The Red & The Blue

1

CONTENTS PAGE

A NOTE FROM THE EDITOR …………………………………………….……….…..………… Yasmin Shah ILLUSTRATIONS ………………………………………………………………………………………. Imaan Ashraf

GLOBAL POLITICS: THE POLARISATION OF BRAZIL ……………………………………………………………… Oliver Locke POPULISM AND AMERICAN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY …...................… Imogen O’Connor A NEW WORLD ORDER? – THE RISING INFLUENCE OF BRICS …..…………… Jai Garg NIKKI HALEY- RISING TO REPUBLICAN VICTORY …………….…………… Antara Kashyap POLITICS AND SOCIAL MEDIA: WHAT HAPPENED? ……………………………. Katie Weber ROE V WADE …………………………………………………………………..………………………. Archie Walters WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE UN IN GLOBAL CONFLICT? ……..…………… Poppy Girven

EUROPEAN POLITICS: THE RISE OF FAR-RIGHT POLITICS IN EUROPE ……………..………………….. Olivia Conlon SECULAR POLICY IN FRANCE …………………………………………………………… Anoushey Saquib HOW THE UK GOVERNMENT CAN TACKLE GLOBAL POVERTY …………… Maia Jafar UK’S UPCOMING GENERAL ELECTION ………………………………..………………… Aaditya Nair

ASIAN POLITICS: TROUBLES IN PAKISTAN ………………………………………………………………… Kareem Mahmood JAPANESE PACIFISM …………………………….……………………………………………….… Yasmin Shah WHAT IS GOING ON IN PAKISTAN? ……………..……………………………………. Emaan Siddiqui CHINA’S ASCENT: A NEW GLOBAL ORDER …………………………………………….. Shyan Teoh

2

AFRICAN POLITICS: THE SUDANESE PEOPLE CANNOT CATCH A BREAK ………..….…….. Ieva Sabaliauskaite AFRICA’S DEVELOPMENT ……………………………………………….…………………….…… Janya Shah NIGERIA’S GENERAL ELECTION AND ITS IMPACTS GLOBALLY …...… Pierce Ashton THE SOUTH AFRICAN ENERGY CRISIS …………………………….….…………… Dominic Mayne

CHALLENGES TO THE STATE: JUNIOR MEDICAL STRIKES ……………………………………………………………….……. Anna Zaman THE TOILET OF VENUS : GOVERNMENT’S CHALLENGERS ……… Eleftheria Sermpeti 2023 NIGER’S COUP D’ETAT ……………………………………………………………..….. Aaliyah Haque THE CHAOS OF SUELLA BRAVERMAN ….……………………………………………….. Aditi Prabhu

3

A NOTE FROM THE EDITOR… This Term's issue of 'The Red & The Blue' covers a breadth of topics globally. Spanning from the surge of far-right policies in the European Union, to the Sudanese humanitarian crisis to political troubles in Pakistan.

With both the UK and US elections around the corner as well as the pressing concern of climate change persisting, the articles this term have a strong focus on change within the political climate. Additionally, amid the shifting dynamics of global politics and the ascend of multipolarity, the articles this term emphasise the emergence of influential powers, as well as the pivotal roles played by international organisations like BRICS and the UN. Moreover, this term, due to the influx of coups, protests and rebellions, a new section on 'Challenges to the State' has been added to reflect the increasingly confrontational political atmosphere.

Thank you to all Year 12 and 13 students who wrote for the issue this term, it has been a pleasure to be a part of the amazing editorial team this year. With this being the final edition for the editorial team and I, we would like to extend a special thank you to Ms Claeys for her wholehearted support throughout the past year in producing these issues.

Happy Holidays and have a wonderful break.

Please Enjoy, Yasmin Shah and the 2023 Editorial Team – Ieva Sabaliauskaite, Imaan Ashraf & Aditi Prabhu

4

5

THE POLARISATION OF BRAZIL The 2022 presidential election in Brazil saw the nation divided. Brazil’s former left president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva sealed a tight victory against the right-winged incumbent Jair Bolsonaro. Lula the former factory worker turned president, secured 50.9% of the vote, with Bolsonaro holding 49.1% of the vote, losing his position as president of Brazil. The two political titans represent the extremes of Brazilian politics which left little to no choice for any middle ground voters.

Bolsonaro is an authoritarian capitalist and military man with the backing of the evangelical Church and the agro sector. He is often viewed as more outspoken and without regard to whom he may offend. On the contrary, Lula is the centre left leader of the Workers Party, with a progressive attitude towards social issues. During his time as president, from 2003-10, Lula had a 90% approval rating having lifted millions out of poverty through raising the minimum wage and various other welfare programs.

However, his tenure came to an end in a rather tragic fashion with corruption scandals spanning Lula’s entire office. Lula made shady building contracts through Brazil's nationalised oil giant, ‘Petrobras’, which were given to construction companies that Lula had directly received money from. This landed Lula with a 12-year sentence of which he only served 580 days until the Supreme Court came to a decision to annul his charges.

INEQUALITY Brazil is a country of contrast; therefore, it is difficult to understand the current political climate without unpacking some of this. Despite being the world’s tenth largest economy (by GDP), Brazil faces major economic disparity, 32% of the population lives in poverty, with parts of Brazil being reminiscent of developed countries of the West and others resembling the slums of developing countries. As with the rest of the world, this issue was only exacerbated during Covid with rising inflation and increased unemployment rates.

Lula is recognised by Brazilians for supporting those less fortunate, with those on lower incomes trusting that now he is in power he will repeat his feats from 12 years ago. Going into the 2022 election he promised tax reform and an increase in the minimum wage likely playing into his previous successes as president. Paired with this, he vowed to eradicate hunger and implement major infrastructure projects like public transportation.

Bolsonaro's attitude towards inequality is conflicting. He originally shifted sentiment towards the nation's low-income earners during the run up to the election, boosting welfare payments by 50%. However, his unwillingness to change his free-market incline which most Brazilians argue only looks to favour big corporations, meant he was 6

unsuccessful in swaying the polls. This can partly explain the ideological divide within Brazil between centre left and far right, yet money is not the only explanation.

AMAZON VS. THE ECONOMY The corner stone of Brazil’s economy is agriculture, exporting for over one billion people across the globe. Bolsonaro recognised this and that the agricultural sector has one of the most powerful political lobbies in Brazil. During his presidency, Bolsonaro placed more value on the development of the country than the environment, with many critics blaming his administration for the highest rate of deforestation within the Amazon in 15 years. He consistently criticised the federal environmental agencies for their fines and promoted many former and current military members with minimal expertise as environment officials, at the Indigenous Affairs Agency and institutes that manage these areas. His negligent attitude towards the environment has raised international concerns, halting talks with the administration of US President Joe Biden about potentially funding Brazilian efforts against logging.

Lula da Silva, on the other hand, has vowed to bolster environmental agencies and remove all illegal mining within indigenous reserves. His previous term as president, however, reflects a different story, with a complete lack of remorse towards the indigenous communities near the Amazon where he constructed the Belo Monte dam. The Belo Monte dam was built to meet increasing energy demands in 2010 but resulted in deforestation and a fall in fish stocks. Despite this, environmentally conscious voters still see Lula as their best option for protecting the Amazon. This creates a conflict of interest between businesses that rely on natural resources from the land and believe Bolsonaro will streamline this process for them, and environmentalists who see such activities as a threat to the Amazon and its indigenous inhabitants.

RELIGION Brazil is a Christian nation, with just over 90% of the population practising some form of Christianity. While this was historically Catholic, recent years have shown a rapid increase in evangelical Christians, currently making up 22.4% of the population in comparison to 1980 with 6.6%. Evangelical beliefs can be characterised simply as less liberal than other branches of Christianity, especially concerning abortion and LGBTQ+ rights. Bolsonaro’s conservative family values resonate strongly with Evangelicals. This was seen through his successful 2018 election where he garnered 70% of Evangelical votes. It is Bolsonaro's social values that made him President in 2018. His close ties to the country's biggest churches are seen through the fact he elected an Evangelical judge to the Supreme Court.

7

While Lula is typically less vocal about his faith (Catholicism), it became a central issue for him as he fended off disinformation accusing him of ‘a plot to close churches’ eventually leading him to backtrack his stance on abortion being a right. The conservative wave led by religiously influenced groups has clashed with the progressive nature of society and the West, leading to a divide between the more conservative parts of Brazil that wish to maintain religious values within society versus the more progressive coast.

OLIVER LOCKE

8

HOW THREATENING IS POPULISM TO AMERICAN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY? Populism as a concept is difficult to assign a true meaning. It is weaponised by the media as a criticism of rising politicians, and appears to supersede traditional, ideological constraints. As a belief system, populism tends to align itself with other ‘host’ ideologies and promotes a Manichean-style hatred of the ‘corrupt elite,’ who hold unfair and unrestrained power to act in their establishmentarian interests. Equally, populism is characterised by an idealisation of the view of the ‘pure people,’ who appear to have one, homogenous view of what is best in society. The nature of these characters takes different forms depending on the different hosts populism attaches itself to, and the extent of the danger that this poses to democracy varies accordingly.

Populism in the US began in the late 19th Century, when the Populist Party represented the feelings of a broader social movement concerned about the economic change brought to American society after the Civil War. It held some prominence for around a 20-year period, where it championed the rights of farmers and workers as the ‘pure people’, as well as showing some racial alliances, disagreeing with black American efforts to gain suffrage or equality. This movement lost prominence, not being able to break through the entrenched 2-party nature of the US system, but it laid the foundations of acceptance of a narrative pitching one social group against another, which was echoed again and again through American history. In the modern US, methods of defining the players in the ‘them versus us’ narrative differ across the political spectrum. The most notable US populist, Donald Trump, uses rhetoric as an outsider to the political system, having come from a real-estate background. This means he is perceived as untarnished by the corruption of the establishment and can understand the struggles of the American voter, despite his actual inheritance of significant wealth. Other Republican members of the Freedom Caucus have utilised a religious and racial narrative, viewing the only ‘pure people’ of America to be white Christians, who need to be protected from dilution by immigrants.

The populist tactics favoured by the US are important to understand why the US government has not properly addressed these issues. American populists aim to gain control over the electorate by distorting the notion of truth, and by making themselves appear as the only true arbiter of reality against a system which aims to mislead. During Trump’s rise to power, he was largely considered a fanatic, with no real chance of gaining a stronghold. He hired fake audiences to boost support at his rallies, successfully creating a bandwagon effect of support. His messages were largely not accepted by traditional media channels, due to their foundation often in simple lies, his constant hyperonisation and his vilification of democracy. However, crucial to his success, Trump circumvented 9

these regulations, dominating other mainstream media channels through his use of Twitter. He tweeted with a range of controversial positions on salient issues, which in turn saw him appearing in news outlets and cable TV to the whole of America. The noise created by this exposure rapidly saw Trump becoming a household name, and a place where those who considered themselves left out by the country’s media elite could turn.

The issue was, when news outlets and fact-checking institutions attacked Trump, this had the opposite effect on those who had an already established distrust for these institutions.

Trump rapidly identified this effect and therefore used it to his advantage, furthering beliefs that he should be considered the only legitimate and incorrupt source of information. As Trump was operating within the regulations of the media, but simply bypassing the safeguards of journalism, it was difficult for the government of the day to prevent this. This formation of a widespread belief in Trump’s post-truth agenda creates a paradoxical situation where intervention from those institutions designed to protect truth only causes a decline in trust of them, and therefore a bolstering of support for an outsider. It is difficult to say how this spiral can be reversed, when an ever-increasing segment of the population will simply believe Trump and his rhetoric, regardless of, or if not even more, where he is proven to be untruthful.

Further, populists are characterised in their deployment of tactics which present them as the ‘saviour’, who must be indispensable to saving politics from elitist corruption. This common populist discourse sees a slow and often unnoticed dismantling of democratic safeguards, seen with Trump’s attacks on the independence of the federal judiciary, curtailing the abilities of free press, and most dangerously, sowing unprecedented distrust in the electoral system. Knowing he was not polling to win in the run up to the 2020 US election, Trump began to sow seeds of manipulation, by declaring a distrust in mail-in votes. When he consequently lost the election to Biden, the former president simply chose not to accept this, but to instead start a movement of those willing to declare Trump as the true winner. This move was wildly dangerous, seeing complete rejection of one of the key footholds of a liberal democracy - free and fair elections. This diluted the notion of truth even further and saw Trump’s ability to lead his supporters unilaterally skyrocket.

Under Trump’s direction, the US soon saw the biggest attack on democracy recorded – the January 6th insurrection. An organised rally in front of the Capitol soon led to a violent and armed attack, where regular members of the public were able to gain entrance into the buildings of the political elite, and left politicians and staffers fearing for their lives.

This attack was widely considered to be incited by the former president. By presenting himself as the leader of those mistreated by the establishment, as the only true beacon of reality, the views of his movement are difficult to change. This attack should be seen as a significant threat to liberal democracy, and a turning point in the future of populism in the US. A culture had now been created where Trump’s following would believe only his messaging, and those in opposition to this showed hatred and irreconcilably different

10

views. The US has become so fundamentally polarised that it appears no return to the centre ground is possible.

The rise of populism in the US, led by Trump, has posed an unprecedented attack on liberal democracy. Never before has there been such a cohesive assault on truth. No past leader has actively positioned themself against the entire political system of legitimacy, nor been able to arouse such a following who would stand with them regardless of their actions. This has birthed a culture never seen before. The extent of visceral hatred between poles of the political compass presents a new threat to democracy which is furthered by the ever-increasing distance between the 2 parties present in the US political system. Populism in the US is highly concerning, and it is difficult to envisage any realistic solutions to this plague on democracy.

IMOGEN O’CONNOR

11

A NEW WORLD ORDER? – THE RISING INFLUENCE OF BRICS In a world blazed by dynamic geopolitical shifts and evolving power structures, the name of BRICS has come to the forefront and emerged as a potential threat to the dominance of the West in today’s age. Consisting of the nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, the intergovernmental organisation comprises these five emerging economies as a potential competitor to the pre-existing G-7. As these nations continue to expand their horizons and evolve economically, questions arise about whether or not the world may face a shift in its economic balance; it may usher in a new transformative era that will bring about revolutionary change.

The term ‘BRIC’ originates from a 2001 publication by an economist at Goldman Sachs, Jim O’Neill, and was used to describe a group of emerging economies that would go on to become dominant global superpowers in the 21st century. The foreign ministers of these four countries (not including South Africa) met in New York in September 2006; however, its first formal summit occurred on June 16, 2006, in Yekaterinburg, Russia, where the four leaders of the countries at the time met: Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Dmitry Medvedev, Manmohan Singh, and Hu Jintao. At the time, the focus of this summit was to improve the global economic situation and reform financial institutions; they wanted to set a foundation where their relationship could be further developed in order to enrich all parties involved.

However, after the summit, the BRIC nations announced the need for a new global reserve currency that would act as a replacement for the US dollar. Since World War II, the dollar has been the king of currency and has given the US insurmountable amounts of economic power over the world, allowing them to exert their influence over other countries and provide them with a huge trade advantage. The member nations stated that the new currency would have to be ‘diverse, stable, and predictable,’ a sentiment that Russia has pushed for in the past. If the dollar were to be dethroned as the global reserve currency, it would severely impact the US’ control over global trade and would be an indicator of a global shift of power.

South Africa joined the BRIC organisation in the 2010s after being formally invited by China and approved by the other member nations. The president at the time, Jacob Zuma, attended the first newly named ‘BRICS’ conference in April of 2011. The BRICS have stayed relatively quiet over the 2010s, with joint projects such as the BRICS cable, an optical fibre submarine communications cable between the BRICS countries, and the New Development Bank, a shared bank by the BRICS countries that aims to cooperate with the 12

Western-dominated IMF and World Bank and pledges donations to member nations to help their struggling economies.

The BRICS commenced their expansion and made a large mark in the geopolitical landscape in the 2020s; in August 2023, at the 15th BRICS Summit, the South African President announced six new member countries: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, with full membership scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2024. Saudi Arabia and Russia are two of the largest oil exports in the world, and being members of BRICS gives the organisation a large advantage.

The BRICS countries together make up more than 40% of the world’s population and 30% of the world’s GDP. Predictions by Goldman Sachs in 2022 showed China overtaking the US as the largest economy by 2050 and India following in 2075, thus indicating the shift in global world order from the West to the East.

China has been insistent on further expansion of BRICS due to trade tensions with the USA (including within the South China Sea), while India and South Africa want a more measured approach. One thing is for certain: the BRICS are bullish on de-dollarisation and if three of the world’s largest economies, including the manufacturing powerhouse of China, are shifting away from the dollar, it may indicate the weakening of the currency and could open doors to a new global reserve currency. Contrarily, the widespread opinion on BRICS is that it is politically unstable, with many countries having a history of opposition, including two of the original members, India and China. BRICS has a long road ahead, and if these political tensions within the organisation cannot be resolved, it will likely not be able to overtake the US dollar with its own specialised currency.

Overall, BRICS remains an area of scepticism and uncertainty in the constantly evolving geopolitical world. The question lingers: could they overtake the G-7 and reshape the current global world order, or will they leave an imprint on the pages of history and remain in the shadows of the West?

JAI GARG

13

NIKKI HALEY – THE WOMAN RISING TO REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL VICTORY IN HEELS ‘I wear heels, and it’s not for a fashion statement – it’s ammunition.’ – Nikki Haley, 2017 BACKGROUND Nikki Haley is an increasingly popular and controversial American politician who served as Governor of South Carolina from 2011 to 2017 and then resigned from this position to become the 29th United States ambassador to the United Nations, which she did from January 2017 to December 2018. Currently, she is running for the position of the 47 th president of the United States, as a Republican candidate. Haley is the first female governor to run for United States President and if she wins the election next year, she will not only become the first Asian American president, but also the first female president.

The current question in the American political climate is ‘If Haley can overtake Ron DeSantis, Vivek Ramaswamy and eventually compete directly against Donald Trump to become the most eminent Republican candidate, could she win the 2024 presidential election?’

POLICIES Haley has very conservative values and this is reflected in the policies that she is keen to introduce if she wins the presidential election. These include a ‘consensus’ on national abortion policy, implying that she would oppose a full ban on abortion. Additionally, she has previously classed transgender rights as a threat to women and has even signed a pledge stating that ‘sex is binary’. By making these statements and proposals, Haley is appealing to a certain conservative demographic in the USA, who are currently becoming increasingly fed up with Biden’s liberal and democratic policies. Thus, she is increasing her popularity in this demographic of the electorate. Her proposed economic policies include tackling inflation, reducing federal government intervention and cutting middle class taxes. Furthermore, she has called out both the Republicans and Democrats over their ‘reckless’ federal spending. Haley advocates for the use of carbon-capture technology but has also denounced efforts to reduce emissions and her advocacy group ‘Stand for America’ stated that ‘liberal ideas would cost trillions and destroy our economy’. Similar to Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis, Haley has claimed that she wants to put tighter restrictions on birth right citizenship and wants to restore Trump’s ‘remain in Mexico’ policy. Haley has labelled herself as a ‘union buster’, declaring that she does 14

not want any trade unions in her state and that unions would not exist in her ideal world.

As for another extremely popular topic in US politics, Haley has generally stuck to vague promises of supporting the police, getting ‘illegal guns off the street’ and reducing incarceration and recidivism in South Carolina.

PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN Haley’s plans to reserve $10 million in television, radio and digital advertising in Iowa and New Hampshire are set to start in December, which she hopes will allow her to compete at a level with Trump. Due to her successful performances in debates, she has been able to bring in grass roots donors and more high-dollar backers and campaign officials have claimed that it has raised $1 million in the 24 hours after her debate. As of the time of writing, she is polling second in New Hampshire and third in Iowa, but Trump prevails as the front-runner in not only these states but nationally. At the moment, her campaign is hoping for an eventual ‘Haley-Trump showdown’ in South Carolina and the chances of this improved massively on Sunday 12th November, when Senator Tim Scott, her home state rival, dropped out of the race without endorsing anyone.

HOW LIKELY IS IT THAT NIKKI HALEY WILL WIN THE 2024 ELECTION? It is still hard to predict the outcome of the election, as it is a year away, but Haley’s outstanding performance in debates, previous political calibre and her personal and relatable story as a daughter of Indian immigrants, her position in the election is certainly becoming more popular, especially among specific voting demographics, like conservative women. Furthermore, in a survey released in early November 2023 by the Des Moines Register, Haley climbed 10 points to 16% on the polls, putting her even with DeSantis.

However, the case of beating Donald Trump as the main Republican candidate will prove to be difficult, due to his immense amount of popularity and admiration among Republican voters in the USA. Nevertheless, Haley exclaimed to a crowd at the capitol building ‘I’ve got one more fella I’ve gotta catch up to, and I am determined to do it’, in early November 2023, meaning that she is still keen on winning more Republican support before the election, so it is still possible that we will see an ever further improvement in Haley’s amount of support and popularity.

ANTARA KASHYAP

15

POLITICS AND SOCIAL MEDIA: WHAT HAPPENED? The internet is a wonderful yet precarious tool; users are shown personalised worlds shaped by technological forces incomprehensible to most. Through this, light can be shone on the disadvantaged’s plights and a platform for meaningful change is provided to all, yet the misuse of the internet’s influence is now a threat we are faced with. Evolving from paper propaganda and soap-box speeches, politicians are now taking to the digital space to campaign, reaching new demographics, both locally and globally, and intertwining their campaigns with pop culture. The danger of this, of course, is replacing fact with satirised fiction in the minds of consumers, causing misinformed voting and thus electing not the best-fit politician, but the most viral. But how did the political migration to the online space occur? And should we be worried for future voters because of it?

The first use of the internet in political campaigns was in the 1996 election in America, where candidates George W Bush and Bob Dole created websites detailing their campaigns and future plans. These websites were primarily informational, yet the competitive spirit that exists in social media today was evident even then, with the creator of Dole’s website, Vince Salvato, reminiscing: ‘We see the Clinton site add something, and we’d say, “how can we beat that?”’. The sites were fairly popular, with the Dole campaign having a mailing list of 85,000 in the early days, yet the popularity of Dole’s site erupted when, near the close of the first presidential debate, he promoted the site, causing viewers to flock to it. This harmless beginning gave an optimistic view of the future; perhaps if campaigns remained purely informational, we would still have a calm media environment. Yet while this was the first usage, social media would not become a major influence on votes until the 2008 ‘Facebook election’.

Leading up to this election, politics was slowly invading the online space. For example, in 2007 Myspace introduced a section of the site dedicated to politics, and in the same year ‘Citizentube’ by YouTube was released. Clearly, social media was becoming a more popular political forum.

Changing political campaigns as we know it, social media was used to its fullest extent by all presidential and congressional candidates in 2008. Winning 70% of votes from those under 25, Obama successfully tapped into the ‘Facebook generation’, with 3 times as many people as in 2004 consuming online political video content. This election was truly a catalyst for the full shift to the online world, showing its power in reaching new demographics. Additionally, the first instance of virality impacting an election was observed, with Obama’s ‘Yes we can’ video gaining over 21 million views in 2008 alone.

16

The content in this election was civil and informational, concerned with creating a positive image of Obama. When assessing if civil usage of social media for politics is possible today, this election provides evidence that it is. Later we would see politicians such as Donald J Trump utilize this in their campaigns.

Then came the 2016 election: a true turning point for political social media. Like Obama, Trump prioritized a strong media presence to gather support, however he was more concerned with appearing superior to his opponents than being liked. This led to his infamous, controversial tweets, publicising views like: ‘The media is spending more time doing a forensic analysis of Melania's speech than the FBI spent on Hillary's emails.’ and ‘How long did it take your staff of 823 people to think that up--and where are your 33,000 emails that you deleted?’ (After Clinton tweeted ‘Delete your account’). Trump became a global internet phenomenon, gaining both support and backlash from his views. The power of a digital footprint was also demonstrated here, with a video of Trump having extremely lewd conversations about women - resurfacing and causing extreme controversy. The use of the media in this election was vicious, and damaged both the reputation of the politicians and of the country; truly changing the online political space as we know it.

This gradual descent into calamity poses a question to viewers: could we ever return to a civil media climate? It’s hard to say. Even in the early days, negativity was present, demonstrated by the ‘Google-bombing’ fiasco in 2004, where a Google search for the phrase ‘miserable failure’ led users to Bush’s White House biography. Perhaps the unlimited access to resources that the internet grants its users ensures that a politician’s past will always catch up to them. Yet, a growing awareness online of the reductionist nature of ‘cancel culture’ (where one offensive action leads to ostracization online) may counter this, and lead to more empathetic consumers. Perhaps the 2024 election will usher in a new era of kindness online. Or perhaps the 2024 election will simply further political social media’s descent into madness. Time will only tell.

KATIE WEBER

17

ROE V WADE Roe V Wade was overturned on the 24th of June 2022. In response: an astounding uproar from the left, centre and some parts of the right that echoed across social media and the political landscape for months after the ruling was overturned, and a significantly less astounding celebration from the right. To say that abortion is a divisive topic in the United States would be an understatement, the topic is filled with emotion and deep-seated values on both sides, however, there is an encouraging willingness to reach across the aisle and make compromises in the more moderate sides of either camp. The argument from the left side of the aisle is that it is a woman’s right to choose and that bodily autonomy and the decision over what she can do with a pregnancy is hers to make and hers alone, which aligns with the core founding principles of the United States as the land of the free and the home of the brave, where no one can interfere with the actions of an individual so long as it does not harm another. This is where the standpoint of most leading Republicans comes in, being that the act of abortion does harm another individual, that individual being the baby, and that the rights of the unborn child override the rights of the mother.

So why was Roe v Wade being overturned controversial? Roe V Wade was a Supreme Court ruling that stated that laws restricting abortion were in violation of the 14th Amendment and therefore unconstitutional. This struck down abortion laws across the nation, specifically in the state of Texas where Jane Roe lived. The ruling being overturned effectively declared a free for all on abortion laws that states could introduce, and since then all, US states have their own law pertaining to the legality of abortion within the state, with blue states such as California adopting laws that legalise abortion up to the point of foetal viability and many red States banning it outright. The decision of Republican states to outright ban abortion has been highly controversial, even going as far as to cause a coalition of 200 human rights groups to write to the UN stating that the bans violate international law and that ‘People residing in the U.S. who can become pregnant are facing a human rights crisis.’ The ruling is also unpopular with the average voter in the states; according to a poll by NPR, 7 in 10 US adults favour some kind of restriction on abortion, even most blue states cut the time to get an abortion at foetal viability, however 64% of adults did not want Roe V Wade to be overturned, which leads me to the focus of this article.

The overturning of Roe V Wade and subsequent abortion bans will prove, in time, to be one of the biggest political blunders in US history. According to Pew Research’s report published on April 26th of this year, 62% of US citizens believe that abortion should be available in either most or all cases. This breaks down to 60% of men, 64% of women, 59% of white people, 73% of black people, 62% of Hispanic people and 73% of Asian 18

people. However, I believe that these breakdowns on race and gender are unimportant to my actual point, the future of the Republican Party and how abortion laws will lose them the moderate vote. According to the Pew Research report, 73% of people aged between 18-29 fall into the pro-abortion side of the debate, this highlights the view that young adults in the US have, being overwhelmingly in favour of abortion, more so than any other age demographic. This is where the political blunder of the Republicans rears its head, the biggest talking point in Republican circles is how the party can win over young voters and shed the ‘male, pale and stale’ image that the party has had since as long as most people can remember. The overturning of Roe V Wade and the subsequent banning of abortion in many of the nation’s biggest states not only undermines this, but effectively sinks any chance the Republicans had of drawing both young voters and soon to be voters to their party. This is because abortion, abortion rights and the ability to determine one's own path in life hits much harder than any other Republican talking point about reducing taxes or building national pride or whatever else. Even people who would typically be considered Republicans, such as myself, are forced to take a step back and reevaluate their support for the party on an issue that could very well affect people we hold near and dear, and in this case I think most would choose the wellbeing and happiness of that person closest to them over a tax cut or other such policy.

ARCHIE WALTERS

19

UNITED NATIONS OR UNITED NUISANCES: WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE UN IN GLOBAL CONFLICT? In an era when the role of NGOs and aid organisations are being called into question over their legitimacy and helpfulness, the United Nations (UN) remains an important force in global conflict resolution, and prevention. The United Nations came into existence after the Second World War as a forum for world peace and co-existence on account of the previous global catastrophe. The scale of human destruction associated with the Second World war made it necessary for world political leaders to produce an international platform for communication and cooperation across states. The UN’s charter obliges it to ensure international peace and security, through the use of aid, peacekeeping troops, and sanctions.

THE SECURITY COUNCIL The main UN conflict resolution mechanism is based in the Security Council. The Security Council, whose constitution comprises fifteen member countries including five permanent members (P5) who have veto power – the US, UK, China, Russia, and France – is responsible for international crisis response. The matter of veto powers in respect of the permanent members remains controversial, and a large issue, as these powers are often used. Some criticisms of this system include the idea that action may not be effective enough because the interests of a country within the P5 members can get in the way of global collaboration. Nonetheless, the Security Council is still one of the major instruments for addressing international disputes.

PEACEKEEPING MISSIONS The role of the UN in global conflicts is mostly embodied by its peacekeeping missions.

These peacekeeping missions are performed by the UN peacekeepers from member countries to stabilise the post-conflict regions and then reconstruct them. The UN has been involved in various peacekeeping missions in Bosnia, Rwanda, as well as South Sudan.

Peacekeeping is not an easy task because there are many problems connected with it, although there are positive intentions. Most of these soldiers work in unstable conditions while dealing with complicated political settings and tribal divisions. The UN, however, has been criticized over cases of peacekeeper misconduct and the fact that swift and

20

effective measures were not taken in some cases. However, this mission illustrates the organisation's desire to establish peace in countries that have been devastated by war.

HUMAN RIGHTS The UN’s role as a peacemaker goes beyond mere peacekeeping. Advocating human rights is one of many missions that the organisation is carrying out. Established in 2006, the UN Human Rights Council ensures that people’s rights are respected worldwide through global efforts. The United Nations has various initiatives, including the special rapporteurs and investigating committees for bringing to light human rights violations or atrocities. Sometimes, an organisation may act on the basis of politics, which may not be very considerate of human rights. The UN has recognized human rights, particularly through the Convention on Human Rights, and therefore they are committed to ensuring a place where all human dignity is valued.

DIPLOMACY AND DIALOGUE: THE UN AS A MEDIATOR Apart from its direct involvement in conflict zones, the UN also performs an important function of diplomacy for averting and settling conflicts. The General Assembly constitutes an international platform for discussion through which different states can raise issues of concern and indicate their positions, while at the same time looking for possible convergences between conflicting interests.

Often, the Secretary-General, who is the head of the United Nations Secretariat, acts as a mediator and facilitates conflict resolution. The UN tries to resolve tense situations through the act of shuttle diplomacy (the use of a ‘messenger’ between two parties) and talks between the parties held behind the scenes. They might not be publicized but such endeavours play a critical role in preventing conflict from intensifying and enhancing goodwill between countries.

The UN plays a key role in solving world-wide conflicts, representing the united efforts of different states for maintaining security, good relations, and general collaboration. The UN has been instrumental in preempting war, mediating disagreements, and delivering aid to people caught up in armed conflict all over the world. Nevertheless, there remains a challenge, as doubts are voiced concerning the efficacy of the UN in handling complicated geopolitics. To keep peace in the world, we want a better UN that will survive.

As such, the way the UN changes and navigates the changing threats in global politics determines the peace of the world tomorrow. Member states must reemphasize the provisions of the UN charter and together build the UN's capacities in dealing with multidimensional conflicts of the twenty-first century.

POPPY GIRVEN 21

22

CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE RISE OF FAR-RIGHT POLITICS IN EUROPE The 20th century saw the rise and fall of numerous far-right parties across Europe, and it is apparent that this trend is now returning throughout the continent. Far-right parties, which were previously outside of conventional politics, are now competing again for government positions with mainstream parties.

This trend of the rise of far-right parties can be seen across various countries in Europe.

In Italy, Giorgia Meloni became the first far-right Prime Minister in Western Europe since WWII after her party, the Brothers of Italy (Fratelli d'Italia), won 26% of the vote in the September 2022 elections. Her party is nationalist, conservative, and anti-immigration, ideologies often present in far-right parties. Across the border in France, Marine Le Pen won a staggering 42% of the votes in the 2022 Presidential Elections. Her party, National Rally, went on to increase their number of seats in parliament from 7 to 89 out of 577, a substantial increase over 12-fold. Furthermore, in Spain, the nationalist Catholicconservative party Vox, founded only 10 years ago, is now the third-largest party in Spain’s national assembly. In May, they doubled their vote in both regional and municipal elections, as well as made negotiations with the centre-right People’s Party to rule the region of Valencia and several other large cities. It is evident that this movement is not merely a coincidence or something inconsiderable. So, is there a homogenous reason to explain this?

There is not a singular cause; different political, social, and economic reasons all play a part. One significant factor could be the anxiety faced after the 2008 financial crisis, which caused economic unpredictability for many Europeans. Governments at the time became greatly unpopular due to their implementation of austerity, and far-right parties were able to use this to their advantage, asserting that if they were in power, they would provide social benefits, safeguard employment, and re-establish economic stability.

Moreover, the issue of immigration and the recent refugee crisis of 2015 contributed vastly to the rise of far-right parties. They were able to take advantage of the unease among the public by framing immigration as a threat to security and national identity. By calling for stricter immigration policies and border controls, they resonated with individuals who felt as though mainstream parties were not adequately addressing these issues. The crisis was a catalyst for a rise in nationalism and a desire to better preserve cultural identity, which far-right parties were able to capitalise on. Amongst many other factors, including economic fallout from the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and the cost23

of-living crisis, these reasons have led to a shift in the political landscape across the continent, with many people believing that the far-right will bring much-needed radical change and a return to the ‘traditional’ values of Europe.

The rise of far-right parties could have significant implications for the future of Europe.

First and foremost, it threatens the stability of the European Union, which was founded on the principles of partnership and collaboration (principles that far-right parties often challenge). Far-right leaders such as Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders (leader of the opposition party in the Netherlands) have already looked towards proposing a possible exit from the European Union for their respective nations, France and the Netherlands, while the United Kingdom has already taken this step. Furthermore, the growing popularity of far-right views could lead to an increase in discrimination and hate crimes across the continent, as often these rather extreme views can target minority groups, leading to partitions within communities. This in turn could have widespread repercussions on how Europe is perceived as a whole by other countries, as this behaviour challenges the values of tolerance and coordination that have shaped post-WWII Europe.

To summarise, the rise of far-right parties and the shift in the political landscape in Europe is a layered development caused by numerous factors ranging from immigration to economic distress. It is crucial, now more than ever, to preserve the values of unity and democracy that are being challenged by this era of change. The continent needs to navigate this period of uncertainty together and look forward to a future of acceptance, innovation, and prosperity.

OLIVIA CONLON

24

SECULAR POLICY IN FRANCE In September of this year, the top administrative court in France upheld laws that prevented Muslim girls from wearing the abaya in public schools. While some argued that these policies discriminated against the Muslim minority in France, the government believes that wearing the abaya in public schools goes against the French principle of secularism (laïcité). But where did these policies of secularism come from?

In 1905, French laws aimed to establish a separation between the church and state. Article I of the 1958 French constitution states that ‘France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic.’ Policies of secularism do not mean that one cannot practice religion within France, instead, these policies aim to protect equality and democracy and ensure that the state is officially neutral in matters of religion.

It is important to note that policies of secularism do not only impact Muslims but in fact apply to all religious groups. In March 2004, the French Senate approved a bill which banned people from wearing ‘conspicuous’ religious symbols in state schools and hospitals. This includes religious symbols and garments from all religions (such as Sikh turbans, Christian crosses, and Islamic headscarves). Therefore, critics highlight how these secular policies may contradict other principles including freedom of expression as the government in France has legislation and laws that control what people can and cannot wear.

Considering all of this, it is important to understand if secularism within France was able to achieve its aim of ensuring that all citizens within France are equal. Following the ban on abayas within schools, the president of France claimed that ‘religious symbols of any kind have no place’ in schools under secularism policies. Supporters of the policy believe that religion should be kept out of schools and therefore because the abaya is viewed as a religious garment by many French people, students should not be allowed to wear religious clothing within schools.

On the other hand, it is estimated that 5.7 million Muslims currently live in France. Many of them argue that these policies impact certain religious groups like their own more than others. Additionally, some argue that it is unfair for a government to control what certain groups of people wear but not others. For example, with the abaya, many argue that it is very similar to long dresses and that it could be seen as a cultural symbol more than a religious one. They believe such policies may incite hatred within France and target certain minority groups. Therefore, some critics argue that such policies have created inequality and have gone beyond the aim of the state remaining neutral.

25

Overall, when it comes to such policies of secularism, there are many debates about whether they achieve their aims of creating more equality. This is because they often try to hide divisions and differences between different religions in order to appear more neutral. Some argue that this creates equality within public spaces as religious symbols and garments are not worn, while others believe that it results in more inequality by targeting specific minority groups.

ANOUSHEY SAQUIB

26

HOW THE UK GOVERNMENT TACKLE GLOBAL POVERTY

CAN

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with rising food and energy prices have halted progress against global extreme poverty. In the face of these challenges, what economic policies could the UK government and its international partners introduce to reduce this problem?

Covid-19 led to the global poor being affected disproportionately, thereby increasing global inequality. In 2021, the average incomes of people in the bottom 40% of the global income distribution is 6.7% lower than pre-pandemic projections, while for those in the top 40%, the shortfall is only 2.8%. The pandemic impacted and reversed trends towards reducing global poverty. While recovery efforts are underway, rising food and energy prices have increased the extent of the challenge.

One policy that could be introduced to reduce extreme poverty worldwide is providing tax incentives to companies that produce green energy technology and donate it to developing countries. The cost of energy for households globally could have increased by between 62.6% and 112.9% since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It is estimated that the energy price rises may have pushed an additional 78–141 million people into extreme poverty.

Providing a renewable source of energy to developing countries would allow for a more stable, greener energy provision, not reliant on the volatile commodity that is oil.

Additionally, such renewable energy projects provide fiscal stimulus to the regions they are located in, creating employment, both in the short term and long term. These projects could be focused on areas with widespread poverty and unemployment, reducing extreme poverty and ensuring that the workers are paid a fair wage for their work to keep people above the poverty line.

Another policy idea is to invest in healthcare systems. In 2017, half the world population did not have access to essential health services and 800 million people spent at least 10% of their household budgets on health expenses for themselves and other family members; for almost 100 million people these expenses were high enough to push them into extreme poverty, forcing them to survive on just $1.90 or less a day. Covid-19 has highlighted and furthered the clear disparity in health provision and health inequality globally. Those living in extreme poverty often have limited access to healthcare services. The pandemic further strained healthcare systems, leading to overwhelmed hospitals, shortages of medical supplies, and reduced availability of essential healthcare services. Those in poverty face barriers to healthcare such as cost, distance and inadequate infrastructure.

If the UK and international partners invest into healthcare systems in developing 27

countries, this would not only take some people out of extreme poverty but would make the population more productive as there would be less travel to access healthcare and fewer days off work sick, increasing rates of economic growth. This economic growth will create jobs (as labour is derived from demand) and pull more people out of extreme poverty.

Finally, enhanced investment into education in developing countries could be pursued by the UK and its partners. Covid-19 led to school closures which kept 90% of students worldwide (1.57 billion) out of school. Lack of access to computers and the internet meant remote learning was out of reach for many, especially for those living in poverty. If all students in low-income countries had only basic reading skills, an estimated 171 million people could escape extreme poverty and if all adults completed secondary education, the global poverty rate would be cut by more than half. Education equips individuals with knowledge and skills, essential to escape the poverty trap. It helps them acquire employable abilities, enhances their productivity, and improves their chances of obtaining better-paying jobs. With higher levels of education, individuals have increased opportunities for upward social mobility, access to higher-income occupations, and the ability to break free from poverty. More generally, as education provides skills, the workforce becomes more productive, thus increasing economic growth. For example, between 1960 and 2000, 75% of the growth in gross domestic product globally was linked to increased math and science skills. This economic growth increases tax revenues for governments which can then be reinvested in areas with extreme poverty.

While there are many policies that could be adopted by the UK government and international partners to combat extreme poverty, the three highlighted above have been selected as they will address the deeper and longer-term considerations which are more important given that the objective must be to eradicate extreme poverty globally and permanently.

MAIA JAFAR

28

ARE WE ANTICIPATING A REPEAT OF LABOUR’S 1997 LANDSLIDE MAJORITY IN THE UPCOMING GENERAL ELECTION? The United Kingdom’s political system as we see today is as volatile and vulnerable as ever before. From three prime ministers holding office in the last year alone, “Trussonomics” playing the English pound and just recently an overrule on Sunak’s ‘Stops the Boats’ policy which partakes as the current PM’s five main key objectives. This is further dramatised with other policies of the Conservative Party, such as halving inflation, though ironically the country is currently experiencing the worst cost of living crisis in recent years. The Conservatives as we see it have failed both politically and economically.

This unsurprisingly, leads to increasing discontent amongst the British public ahead of the upcoming general election. Are we seeing an end to Conservative power?

Firstly, statistics prove a shift in political attitudes. According to recent opinion polls, (updated in October 2023) after two recent UK by-elections we see a clear swing and increased political confidence for the Labour vote, with opinion polls for the leader of the opposition party - Keir Starmer - going up by 22 percent. Moreover, recent results state that Labour overcame a 24,664 majority to win Mid Bedfordshire, marking the largest Conservative numerical majority overturned in the UK by the main opposition party since 1945. In Tamworth, the 23.9-point swing from Conservative to Labour represented the second-largest percentage overturn of its kind since and took on what was a 66% Conservative majority in the 2019 general election. Therefore, we can confidently state that the Labour Party’s position for the general election next year is quite powerful. According to polls, a Starmer-led Labour government is seen today as more likely to improve public services, act with a ‘fresh start’ and address the NHS waiting crisis more effectively thus enhancing their chances of winning the next election.

Furthermore, Labour provides an attractive manifesto. Moving away from opinion polls and by-election results, it is majorly due to the policies Starmer strives to achieve when elected that make him popular. Starmer’s main policies include increasing investment in social and public welfare such as on the NHS and provision of greater government benefits provided to the working class. Furthermore, he calls to increase income tax by up to 5 percent and proposes legislation for greater protection of immigration and asylum seeker rights which strengthens his political narrative as they directly retaliate with Sunak’s government. With over 48 percent of UK adults classified 29

under the lower working class - this great demographic holds significant power in the upcoming general election as it would further strengthen the Labour majority. Moreover, what remains nationally significant is Starmer’s calls for greater devolved powers nationally where he proposes to increase monetary funding in the devolved states of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. This would increase political voter turnout and the vote majority for Labour because regions such as Scotland, complemented with rising nationalism, place importance on ultimate independence which can only be achieved by increasing devolved powers.

Lastly, the sole weakness of the Conservative Party in the recent decades, months and even days ultimately favours a call for immediate change and thus a call for support for Labour. Poor conservative economic policies leaving the UK at a standstill entail the sacking of Braverman, the overruling of the Rwanda Policy and the sheer social discontent among the public paves the way for Labour’s predicted landslide victory in the upcoming election.

‘A week is a long time in politics,’ former Prime Minister Harold Wilson clearly states.

Through constant political shifts, falling trust amongst the public and the government, as well as an overturn in their own government regime puts pressure to vote for the opposition for the sake of a new difference - a new approach to be born. Labour holds the light that the British public is hungry to catch hold of. It’s like a repeat of ‘New labour, New Britain.’ Blair captivated the country with his attractive reform agenda and calls for immediate and effective change. Now, Starmer follows that agenda and what we see through his political game which is an act in service for a repeat of Tony Blair’s landslide majority in 1997.

A week, a month and even a day before election time… anything is frankly possible. The government presents itself already in a feeble state. Is Labour going to crash it or change it? We can only truly see it no later than on the 28th of January 2025.

AADITYA NAIR

30

31

TROUBLES IN PAKISTAN Recently, Pakistan has been faced with devastating floods, as well as an ongoing economic crisis which has gone hand in hand with political unrest in Pakistan. It has caused severe economic challenges for months due to which food, gas and oil prices have risen. The recent Russian invasion of Ukraine has caused fuel prices to rise worldwide. Excessive external borrowings by Pakistan raised the ‘sceptre of default’, causing the currency to fall and making imports relatively more expensive. By June 2022, inflation was at an all-time high along with rising food prices. Poor governance and low productivity per capita with other low to middle-income developing countries have contributed to a balance of payments crisis where the country is unable to earn enough foreign currency to fund the imports it consumes. Pakistan’s ongoing systemic economic crisis has been its biggest issue since its independence in 1947.

The devastating floods which crippled Pakistan in 2022 have caused billions in damage, strained the country’s agriculture and health sectors - exposing Pakistan’s vulnerability to climate disasters - and troubling weaknesses in governance and economic stability. The consequences of the floods were disastrous, submerging one-third of the country in water, 15,000 people were left dead or injured and 8 million were displaced. Over 2 million homes, 13,000 kilometres of highways, 439 bridges and more than 4 million acres of agricultural land were destroyed or damaged. An estimated 9 million more people could be forced into poverty as a direct consequence of these devastating floods. It has had a direct effect on the economy as the losses have amounted to 2.2% of the GDP; the agriculture sector accounts for the largest decline at 0.9%. Despite these massive losses, neither Pakistani Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari nor Climate Change Minister Sherry Rehman have acknowledged the need for policy change at home. Both belong to the party that governs the Sindh province, which has been the worst-hit province by the flooding.

In fact, Pakistan’s biggest obstacle to addressing this and other crises may not be a lack of international support, but rather its political polarization. Throughout the floods, domestic politics proceeded as usual, with the government and Imran Khan, who was not prime minister at the time, waging bitter fights even with one-third of the country underwater. Islamabad refused to suspend a key by-election on September 29, 2022.

Khan continued holding political rallies. Khan and his supporters insinuated the government shouldn’t be trusted with flood aid, and he accused the ruling coalition of seeking to ban the transmission of his telethons. As a result of weak governance and cooperation, it led to the increase of ‘water mafias’, illegal and unregulated construction, and poor urban and rural planning. The floods have exposed key flaws in the political state of Pakistan. Reports surfaced that less than a quarter of the 160 million donated by 32

international aid to help rebuild the affected areas have been dedicated to on-the-ground relief efforts. United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator Julien Harneis noted that of the total amount pledged, only 38.35 million had been converted to assistance for the Pakistani people, according to local media reports. With the remaining funds unaccounted for, there have been murmurs of corruption and looting as a plausible explanation. It can be said that the corruption of many has resulted in an ineffective response to the devastating floods which has left the country in dire peril.

Imran Khan took power in 2018 after the general election and addressed a balance of payments crisis with a bailout from the IMF. He limited defence spending to try and close the fiscal deficit which led to some general economic growth. He enacted policies with increasing tax collection and investment. He presided over the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused economic turmoil and rising inflation in the country, which threatened his political position. However, his failure to revive the economy and the rising inflation rate caused him political problems. Despite his promised anti-corruption campaign, the perception of corruption in Pakistan worsened during his rule. He was accused of political victimization of opponents and clamping down on freedom of expression and dissent. in 2022, Khan became the first prime minister to be ousted through a no-confidence motion vote in Parliament. His inability to deal with the economic crisis contributed to his falling out with Pakistan’s military which had remained a key backer of his government. Khan claims that the United States was behind a ‘foreign conspiracy’ to oust him in a regime change. He also claimed that he had been punished on not accepting U.S policy after withdrawal from Afghanistan. On the 11th of April 2022, the national assembly held an election to decide the new PM and the Pakistan Muslim League nominated the former Chief Minister of Punjab - Shahbaz Sharif. Sharif and the Pakistan Muslim League won with 174 votes. Imran Khan called for a mass rally and protests were held in several cities in Pakistan. Attendees allegedly numbered up to tens of thousands in some areas while the tweet ‘#imported_government_rejected’ trended on Twitter.

A data scientist who had previously claimed that 76% of PML-N vice president’s Twitter followers were fake was allegedly ‘abducted’ to be asked how the trend came to be. PTI’s Dr. Shahbaz Gill alleged that the PTA slowed down the internet in Islamabad to ‘censor’ videos on the protest. It is seen that the current government has taken on a somewhat authoritarian state which threatens the democratic integrity of the state. Khan was arrested on the 9th of May 2023 on charges of corruption. Currently, he stands to face a 3-year sentence which has caused further political unrest. Protesters in Islamabad blocked one of the main highways in and out of the capital. People also lit fires, dismantled street signs, and threw stones. Protesters in Peshawar also set fire to the Radio Pakistan premises. In London, supporters of Imran Khan demonstrated outside the High Commission of Pakistan following his arrest. The interior ministry ordered the suspension of mobile broadband services throughout the country, as demonstrations 33

intensified and were staged outside army facilities. Independent monitors reported that there was restricted access to social media platforms, including YouTube, Twitter and Facebook, and total internet shutdowns in some regions. The internet services were restored late on 12th May 2023. The current state of censorship can be attributed to the authoritarian role the state has taken on and further threatening the democratic nature of Pakistan’s political system.

KAREEM MAHMOOD

34

IS JAPAN ABANDONING ITS PACIFISM DUE TO REGIONAL SECURITY THREATS? After the events of World War II and the infliction of nuclear weapons upon Japan in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, a new Japanese constitution known more commonly as the Peace Constitution was drafted. Within it, it was stated that ‘the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right’ and ‘land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained.’ Since 1945, the Japanese have adhered to their pacifist principles, however, the increasing threat of China and North Korea suggests Japanese pacifism is coming to an end...

CHINA Japan and China’s relationship is defined most by the disputes occurring over Taiwan and the South China Sea. China’s claim to Taiwan and potential invasion has a direct impact on Japan as former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made clear - contingency concerning Taiwan would also be an emergency for Japan. Further, a study by the US-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, found Taiwan would only be able to fend off a Chinese invasion if the US utilises its bases in Japan as this is the only way US military aircraft can involve themselves in the conflict. This study, coupled with Joe Biden’s willingness to militarily defend Taiwan in the face of an attack, demonstrates that Japan will almost certainly be involved in conflict over Taiwan. Moreover, in fear of conflict in the South China Sea, Japan intends to purchase 400 Tomahawk missiles from the US in 2025. Additionally, already in 2023, the government plans to purchase eight F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters and eight F-35B Lightning multirole fighter aircraft, part of a much larger package of F-35s it’s set to acquire from the US. In this way, the threat of China certainly suggests Japan has strayed from their pacifist principles.

NORTH KOREA The threat of North Korea also presents a substantial reason why Japanese pacifism might be abandoned. Firstly, North Korea has recently been developing nuclear weapons and it conducted its 6th nuclear test in 2017. In addition to this, it has been building up its weapons and military strength. The unpredictable and isolationist North Korea causes Japan to feel a need to increase their military spending. Previously, in line with Article 9 of the constitution, Japan had capped military spending at approximately 1% of GDP. However, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida recently approved a plan to increase defense 35

spending to 2% of GDP by the fiscal year of 2027. This certainly demonstrates Japan feels unsafe without sufficient protection and therefore may abandon pacifist principles due to the threat of North Korea. Furthermore, in July 2023, North Korea fired a ballistic missile towards Japan displaying the instability of the region. Kazuto Suzuki, an international security and political science professor with the University of Tokyo says, ‘There is a general understanding in Japan that we are now living in a very rough neighbourhood,’ displaying the potential for the end of Japanese pacifism.

The active militarisation by the Japanese and the failure to offer diplomatic solutions suggests Japan is undoubtedly abandoning pacifist principles. However, this abandonment of its principles is primarily due to the necessity of self-protection in the modern anarchical world and not due to an intentional abandonment of these key values.

YASMIN SHAH

36

WHAT IS GOING ON IN PAKISTAN? Despite only being an established state for 76 years, Pakistan’s political history has been nothing less than chaotic and turbulent, especially in the last two years. This makes the current situation extremely hard to summarize but it is crucial to go back in time and look contextually at the political history of Pakistan to understand it.

Pakistan was founded in order to create a safe country for the Muslims living in Hindustan (Ancient India). Despite this, there has been fighting among the provinces and deeprooted conflict has prevented Pakistan from gaining stability. Part of this insecurity in defining an identity has been due to ideological debate on whether the governance should be Islamic or secular. There is also a lack of a nationally based political party, and the country has had to rely on the civil service and the army, which has led to a military dictatorship in a sense. Therefore, this can be attributed to tension between the Pakistani military and the democratically elected government.

Pakistan was a multi-party democracy where several political parties competed for seats in National and Provincial assemblies. However, after the Fall of Dhaka (now known as Bangladesh) in 1971, a two-party system was unofficially created between the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

So what is going on? Known as the 2022-23 political unrest, there have been a series of political and economic crises, which all started with the ousting of Imran Khan (PTI) as prime minister on April 10th 2022, after he lost a vote of no-confidence. A former prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif (PPP), was put in as an interim prime minister until the 14th of August, but when the National Assembly was dissolved, he was replaced by Mr. Anwaar ul-Haq. The purpose of this is to have fair elections since ul-Haq is currently independent of a political party despite having previous affiliations. The day after the ousting there were nationwide protests by his supporters that were met with police brutality to try and control this. Following this, Imran Khan kickstarted a public campaign demanding early elections. In August 2022, a by-election was held in Punjab, the country’s biggest province and PTI won.

Things were looking promising for the ex-prime minister, until 9th May 2023. Imran Khan was arrested ‘for not co-operating with authorities in an ongoing corruption investigation.’ This led to more civil unrest ensuing nationwide, known as the May 9 riots, which led to extensive damage done to government and military facilities. Overall, at least eight people have been killed and dozens injured during these protests. Information about the country during this time was scarce as the government ordered complete internet and mobile blackouts. Khan was quickly released on May 11th, but since then mass arrests of 37

PTI leaders and workers have taken place for various reasons. This also led many to resign from PTI and instead attempt to join a new party ‘Istehkam-e-Pakistan' (IIP). IIP was formed by Jahangir Tareen, a close aid of Imran Khan and pledged to work for economic and social reforms. This continued to cause controversy as PTI rejected the new party, saying that the country’s issues would only be worsened, not resolved, by launching new parties. The state of the country and its economy only worsened when Imran Khan was again arrested on 5th August 2023 for ‘corrupt practices’ and selling state secrets to the United States (despite the US government denying these accusations), and Khan was sentenced to three years. As a result of this, he was also disqualified from politics for five years. He was kept in custody until he was originally granted bail on 29th August. But this joy was short-lived as a few days after, the Islamabad High Court ordered that he remain in custody due to a possible connection with a ‘cypher case.’ The former PM has now been under arrest for 104 days. For these 104 days, no one has seen or heard from him as he has been kept under extreme security. Since then, there continues to be political unrest in Pakistan as PTI supporters campaign for the freedom and reinstatement of Khan, whereas other members of the general public blame Khan for corruption and wish for him to be given the death sentence (Pakistani courts verified this is a possibility in October 2023). A general election has been announced for 11th February 2024, but the future of the Islamic Republic is becoming increasingly unclear.

EMAAN SIDDIQUI

38

CHINA’S ASCENT: A NEW GLOBAL ORDER The Chinese word for ‘crisis’, wéijī (危机), places the character of ‘danger’ next to that for ‘opportunity’. Despite not literally carrying such meaning, it captures the idea attributed to Chinese leaders in their ability to bend adversity into opportunity, supporting the view that the performative legitimacy of the Chinese state rivals that of the democratically elected states in the West. Defined as ‘a state that possesses military and economic power with general influence vastly superior to that of other states,’ as the leading superpower, China will invariably be shaped by its long-standing history and tradition, one that is unknown to the West, ending the dominant Western model for success. As the driver of the new world, its hegemonic relationships with Africa and Latin America will mark the demise of the Western world.

Since coming into power in 1949, the CCP has been the sole governing party under an authoritarian state, where the idea of popular accountability has remained absent in China for centuries and the legitimacy of the state relies on a de facto results-based compact between the state and the people, in which the state is required to deliver economic growth and rising living standards for the Chinese people. The state remains highly competent in achieving this, especially since Deng Xiaoping’s ‘reform and opening’ period, relentlessly fixated on modernisation, which led to the announcement that absolute poverty had been eradicated in early 2021, and that the China Dream had fast arrived to create the largest middle class in the world. Unlike the prevailing stereotype in the West of an easily manipulated Chinese person under state control, it is this continuance in delivering economic success that enhances the state’s performative legitimacy, allowing the CCP to stay in power despite the dominant Western consensus that only through the adoption of liberal democracy can a country succeed.

The 1989 massacre presents the alternative story of China, one of brutal state oppression that will only worsen through the development of new technology and artificial intelligence, furthering the state’s ability to shape the minds of its citizens, especially since the implementation of the Great Firewall which has led to the withdrawal of major international websites- the Economist referring to it as digital totalitarianism.

Nevertheless, the 1989 massacre demonstrates the principal outlook of the CCP- to deliver on the China Dream for the majority with no regard for those who choose to not accept it. Unlike its Soviet equivalent, the Chinese state has displayed its ability to be pragmatic and flexible in responding to situations. The government’s handling of the COVID-19 protests best highlights this, demonstrating that when nationwide protests against its zero-COVID policy amid slowed economic growth emerged in late 2022, the 39

government responded by easing restrictions much faster, providing strong evidence that despite harsh censorship, the people’s voices are still heard when in massive waves.

Alongside this, Chinese leaders have recognised the necessity to look beyond the pursuit of GDP growth, focusing on inequality and environmental issues, to appease the majority, demonstrating how, as growth will inevitably slow down, this anticipated Western shift towards liberal democracy will not happen as the CCP continues to deliver.

Unlike the future envisaged by Francis Fukuyama, who saw no viable alternative option to liberal democracy, China as the leading superpower would represent the first great power from the ‘wrong side’ of the great divide in the world from the 19th and early 20th centuries, marking the end of Western universalism and leading the creation of a new global order, where its actions and influence will be fundamentally based on its own 3,000 years of culture and tradition.

This difference in culture is highlighted in the ongoing conflict in Taiwan and Hong Kong, where the Chinese state’s non-negotiable attitude stems from their distinctive belief that the Han Chinese are of a single race, believing in polygenism and how their origins remain unconnected with the rest of the world. This explains why China continues to see Hong Kong and Taiwan as ‘lost territories’ that must be reclaimed and therefore actively seek to do so, forcing countries to recognise Taiwan as a part of China and the passage of the national security law in 2020 in Hong Kong. Taiwan remains the prime area of conflict between the US and China, where any attempt to reclaim it would be seen as a direct attack on a fellow democracy which the US would feel obliged to defend. However, when considering China’s long term autocratic outlook, it is clear that war is unlikely to occur.

Shaped by the Confucian ethos that have lasted for over two millennia, the state has never been required to be accountable, instead, staying faithful to the moral precepts of Confucianism. As the first superpower from outside the Western world, China in the lead represents a symbolic shift in power dynamic, taking Africa, China’s biggest trading partner, historically victim to the brutalities of the West, along with it, changing the world in the most profound ways, yet doing so without triggering world war through its assertive yet non-aggressive methods.

SHYAN TEOH

40

41

THE SUDANESE PEOPLE CAN NOT CATCH A BREAK After the humanitarian crisis in the Western region of Sudan, Darfur, the country is faced with another humanitarian crisis. A cruel dictatorship has been overthrown, yet the peaceful transition to civilian rule has been left in shards as the capital, Khartoum, has become a war zone for power.

WHAT HAPPENED IN DARFUR? In 2003, the population of Darfur rebelled against the government which they accused of oppressing the non-Arab population in the region. In turn, the government responded by carrying out a campaign of ethnic cleansing against these same non-Arabs. The president of Sudan at the time, Omar al-Bashir, sponsored the notorious Janjaweed forces who committed human rights violations, mass killings and sexual assault against the Darfur people. In 2009, al-Bashir became the first sitting head of state to be indicted by the ICC, charged with war crimes and genocide against the civilians of Darfur. Over the course of the conflict, 3 million people were displaced from the region and 400,000 were killed.

The United Nations has described it as the ‘world’s worst humanitarian crisis.’

In 2007, the African Union and the United Nations organized a joint peacekeeping mission in Darfur (UNAMID), yet it is largely known as a complete failure. The operation has been criticised for having deficiencies in proper reporting, an inability to control the continued violence and the mission budget cuts from the UN. Due to pressure from the Sudanese government and Western nations to reduce costs, all peacekeepers were fully withdrawn on the 30th of June 2021, which failed to resolve the region’s problems. In October 2020, the post-Bashir temporary government established an agreement with the armed groups in Darfur to end armed hostilities, granting the rebels political representation and a 10-year plan to develop the region. However, in spite of this, violence and tensions have continued. This November, at least 1000 people from the Masalit community in West Darfur have been killed, prompting warnings of a possible repeat of a genocide.

SUDANESE REVOLUTION The Sudanese revolution began in 2018 which led to a coup d’etat that ousted the Omar al-Bashir and established a junta (military group that leads a country after taking over power by force). The people were facing economic hardship, including high inflation, rising food prices and a scarcity of basic goods. The initial protests were triggered after the bread prices tripled, but this led to people expressing further discontent with the 42

government. Al-Bashir was criticized for corruption and policies that favoured the elite and his regime was characterized by authoritarian rule. Since the coup and al-Bashir’s imprisonment by the junta, the military has seized power. The ultimate goal was to establish a democratic government, finally ruled by the people. In 2020, the UN established the UN Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan (UNITAMS) to support the Sudanese democratic transition, but as of April 2023, this idea has been left in the dust.

The conflict is a fight for control of Sudan between Sudan’s Armed Forces (SAF) and Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The SAF is the country’s military force, while the RSF is a paramilitary force which is primarily composed of the Janjaweed forces who were involved in Darfur. 7 months onwards, 9 temporary ceasefire deals have failed and the impact on civilians is drastic. More than 9000 people have been killed, 5 million have been displaced and over half of the population (over 20 million) needs humanitarian aid according to the World Food Program (WFP). Food and fuel prices are only increasing and there are poor harvests due to climate shocks which further drive food insecurity in addition to the conflict. Food prices in 2023 are 228% higher than in 2021 according to WFP and more than 6 million people are on the edge of famine. The pre-existing economic crisis is being worsened by the disrupted internal trade routes at the heart of the country’s economy.

The people of Sudan are suffering economically, they don’t have access to basic resources and their relatives are being killed by selfish military forces who want to establish the same dictatorship they got rid of. One humanitarian crisis after another, the Sudanese civilians simply can’t get a break.

IEVA SABALIAUSKAITE

43

BEYOND AID: UNRAVELLING AFRICA’S WEB OF DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES Africa, a continent home to 54 countries and an estimated 490 million people living below the poverty line grapples with multifaceted challenges hindering its development. The continent's capacity to harness its rich natural resources is juxtaposed with a history marked by European colonisation, geographic constraints, and issues in aid management.

European colonisation in the 1400s, initiated a transatlantic slave trade that left an indelible mark on Africa's economic trajectory. The brutality of slavery, with millions of Africans stripped of their identity and forced into labour, resonates in the continent's present struggles. While some argue that colonial infrastructure and governance benefited Africa, the lasting impact of eroded cultures and the imposition of foreign economic policies reveals a more complex reality. The repercussions faced by Africans stem from Europeans’ lack of interest in conserving the traditional African culture, a disregard driven by the ideology of Social Darwinism. This belief posited the idea that some ethnic groups are superior to others.

Beyond Europe’s early globalisation efforts, Africa's physical geography also poses significant challenges. The continent hosts the largest share of landlocked countries globally; these countries are victims of environmental determinism as they are enclosed between other countries and therefore do not have access to global trade routes and ports.

This means that landlocked countries like Ethiopia and Chad face substantially higher costs in trade and transportation, impeding their integration into global trade routes.

In order to extract resources from Africa, the Europeans built vast transportation networks, however, this created gaps in the economy as certain sectors (beneficial to trade) got more attention than others. Roads and railways were built, but only where they served the needs of the colonial masters. The former capital city of Nigeria, Lagos, illustrates the negative effects of uneven growth continuing to this day. Lagos is a centre of oil extraction; hence the city is tied to the rise and fall of oil prices, creating cycles of extreme wealth and poverty. The focus on oil puts Lagos under immense pressure to extract and refine, at any cost, which happens at the expense of the development of its manufacturing and agricultural sectors. On top of all this, the wealth accumulated from the oil industry is not shared equally and only resides with those at the top. The World Bank claims that four out of every five dollars earned by the energy sector benefit just 1% of the Nigerian population.

44

Corruption further exacerbates Africa's challenges. British colonial rule may have inadvertently fostered corruption among chiefs, eroding trust between leaders and society. When the British Empire took over Africa, the central state was weak, therefore the colonial powers controlled the population through chiefs. This gave greater autonomy to chiefs than they had in precolonial times, creating a hierarchal system with self-serving chiefs who held unprecedented power. The hierarchical systems established during colonisation persist and have consequently hindered equitable development.

Foreign aid’s moral intent aimed at bridging economic gaps in developing nations is correct; however, it often falls short of its intended impact. While NGOs like the IMF and the World Bank prioritise economic well-being, their Structural Adjustment Programs can strip governments of control, fostering uniform policies irrespective of a country's unique circumstances. Despite an annual aid influx of around $50 billion, the uneven distribution of funds widens inequality and can perpetuate corruption, hindering economic growth. Foreign direct investment (FDI) from NGOs can also be disadvantageous as decision-making is often influenced by developed Western countries, leading to policies that primarily serve their interests.

However, it's crucial not to homogenise Africa's economic status. Many countries have experienced significant growth, for example, Ethiopia's GDP has grown nearly $60 billion over a decade. Despite a 22% reduction in poverty in Ethiopia, issues like unskilled labour and high transport costs persist. Ethiopia's pursuit of funds for a hydroelectric project aiming to generate 6000 megawatts of energy, illustrates the nation's ambitions.

However, infrastructural FDI doesn't always translate to improved living conditions, GDP growth, or a robust economy. These projects offer financial prospects for some, but they don't ensure mass job creation.

In conclusion, while aid has provided relief from poverty, its impact is marred by issues of corruption and dependency. The historical context of colonisation, coupled with geopolitical and structural challenges, underscores the need for nuanced solutions. A selfsustaining approach to economic prosperity, free from conditional aid, is crucial. The strings attached to aid often hinder organic growth, perpetuating a cycle of poverty.

Africa's potential for improvement lies in addressing historical injustices, embracing equitable development, and fostering self-reliance.

JANYA SHAH

45

WHAT NIGERIA’S GENERAL ELECTION OUTCOME MEANS FOR AFRICA AND THE REST OF THE WORLD Nigeria is the most populated country in Africa with a population exceeding 200 million which means it has the largest consumer and labour market in West Africa. It also has one of the largest economies on the continent with diverse sectors in oil, agriculture, and manufacturing; therefore, Nigeria’s political and economic status is crucial for the whole continent. A coherent and stable government in Nigeria can promote economic development, job creation, and an increase in overall living standards throughout West Africa.

Nigeria is Africa’s largest oil exporter and is a member of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) therefore local political decisions regarding the production and exportation of oil can greatly affect petroleum supply and prices. Any disruptions would mean individuals and businesses in local and global countries would experience a higher cost of living. Historically, Nigeria has been very dependent on the revenue generated from oil exploration as it represents a significant portion of its GDP; this can be a positive or negative pressure point for the country as it becomes very vulnerable to the flux in oil prices. Nigeria is also a member of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) where they play a significant part in conflict resolution within the region. For example, Nigeria sent peacekeeping troops and played a key role in the negotiations to end the conflict of the Liberian civil war in the 1990s. Nigeria often hosts diplomatic meetings in its capital, Abuja, to support regional peace-keeping initiatives.

The 2023 general election offered the nation new opportunities on both the domestic and international front with some new political contenders in addition to the long-standing political candidates and renewed faith of the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) to spread confidence in the credibility of the Nigerian voting process. The INEC worked hard to promote the credibility of the electoral process through a 62 % increase in funding over the 2019 elections with the introduction of the Biomodal Voter Accreditation System and INEC Result Viewing portal. Consequently, an extra 9.5 million registered to vote, mostly under the age of 35; this younger cohort were enticed to vote with the allure of a new Christian candidate, Peter Obi of the Labour Party, who is popular with the younger voters and the investment in technology to safeguard the voting and results process. A new biometric voter identification card was issued and a computerized network that offered immediate collation of the votes from 177,000 polling venues was in place.

46

The incoming administration led by Bola Tinubu of the All Progressive Congress (APC) is working hard to legitimise its manifesto given the level of distrust that is innate with new governments and their political agendas in this region. They are prioritising the following policy areas: diversify its reliance on oil, create robust fiscal policies to combat a staggering inflation rate of 21%, reduce the level of poverty (40% of the population live below the poverty line), reform its education, and target security sector reforms.

Educating its young population (70% of the population is under 30) is crucial to increasing employment (42% of young adults are unemployed) and discouraging emigration. There has been a rise of jihadism in the Lake Chad and Sahel regions which threatens Nigeria’s national security, and so the administration is focusing on restructuring the geo-strategic leadership governing these areas, as well as reforming the security sector, as mentioned previously.

From an international perspective, this election, despite its failure to report from many polling stations, did succeed in sending a strong positive message in contrast to the democratic ‘backsliding’ from previous military coups and this is critical to growing political stability and keeping peace in the region. The fluctuation of Nigerian oil production, prices, and inflation has economic implications for regions such as the United States, Western Europe, and Asia which rely on Nigerian oil because of tensions and shortages of supply in the Middle East.

To conclude we must recognize that the outcome of Nigeria’s election sealed a powerful affirmation of the democratic process not just for Africa but also for its global partners with this first-time strong parliamentary support of the new president. Given its diversity, significance, and active diplomatic involvement, Nigeria exerts influence far beyond its own borders. With its prominent status as an economic hub and large population, it is crucial for the country to maintain stability, effective governance and promote growth and a peace-keeping role which this new government can achieve.

PIERCE ASHTON

47

THE SOUTH AFRICAN ENERGY CRISIS – CORRUPTION, MISMANAGEMENT AND AGEING INFRASTRUCTURE There has been a highly debilitating energy crisis in South Africa since 2007, resulting in mass load-shedding (rotating power outages), which have only become worse over time, with many being affected by blackouts which can last up to 10 hours a day or longer. This period of national blackouts has invited a plethora of problems such as reduced business productivity, protests, and the escalation of lingering economic issues. The causes for this disaster can be narrowed down to three factors: corruption, poor infrastructure, and mismanagement in key sectors, all of which operate in a vicious cycle that is currently showing few signs of improvement, considering that the load-shedding became a nearpermanent measure during 2022. The issues and roots of the ongoing energy crisis will be explained throughout this article.

The causes for this problem have been stubbornly entrenched in South African politics for more than a decade now, with the most prevalent issue being corruption in the energy sector and government. Eskom is the government-owned national power utility, responsible for generating approximately 95% of the country’s electricity. In a recent interview, former Eskom CEO, André de Ruyter, stated that the utility loses almost $55 million a month due to corruption, which stems mainly from political interference within Eskom and resourced being diverted from more important investments. The accumulation of corruption scandals throughout the years, most notably in 2017 with the nepotism and cronyism seen with the Gupta family and previous President Jacob Zuma, which led to severe misallocation of resources and finances, have severely hindered the utility’s ability to sufficiently supply electricity, let alone invest in the ageing, outdated energy infrastructure.

The majority of Eskom power stations are almost 50 years old and are severely undependable and outdated. The country’s energy supply is also heavily reliant on coal – accounting for almost 87% of electricity generation, which puts the energy supply at risk due to supply disruptions caused from labour strikes, and global supply fluctuations, as well as the old energy plants often requiring maintenance - leading to breakdowns and outages which further reduces the energy supplied. South Africa has been working to modernise its energy production by aiming to implement more renewable energy sources, but with the persisting issue of corruption and misallocation of resources, the progress has been made extremely slow. For example, in 2019 an investigation into corruption was launched due to irregular increases in costs, and frequent delays in the construction of 48

the Medupi and Kusile power stations. The investigation revealed that $9.13 billion had allegedly been stolen from the projects, once again showing that corruption and mismanagement underpins South Africa’s seemingly never-ending energy crisis.

The current government (the ANC) under Cyril Ramaphosa has declared that they plan to focus on varying energy supply, decommissioning older plants, and returning the Medupi and Kusile power stations to service on schedule, but with the country’s history of corruption derailing development, misallocation of resources, and load-shedding recently recovering from an all-time high, how much of a guarantee can these resolutions really be?

DOMINIC MAYNE

49

CHALLENGES TO

THE STATE 50

JUNIOR MEDICAL STRIKES Underpaid and overworked, junior doctors have had enough.

According to the British Medical Association (BMA), in the past 12 months around 79% of junior doctors say they often think about leaving the NHS. This is a direct threat to the state, and the consequences of a depleted NHS are vast and deeply worrying.

The clearest reason as to why junior doctors are striking is the pay cuts. The BMA has estimated that between 2009 and 2022, junior doctors in England have had a 26 per cent real terms pay cut due to below-inflation pay rises. In order to rectify this, the government would need to award doctors a 35 per cent increase for 2022-23, which they have not yet agreed to. Another reason why junior doctors are striking is the introduction of medical apprenticeships. Launched by the NHS in January 2023, they mean that individuals without a medical degree can work as apprentices to become junior doctors. Many traditional medical students feel that this devalues their medical degree. Therefore, we see that junior doctors not only striking due to insufficient pay, but also due to the lack of respect they feel that they receive from the government. In summary, junior doctors are mainly striking as they want to improve the NHS; they want to provide high-quality care to patients, however, they feel they have been left with no other choice. The strikes signal deep dissatisfaction with the current state of the NHS and are a last resort for junior doctors.

Junior doctors striking poses a significant threat to the state as it will significantly disrupt the lives of the public. Although A&E services will remain open, hospital bosses have said that they cannot guarantee patient safety during the strikes. The issue of junior doctors striking is deeply concerning as they make up over 40% of the medical workforce; the expertise of these doctors ranges from those fresh out of university to those with over 10 years of medical experience. Approximately two-thirds of junior doctors are BMA members, leaving hospitals extremely understaffed during these strikes. Additionally, millions of pounds must be paid to plug holes in staffing left by striking doctors. The West's largest hospital has had to pay over 3 million pounds for cover during the strikes.

The cost of this cover is 5 times more than the trust saved from the pay deducted from striking workers, putting the government at a significant loss. The extremely high cover costs are not only financially burdening the government more, but also further evidence the lack of respect that the junior doctors receive from the state.

Due to the state's refusal to work with junior doctors and comprise a fair offer for the strikers, public opinion of the government has worsened. An anonymous speaker told the BBC: ‘I think that is absolutely disgraceful. You are paying far more in “scab wages” than you would have just giving the juniors a pay rise.’ In a recent survey, more than 2 in 5 51

correspondents blamed the government for the increase in waiting lists for non-urgent, elective treatment. Furthermore, junior doctors also walked out from the 2nd to 4th of October, exacerbating the issue of the depleted, understaffed NHS. This led to ‘Christmas Day’ levels of staffing and almost 130,000 in and outpatient appointments being rescheduled. These figures demonstrate the public’s frustration with the government, in particular how they have approached this issue, as the strikes are now significantly impacting people's lives on the daily.

To conclude, the consequences of junior doctors striking are detrimental to the state; not only has this led to a depleted NHS, but the financial losses caused by the strikes are immense and public opinion of the government has worsened too. It is of utmost importance that the government cooperate with the BMA and try and find a solution to the problem at hand before the NHS delves further into chaos.

ANNA ZAMAN

52

THE TOILET OF VENUS – THE POLITICAL ALLY TO THE GOVERNMENT’S CHALLENGERS Slashes through a scarlet red. Shards of glass millimeters from the porcelain tones of bare skin. Anguished faces in front of it all.

‘The Toilet of Venus’, a Velazquez painting from the mid 17th century, has recurringly come up as a target in the National Gallery. In 1906, a vicious attack from the Suffragettes, and again, this year, in November 2023, victim to another violent protest act by the pressure group Just Stop Oil. While different in aims and beliefs, the Suffragettes and Just Stop Oil are alike in intensity and strength. The Suffragettes were an activist group at the start of the 20 th century who fought for women’s right to vote in elections through violence. While Just Stop Oil is a nonviolent outsider pressure group fighting for no new oil, coal and gas to be extracted, they have similar methods to the Suffragettes.

Locking on has always been a common form of protest. By attaching themselves to objects, protesters make it difficult to remove them from the place of protest. This was common in both the Suffragettes and Just Stop Oil. The ‘Grille’ incident, in 1908, where 2 women of the Women’s Freedom League chained themselves to a grille above the chamber in the House of Commons was famous for the difficulty of getting the women off. This was used to show the women’s indignance and astuteness in the need for their right to vote. Similarly, famous instances of Just Stop Oil members locking on include the recent ‘Les Misérables’ interruption in the Sondheim theatre in London where they used flexible bicycle locks to attach themselves to the set while chanting ‘Just Stop Oil’, as well as gluing their hands to famous paintings in Glasgow and London periodically.

The painting in question, however, has been treated with a different type of protest. It has been hit, smashed and slashed by these groups, targeted for the attention it attracts.

All the way back in 1914, a Suffragette named Mary Richardson stormed the National Gallery and grabbed this painting into a chokehold. Armed with a butcher knife up her sleeve, ‘Slasher Mary’ cut 5 lines into the painting, to try to ‘destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history.’ Although this did ultimately fail, with the painting being repaired shortly after, the message was clear. It wasn’t about the money – it was about the male gaze, the power they had over women and ‘the way men visitors gaped at it all day long’ while women still did not have the basic right to vote.

53

The painting is not said to be one of the most revealing nude paintings, albeit still being erotically charged. The issue raised by the Suffragettes tied more to the power that men had and how they chose to be occupied. Rather than treating women as equals, they just looked at them as objects, intending on gazing at the image of a woman’s bare body rather than treating women with this displayed awe. The energy put into this appreciation of the body in the painting was seen to be so misplaced – women are neither bodies nor paintings. They were not being treated with respect, let alone fairly – the men could appreciate art all they wanted rather than fighting for equality which provided a motive for ‘Slasher Mary’s fury. After all, paintings can’t vote. The action added to the pressure of the suffrage movement and secured women the right to vote 6 years later, in August 1920.

In November 2023, 2 activists from Just Stop Oil showed up in Room 30 in the National Gallery and started hitting the glass of the salvaged painting with hammers. Following snaking cracks forming on the surface, the activists began cries of ‘Just Stop Oil’, tying it to the Suffragettes movement in their speech ‘Women did not get the vote by voting. It is time for deeds and not words.’ This shows the influence that the actions taken 100 years ago by a causal group have on current politics and how they are carried forward in legacy.

Perhaps in damaging the painting the intention wasn’t the same, but Just Stop Oil’s modus operandi is capturing media attention rather than appealing to the public. In fact, they are not generally ‘liked’ by the public. Keir Starmer described them as ‘contemptible’ and Rishi Sunak states they are ‘a small minority disrupting the lives of the hardworking majority.’ Following the damage of this painting, they captured the eye of the media and the people, and although this most probably won’t lead to changes in the licensing of new oil rigs, it is more publicity and information for the public and the government to consider.

By pivoting off the ideas of the Suffragettes, this modern-day activist group holds out hope to bringing about a more environmentally sustainable future through publicity. ‘The Toilet of Venus’, in its own way, is a medium for this protest to come into the public eye, time and time again. It is a host for radical ideas to be expressed and aids as an accelerant for these radical ideas to be seriously considered.

ELEFTHERIA SERMPETI

54

2023 NIGER’S COUP D’ETAT: THE COMPLEX CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES A coup can be defined as ‘a sudden, violent and unlawful seizure of power from a government.’ This is what unfolded in Niger earlier this summer. 6 countries in Western and Central Africa have had military takeovers since 2020 – all of which are former French colonies, including Niger. The French colonialism over West Africa has continued to disrupt the region, leaving governments with no support after draining their oil and mineral resources. These dynamics play a key role in defining the Nigerien coup.

In the summer of 2023, Niger faced a crisis in which their government was overthrown and their president, Mohamed Bazoum was taken, removed and detained. Mali, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Niger, Chad and Gabon are all now run by military operations (otherwise known as juntas) after they ousted the civilian leaders. This article will focus on the democratic instability of Niger in 2023 and the subsequent events of the coup that occurred as a result.

Coup d’états are complex and multifaceted, which was illustrated by the events in Niger throughout July and August in 2023. It is important to acknowledge the socio-economic and political background of this landlocked area located within the Sahel region of Africa.

Some believe the coup to be partially caused by the poor economic management and lack of security under President Bazoum, however, Niger’s economy has seen a strong rebound following the Covid-19 years, with growth estimated at 11.5% with high targets for increased oil production and international financial support as their oil and mineral reserves also show potential for development within the energy industry. Despite this, it is a developing nation and a country that remains one of the poorest in the world. The country relies heavily on primary and secondary sector jobs, dependent on agriculture for 40% of its GDP and has consistently been ranked at the bottom of the Human Development Index. It ranks among the least developed and heavily indebted countries in the world. Its poor economic state is further exacerbated by its geographical location; the harsh climate of Niger, facing frequent drought cycles and desertification - paired with the corruption within the government means that the country faces an economic deficit and has been unable to industrialise in the same way that Western democracies have. It is also a landlocked region, which limits access to maritime trade and eliminates the opportunity for development through the fishing industry.

It is therefore no surprise that there is a dimension of environmental determinism restricting Niger’s socio-economic development. However, this was compounded by the 55

significant political events of the coup beginning on July 29th when the EU cut off financial support to Niger while the African Union called on the coup leaders to return to their barracks. The French also suspended all development aid and budget support, demanding a prompt constitutional order to place Bazoum back in charge.

The EU was not the only player involved in seeking a swift resolution to the unfolding events in July. With President Bazoum taken hostage, The Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) issued an ultimatum giving the coup leaders one week to reinstate Bazoum or else ‘all measures’ would be taken to restore constitutional order which included international sanctions and potential force. ECOWAS, a key economic player in the West Africa region is a political and economic union of 15 countries, with a goal of achieving ‘collective self-sufficiency’ for its member states – it acts as a trade bloc for these developing countries as well as a peacekeeping force for countries within the Sahel. They announced ‘immediate sanctions’ on Niger, including the closure of land and air borders, as well as issuing a ‘no-fly’ zone on all commercial flights to and from Niger and the suspension of all commercial and financial transactions between ECOWAS and Niger.

This placed additional pressure on a response from the military junta already facing increasing tensions with the EU. Even Niger’s southern neighbour and regional powerhouse Nigeria could not settle the bubbling tensions despite Nigeria cutting power supplies. A particularly damaging response given Nigeria supplies 70% of Niger’s electricity.

In early August, Niger found itself deep within the throes of political unrest despite intervention, threats, and sanctions from key players both in the region and internationally. It was with a dash of irony that on the 63rd year anniversary of independence from France, the windows of the French embassy were broken with burning effigies of the nation’s flag dominating media channels causing Joe Biden to call for the immediate release of Bazoum and his family and for the country to restore democracy. This response was perhaps motivated by images of hundreds of Russian flags being flown by protesters in Niamey. The flag became a symbol of a broader geopolitical shift in the region, affiliated with anti-West and anti-French attitudes, therefore posing a threat to the US as it indicates a concern that Niger’s military leaders may turn to the Russian mercenary group, Wagner, for help.

This complex relationship between Niger’s military forces and Russia is one of the reasons sitting at the heart of the causes of the coup d’état. But of course, there are many other catalysing factors including political instability. The government is challenged by corruption, making it difficult to effectively govern the nation or manage public affairs for the benefit of the population. There have been major suspicions of corruption within the defence sector such as a high-profile case of embezzlement in the purchase of military equipment in 2020. Furthermore, there is the argument that the civilian government just did not deliver, they failed to distribute wealth to the public and is ill managed.

56

This political unrest links to the issue of the security problem, which is particularly bad in Niger. The Sahel region as a whole has become a stronghold for armed groups linked to Al-Qaeda and ISIL. Almost half the deaths from terrorism around the world in 2022, occurred in the Sahel. This means that there has been growing impatience and discontent amongst the public concerning the failings of their own government; this led to the defence and security forces putting an end to the civilian regime of Bazoum.

It is easy to look at Niger as a developing nation and believe the country is simply poor, corrupt and full of political, social and economic unrest. Whilst these sweeping statements may relay some truth, we cannot ignore the history of colonial mismanagement that plays a key factor into why the coup began in the first place. The anti-French sentiment has begun to solidify across the Sahel, France is the old colonial power, there is a history of exploitation that dates to the slave trade – many in West and Central Africa believe that this exploitation hasn’t stopped, and instead has manifested itself in new ways, such as neo-colonialism. An idea remains that France has an unequal relationship with its former colonies and places its own political and economic interests above all else, as shown through their overwhelming control of heavy industry. In Niger, for example, they extract Uranium, which although does generate revenue for Niger’s government, also potentially fuels the ongoing exploitation of Nigerien workers which has led to a push for the emerging anti-French attitude.

AALIYAH HAQUE

57

THE CHAOS OF SUELLA BRAVERMAN BRAVERMAN’S RISE INTO OFFICE Braverman was elected to the House of Commons in 2015 as an MP for Fareham. She won 56.1% of the vote with a majority of 22,262, and subsequently gave a speech, where she discussed her interest in education, home affairs, and justice. In 2016, Braverman campaigned in favour of exiting the European Union and was appointed chair of the European Research Group, a group of pro-Leave Conservative MPs. In January 2018, Braverman was appointed Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Exiting the European Union but resigned in November 2018 in opposition to Theresa May’s draft Brexit deal. In 2022, after the resignation of Boris Johnson, Braverman stood at the Conservative Party leadership election, however failed to make it past the second round of ballots. In September 2022, Braverman was made Home Secretary in Truss’ cabinet, but left office in October due to breaking the ministerial code. Her second term as Home Secretary began under the premiership of Sunak just a week later, but eventually ended in her sacking in November 2023.

TO BE OR NOT TO BE CONTROVERSIAL? Braverman’s first major dispute came under the leadership of Truss in October 2022. Less than two months after being appointed, Braverman admitted sending an official document to another lawmaker through her personal email address. Despite arguing that this incident was an honest mistake and not intentional, Braverman was dismissed from her role as Home Secretary. However, just six days later, Rishi Sunak, the newly appointed Prime Minister, reinstated Braverman as Home Secretary. Sunak’s decision led to criticism and scrutiny from not only the public, but also from within Parliament. He faced heavy questioning from Keir Starmer and the opposition during Prime Minister Questions, as well as lawmakers in the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, which issued a report stating that the ‘leaking of restricted material is worthy of significant sanction”, and “subsequent change in prime minister should not wipe the slate clean’.

Braverman’s rhetoric throughout her tenure has been seen as divisive and potentially even extremist. Her comments have often angered the opposition, rights groups, religious leaders, and even some members of her own party. In November 2023, it was released that Braverman wanted to create a new law to deter charities from providing tents to homeless people and later described homelessness as a ‘lifestyle choice’ in a post on X. Civil rights groups as well as a Conservative lawmaker named Bob Blackman, who oversees a government panel on homelessness, denounced her.

58

Braverman is perhaps most infamously known for her stance and policies to do with immigration. Her focus was stopping small boats, that were filled with migrants seeking asylum in the UK, from crossing the English Channel. In 2022, the government introduced a policy that would send migrants arriving in Britain by ‘illegal, dangerous or unnecessary methods’ to Rwanda. Although the plan was introduced by Braverman’s predecessor, Priti Patel, it was heavily supported and advocated by Braverman.

Braverman stated that it was her ‘dream’ to see a flight take off to Rwanda and described asylum seekers arriving in Britain as an ‘invasion’. As expected, Braverman’s comments received a significant amount of criticism, especially from a human rights perspective, and were even condemned by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Court of Appeals decided that such measures would violate human rights and the Supreme Court ruled, on the 15th of November 2023, that Rwanda is not a safe country for the government to send migrants to and therefore concluded that this policy is unlawful. This has led to the blocking of the scheme, and hence a questioning of the ability of the government, particularly of Sunak and Braverman.

BYE BYE SUELLA! In November 2023, Braverman published an article in the Times of London newspaper, accusing the police of ‘double standards’ after the head of the Metropolitan police allowed a pro-Palestine march to take place on Armistice Day. She branded these protests as an ‘assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists’ and claimed that the police are more concerned with public opinion of themselves rather than ensuring public safety. Braverman effectively accused policemen of being inherently biased towards leftleaning protests such as those surrounding the Black Lives Matter movement or calling for a ceasefire in Palestine. The article was sent to Downing Street for approval, but a series of changes that were demanded by No 10 were ignored and Braverman published the writing in defiance of the Prime Minister, leading to her sacking on the 14th of November 2023.

In her resignation letter, addressed to the Prime Minister, Braverman accused Sunak of having ‘no personal mandate to be prime minister’ and detailed a ‘secret deal’, which gave Braverman assurance upon entering office on key policies including legal and illegal migration, the Northern Ireland Protocol, and ignoring the ECHR and HRA. Braverman also described Sunak as ‘weak, and lacking in the qualities of leadership that this country needs’ and stated that ‘[his] plan is not working,’ indicating her belief that the government is no longer effective. Braverman alluded to the fact that the government is moving too much towards the centre rather than aligning with an ‘authentic conservative agenda’, possibly appealing to more right-leaning Conservatives in a bid to run for party leader.

ADITI PRABHU

59