MIL-OSI Publisher – Page 811 – MIL Submissions Engine

August 19, 2025

Going with the flow: how penguins use tides to travel and hunt

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rory Wilson, Professor of Aquatic Biology and Sustainable Aquaculture, Swansea University

Magellanic penguins in the surf. Ondrej Prosicky/Shutterstock

Poohsticks, the game in which Piglet and Winnie the Pooh throw sticks into the river from one side of a bridge, and then rush over to the other side to see whose stick appears first, is all about current flow. Disappointingly, neither Piglet nor Pooh mention fluid dynamics despite its pivotal importance in determining who won.

Unlike sticks, though, animals can respond to those flows. The movement of water and air – with their winds and currents – can affect flying and swimming animals profoundly. And as we recently discovered, penguins are far more tuned in to these dynamics than anyone realised.

Anyone who’s ever swum in the sea will know how cross-currents can drag you along the coast, even when you’re trying to swim straight in. Magellanic penguins, a South American penguin, face this challenge daily, but they appear to have found a clever solution.

Penguins can swim far from land but seem to know exactly where they are. More importantly, they seem to know how to get back to their breeding colonies, whether currents are confounding them or not.

A group of Magellanic penguins going to sea from some rocks. — Masters of navigation.
Jeremy Richards/Shutterstock

To understand how they do this, our team – which included researchers from Argentina, Germany, Japan and the UK – fitted high-tech tracking tags to Magellanic penguins breeding in Argentina. These birds often forage up to 43 miles offshore, far beyond the range of visual landmarks. And it’s unlikely they’re using the seafloor as a map, as Magellanics rarely dive that deep.

The tech we placed on the penguins recorded some pivotal information. Global positioning systems (GPS) gave the birds’ positions when they were at the surface between dives. And trajectories underwater could be calculated using dead reckoning. This is what a car navigation system does when it goes into a tunnel – it starts with the last GPS position and uses vectors on the car heading and speed to work out the path.

Our team did this with the penguins’ data, calculating the underwater pathways for every second of their one to three day trips. We then integrated this with the currents. This was no simple undertaking because currents change dramatically over the tidal cycle and vary with position.

So what could the penguins do in such a dynamic environment? One option (assuming they somehow knew both where they were and where home was) would be to head straight for the colony. But doing this would often have meant swimming against strong currents, sometimes of up to 2 metres per second (around 4.5mph). That’s about the same speed as an Olympic swimmer.

Although penguins can cruise at that speed, going faster to beat the current would cost them a lot of extra energy.

Interestingly, we found that during slack water, when the currents were trivial, the penguins headed directly home. So, somehow they knew where they were in relation to the colony. Theories about how animals might do this include them using magnetic field sensing, celestial cues, or even using smell to find their way but it’s a mysterious and hotly debated topic among experts.

When the current was strong, the penguins generally aimed in the right direction to return home. But they often combined this with swimming in the same general direction as the current, which typically flowed across the direct line to the nest. So, some birds appeared set to overshoot the colony, probably landing further down the coast.

However, the yin and yang of tidal currents means that what flows one way on the rising tide reverses on the ebb. The penguins seemed to understand this. They swam roughly equivalent, but mirror-imaged, trajectories on both incoming and outgoing tides, according to the direction of the current.

This strategy effectively cancels out potential overshoots over the course of a tidal cycle. Once they were close enough to the colony, the penguins launched into a final burst of power and made a direct line for home. This strategy increases the length of the path to get home. But it’s easy travelling since much of the work to move is done by the current and the increased distance gives the penguins opportunities to find prey.

Navigational experts

This suggests that Magellanic penguins can detect both the direction and speed of ocean currents. While some theories propose that animals sense small-scale turbulence to gauge flow, the mechanisms remain poorly understood.

Still, what these penguins manage is remarkable. It’s a kind of navigational party trick that helps ensure they return reliably to feed their chicks, seemingly untroubled by shifting currents.

Ocean and air circulation patterns are becoming more chaotic with climate change. If penguins, and other marine animals, can keep navigating our waters with skill and instinct, it’s one small piece of good news in a rapidly changing world.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Going with the flow: how penguins use tides to travel and hunt – https://theconversation.com/going-with-the-flow-how-penguins-use-tides-to-travel-and-hunt-262267

August 19, 2025

Transatlantic unity at the White House disguises lack of progress towards just peace for Ukraine

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

At a high-stakes meeting at the White House on August 18, the US president, Donald Trump, and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, tried to hammer out the broad contours of a potential peace agreement with Russia. The tone of their encounter was in marked contrast to their last joint press conference in Washington back in February which ended with Zelensky’s humiliation by Trump and his vice president, J.D. Vance.

The outcomes of the presidential get-together, and the subsequent, expanded meeting with leaders of the European coalition of the willing, were also a much more professional affair than Trump’s summit with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on August 15. The results of the meetings in the White House were still far from perfect. But they are a much better response to the reality in which Ukrainians have lived for the past more than three-and-a-half years than what transpired during and after the brief press conference held by the two leaders after their meeting in Alaska.

This relatively positive outcome was not a foregone conclusion. Over the weekend, Trump had put out a statement on his Truth Social platform that: “President Zelenskyy (sic) of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately”. But this came with the proviso that Zelensky would need to accept Ukraine’s loss of Crimea to Russia and forego his country’s future Nato membership. This, and similar ideas of land swaps between Russia and Ukraine, have already been roundly rejected by the Ukrainian president.

Importantly, Kyiv’s position has been fully backed by Ukraine’s European allies. Leaders of the coalition of the willing issued a joint statement on August 16 to the effect that any territorial concessions were Ukraine’s to make or refuse.

On Nato membership, their statement was more equivocal. European leaders asserted that Russia should not be allowed to have a veto on Ukraine’s choices.
But the coalition’s reiteration of the commitment that it is “ready to play an active role” in guaranteeing Ukraine’s future security opened up a pathway to Trump to “Article 5-like protections” for Ukraine against future Russian aggression and promising “a lot of help when it comes to security”. Nato’s Article 5 guarantees that an attack on one member is an attack on all and commits the alliance to collective defence.

A possibly emerging deal – some territorial concessions by Ukraine in exchange for peace and joint US and European security guarantees – appeared to become more certain during the televised meeting between Trump and his visitors before their closed-door discussions. In different ways, each of the European guests acknowledged the progress that Trump had made towards a settlement and they all emphasised the importance of a joint approach to Russia to make sure that any agreement would bring a just and lasting peace.

As an indication that his guests were unwilling to simply accept whatever deal he had brought back with him from his meeting with Putin in Alaska, the US president then interrupted the meeting to call the Russian president. Signals from Russia were far from promising with Moscow rejecting any Nato troop deployments to Ukraine and singling out the UK as allegedly seeking to undermine the US-Russia peace effort.

Peace remains elusive

When the meeting concluded and the different leaders offered their interpretations of what had been agreed, two things became clear. First, the Ukrainian side had not folded under pressure from the US, and European leaders, while going out of their way to flatter Trump, held their ground as well. Importantly, Trump had not walked away from the process either but appeared to want to remain engaged.

Second, Russia had not given any ground, either. According to remarks by Putin’s foreign policy advisor, Yuri Ushakov, posted on the Kremlin’s official website, Russia would consider “the possibility of raising the level of representatives of the Ukrainian and Russian parties”. His statement falls short of, but does not rule out, the possibility of a Zelensky-Putin summit, which Trump announced as a major success after the White House meetings yesterday.

Such a meeting was seen as the next logical step towards peace by all the participants of the White House meeting and would be followed, according to Trump, by what he called “a Trilat” of the Ukrainian, Russian and American presidents. The lack of clear confirmation by Russia that such meetings would indeed happen raises more doubts about the Kremlin’s sincerity.

But the fact that a peace process – if it can be called that – remains somewhat intact is a far cry from an actual peace agreement. Little if anything was said in the aftermath of the White House meeting on territorial issues. Pressure on Russia only came up briefly in comments by European leaders, whose ambitions to become formally involved in actual peace negotiations remain a pipe dream for the time being. And, despite the initial optimism about security guarantees, no firm commitments were made with Zelensky only noting “the important signal from the United States regarding its readiness to support and be part of these guarantees”.

Peace in Ukraine thus remains elusive, for now. The only tangible success is that whatever Trump imagines as the process to a peace agreement did not completely fall apart. But as this process unfolds, its progress, if any, happens at a snail’s pace. Meanwhile the Russian war machine deployed against Ukraine grinds forward.

At the end of the day, yesterday’s events changed little. They merely confirmed that Putin keeps playing for time, that Trump is unwilling to put real pressure on him and that Ukraine and Europe have no effective leverage on either side.

Trump boldly claimed ahead of his meetings with Zelensky and the leaders of the coalition of the willing that he knew exactly what he was doing. That may be true – but it may also not be enough without knowing and understanding what his counterpart in the Kremlin is doing.

Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

– ref. Transatlantic unity at the White House disguises lack of progress towards just peace for Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/transatlantic-unity-at-the-white-house-disguises-lack-of-progress-towards-just-peace-for-ukraine-263353

August 19, 2025

From oil to cod – ISRF event explores what yesterday’s empires reveal about today’s wars

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Smith, Senior Consultant, Universal Impact, The Conversation

Modern warfare is high-tech, violent and often incomprehensible. It is also widespread with one in eight people globally exposed to conflict last year.

The shocking images which daily fill news reports and social media feeds can leave us feeling confused and helpless. But researchers can at least offer context to help us better understand these turbulent times.

This was the motivation behind a recent series of events organised by the Independent Social Research Foundation (ISRF), which The Conversation UK works with via its subsidiary Universal Impact. And a common theme was the argument that imperialism laid the foundations for many contemporary power struggles.

In these lectures on decolonisation, Martin Thomas, Julia Laite and Adam Hanieh detailed how the world we know today was shaped by the rise of empire.

For centuries, the world’s wealthiest nations forcibly acquired territory and access to natural resources, not least oil.

For Adam Hanieh oil runs through the history of Empire and decolonisation.

Adam Hanieh, Professor of Political Economy and Global Development at the University of Exeter, explained how oil propelled the allies to victory in the First and Second World Wars. Not just by fuelling their militaries but also as the raw material behind the petrochemicals essential for developing the atomic bomb.

Indeed, as Hanieh revealed, the biggest individual institutional consumer of oil remains the US military. And yet its emissions were neither counted in the Kyoto Protocol nor the Paris Agreement.

To ensure ongoing control over oil supplies, Hanieh told how the US has forged connections in the Middle East, establishing two pillars of “influence and domination”: Israel on one side and the Gulf States, and particularly Saudi Arabia, on the other.

He said that the Middle East is one of the world’s biggest importers of arms, mainly from the US, so “petrodollar wealth is recirculating into American markets and American war making companies”.

“The centrality of both war making and the ways our lives are run through global finance gives the Middle East a central role in American power globally,” Hanieh said.

“One of the root causes of conflict, of violence, is the kind of deep ways in which global power depends upon the Middle East and controlling and building alliances with those states.”

Martin Thomas looked at how successful decolonialisation has been in remaking the modern world.

According to Martin Thomas, this global financial order has thwarted many aspirations of the former colonies which fought for self-determination after the Second World War.

Thomas, Professor of Imperial History at the University of Exeter, explained how many newly independent countries were embroiled in “Cold War rivalries which condemned third world states to subservience to the rich world’s economic demands”.

Thomas views the Soviet Union as “undoubtedly an empire”. He argued that following its fall, Russia’s governing elite was unable to “come to terms with the reality of a decolonising world”. Consequently, it is now waging a “war of imperialism” in Ukraine.

A black and white image of paratroopers jumping out of a plane. — US paratroopers carrying out a strike in the Tay Ninh province of South Vietnam in 1963.
Everett Collection/Shutterstock

“Central to President Putin’s claims is the fact that in his, or in the Russian leadership’s, world view Ukraine is not an authentic nation state that self-determination could legitimately apply to,” Thomas said.

“I don’t accept that. I don’t think most Western governments accept that. And therefore I do see this as, crudely put, imperial bullying with dreadful human consequences.”

Ukraine’s rare mineral reserves have been at the centre of the war, as a reason for both the Russian invasion, as well as the involvement of the United States as a self-styled peacemaker. Indeed, if there’s a consistent theme running through the history of colonialism it is this struggle over natural resources.

Another example is Newfoundland where, as Julia Laite, Professor of History at Birkbeck, University of London, explained, cod was another prized commodity of empire. This unfashionable but extremely profitable product provided, in its dried salted form, one of the main food sources for enslaved people working on plantations.

Laite revealed how Newfoundland — which became England’s “very first transatlantic colonial possession” in 1583 — was one of the earliest places “to experience the environmental cost of this avarice”.

It was also the site of one of the most “totalising destructions of an indigenous culture in British imperial history” with Laite explaining how indigenous culture of the Beothuk people was destroyed by the “particular brand of negligent extractive colonialism” practised in Newfoundland.

Julia Laite’s family has been on Newfoundland since 1635.

Laite told the story of Shanawdithit, the final known living member of the Beothuk, and how her artwork is the last remaining first-hand account of their history and culture.

“Shanawdithit’s story is also the story of these imperial entanglements, the violence and the greed that underwrote them, and the price that people and the planet paid.

“She single-handedly ensured the survivance – however fragile and slight – of an entire culture of people. She reminds us of what an act of hope it is to tell a story, even at the end of the world.”

The ISRF’s mission is to find new solutions to some of today’s most pressing social issues.

Few things seem more pressing than halting the bloodshed in Ukraine, Palestine and Sudan. But while peace currently seems unimaginable – the end of empire once seemed unimaginable, too.

Universal Impact offers specialist training, mentoring and research communication services – donating profits back to The Conversation UK, our parent charity. If you’re a researcher or research institution and you’re interested in working together, please get in touch – or subscribe to UI’s weekly newsletter to find out more. Universal Impact is a partner of the ISRF

– ref. From oil to cod – ISRF event explores what yesterday’s empires reveal about today’s wars – https://theconversation.com/from-oil-to-cod-isrf-event-explores-what-yesterdays-empires-reveal-about-todays-wars-263072

August 19, 2025

Zelensky leaves Washington with Trump’s security guarantees, but are they enough?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sonia Mycak, Research Fellow in Ukrainian Studies, Australian National University

The last time Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited the White House earlier this year, he was berated by Donald Trump.

On Monday, he returned with European leaders by his side. He emerged with some signs of progress on a peace deal to end Russia’s war against Ukraine.

The presence of the European leaders no doubt had a great impact on the meeting. After Trump’s recent summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, they were concerned he was aligning the United States with the Russian position by supporting Putin’s maximalist demands.

We see from Trump’s statements over the last couple of months, the only pullback from his erratic pronouncements, largely based on Russian disinformation, seems to come when a body politic around him brings him back to a more realistic and informed position. So, this show of European unity was very important.

Security guarantees remain vital

There was considerable progress on one critical part of the negotiations: security guarantees for Ukraine.

It is significant that the US is to be involved in future security guarantees. It was not that long ago Trump was placing all the responsibility on Europe. So, this signals a positive development.

I listened to the briefing Zelensky gave outside the White House in Ukrainian for Ukrainian journalists. He explained it will take time to sort out the details of any future arrangement, as many countries would be involved in Ukraine’s future security guarantees, each with different capabilities to assist. Some would help Ukraine finance their security needs, others could provide military assistance.

Zelensky also emphasised that funding and assistance for the Ukrainian military will be a part of any future security arrangement. This would involve strategic partnerships in development and production, as well as procurement.

Zelensky made a point of this at a news conference in Brussels prior to Monday’s meeting. It is a priority for Ukraine to have a military strong enough to defend itself from future Russian attacks.

Reports also indicate the security guarantees would involve Ukraine buying around US$90 billion (A$138 billion) of US military equipment through its European allies. Zelensky also suggested the possibility of the US buying Ukrainian-made drones in the future.

According to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, there was also discussion about an Article 5-type security guarantee for Ukraine, referring to the part of the NATO treaty that enshrines the principle of collective defence for all members.

However, contrary to popular belief, NATO’s Article 5 does not actually commit members of the alliance to full military intervention if any one member is attacked. It allows NATO states to decide what type of support, if any, to provide. This would not be enough for Ukraine.

Ukraine has already seen the result of a failed security arrangement. In the
Budapest Memorandum of 1994, the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia guaranteed to respect Ukraine’s borders and territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world.

However, look what happened. Russia invaded in 2014 without any serious consequences, and then launched a full-scale invasion in 2022.

Given this, any future security guarantee for Ukraine will need to be rigorous. Ukrainians are very cognisant of this.

Loss of Ukrainian territory

Prior to his Alaska summit with Trump, I would have said Putin is not interested in any kind of deal. We saw how in previous meetings in Istanbul, Russia sent low-level delegations, not authorised to make any decisions at all.

However, I think the scenario has changed because, unfortunately, in Alaska, Trump aligned himself with Putin in supporting Russia’s maximalist demands. It’s highly likely Putin now believes he has an advocate for those demands in the White House.

This could mean Putin now perceives there is a realistic chance Russia could secure Donbas, the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

I don’t believe Ukraine would ever agree to any formal or legal recognition of a Russian annexation of Crimea or any of the other four regions that Russia now partly occupies – Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

Zelensky has been adamant Ukraine would not cede territory to Russia in any peace deal. And he alone cannot make such a decision. Changing any borders would need a referendum and a change to the constitution. This would not be easy to do. For one thing, it’s a very unpopular move. And Ukrainians living in Russian-occupied territory would not be given a free and fair vote.

Putin’s war against Ukraine is an attempt at illegally appropriating very valuable land. In Alaska, he demanded Russia essentially be gifted the entire regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, including land not currently occupied by the Russian military.

This land has extensive Ukrainian military fortifications. Giving up this territory would leave Ukraine completely exposed to future Russian invasions – the country would effectively have no military protection along its eastern border regions. This would put Russia in a very advantageous position in future plans to regroup and attack again.

Even if Zelensky felt compelled to agree to some kind of temporary occupation and a frozen conflict along the current front lines, I don’t believe Ukraine could give up any land still under Ukrainian control.

In a recent Gallup poll, 69% of Ukrainians favoured a negotiated settlement to the war as soon as possible. In my view, this reflects the fact the United States, under the Trump administration, is proving to be an unreliable partner.

A settlement that rewards Russia for its genocidal war against Ukraine would set a very dangerous precedent, not only for the future of Ukraine but for Europe and the rest of the world.

At recent negotiations between the two sides in Istanbul, the head of the Russian delegation reportedly said “Russia is prepared to fight forever”.

That has not changed, no matter what niceties have occurred between Trump and Putin. They are prepared to continue to fight.

Sonia Mycak does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Zelensky leaves Washington with Trump’s security guarantees, but are they enough? – https://theconversation.com/zelensky-leaves-washington-with-trumps-security-guarantees-but-are-they-enough-263423

August 19, 2025

Por qué las baldosas miden 31,6 o los secretos milimétricos del universo

Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By José Ygnacio Pastor Caño, Catedrático de Universidad en Ciencia e Ingeniería de los Materiales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM)

Baldosas de terracota TY Lim/Shutterstock

Es una mañana cualquiera y estamos descalzos en la cocina, preparándonos un café sin prisas, mientras sentimos el contacto de nuestros pies con el suelo. El mundo aún se está empezando a desperezar y, distraídos, contemplamos las baldosas que nos transmiten el frescor del alba: perfectamente alineadas como teselas de un puzle obsesivamente preciso. ¿Cuánto mide cada una de ellas? No son de 30 centímetros exactos, ni tampoco 33,3. Se nos pasa por la mente que pueden estar diseñadas en medidas anglosajonas, pero tampoco miden 30,48 cm (un pie o doce pulgadas). Y tampoco son un múltiplo de 3,14159… como 31,4 cm. ¡Ufff, y esto, a algunos, nos llevaría a algún mal recuerdo del número pi y las matemáticas!

De repente, surge ante nosotros un número extraño, casi mágico: 3,16 decímetros (dm), es decir, 31,6 centímetros. Es como si alguien hubiera decidido jugar con nuestra mente, escondiendo un enigma matemático justo bajo nuestros pies, en algo tan cotidiano y aparentemente anodino como las baldosas del suelo.

Una idea brillante de Charles Renard

A estas alturas, lector, es posible que ya haya empezado a medirlas, sorprendido porque ni siquiera son cuadradas. Pero no dejaremos que las modernas tendencias en porcelánicos nos arruinen una fascinante historia que se remonta al siglo XIX. Todo comenzó con Charles Renard, un ingeniero francés cuya brillante idea fue racionalizar las dimensiones industriales, facilitando así tanto la fabricación como el transporte de mercancías. Lo que parecía simplemente una manía ingenieril, para ordenar el caos numérico en secuencias armoniosas, acabó conectando con fenómenos mucho más profundos y misteriosos de la Física.

El ingeniero e inventor francés Charles Renard (1847-1905).
Wikimedia Commons.

Y es que la intuición de Renard no se quedó atrapada en las fábricas ni en los almacenes, sino que extendió sus tentáculos hacia terrenos sorprendentes, enlazando con ámbitos tan diversos como los decibelios, esas curiosas unidades con las que medimos la intensidad del sonido – es la base del “decibelio medio”: 10 · log₁₀(10sqrt{10}) ≈ 5 dB–, y la mismísima constante de Planck, esa misteriosa cifra que gobierna el mundo microscópico de las partículas elementales y la estructura íntima del universo –en cálculo dimensional, 10√10 conecta con la constante de normalización de Planck en unidades físicas naturales–.

Una medida común en el siglo XX

Lo cierto es que esta medida de 3,16 nunca llegó a convertirse en un estándar universal, sino más bien en una sugerencia práctica. Una recomendación amable, podríamos decir. Desde finales del siglo XIX y, especialmente, con el intenso florecimiento de la industria cerámica en España a mediados del siglo XX, esta curiosa cifra reinó cómodamente como la dimensión más habitual en baldosas y azulejos.

¿Y hasta cuándo duró el reinado del intrigante 3,16? Pues, aunque sigue utilizándose hoy día, hay que admitir que ha perdido bastante protagonismo frente a formatos más grandes, más audaces, con nuevas proporciones y simetrías sugerentes (como esos elegantes 30×60, 45×90 o los imponentes 60×120). La culpa es de las modas contemporáneas, los porcelánicos rectificados y esas ganas tan nuestras de innovar para dejar atrás lo de siempre. Pero no desesperen los nostálgicos: la humilde baldosa de 3,16 decímetros todavía se fabrica, sobre todo en gamas clásicas o series destinadas a reposiciones.

10 baldosas de 31,6 cm dan como resultado un metro cuadrado.
Ruth Maicas.

La lógica interna del 3,16

Volviendo ahora a nuestra realidad más inmediata, esa extraña cifra, esos 31,6 centímetros, no son producto de un error del fabricante ni de un capricho estético pasajero (las actuales, sí). Las dimensiones aparentemente azarosas de las baldosas poseen, en realidad, una lógica interna fascinante. Ese pequeño decimal, ese insignificante 0,16, esconde una sorprendente maravilla de diseño industrial y eficiencia matemática, un detalle magistral de ingenio que, aunque invisible para nosotros durante años, siempre ha estado ahí, esperando descubrirse.

Lo primero que tenemos que saber es que estas baldosas no están solas en el universo de los revestimientos cerámicos. Son piezas de un engranaje mucho mayor, una estructura modular que conecta múltiples escalas. Precisamente, 31,6 cm es una medida estándar muy utilizada por fabricantes europeos para pavimentos y revestimientos cerámicos cuadrados.

Razones industriales y económicas

Pero ¿por qué usar módulos de 31,6 cm y no 33,3 cm? Uniendo tres piezas de 33,3 cm nos daría un metro. La respuesta a esta pregunta tiene su origen en las decisiones industriales tomadas décadas atrás, cuando las fábricas comenzaron a utilizar moldes y planchas cerámicas con dimensiones pensadas para maximizar el aprovechamiento de materiales.

Cuando vamos a comprar esas placas en el almacén, el precio que nos dan es el de un metro cuadrado y eso corresponde exactamente a diez baldosas. Aquí está la sorpresa, un metro cuadrado son 100 decímetros cuadrados, eso quiere decir que cada baldosa tiene 10 decímetros cuadrados y la raíz cuadrada de 10 es 3,16, en nuestro caso decímetros, es decir 31,6 centímetros. Este curioso número nos da un equilibrio perfecto entre economía, estética y sistema métrico.

Además, existe otro factor silencioso, pero clave en su instalación: las juntas. Estas baldosas no habitan aisladas, sino que se separan por pequeñas líneas que rellenamos con cemento o lechada. Cuando incluimos este espacio (habitualmente entre 1 y 2 milímetros), las dimensiones totales se ajustan con precisión: se logra que tres losetas formen un metro, y logramos un encaje perfecto entre piezas de distintos tamaños. Parece una danza matemática cuidadosamente orquestada, invisible para la mayoría de nosotros, pero fundamental para constructores, arquitectos y diseñadores.

¿Y por qué nadie nos había contado esto antes? ¿Por qué consideran que somos unos zotes en matemáticas? No, no es eso. Resulta que los detalles se quedan atrapados en las fábricas y los laboratorios, alejados de la vida cotidiana y de nuestra mirada curiosa.

Las matemáticas de la vida

Estas dimensiones, lejos de ser triviales, encajan con una filosofía de la construcción que busca eficiencia, sostenibilidad y precisión. La decisión de utilizar baldosas de 31,6 cm no solo es estética, también es económica y ecológica, al reducir el desperdicio de materiales en la fabricación y colocación. Este enfoque refleja una armonía interna que conecta cada pequeña baldosa con el universo de nuestras vidas.

El misterio del 3,16 abre una puerta a preguntas aún más fascinantes ¿Cuántas otras decisiones invisibles determinan las dimensiones de objetos aparentemente triviales? ¿Qué otros enigmas matemáticos aguardan escondidos en los elementos cotidianos de nuestro entorno natural y artificial? ¿Por qué existe una relación ideal entre las distintas partes de nuestro cuerpo?

Al final, el suelo de nuestros hogares esconde más que un simple patrón geométrico: es un pequeño homenaje a la perfección silenciosa de la vida. Ahora, cada vez que miremos esas baldosas, tendremos la oportunidad de descubrir no solo una cifra peculiar, sino una invitación a explorar el mundo cotidiano con una mirada diferente y, de paso, vacilar a nuestros amigos con un dato curioso y sorprendente.

Las personas firmantes no son asalariadas, ni consultoras, ni poseen acciones, ni reciben financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y han declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado anteriormente.

– ref. Por qué las baldosas miden 31,6 o los secretos milimétricos del universo – https://theconversation.com/por-que-las-baldosas-miden-31-6-o-los-secretos-milimetricos-del-universo-261116

August 19, 2025

Los monasterios, nuevo refugio del arte contemporáneo

Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Alicia Grueso Hierro, Investigadora postdoctoral, Universitat Politècnica de València

El monasterio de Santa María de El Paular, en Madrid (España). Fotografía: @María Ángeles Domínguez Illescas

Cuando empleamos la palabra trascendencia, podemos estar hablando de su valor filosófico en Kant, o también podemos referirnos a santo Tomás de Aquino y la filosofía escolástica de los trascendentales del ser, que se manifiestan en la unidad, la verdad, la bondad y la belleza

Pero aquí nos interesa la lingüística de una etimología que indica sobre todo elevación, que asciende –‘trans’ (a través, más allá) y ‘scandere’ (escalar)–, que nos hace superar un límite y subir de escala. La trascendencia nos obliga a mirar arriba, a lo más alto.

Otra acepción alude en lenguaje llano a lo que es importante. Por eso, si planteamos la trascendencia del arte contemporáneo, cuestionamos su papel en nuestra sociedad de consumo, preguntando qué quedará para la posteridad del arte del presente.

Vídeo resumen del I Seminario Trascendencia y Arte Contemporáneo en El Paular.

Ars mutandi

La creación de los siglos XX y XXI es un campo de operaciones fértil para todo tipo de mezclas tanto estéticas como éticas. Durante más de cien años, los artistas han roto sus propios patrones y criterios en reformas y contrarreformas sucesivas, adentrándonos en el extrañamiento y en lo inverosímil.

Se suele pasar por alto en el mundo moderno ilustrado, tecnológico y científico su vestigio arcaico, su tradición espiritual, aunque existen ejemplos de artistas vinculados a las ramas de la Teosofía y al Esoterismo desde finales de siglo XIX, véase Hilma Af Klint o el grupo de pintores Trascendental Painting Group.

Todavía hoy confirmamos la desvinculación del artista secular con lo sacro, al menos aparentemente. Si, como dice el filósofo José Luis Pardo, el populismo identitario es la nueva religión católica, puede haber una vía de desidentificación que permita huir de los dogmas actuales. Las tendencias del arte influidas por las corrientes posmodernas han seguido políticas ideológicas (decoloniales, feministas o ecologistas) en gran medida dirigidas por poderosas agendas museísticas y estatales. A priori no hay ningún mensaje masivo que marque un camino negativo, que vaya a contracorriente. Pero esto puede estar cambiando.

Artistas de inspiración cristiana

Siempre latente, sin embargo, sin hacer ruido, espera el abismo divino abajo, cabizbajo. Dios ¿humano o inhumano?, inexistente en el discurso oficial de los millenials, empieza tímidamente a escucharse.

De inmediato irrumpen ejemplos donde vemos resurgir la pregunta exaltada por el sentido trascendente de la vida. Ya gozaron años de bonanza los artistas malditos, ¿pasaremos ahora a los benditos? La actriz y directora de escena Angélica Liddell se adelanta rabiosa, y sus dramaturgias crean obras laicas que no son panfletos ni publicidad misionera ni catequesis pastoral.

Pintura abstracta con un cuadrado blanco y un triángulo en rojo. — Cantico a San Juan de la Cruz, de Gustavo Torner (1991).
Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando/VEGAP

Vemos el impacto del film Sirat, en el que las raves son trances espirituales, y podemos pensar en los Padres del Desierto, los monjes eremitas que se adentraron en el vacío de la vida despojada en el siglo II para entregarse plenamente a Dios. La aparición del director de la película, Oliver Laxe, en las redes refleja una imagen de Jesucristo predicando en calma profana y profética.

En música surgen discos como Jesucrista Superstar, de Rigoberta Bandini, iconos como Rosalía traducen el Cántico Espiritual en su interpretación de “Aunque es de noche” –que adapta el poema de san Juan de la Cruz– y grupos experimentales nos inducen a lo no trivial, como en un concierto de Anoushka Shankar y Gold Panda.

Encontramos resonancias en artistas de vanguardia que indagaron como creyentes en formas devocionales, desde la abstracción de Mondrian, Rothko o Torner a la figuración de Dalí pasando por el cine expandido, de José Valdelomar a Bill Viola. Perejaume dialoga con la cruz, Llorenc Barber con el campanario y el venerable Gaudí comienza a ser canonizado. En los límites de lo conceptual y la canalización como médium se encuentra Eulàlia Valldosera. Algo indica que una fina línea une la espiritualidad, la mística y los artistas gracias a su peculiar carisma.

Dibujo de un monje arrodillado frente a la cruz. — Dibujo de san Rafael Arnaiz y Barón, monje trapense, incluido en sus escritos.
‘Vida y escritos de Fray María Rafael Arnáiz y Barón. Monje Trapense’, Edit. El Perpetuo Socorro. Madrid,1966

Previo a la Guerra Civil Española, un joven estudiante de arquitectura con aspiración artística, Rafael Arnaiz, ingresó en 1934 en el Monasterio de San Isidro de Dueñas y hoy ya es considerado un santo del siglo XX.

Monasterios abiertos

Creadores como Federico García Lorca o Luis Buñuel frecuentaban el Monasterio de El Paular, así como los pintores becados en este enclave monástico de Rascafría (Madrid) y que vivían en las mismas celdas sencillas, donde encontraron lugares de retiro para inspirar sus trabajos. Un artista ordenado es alguien que necesita de una rutina y repetición, y un espacio aislado permite la concentración.

En España contamos con un número altísimo de monasterios, más de 700, siendo el país con más recintos de clausura de Europa. En los últimos años abren sus hospederías a estancias temporales para mujeres y hombres. Enclavados en paisajes naturales insólitos por su belleza, a través del cántico gregoriano y ritmo de la oración (siete rezos, entre el oficio de lectura y las completas), proporcionan condiciones de observación y meditación terapéuticas.

Rebeldes contra el mundo

Las órdenes monacales han permanecido invariables a través de los siglos, presumiendo de ser una de las experiencias comunitarias más antiguas de Occidente. Por otro lado los artistas modernos buscan modos alternativos de subsistir, nuevos modelos de existencia, precisamente repensando el individualismo en pos de una experiencia común.

En una época de sobreexposición en redes y termómetros asfixiantes, de sometimiento a las cookies y al expolio de datos, los monasterios esperan tranquilos desde la retaguardia, resguardados, y pueden ser una respuesta. En su ocultación, cultivando la austeridad, el anonimato y la huida de la norma convencional, predican el desacato contra el capitalismo más agresivo, más destructivo. Son, desde su inmovilidad y refugio pacífico, los otros rebeldes insumisos de la historia.

Hallamos similitudes entre el deseo de plenitud poética y el ejemplo de la vida contemplativa. ¿Tendría sentido que los dos mundos, el seglar y el monacal, convivieran? Después de todo, los y las monjas transitaron, fueron profanos que más tarde se consagraron en una comunión de solitarios en “libre dependencia de Dios”, alabando con pasión el poder divino.

¿Y podrían de igual modo los creadores sin fe acercarse a estudiar las órdenes desde el respeto, la curiosidad y la observación? Ejemplos no nos faltan: Le Corbusier trabajó por la causa cristiana erigiendo una iglesia magnífica en Ronchamp y el dadaísta Hugo Ball, después de fundar el mítico y anarquista Cabaret Voltaire, se dedicó a la lectura de los místicos y cristianos.

Al final del ajetreado camino, cuando volvemos al silencio, una frase cartuja nos recuerda que “solo cuando el lenguaje se detiene se comienza a ver”.

Alicia Grueso Hierro no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.

– ref. Los monasterios, nuevo refugio del arte contemporáneo – https://theconversation.com/los-monasterios-nuevo-refugio-del-arte-contemporaneo-260253

August 19, 2025

El fuego no es el único enemigo: el ‘burnout’ en los bomberos

Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Alicia Arenas Moreno, Profesora de Psicología Social, Universidad de Sevilla

El coste psicológico, físico y emocional de trabajar en el cuerpo de bomberos es enorme. Hryshchyshen Serhii/Shutterstock

Cuando imaginamos a un bombero, solemos pensar en una persona capaz de un acto heroico como extinción de incendios forestales o rescates en incendios, inundaciones y accidentes. Sin embargo, pocos se detienen a considerar el coste psicológico y emocional que conlleva esta labor.

El síndrome de burnout –un estado de agotamiento emocional, despersonalización y pérdida de eficacia profesional– se ha convertido en una amenaza creciente para estos trabajadores esenciales. Analizando 36 estudios sobre este asunto, nuestro equipo ha llegado a la conclusión de que el desgaste emocional es una realidad frecuente y preocupante en el colectivo de los bomberos. Paradójicamente, la investigación sobre el tema sigue siendo escasa en comparación con otras profesiones de riesgo, como personal sanitario o policías.

Riesgos más allá del fuego

Ricardo comienza su día sabiendo que no volverá a casa hasta el día siguiente. Mientras la mayoría de las personas tienen una jornada laboral de ocho horas, para un bombero el turno dura 24 horas seguidas. Eso significa estar disponible, alerta y preparado desde que entra al parque, a las 8:45 de la mañana, hasta la misma hora del día siguiente.

No es fácil teniendo en cuenta que su labor va mucho más allá de apagar fuegos. A veces le toca abrir la puerta de un anciano que no responde a las llamadas de sus familiares para averiguar si sigue con vida. Otras se ocupa de contener una fuga de gas, o de intervenir en un accidente o incluso de asistir en un intento de suicidio. En suma, su rutina está marcada por la incertidumbre, y cada salida exige no solo destreza técnica, sino también templanza, empatía y capacidad para actuar bajo presión. Y aunque en teoría pueden dormir por la noche, en la práctica rara vez descansa bien: las alarmas pueden sonar en cualquier momento.

Las demandas laborales excesivas, como la exposición constante a situaciones de emergencia, los turnos prolongados y la ambigüedad de rol, figuran entre los principales desencadenantes del síndrome del burnout en estos profesionales. Además, la falta de reconocimiento institucional y el escaso apoyo organizacional agravan la situación.

No a todos los bomberos les afecta por igual

No a todos les afecta por igual. A nivel individual, ciertos rasgos de personalidad, como el neuroticismo, una baja autoeficacia y el uso de estrategias evitativas de afrontamiento pueden actuar como factores de riesgo favoreciendo la aparición del burnout.

Por el contrario, la inteligencia emocional y la búsqueda de sentido en el trabajo pueden funcionar como factores protectores.

Cansancio, alteraciones del sueño y lesiones

El burnout no solo lleva a sufrir cansancio o desmotivación. Sus consecuencias afectan gravemente tanto a la salud del bombero como al servicio que presta a la comunidad. Los estudios incluidos en nuestra revisión muestran una asociación clara con diversos trastornos psicológicos, como la depresión, el estrés postraumático y las alteraciones del sueño .

A nivel físico, el desgaste emocional se ha vinculado con un aumento del riesgo de lesiones musculoesqueléticas. Además, el burnout afecta negativamente al rendimiento, aumentando la posibilidad de errores, el absentismo y los problemas de seguridad laboral.

La paradoja del bombero “vocacional”

Podríamos pensar que tener una fuerte vocación es un factor positivo. Sin embargo, puede volverse en contra en determinadas circunstancias, intensificando el impacto emocional de las situaciones críticas y actuando como un factor de riesgo en contextos de alta carga afectiva. De igual forma, la autocompasión, aunque generalmente protectora, puede convertirse en un riesgo en bomberos cuando no se acompaña de estrategias adaptativas.

Incluso el apoyo social, tradicionalmente valorado como amortiguador del estrés, ha mostrado resultados contradictorios: en contextos organizacionales tensos o poco funcionales, el apoyo entre compañeros puede no ser suficiente o incluso perjudicial, aumentando el agotamiento emocional.

En España no se considera una enfermedad profesional

A pesar de su gravedad, el burnout no está reconocido como enfermedad profesional en España, lo que impide a los bomberos acceder a intervenciones específicas. Esta omisión contrasta con países como Suecia o Canadá, donde existen protocolos estructurados para su prevención, como el modelo de gestión del estrés por incidentes críticos (CISM, por sus siglas en inglés).

Nuestra revisión sistemática señala, además, una preocupante falta de estudios realizados en el contexto español, lo que limita la capacidad de diseñar políticas adaptadas a las particularidades del país . El vacío se torna más grave si se considera el reciente aumento de fenómenos climáticos extremos, como la dana de 2024, que multiplican las exigencias sobre este colectivo.

Cuidar a los que nos cuidan

Ante este panorama, sería interesante, a nivel individual, apostar por programas de entrenamiento en regulación emocional, resiliencia, y estrategias activas de afrontamiento. A nivel organizacional, se podría actuar mejorando el clima laboral, clarificando los roles, equilibrando la carga de trabajo y fortaleciendo el liderazgo.

El burnout en bomberos no es un signo de debilidad, sino una respuesta comprensible ante un entorno laboral desafiante y que exige un nivel de esfuerzo emocional constante. Reconocerlo como riesgo psicosocial y desarrollar políticas públicas de prevención y atención, más allá de las obligaciones mínimas establecidas por la Ley 31/1995 de Prevención de Riesgos Laborales, sería de gran ayuda para este colectivo.

La salud mental de quienes nos protegen no puede esperar. Reconocer el problema, invertir en prevención y adaptar las organizaciones a las necesidades reales del trabajo de emergencias no es solo una cuestión de justicia laboral, sino de responsabilidad social.

– ref. El fuego no es el único enemigo: el ‘burnout’ en los bomberos – https://theconversation.com/el-fuego-no-es-el-unico-enemigo-el-burnout-en-los-bomberos-260071

August 19, 2025

Alaska summit and its afterlife provides a glimpse into what peace looks like to Putin and Trump

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ronald Suny, Professor of History and Political Science, University of Michigan

U.S. President Donald Trump greets Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

For all the pomp and staged drama of the summit between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska, the substantive part of the spectacle – that is, the negotiations between two great powers over the grinding war in Ukraine – did not at first appear to yield much. There was no deal and little detail on purported areas of progress.

The post-Alaska analysis, however, suggested the U.S. had shifted away from Ukraine’s position. Trump, it was reported, essentially agreed to Putin’s call for territorial concessions by Ukraine and for efforts toward a conclusive peace agreement over an immediate ceasefire – the latter opposed by Putin as Russia makes gains on the battlefield.

Those apparent concessions were enough to prompt alarm in the capitals of Europe. A hastily arranged follow-up meeting between Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy – and assorted European Union allies – and Trump in the White House on Aug. 18 yielded vague promises of security guarantees for Ukraine.

This is all very frustrating for those looking for some concrete foundations of a peace deal.

Yet, as a longtime scholar of Russian and Soviet history, I believe that the diplomatic whirl has revealed glimpses of what a future peace deal may look like. Or, more precisely, what it looks like for Putin and Trump.

It may be a bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow, but what it all suggests is a meeting of minds between the leaders of the two great powers involved: Russia and the United States. After all, as Trump told Fox News following the Alaska summit: “It’s good when two big powers get along, especially when they’re nuclear powers. We’re No. 1 and they’re No. 2 in the world.”

Known knowns and unknowns

Some of what we already knew remains unchanged. First, the European powers – notably Germany, France and the U.K. – remain fully supportive of Ukraine and are prepared to back Kyiv in resisting the Russian invasion and occupation.

Second, Zelenskyy opposes concessions to Russia, at least publicly. Rather, Ukraine’s leader seemingly believes that with Western – and most importantly, American – arms, Ukraine can effectively resist Russia and secure a better end to the conflict than is evident at this moment. Meeting Trump again in the Oval Office after being ambushed by Trump and Vice President JD Vance in February, Zelenskyy was as deferential and grateful to the U.S. president as his more formal dress indicated.

Microphone booms and cameras frame two men sitting on chairs. — All eyes were on Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office on Aug. 18, 2025.
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

In contrast to Zelenskyy and the European powers, the aims and positions of the United States under Trump appear to be fluid. And while Putin talks of the need to address the “primary causes” of the Ukraine conflict and publicly pushes a maximalist position, it isn’t entirely clear what he will actually settle for in regard to the security and land arrangements he says he needs.

The imperial mindset

I would argue that there are two ways of interpreting the aims of both the United States and Russia: “imperial” and “hegemonic.” The former stems from an understanding of those countries’ long experience as empires. Countries that have descended from empires have memories of former greatness that many wish to repeat in the present.
And while there is nothing fatalistic about such imperial fantasies that translate the past into the present, they often echo in the repertoire of the influential and powerful.

There are signs in the rhetoric of both Trump and Putin of such grandiose imperial impulses. Both have talked of returning their country to a “great” past and have harbored desires of annexing or dominating other countries.

And many Western analysts of Russia are convinced that Putin dreams of becoming another Peter the Great, who expanded his empire into the Baltic region, or Catherine the Great, who sent her armies south into “New Russia” – that is, what is today Ukraine.

Hegemonic thinking

But there is also another way, short of empire, that explains how great powers act in the world: as hegemons, either regionally or globally.

Instead of the colonizing of other territories and peoples, hegemons act to dominate other countries economically and militarily – and perhaps ideologically and politically, as well. They do so without taking over the smaller country.

The United States, through its dominant position in NATO, is a hegemon whose sway is paramount among the members of the alliance – which can hardly operate effectively without the agreement of Washington.

Putin’s interests, I would contend, are short of fully imperial – which would require complete control of Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy. But they are flagrantly hegemonic. In this reading, Putin may well be satisfied to get what the Soviets achieved in Finland during the Cold War: a compliant state that did not threaten Moscow, but remained independent in other ways.

Putin has such an arrangement with Belarus and might be satisfied with a Ukraine that’s not fully sovereign, militarily weak and outside of NATO. At the Alaska summit, Putin not only mentioned Ukraine as a “brotherly nation,” but also emphasized that “the situation in Ukraine has to do with fundamental threats to Russian security.”

One can read Putin’s words in many ways, but his public comments in Alaska framed the Ukraine conflict in Russian security terms, rather than in imperialist language.

Are negotiations possible?

The problem for Putin is that Russia does not have the economic and military power, or the reputational soft power attraction, to become a stable, influential hegemon in its neighborhood. Because it cannot achieve what the U.S. has accomplished through a mix of hard and soft power since the fall of the Soviet Union – that is, global hegemony – it has turned to physical force. That move has proved disastrous in terms of casualties, domestic economic distress, the mass migration of hundreds of thousands of Russians opposed to the war, and isolation from the global capitalist economy.

What Putin desires is something that shows to his people that the war was worth the sacrifices. And that may mean territorial expansion in the annexation of four contested provinces of Ukraine – Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson – as well as Crimea, taken in 2014. That goal certainly seems imperial.

And while the distinctions between an imperial foreign policy and a hegemonic one may seem semantic or academic, they are crucial when looking at the prospects of peace. Imperialism is always about conquest and total subordination of one regime to another.

If indeed Putin is an imperialist who wants full control of Ukraine – or, as is often claimed, its elimination as a sovereign state and the recreation of a polity akin to the Soviet Union – then negotiation and compromise with Russia become impossible.

My sense is that to solidify his relations with Trump and his territorial gains in Ukraine, Putin will be satisfied with accepting the rest of Ukraine as a nation-state that remains outside of NATO and is neither a base for Western powers nor a perceived military threat to Russia.

The problem here, of course, is that such a solution may be unacceptable to Zelenskyy and would have to be imposed on Kyiv. That would be anathema to the major European powers, though not necessarily for Trump.

And here we find another obstacle to peace in Ukraine: Europe and the U.S. do not have a united position on the final solution to the war. Even if both accept the view that Russia’s aims are primarily about its own idea of security rather than conquest or elimination of Ukraine, would Europe accept Putin’s demands for a major overhaul of the military balance in east-central Europe.

Trump appears less concerned about the prospect of a truncated Ukraine subordinated to Russia. His major concerns seem to lie elsewhere, perhaps in the Nobel Peace Prize he covets. But the United States may have to guarantee the security of Ukraine against future Russian attacks, something that Trump has hinted at, even as he abhors the idea of sending American troops into foreign conflicts.

A man is carried out of a building by rescue workers. — While leaders talk peace, Russian drone strikes continue in Ukraine.
Serhii Masin/Anadolu via Getty Images

Realism at odds with a just peace

Wars have consequences, both for the victorious and the defeated. And the longer this war goes on, the more likely the grinding advance of Russia further into Ukraine becomes, given the military might of Russia and Trump’s ambivalent support of Ukraine.

With those realities in mind, the solution to the Russia-Ukraine war appears to be closer to what Russia is willing to accept than Ukraine. Ukraine, as Trump so brutally put it, does not have cards to play in this tragic game where great powers decide the fate of other countries.

We are back to Thucydides, the ancient Greek founder of political science, who wrote: “Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Not surprisingly, this is what international relations theorists call “realism.”

Ronald Suny does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Alaska summit and its afterlife provides a glimpse into what peace looks like to Putin and Trump – https://theconversation.com/alaska-summit-and-its-afterlife-provides-a-glimpse-into-what-peace-looks-like-to-putin-and-trump-263309

August 19, 2025

Werewolf exes and billionaire CEOs: why cheesy short dramas are taking over our social media feeds

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Wenjia Tang, Postdoctoral Research Associate in Digital Communication, University of Sydney

What can you do in 60 seconds? In short dramas, or “micro dramas”, that’s enough time for a billionaire CEO to fall in love with his contracted wife, or for a werewolf mafia boss to break a curse.

These vertically framed, minute-long serials are reshaping the way we consume screen entertainment.

ReelShort, NetShort and DramaBox are currently the leading short drama platforms. DramaBox has been downloaded more than 100 million times on Google Play, while ReelShort was ranked second on Apple’s top free entertainment apps at the time of writing, ahead of Netflix, HBO Max, Prime Video and Disney+.

Short dramas originated in China in the early 2020s through short video platforms such as Douyin (TikTok’s sister app) and Kuaishou (also known as Kwai).

The format has since expanded globally through both Chinese platforms and social media apps such as TikTok and Instagram. It reflects a growing trend in smartphone entertainment towards shorter, scrollable content.

Our new research, which involved interviewing 12 people in the short drama industry, shows it is creating much-needed job opportunities. At the same time, this industry is expanding faster than regulation can catch up – and that spells trouble.

Cliffhangers and outrageous storytelling

Short dramas are optimised for fragmented viewing via smartphones. The format blends TikTok’s fast-paced plotting style with recognisable screen genres. Think: a cheesy lifetime flick delivered in one-minute bursts. Most series have between 50 and 100 episodes.

Their appeal lies in dramatic storylines and cliffhangers. Each episode ends with a twist, designed to keep you hooked. This might be the revelation of a mysterious identity, or a tangled misunderstanding that is bound to lead to conflict. As ReelShort puts it: “every second is a drama”.

Let’s look at the hit series Playing by the Billionaire’s Rules as an example. Over 89 episodes, the series features a contract lover, million-dollar debts, an accidental pregnancy and a secret love triangle.

While it falls short of Hollywood standards of plot, dialogue and acting, it captures viewers’ attention through a conflict-ridden plot and provocative (sometimes amateurish) performances.

Playing by the Billionaire’s Rules is one of thousands of such series available online. In most cases, the first five to ten episodes are free, after which viewers must pay (usually right when the story is at its most thrilling).

A low-cost format, ripe for expansion

Despite illogical storytelling, crude production and exaggerated, stereotypical characters, short dramas are proving to be highly lucrative. In one 2023 article, The Economist described this “latest Chinese export to conquer America” as a hybrid of TikTok and Netflix.

Their popularity can also be linked to the COVID pandemic and the Hollywood writers’ strike, both of which slowed down the global screen industry.

Our research shows short drama production teams, which are mostly led by Chinese producers, have now expanded globally to the United States, Australia, eastern Europe and other parts of Asia, in search of new collaborative opportunities.

Los Angeles is emerging as the fastest-growing production hub. According to one LA Times article, short drama apps outside of China made US$1.2 billion (about A$1.8 billion) last year. Some 60% of this revenue came from the US.

Companies the world over are cashing in on the opportunity. Spanish-language media company TelevisaUnivision has started investing in the format, as has Ukrainian startup Holywater, which is using AI to generate almost fully synthetic short dramas.

Even the Hollywood giant Lionsgate has taken notice of short dramas, and is exploring their commercial potential.

It’s also possible short dramas will open the door for new players in the streaming wars. Although Netflix isn’t currently producing short dramas, it has started experimenting with the vertical short format (in the form of series and movie clips) on its mobile app.

Short dramas are also easily replicated across countries and various market conditions, and allow for localised content strategies. For example, the short drama Breaking the Ice reboots the Chinese campus romance template into a story centred on hockey players, making it more relatable for North American audiences.

Fantasy templates, such as those featuring werewolves, vampires, and witches, have also proven universally successful – and are often used by Chinese producers as low-risk, easily localised genres to test new markets.

Concerns behind the scenes

Our research finds the short drama industry is seen as a promising avenue for creating job opportunities, and for allowing actors and creators to get significant exposure on a modest budget.

But we’ve also found the industry to be far less regulated than more established screen industries.

There are growing concerns in the industry around labour exploitation and copyright infringement, as well as uncertainty over how sustainable the model will be in the long run.

One of our interviewees, a producer based in Los Angeles, revealed several concerning practices including problems with overtime work, stealing and recycling of drama scripts, underpayment of film school graduates, and a prevalence of unfair contracts for screenwriters.

The screenwriters we interviewed told us they hadn’t received proper credit for their work, and were bound by “buyout contracts” that excluded them from receiving additional compensation – even if their scripts garnered millions of views.

Earlier this year, the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance and Casting Guild of Australia issued a joint statement urging local actors to verify the credentials of any “vertical series” production teams before signing contracts with them.

Still, the short drama format continues to draw significant attention from across the screen industry. More than just a passing content trend, this may be the beginning of a structural shift in what “television” means: low-cost, easily replicated and recklessly fast-paced.

– ref. Werewolf exes and billionaire CEOs: why cheesy short dramas are taking over our social media feeds – https://theconversation.com/werewolf-exes-and-billionaire-ceos-why-cheesy-short-dramas-are-taking-over-our-social-media-feeds-259385

August 19, 2025

‘There’s no such thing as someone else’s children’ – Omar El Akkad bears witness to the destruction of Gaza and the West’s quiet assent

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Clare Corbould, Associate Professor of History and Associate Head (Research) of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Deakin University

Omar El Akkad does not want you to look away. An award-winning journalist and novelist, El Akkad was born in Egypt, lived as a teenager in Qatar and Canada, and migrated as an adult to the US, where he now lives with his family in the Pacific Northwest.

His essay collection, One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, draws on his life, from childhood to new fatherhood. He combines these reflections with a sharp grasp of modern history to examine responses in the west to “the world’s first livestreamed genocide” in Gaza.

Finding that response wanting, he urges readers to watch, listen, reflect and act.

Review: One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This – Omar El Akkad (Text Publishing)

As someone whose parents migrated to the west for the freedoms and opportunities it would afford their children, El Akkad has an acute sense of the past events, ideas and structures that have shaped the present. He pays keen attention to the legacies of colonial rule.

Witnessing history

El Akkad’s descriptions of atrocity are not easy to read. Nor is his blunt demand to do something. Yet the force of his observations and the bite of his prose make it hard to turn away.

His purpose is akin to many famed witnesses in history. Contemporaneous statements about violence often serve later as testimony in determining what happened, who was responsible, and what recompense is due.

Think of George Orwell on propaganda in Spain. Or British journalists Gareth Jones and Malcolm Muggeridge exposing famine in 1930s USSR, while other western communists looked away. Or Victor Klemperer’s diaries, published after the war, which tracked how the Nazis twisted everyday speech.

Above all, this kind of testimony guards against future claims of innocence, against the reassuring assertion that “they didn’t know what was going on” or “they were of their time”.

Less well-known to Australian readers may be American journalist Ida B. Wells, but El Akkad’s fire and fury also brought her to mind. In the 1890s, Wells fiercely attacked lynching in her own newspaper, the Memphis Free Speech. She investigated specific instances of ritualised mob violence.

Wells also catalogued how news outlets told those stories. They minced words to protect the perpetrators, while smearing the reputations of the dead, who were always named.

El Akkad also pays close attention the way the violence in Gaza is framed and described. He observes how reporters use the passive voice, which not only hides the names of killers but implies mass death came about by accident or magic. “Palestinian Journalist Hit in Head by Bullet During Raid on Terror Suspect’s Home,” read one Guardian headline, he notes.

Both Wells and El Akkad show how victims of racist and colonial violence are cast as already guilty. With lynching, the pretext was often an accusation of rape, though that was rarely the actual spark. Far more common were disputes between men over land, pay, labour organising, business competition or voting drives.

In the case of Gaza, the media mimics the claims of Israeli politicians, its military and allies of both. They all cast civilians as terrorists or terrorists-in-waiting, even children. The words clean the consciences of onlookers. They launder harm as if it were cash.

Modes of resisting

As the book’s title, which began life as a viral tweet, goes: One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This.

Bearing witness to the atrocities and the gutless responses, El Akkad reminds liberal readers that if Gaza had happened in the past, they would condemn the violence. What’s more, they would imagine that, had they been alive at the time, they would have firmly resisted the wrong or even taken a heroic stance against it.

One blistering passage will hit very close to home for Australian readers:

I read an op-ed in which a writer argues that the model for Palestinian-Israeli coexistence is something like Canada’s present-day relationship with the Indigenous population, and I marvel at the casual, obvious, but unstated corollary: that there is an Indigenous population being colonized, but that we should let this unpleasantness run its course so we can arrive at true justice in the form of land acknowledgments at every Tel Aviv poetry reading.

As well as diagnosing the problem, El Akkad surveys and evaluates modes of resisting what is happening in Gaza. He discards as ineffective the old appeal to westerners’ self-interest. Pointing out that horrors they permit elsewhere will eventually come for them just doesn’t work.

His essays were written between the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and August 2024, when the US presidential campaign was in full swing. Much of his energy goes to addressing the “lesser of two evils” debate about voting in a democracy where the options are far right and, at most, centre-a-bit-left. Only from a relatively protected position, he observes, could one vote for the Democratic Party on the grounds that the other side “would be so much worse”.

Making this case, El Akkad says, rests on a quiet assent to mass death. He calls this a “reticent acceptance of genocide” and asks liberals in the United States (and by implication in other western democracies) to examine their consciences.

The remedying action El Akkad proposes is widespread negation, or “walking away”. People, en masse, must refuse to accept that the meagre promises of the less conservative political parties are the best options on offer.

This will require sacrifices. El Akkad provides examples of people he admires: the writer who refused a prize from an organisation that had been silent about Gaza; the teacher brave enough to talk with teenage students about the intolerable rate of children and civilians (not “noncombatants”) dying. Most starkly, he writes of Aaron Bushnell, the US Air Force veteran, whose last words before setting himself on fire outside the Israeli embassy in Washington D.C. were “free Palestine”.

Systematic violence

Like Wells, El Akkad links systematic violence to the structures that underpin the modern world. Chief among them is capitalism. Real change, he suggests, will come when enough of us, to use the old 1960s parlance, “drop out”, though he prefers “negation”, a word that that implies there is something to defy.

It is time, he argues, for a well-educated western citizenry to say “enough”. Our phones are smart enough; we are (collectively) rich and sated enough.

It might be hard at first, but we will learn that “maybe it’s not all that much trouble to avoid ordering coffee and downloading apps and buying chocolate-flavored hummus from companies that abide slaughter”.

Doing so might just halt a genocide. In time, this kind of collective action might also stop other looming calamities, not least climate collapse. El Akkad’s steady focus throughout the book on the death, maiming and immeasurable psychic injury to the children of Gaza makes that case feel urgent.

If that sounds hyperbolic, El Akkad might ask what children you had in mind when you flinched from his diagnosis and prognosis. Your answer likely turns on the location, colour and wealth of the children you have in mind. Children in Tuvalu, for example, know he is not exaggerating.

In one of the book’s most arresting lines, El Akkad asks: “How does one finish the sentence: ‘It is unfortunate that tens of thousands of children are dead, but …’”

Better, he suggests, that we all behave in a way whose ethics is grounded in the claim: “there’s no such thing as someone else’s children.”

Omar El Akkad will be appearing at the Wheeler Centre, Melbourne, on October 22, 2025

Clare Corbould does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘There’s no such thing as someone else’s children’ – Omar El Akkad bears witness to the destruction of Gaza and the West’s quiet assent – https://theconversation.com/theres-no-such-thing-as-someone-elses-children-omar-el-akkad-bears-witness-to-the-destruction-of-gaza-and-the-wests-quiet-assent-251615