Department of Defense or of the Department of the Air Force.
A few snippets of musicalised dialogue from the cast album of the new Broadway musical Death Becomes Her – with music and lyrics by Julia Mattison and Noel Carey, and a book by Marco Pennette – have recently become trending sonic memes on TikTok.
In all sorts of situations, users are lip synching to audio clips of Broadway star Jennifer Simard, in the character of Helen Sharp (played by Goldie Hawn in the 1992 cult film on which the musical is based), saying things like “That was rude. That was pretty fuckin’ rude” and “She stole my life. She made me cuckoo. She’s why I spent four years locked in that health spa.”
Musical theatre fans love a good meme (scholar Trevor Boffone has written a whole book about the phenomenon) and Death Becomes Her is primed to create a lot of them: a show featuring two divas (played by Simard and Megan Hilty as Madeleine Ashton, Meryl Streep’s role in the movie) based on a cult film about divas begs to be shaped and reshaped by fan culture.
Helen and Madeleine are longtime rivals who both take a magic potion that makes them immortal. This leads them to find increasingly extravagant ways to try and do away with each other, with the help of Helen’s put-upon husband Ernest (Christopher Sieber), a plastic surgeon who reluctantly falls into the role of restoring their bodies after each “accident”.
Some of Hilty’s clips have also been TikTok-ified (notably Tell Me, Earnest) but Simard is winning the numbers game. Her “That was rude” clip alone has 321,000 videos and counting.
Finding the patter
There seem to be two main reasons for the attraction of these clips. First is Simard’s delivery of the words. Simard is a longstanding Broadway star and an expert at musical comedy timing.
Second is the rhythmic quality of the dialogue. Not fully sung, these bits are spoken in mostly strict rhythm over orchestral accompaniment. That they have become such earworms demonstrates it is not only melody that burrows into the brain, but also rhythmic contour.
There is a long history of this style of speak-singing in musical theatre, notably popularised in the late 1950s by Robert Preston in The Music Man and Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady.
Neither of those actors was a strong singer, but both had excellent timing and were able to deliver spoken lines above music with a strong sense of musicality.
Simard is an excellent singer with a very wide range, but the comic role of Helen – ever the underdog to her rival famous actress Madeleine – lends itself to this style of heightened speech.
Most effective rhythmically, and the most popular excerpt, is the “That was rude” meme, where Simard begins slowly without accompaniment; the bass comes in on “rude” and sets a groove for the rest of the short excerpt.
This one has been used in every possible situation, from responses to nasty notes left on people’s cars to complaints about incorrect drink orders. Some of the TikTokers refer to Simard in on-screen text, but this one seems to have become popular outside any specific reference to the show, in a truly viral moment.
Ripe for the lip-sync
The lengthiest of the trending excerpts is the one that begins with “We talked about killing her before”, which sets off a monologue about Helen’s plan to do away with Madeline once and for all.
This is a tour de force for Simard’s comic timing, as it begins in free rhythm and then gradually takes on a more consistent beat. TikTokers are tending to use this one primarily as a demonstration of their lip-syncing skills, as opposed to the other shorter clips that are applied in different ironic situations.
This trend also shows the continuing importance of the cast album in musical theatre culture. The majority of TikTokers probably have not seen the show, currently only playing on Broadway with high ticket prices. Yet the cast album (easily available on all the main streaming sites) gives access.
The fact these clips come from a cast album also more easily allows fans to create their own visuals around it. Unless they actually saw the show they only have production photographs and short publicity clips (and the occasional shaky bootleg or slime tutorial) to go on in terms of what it looks like.
Audio from a source like the soundtrack of the Wicked movie has not led to so many lip-sync videos because the visual track is so readily accessible; as a film, Wicked’s visuals define its audio while a cast album can more easily work the other way round.
Beyond Broadway
I saw Death Becomes Her on Broadway in January and enjoyed it. It’s a fun show full of special effects and comic bits. The score is serviceable (it’s not Sondheim), but it is catchy – very important for its use in these TikTok trends – and well performed by Simard and the rest of the cast.
This whole phenomenon demonstrates that the current cultural sphere of “Broadway” extends well beyond the street itself. This has been the case at least since the rise of the cast album in the 1950s (My Fair Lady’s was the best-selling LP of 1956), but now the reach is intensified by social media spaces like TikTok; you don’t have to have actually seen Death Becomes Her to experience it.
Gregory Camp does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
As the influencer ecosystem expands and its culture evolves, there is increasing pressure for the industry to prioritize ethics over profit.(Shutterstock)
Social media influencers have become cultural powerhouses, setting trends, shaping lifestyles and even swaying political views. As their influence grows, so do ethical debates about them: are they villains exploiting their audiences, victims of an unregulated industry or champions driving positive change?
In our chapter in the recently released book, Influencer Marketing, we synthesized existing literature to explore the ethical minefield of influencer culture and attention economy. We scrutinized the responsibilities of influencers, brands, platforms and consumers, and the broader impact of influencers on society at large.
Influencers as villains
Influencers are often cast as villains in the online world. They are frequently criticized for inauthentic behaviour, such as by failing to disclose partnership agreements, perpetuating unrealistic beauty or lifestyle standards or by lying to their audiences outright.
Despite regulations, many influencers hide their paid partnerships.
In 2023, for instance, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found that 81 per cent of influencers failed to properly disclose paid partnerships.
Influencers are incentivized to do this because advertising-heavy content can appear inauthentic and be off-putting to followers. These omissions mislead audiences into thinking products and brand reviews are based on genuine opinion, rather than part of a paid script.
Despite the controversy, Gibson’s story was adapted by Netflix into a series called Apple Cider Vinegar, further fuelling the money-making machine.
Another case is that of Yovana Mendoza, a raw vegan influencer who was filmed eating fish in a Bali restaurant. The video went viral after being leaked by fellow travellers. Despite later revealing that she had stopped being vegan because of health reasons, she still faced backlash and accusations of hypocrisy.
Unrealistic beauty standards
Influencers, and particularly virtual CGI influencers, are also villainized by the masses for perpetuating unrealistic standards and lifestyle choices.
From posing as the “perfect family” or the “perfect wife” (such as trad wife influencer Hannah Neeleman, also known as Ballerina Farm), to flaunting ultra-thin or perfectly chiselled beauty ideals, influencer content fosters harmful social comparisons.
These portrayals can contribute to anxiety and low self-esteem among social media audiences. Influencers prey on these insecurities to make profit and gain influence, which affects the well-being of these audiences.
In the case of male Instagram followers of the hashtag #fitfam, one study found increased pressure to achieve the so-called “instabod” — a sculpted, idealized physique — was linked to symptoms of muscle dysmorphia.
Influencers as champions
Despite the controversies surrounding influencer culture, some content creators are leveraging their platforms to do good. Body positivity influencers, for instance, advocate for self-love and self-acceptance, which can improve body satisfaction and appreciation among young women.
There are also green influencers who champion sustainability. For example, Alessandro Vitale teaches urban farming, while Emma Dendler advocates for zero-waste living.
A study found that many women fashion influencers over 50 engage in what researchers call “styleactivism.” They use their social media platforms to bring about important changes in the ageist and sexist fashion and beauty markets.
There is also a growing movement known as “deinfluencing,” where influencers discourage mindless consumption by critiquing over-hyped products, like the viral Stanley Cup water bottle.
Many influencers operate without the backing of talent managers or influencer agencies, despite taking on multiple roles, including videographers, video editors, scriptwriters, lighting specialists, directors and on-screen talent. This leaves them especially vulnerable to exploitation.
As the influencer ecosystem expands and its culture evolves, there is increasing pressure for the industry to prioritize ethics over profit. Weeding out the unethical practices lurking in various corners of this lucrative industry will require collective efforts from policymakers, brands, as well as influencers and their followers.
Aya Aboelenien receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC)
Ai Ming Chow does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By J.B. Ruhl, Professor of Law, Director, Program on Law and Innovation, and Co-director, Energy, Environment and Land Use Program, Vanderbilt University
In one fell swoop, the U.S. Supreme Court has changed a big part of the game.
Whether the effects are good or bad depends on the viewer’s perspective. Either way, there is a new interpretation in place for the law that is the centerpiece of the debate about permitting – the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, known as NEPA.
Only after completing that work can the agency make a final decision to approve or deny the project. These reports must evaluate direct effects, such as the destruction of habitat to make way for a new highway, and indirect effects, such as the air pollution from cars using the highway after it is built.
Decades of litigation about the scope of indirect effects have widened the required evaluation. As I explain it to my students, that logical and legal progression is reminiscent of the popular children’s book “If You Give a Mouse a Cookie,” in which granting a request for a cookie triggers a seemingly endless series of further requests – for a glass of milk, a napkin and so on. For the highway example, the arguments went, even if the agency properly assessed the pollution from the cars, it also had to consider the new subdivisions, malls and jobs the new highway foreseeably could induce.
The challenge for federal agencies was knowing how much of that potentially limitless series of indirect effects courts would require them to evaluate. In recent litigation, the question in particular has been how broad a range of effects on and from climate change could be linked to any one specific project and therefore require evaluation.
With the court’s ruling, federal agencies’ days of uncertainty are over.
The cover image of the 637-page environmental impact assessment shows a view of the region where a railway is proposed to be built. U.S. Surface Transportation Board
At issue was an 85-mile rail line a group of developers proposed to build in Utah to connect oil wells to the interstate rail network and from there transport waxy crude oil to refineries in Louisiana, Texas and elsewhere. The federal Surface Transportation Board reviewed the environmental effects and approved the required license in 2021.
The report was 637 pages long, with more than 3,000 pages of appendices containing additional information. It acknowledged but did not give a detailed assessment of the indirect “upstream” effects of constructing the rail line – such as spurring new oil drilling – and the indirect “downstream” effects of the ultimate use of the waxy oil in places as far flung as Louisiana.
In February 2022, Eagle County, Colorado, through which trains coming from the new railway would pass, along with the Center for Biological Diversity appealed that decision in federal court, arguing that the board had failed to properly explain why it did not assess those effects. Therefore, the county argued, the report was incomplete and the board license should be vacated.
In August 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed and held that the agency had failed to adequately explain why it could not employ “some degree of forecasting” to identify those impacts and that the board could prevent those effects by exercising its authority to deny the license.
The railway developers appealed to the Supreme Court, asking whether NEPA requires a federal agency to look beyond the action being proposed to evalutate indirect effects outside its own jurisdiction.
Petroleum-drilling equipment stands in the Uinta Basin in eastern Utah. AP Photo/Rick Bowmer
A resounding declaration
Writing for a five-justice majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered a ringing, table-pounding lecture about courts run amok.
Kavanaugh did not stop to provide specific support for each admonition, describing NEPA as a “legislative acorn” that has “grown over the years into a judicial oak that has hindered infrastructure development.” He bemoaned the “delay upon delay” NEPA imposes on projects as so complicated that it bordered “on the Kafkaesque.”
In his view, “NEPA has transformed from a modest procedural requirement into a blunt and haphazard tool employed by project opponents.” He called for “a course correction … to bring judicial review under NEPA back in line with the statutory text and common sense.” His opinion reset the course in three ways.
First, despite the Supreme Court having recently reduced the deference courts must give to federal agency decisions in other contexts, Kavanaugh wrote that courts should give agencies strong deference when reviewing an agency’s NEPA effects analyses. Because these assessments are “fact-dependent, context-specific, and policy-laden choices about the depth and breadth of its inquiry … (c)ourts should afford substantial deference and should not micromanage those agency choices so long as they fall within a broad zone of reasonableness.”
Second, Kavanaugh crafted a new rule saying that the review of one project did not need to consider the potential indirect effects of other related projects it could foreseeably induce, such as the rail line encouraging more drilling for oil. This limitation is especially relevant, Kavanaugh emphasized, when the effects are from projects over which the reviewing agency does not have jurisdiction. That applied in this case, because the board does not regulate oil wells or oil drilling.
And third, Kavanaugh created something like a “no harm – no foul” rule, under which “even if an (environmental impact statement) falls short in some respects, that deficiency may not necessarily require a court to vacate the agency’s ultimate approval of a project.” The strong implication is that courts should not overturn an agency decision unless its NEPA assessment has a serious flaw.
The upshot for the project at hand was that the Supreme Court deferred to the board’s decision that it could not reliably predict the rail line’s effects on oil drilling or use of the oil transported. And the fact that the agency had no regulatory power over those separate issues reinforced the idea that those concerns were outside the scope of the board’s required review.
A train rolls along a stretch of track in Utah that could be connected with a proposed railway to carry oil to market. AP Photo/Rick Bowmer
A split court
Although Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote that she would have reached the same end result and upheld the agency permit, her proposed test is far narrower.
By her reading, the federal law creating the Surface Transportation Board restricted it from considering the broader indirect effects of the rail line. But her finding would be relevant only for any federal agencies whose governing statutes were similarly restrictive. By contrast, Kavanaugh’s “course correction” applies to judicial review of NEPA findings for all federal agencies.
Though the full effects remain to be seen, this decision significantly changes the legal landscape of environmental reviews of major projects. Agencies will have more latitude to shorten the causal chain of indirect effects they consider – and to exclude them entirely if they flow from separate projects beyond the agency’s regulatory control.
Now, for example, if a federal agency is considering an application to build a new natural gas power plant, the review must still include its direct greenhouse gas emissions and their effects on the climate. But emissions that could result from additional gas extraction and transportation projects to fuel the power plant, and any climate effects from whatever the produced electricity is used for, are now clearly outside the agency’s required review. And if the agency voluntarily decided to consider any of those effects, courts would have to defer to its analysis, and any minor deficiencies would be inconsequential.
That is a far cry from how the legal structure around the National Environmental Policy Act has worked for decades. For lawyers, industry, advocacy groups and the courts, environmental review after the Eagle County decision is not just a new ballgame; it is a new sport.
J.B. Ruhl does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
News of the spectacular “spiderweb” mass drone attack on Russian air bases on June 1 will have been uppermost in the minds of delegates who assembled the following day for another round of direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. The attack appears to have been a triumph of Ukrainian intelligence and planning that destroyed or damaged billions of pounds’ worth of Russian aircraft stationed at bases across the country, including at locations as far away as Siberia.
Ukraine’s drone strikes, much like Russia’s intensifying air campaign, hardly signal either side’s sincere commitment to negotiations. As it turned out, little of any consequence was agreed at the brief meeting between negotiators, beyond a prisoner swap, confirming yet again that neither a ceasefire nor a peace agreement are likely anytime soon.
But the broader context of developments on the battlefield and beyond can offer important clues about the trajectory of the war in the coming months.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
At an earlier meeting in Istanbul in May, Moscow and Kyiv agreed to draft and exchange detailed proposals for a settlement. The Ukrainian proposal restated the longstanding position of Kyiv and its western allies that concessions on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country are unacceptable.
In other words, a Russian-imposed neutrality ruling out Nato membership and limiting the size of Ukraine’s armed forces is a non-starter for Kyiv. So is any international recognition of Moscow’s illegal land-grabs since 2014, including the annexation of Crimea.
The Ukrainian proposal is for an immediate ceasefire along the frontline as “the starting point for negotiations”. Any territorial issues would be discussed “after a full and unconditional ceasefire”.
Russia’s proposals, meanwhile, are also mostly old news. Russia maintains its demands for full recognition of Russian territorial claims since 2014, Ukrainian neutrality.
These stringent Russian demands in return for even a temporary ceasefire are hardly any more serious negotiation positions from Ukraine’s perspective than Kyiv’s proposals are likely to be to Moscow. In fact, what the Kremlin put on the table in Istanbul is more akin to surrender terms.
Ukraine is in no mood to surrender. The spiderweb drone attack against Russia’s strategic bomber fleet is a significant boost for Ukrainian morale. But, like previous drone strikes against Moscow in June 2023, it means little in terms of signalling a sustainable Ukrainian capability that could even out Russia’s advantages in terms of manpower and equipment.
The state of the conflict in Ukraine as at June 3 2025. Institute for the Study of War
Closer to the frontlines inside Ukraine, Kyiv’s forces also struck the power grid inside Russian-occupied parts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions. This may delay any Russian plans to expand its control over the two regions. But, like the latest drone strikes inside Russia, it is at best an operation that entrenches, rather than breaks the current stalemate.
But while Russia might continue to make incremental gains on the battlefield, a game-changing Russian offensive or a collapse of Ukrainian defences does not appear to be on the cards.
International support
Kyiv’s position will potentially also be strengthened by a new bill in the US senate that threatens the imposition of 500% tariffs on any countries that buy Russian resources. This would primarily affect India and China.
These are the largest consumers of Russian oil and gas, and if New Delhi and Beijing decide that trade with the US is more important to them cheap imports from Russia, the move could cut Russia off from critical revenues and imports.
But, given how indecisive Donald Trump has been to date when it comes to putting any real, rather than just rhetorical, pressure on Vladimir Putin, it is not clear whether the proposed senate bill will have the desired effect. The bill has support of over 80 co-sponsors from both the Republican and Democratic caucuses, meaning the senate could overturn a presidential veto. But any delay in imposing tougher sanctions will ultimately play into Putin’s hands.
By contrast, European support for Ukraine has, if anything, increased in recent months. For example, EU leaders adopted their 17th sanctions package against Russia on May 20. A week later, Germany and Ukraine announced a new military cooperation agreement worth €5 billion (£4.2 billion).
It still falls short of what Kyiv would require for a major shift in the balance of power on the battlefield. But for now it is enough to prevent Russia from becoming militarily so dominant that Moscow’s current settlement proposals would present the only option for at least some part of Ukraine to survive as an independent state.
The war remains in a stalemate. Neither Moscow nor Kyiv appear to have the capacity to escalate their military efforts to the degree necessary that would force the other side to make substantial concessions.
Both sides are playing for time in the hope that their fortunes may change. For Ukraine, this would mean more US military support coupled with more sanctions pressure on Russia, while Europe follows through on building up its own and Ukraine’s defence capabilities.
Russia’s calculations will be different. Putin will need to keep his few remaining allies – China, Iran and North Korea – on side while trying to make a deal with Trump. This may be impossible to achieve.
In this case, the Russian dictator’s best hope might be that Trump does not impose any serious sanctions on Russia or its trade partners, let alone lean into increasing military support for Ukraine.
For both sides, a lot still hinges on Washington. The unpredictability of the Trump White House, much like the self-imposed restraint under Biden, not only makes it unlikely that the war in Ukraine moves beyond the current stalemate, it has become a major, and perhaps the decisive road block that enables both Moscow and Kyiv to dream of victory in a war that has become unwinnable.
Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.
Tetyana Malyarenko does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The UK government’s new strategic defence review has laid out a blueprint aimed at making Britain “secure at home, strong abroad”.
The review represents a change in how the government thinks about the UK’s defence amid a rapidly changing geopolitical picture. The Labour government launched the review in July 2024 shortly after taking office, as a first step in reassessing UK armed forces in the face of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Prime Minister Keir Starmer acknowledged at the time: “We live in a more dangerous and volatile world.”
The government has accepted the review’s 62 recommendations. The most eye-catching parts are investment and development of new weapons: expanding the UK’s nuclear capabilities, drone swarms and long-range missile systems, new F-35 and updated Typhoon fighter jets and autonomous weapon systems.
Unlike past reviews, this one was conducted by experts outside of the government: former Nato secretary general Lord Robertson, former US National Security Council member and former White House adviser Fiona Hill, and retired British Army officer General Sir Richard Barrons.
In addition to practical measures of investment and expansion, the review lays out the more difficult changes that are needed to respond to security challenges, namely Russian threats to Europe. Here are three key aspects to understand.
1. War-fighting ready
The review says the UK must be “ready to fight and win” a full-scale war. Importantly, it suggests that the UK is no longer in an era of going to war when it chooses – but instead is facing the possibility of being forced into war.
Academic Mary Kaldor made the distinction between the two types of wars in her book New Wars and Old Wars, stating that old wars are “wars of necessity”, and new wars are “wars of the willing”. Published a few years after the end of the cold war, it’s easy to see why Kaldor made this distinction.
But the strategic review paints a different picture – that wars of necessity are once again the UK’s primary security concern. This means the UK must be on a different war footing than it has been since 1991.
As such, the government and the UK armed forces will have to change and become more innovative to meet this challenge. To do this, the review lays out plans for an “integrated force” model (rather than joint forces). It describes this approach as leading to “a more agile and lethal combat force”.
The review also calls for a “whole society approach”, including expanding the voluntary under-18 cadet forces, protecting national infrastructure and public outreach.
2. Pace of innovation
The review includes a host of recommendations for digital innovation and munitions production, and suggests that the defence industry could be an even bigger contributor to growing the economy. But, it notes, the UK’s defence industry is currently “stuck in cold war-era procurement cycles” and processes.
It points to a need to speed up planning and procurement and improve partnerships with the commercial sector.
Many digital innovations are being driven by industry in the US and China, such as the work on AI, nanotechnologies, robotics and automation. The challenge for the UK will be how to build good relationships with those countries on innovation which does not have a strong presence in UK digital industries.
The reelection of Donald Trump in 2024 shocked many into thinking that the trans-Atlantic relationship was fast dissolving, though the change has been going on for some time . This review acknowledges that in setting out a “Nato first” approach:
There is an unequivocal need for the UK to redouble its efforts within the Alliance and to step up its contribution to Euro-Atlantic security more broadly – particularly as Russian aggression across Europe grows and as the United States of America adapts its regional priorities.
It states that Europe and the transatlantic area will be the UK’s primary reference for security. This marks a shift from the previous “Indo-pacific tilt” defence focus laid out in the 2021 integrated review.
The Nato-first approach seems to be at odds with the direction of Nato’s largest and most powerful member, the US. Since the end of the 1990s, US presidents have repeatedly sought to realign US grand strategy towards China and away from Europe. Had the Russian Federation not invaded Crimea in 2014, the Obama administration may have been able to carry out this pivot.
As it stands, with the second Trump presidency and its repeated calls for increasing defence spending from European states (in addition to what has often been seen as less than resolute intentions towards Russia), one might think Nato should be counting its days, rather than being placed at the centre of a new strategic review.
However, regardless of Trump’s actions, the UK will still matter for Washington for the foreseeable future, because it remains an ally and it does defence well. Nato still remains the way to do coalition-building because it has been around for so long and has built up the institutions to do high-level defence cooperation and coordination.
The review recognises the direction of travel for Washington, and how much it requires the UK and other European governments to invest in their own defence.
David J. Galbreath has received funding from the UKRI.
