Why some children with learning difficulties get identified – and others don’t

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Johny Daniel, Associate Professor, School of Education, Durham University

Kristina Igumnova26/Shutterstock

Two children sit in different schools. Both struggle to read. Both have similar low scores on national tests. But while one gets a diagnosis of specific learning difficulties and a package of support, the other is left to fall behind.

My colleagues and I have carried out new research analysing the records of around 540,000 primary school children across England. It reveals a troubling picture. Whether a child gets identified with specific learning difficulties – an umbrella term for conditions involving difficulties with reading and mathematics – depends not just on how they perform academically, but on the school they go to, their gender, their family’s income, their first language, and even the average ability of their classmates.

Fewer than 2% of pupils in England are identified as having a specific learning difficulty. That figure sits well below international estimates suggesting that between 5% and 10% of children are affected. Some researchers put the true prevalence of reading difficulties as high as one in five. Clearly, in England, a large number of children are not getting the support they need.

Our study found that where a child goes to school plays a role in whether they get identified or not. We observed that children in high-achieving schools were actually more likely to be identified, even with the same test scores as peers elsewhere who weren’t identified. Findings suggest that when a child falls behind in a school where most pupils do well, they get noticed. In schools where low attainment is more common, the same child simply blends in. Same academic struggles, different school, different outcome.

Children being missed

One of the most striking findings concerns gender. After accounting for academic scores, boys were twice as likely as girls to be identified with specific learning difficulties. This isn’t simply because boys struggle more. It likely reflects how difficulties present differently by gender. Boys who struggle often act out while girls are more likely to struggle quietly with anxiety and inattention, which are far less visible in a classroom setting. Our findings suggest that a child who is silently struggling may go unnoticed and miss out on the support they need.

Girl working with teacher
Receiving the right support can make a huge difference to children.
PeopleImages/Shutterstock

Children who speak a language other than English at home, around one in five pupils in England today, face the starkest disparity. Accounting for their actual test scores, these pupils were dramatically less likely to be identified with specific learning difficulties.




Read more:
Developmental language disorder can have life-long effects – and it’s easily missed in multilingual children


This is because assessment tools are largely designed for monolingual English speakers. When a child struggles to read, it can be easy for teachers to attribute the difficulty to language acquisition rather than a potential learning difficulty. But the two can coexist. Missing that distinction means missing a child.

Children from more deprived neighbourhoods were also less likely to be identified. In England, the most common route to a specific learning difficulty diagnosis such as dyslexia involves private assessment, a process that can cost hundreds of pounds. Affluent families can navigate and afford this – many others cannot.

What needs to change

England’s special educational needs and disabilities code of practice acknowledges specific learning difficulties, but offers no clear guidelines for how to identify pupils. The result is a system where practice varies enormously by school. That variability is not random. It follows fault lines of gender, language and poverty.

The most urgent priority is a national framework that sets out clearly what specific learning difficulties are and how schools should identify them. This was not addressed in the government’s recent policy paper on schools, which covered special educational needs provision. Alongside that, teachers need better training to recognise their own biases in referral. But training alone is not enough – identification should not be left to teacher judgement.

Standardised, objective reading and maths screening tools, applied consistently to all children, are the most reliable way to ensure every child who needs support is identified early, regardless of how they behave in class. Until then, which children get help will continue to depend far too much on luck.

The Conversation

Johny Daniel 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. Why some children with learning difficulties get identified – and others don’t – https://theconversation.com/why-some-children-with-learning-difficulties-get-identified-and-others-dont-276433

Long COVID associated with higher risk of heart disease

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pia Lindberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet

Women with long COVID had more than double the risk of developing cardiovascular disease compared with women without long COVID. TetianaKtv/ Shutterstock

Most people who get COVID recover within a few weeks. But for some, symptoms persist for months – a condition now known as long COVID. While it’s often associated with fatigue, breathlessness and “brain fog”, growing evidence suggests it may also affect something less visible, but potentially more serious: the heart.

In our recent study, we found that people with long COVID had higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease – including cardiac arrhythmias, heart attack and heart failure. Importantly, the increased risks were seen in people who had never been hospitalised during their initial COVID infection.

Much of the early research on long COVID and heart health focused on patients who were hospitalised, particularly those treated in intensive care. These patients often had multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease such as being overweight and having hypertension or diabetes. This made it difficult to separate the effects of severe acute illness from the long-term effects of the infection.

However, the majority of people who had COVID were never admitted to a hospital – yet many still developed chronic symptoms of so-called long COVID. To explore the potential risks in this much larger group, we focused specifically on patients who had experienced a mild-to-moderate COVID infection which they managed at home.

We used healthcare data from more than 1.2 million adults living in Stockholm, Sweden. Among them, 9,000 were diagnosed by a doctor with long COVID. We then followed up these patients over time and compared occurrence of new cardiovascular disease – including heart attack, heart failure, arrhythmias, stroke and peripheral arterial disease – with people who did not have long COVID and had no previous cardiovascular disease.

After a follow-up period of up to four years, cardiovascular disease was more common among people with long COVID.

Among women with long COVID, 18% experienced some form of cardiovascular event, compared with 8% of women without long COVID. Among men, the corresponding figures were 21% versus 11%.

These results did not substantially differ even when we adjusted analyses for age, socioeconomic status and underlying health status – including conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol, obesity, depression, smoking and alcohol consumption which are known risk factors of cardiovascular disease.

An older man has his blood pressure checked by a young female doctor.
Men with long COVID had a 30% higher risk of cardiovascular disease.
fizkes/ Shutterstock

Women with long COVID had more than double the risk of developing cardiovascular disease overall compared with women without long COVID, while men had around a 30% higher risk.

The strongest associations were seen for irregular heart rhythm and coronary heart disease. In women, we also observed an increased risk of heart failure and peripheral arterial disease. However, we did not find an association between long COVID and stroke risk.

Why long COVID might affect the heart

It’s not fully understood why long COVID is associated with cardiovascular disease, but several biological mechanisms have been proposed.

The virus can affect the lining of blood vessels, leading to what is known as endothelial dysfunction. It may also trigger long-lasting inflammation and changes in the immune system. Together, these processes can affect how blood flows through the body and how the heart functions.

There’s also growing evidence that long COVID can disrupt the autonomic nervous system – the automatic mechanisms that control heart rate and blood pressure. This may potentially explain why irregular heart rhythms and conditions such as postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (Pots) are more common in long COVID patients.

Another possibility is that long COVID may not necessarily cause entirely new disease, but rather reveal underlying conditions that had not yet been diagnosed. In some cases, symptoms such as chest pain or palpitations may lead to further medical evaluation, increasing the likelihood that cardiovascular disease is detected.

Our findings suggest that long COVID is not simply a transient condition, even among people who were never severely ill during the acute infection. Instead, it may have longer-term implications for cardiovascular health.

At the same time, it’s important to put the results into context. The overall risk of cardiovascular disease remains relatively low at the population level. But the relative increase in risk is meaningful and comparable to that seen with established cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension or diabetes.

The increased cardiovascular risk in long COVID has also important implications for healthcare. Patients with long COVID – particularly women and younger patients – may benefit from more structured follow-up, including assessment of cardiovascular symptoms and better management of cardiovascular risk factors

It also suggests that long COVID should be included in future strategies for cardiovascular risk assessment and prevention, not only in specialist care but also in primary care settings where most of these patients are managed.

More research is now needed to understand the long-term trajectory of these risks and whether they persist, decrease or increase over time. Future studies should also explore whether early identification and management of cardiovascular symptoms in long COVID could help reduce the risk of more serious complications later on.

As the number of people living with long COVID continues to grow, understanding its broader health consequences will be essential – not only for each patient, but for healthcare systems as a whole.

The Conversation

Artur Fedorowski received funding from the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation.

Axel Carl Carlsson and Pia Lindberg 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. Long COVID associated with higher risk of heart disease – https://theconversation.com/long-covid-associated-with-higher-risk-of-heart-disease-279883

The Testaments: female friendship fuels resistance in this Handmaid’s Tale sequel

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Debra Ferreday, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Lancaster University

The Testaments, now streaming on Disney+, has big shoes to fill. It arrives in a post-MeToo media landscape still shaped by the seismic impact of Margaret Atwood’s previous adaptation, The Handmaid’s Tale. Released in 2017, The Handmaid’s Tale quickly transcended its source material to become a feminist touchstone, inspiring a vivid visual and cultural language of resistance across politics, performance, music and the arts.

In Atwood’s world of Gilead, women are reduced to archetypes within a patriarchal rape culture: complicit, privileged wives; submissive house servants known as “Marthas”; or the Handmaids themselves, stripped to mere breeding stock for the regime.

As life in the US seemed eerily to catch up with Atwood’s vision, the hallmark red dress, white cap and down-turned gaze of the handmaids became iconic. For protesters, it provided a graphic symbol of the fate awaiting women in a world where the president has described himself as the “fertilisation president” “protecting” women whether they “like it or not”.

When Atwood returned to Gilead in 2019 with follow-up book The Testaments, she did so in the shadow of renewed assaults on women’s and LGBTQIA+ rights worldwide. The release of this adaptation of her sequel challenges viewers not only to face that reality, but to think about what popular culture can do in the face of cultural regression.

The trailer for The Testaments.

The Testaments also has to resolve the plot dilemmas established in The Handmaid’s Tale. Many fans had been disappointed that, after following along for six seasons, they did not get to see protagonist June (Elisabeth Moss) reunited with her daughter Hannah. Nor did we see an end to Gilead.

The Testaments returns to these themes while probing why Atwood’s world still grips us amid escalating crises. Can the series offer anything fresh, or has original show-runner Bruce Miller’s vision – mixing extreme violence with striking visuals – already run its course?

The aesthetics of Gilead

The Testaments looks strikingly different from its predecessor, although the two shows share a visual DNA.

Much like our own world, Gilead has become, in some ways, inured to tyranny. For the privileged at least, there is a sort of everyday acceptance recognisable from real-world examples of life under dictatorship.

Like the young audience it courts, Gilead’s young women – including protagonist Hannah, played with tensile calm by One Battle After Another’s Chase Infiniti – have grown up in a world where political violence and control of the reproductive body are explicitly intertwined. We pick up the story some years after the original show, although since girls in Gilead are not allowed calendars they don’t know exactly how long. We are told this in voice-over by Hannah, now renamed Agnes.

Another resonance with our own times is the importance of style as a means of both escape and control.

The costume and set designs of new Gilead resemble a contemporary AI-authored Pinterest board. For all its pretensions to timelessness, this world has fashion. The handmaids’ Puritan-plain red line dresses have been replaced by neat Kennedy-era ensembles in gentler tones of plum, pink and white.

The scarcity we saw in The Handmaid’s Tale has been superseded by a pastel-toned, cottagecore fantasy of colonial mansions and horses’ manes flowing in golden sunlight. Images of containment abound. Characters fill the frame or are seen through frames, gates, tantalisingly half-open windows and a dolls’ house which uncannily mirrors the home of commander Kyle, Agnes’ absent adopted father, in which she is held captive.

For all the old money theatrics, obsession with bodies is never far from the surface. “The Plums” are so called because they are ripe fruit, waiting to be plucked by much older, powerful men – a fate which becomes assured when a girl has her first period. Violence is never far away either. While the girls attend a sort of finishing school run by disappointed ideologue turned resistance figure Aunt Lydia (Anne Dowd, reprising her breakout villain role from The Handmaid’s Tale), the peacefulness of their education is disrupted by constant threats of corporal punishment.

Female friendship and hope

The Gilead of The Testaments is a fun-house mirror version of our own times. People are entertained by watching violence against groups treated as less than human – but instead of TikTok or constant news coverage, it’s public punishments like mutilations and executions.

“God’s justice is beautiful”, the girls are told, as they view a scaffold (a public hanging site) which they are told holds members of a supposed sex trafficking gang, though they are also told the victim was really to blame.

Obsessed with cleanliness, order, and control, this world is nastily prurient. It is fixated on spotting and rooting out impurity. It reminds us what is at stake when the state polices reproductive bodies.

Ultimately, though, it is the power of young women’s friendship and the inherent, ebullient anarchy of teen girls that holds the potential finally to bring down Gilead. This is what makes the show original.

Atwood has said she wrote The Testaments to offer hope. Hope, in 2026, seems like a dangerous thing: it can seem naïve given the demands of the current moment. But as the American writer and activist Rebecca Solnit puts it: “If the word hope doesn’t work for you, try ‘Never fucking surrender.’”

Aided by its talented young cast, The Testaments reworks Gilead into a space where resistance emerges spontaneously in a world structured to make it unthinkable. In this setting, girls’ friendships, their laughter and their power become seeds of rebellion. The result is a timely, absorbing reflection how we might at last burn the dolls’ house to the ground.

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

The Conversation

Debra Ferreday 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. The Testaments: female friendship fuels resistance in this Handmaid’s Tale sequel – https://theconversation.com/the-testaments-female-friendship-fuels-resistance-in-this-handmaids-tale-sequel-280062

Babies: raw, nuanced, real – what this BBC drama gets right about recurrent miscarriage

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Susie Kilshaw, Professor in Medical Anthropology, UCL

I heard about the new BBC drama Babies the week before it aired and was keen to watch it, not least because miscarriage is so rarely portrayed on screen – particularly as a central storyline. I enjoyed it, insofar as that word can be applied to such a devastating subject. The series offers a raw, nuanced and deeply realistic account of recurrent miscarriage and it gets a great deal right.

Lisa (Siobhán Cullen) and Stephen (Paapa Essiedu) are a young couple in their thirties navigating the heartbreak caused by repeated miscarriages. The pacing of the show – at times almost painfully slow – mirrors the real experience of conception, early pregnancy and reproductive loss.

It allows the viewer to sit with emotional complexity – the shifting feelings, the uncertainty and the drawn-out liminality of making a family. Time appears suspended for the couple, even as life continues around them. We see Lisa returning to work increasingly detached, exhausted and withdrawn, while other pregnancies progress, babies are born and the world moves on.

Stephen’s insistence that they “must think positive” is familiar – the partner adopting a supportive role while masking their own grief. When Lisa challenges his suggestion that others don’t realise she has “been through so much,” reminding him that it has happened to both of them, the moment is ambiguous. Is she inviting him to share in the grief, or expressing frustration that he is not experiencing the loss in the same way? These tensions echo accounts shared by women I have interviewed through my work on fertility, reproduction and pregnancy endings.

Throughout the series, Lisa and Stephen navigate layers of distress – at times drawing close, at others remaining emotionally distant. Their oscillation between hope and despair, and between the need to “keep moving” and the pull of grief, reflects patterns commonly found in miscarriage stories.

Visceral realities of baby loss

I was most interested in how the physical experience of miscarriage would be portrayed. Early in the first episode, I felt a familiar disappointment. The miscarriages occur off-screen, with the focus placed almost entirely on emotional aftermath, with little attention paid to the reality of pain and bleeding. However, this shifts with Lisa’s third miscarriage, which is one of the most accurate portrayals I have seen.

We see blood, albeit briefly and only a very small amount. Lisa’s pain is audible in her cries and moans. The movement through different spaces – her place of work before returning home, then their bedroom, the bathroom, the living room – marks escalating levels of distress, capturing the duration and inconsistency of miscarriage.

This is not a quick or contained event, but an unfolding process. Stephen’s growing panic as he seeks help, culminating in the arrival of paramedics (seemingly against Lisa’s wishes), underscores the seriousness of the situation, the lack of preparation and the couple’s helplessness.

The series also conveys the diversity of miscarriage experience and response. Lisa’s first loss is a “spontaneous” miscarriage at seven weeks; the second, a missed miscarriage managed surgically; the third unfolds “naturally” after the onset of pain and bleeding. Importantly, the viewer witnesses these experiences in ways that may feel recognisable to many – this is not “just a heavy period”.

That said, I would have welcomed more detail on miscarriage management. While we learn that Lisa undergoes an “ERPC” (evacuation for retained products of conception) for her second miscarriage, the absence of discussion around her options and decision-making represents a missed opportunity to depict clinical care more fully, and to foreground women’s agency.

The series doesn’t shy away from the visceral reality of loss. Lisa’s anguished description of “my baby dripping into the toilet”, is confronting but important. Miscarriage is often sanitised in public debate, and frequently unfolds in private domestic spaces. Babies portrays the reality of miscarriage, including toilets, where most miscarriages occur and are disposed of. The drama also gives a sense of the range of feelings that accompany miscarriage: hope, fear, anger, frustration, optimism, sadness and grief.

While Babies succeeds in many respects, the portrayal of clinicians is more problematic. The first doctor’s casual “Yup, yup, yup, all gone” during a scan devastates, with no sense that for Lisa what is “gone” is her longed-for baby.

During the second pregnancy the sonographer refers to their “baby” and suggests they look at the screen before becoming excruciatingly quiet. The abrupt shift from shared excitement to silence and blunt disclosure, and the GP’s depiction is emblematic of an unfeeling NHS system, all contributing to a narrative of insensitive care.

Some viewers may recognise these experiences. Over 15 years of research in Qatar and the UK, I have encountered accounts of poor and insensitive miscarriage care. However, more recent research suggests that particularly within the NHS, care has improved significantly, with women reporting compassionate and sensitive support. During 20 months of fieldwork in a large NHS foundation trust in England, I consistently observed responsive and empathetic clinical care.

This is not to suggest uniformity across and within settings, but rather to question whether Lisa’s experience reflects the norm in many NHS contexts today. As I have argued elsewhere, an understanding of miscarriage as bereavement increasingly underpins NHS care, reflecting a broader cultural shift that recognises miscarriage as a significant loss.

While Babies contributes to this important recognition, it also reinforces a dominant narrative in which miscarriage is always experienced as traumatic and devastating. While this will resonate with many – and such validation is important – it risks marginalising those whose experiences fall outside this, including some of the women I have interviewed in my work.

The involvement of consultants from Tommy’s Charity contributes to the series’ sensitivity and accuracy, underscoring the value of such collaborations. Cullen and Essiedu deliver compelling performances, conveying emotional complexity and intimacy with subtlety and depth.

Babies is slow, thoughtful and often heartbreaking. Despite some limitations, it is a welcome and important contribution – one that lays bare the realities of miscarriage with honesty and compassion.

The Conversation

Susie Kilshaw receives funding from the Wellcome Trust as part of a University Award in the Social and Historical
Science (Award number: 212731/Z/18/Z) and also holds a AHRC Curiosity Award (Award number: UKRI1126)
She has also received funding from ESRC Impact Acceleration grant (Award number: KEI2024-01-53 ESRC IAA KEIF).

ref. Babies: raw, nuanced, real – what this BBC drama gets right about recurrent miscarriage – https://theconversation.com/babies-raw-nuanced-real-what-this-bbc-drama-gets-right-about-recurrent-miscarriage-280134

Credit and credibility: rating agency errors come with a cost

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Misheck Mutize, Post Doctoral Researcher, Graduate School of Business (GSB), University of Cape Town

The rating agency S&P Global’s Africa Credit Rating Trends 2025 reviews the past year’s rating activities and analyses the continent’s prospects for 2026. It is an important document because it interprets underlying drivers of creditworthiness. It shapes how global investors and policymakers understand risk, opportunity and reform dynamics across the continent.

But the document had some serious flaws in it. As someone who has been researching Africa’s capital markets and the institutions that govern them for decades, I believe they are worth commenting on because mistakes like this can influence investor perceptions. In turn, this can reinforce existing biases and affect how African economies are priced in global financial markets.

Firstly, there were several basic errors. Burundi was mislabelled as Uganda. Sudan and South Sudan were merged into a single country despite being separated since 2011.

The report also displayed a non-existent lake in the Great Lakes region and the Republic of the Congo was casually referred to by its unofficial name, Congo Brazzaville. The agency also presented the continent as having 54 countries, excluding the Sahrawi Republic, which is recognised by the African Union.

At first glance, these errors may seem like minor technical mistakes or editorial lapses in a document focused on financial analysis. But that reading misses the deeper issue. These are not just errors on a map. Errors like this raise questions about the accuracy, depth and rigour of the research and analytical processes behind the credit rating reports that move billions of dollars across the globe.

Systematic risk overestimation is what has led to African countries being penalised with higher interest rates and limited financing options. In effect, seemingly small errors have translated into real economic costs for African economies.

Moody’s made such errors in the past. It issued speculative downgrades for Kenya and Nigeria that it reversed within six and 12 months, respectively. One speculative commentary by Moody’s cost Kenya over US$150 million in a derailed bond buyback programme.

The gaps

At the core of these research shortcomings is a simple but consequential reality – limited presence on the ground.

S&P Global has an office in South Africa from which the team is expected to cover the whole continent. In addition, most of its rating analysts are based in Europe and Asia. These analysts visit the countries they rate for a maximum of two weeks in a year. These short visits and inadequate consultations have resulted in risk assessments based on conservative assumptions, desktop research and publicly available information.

S&P Global has been rating Uganda since December 2008. Yet its researchers still confuse the country’s location on the map.

This matters because global investors who engage Africa from a distance often operate with a cautious instinct. They still, erroneously, perceive Africa as a single, homogeneous risk bloc rather than 55 distinctive sovereigns with different risk dynamics.

Such geographical inaccuracies inadvertently validate this flawed narrative and risk perception, feeding into the misperceptions that distort capital allocation and inflate borrowing costs.

Another flaw the mistakes in the report illustrate is weak internal controls.

In global institutions like S&P Global, it is assumed that every publication undergoes multiple layers of quality assurance and editorial scrutiny. If such fundamental inaccuracies can pass through these filters, what about an analyst’s own assumptions that are embedded in sovereign risk models?

Is it possible that such errors escape scrutiny?

What is also worrying is how S&P Global responded to this issue when it was raised. The errors were flagged repeatedly on S&P Global’s social media platforms after the report was published, yet they remained uncorrected for nearly two weeks.

That delay was telling. It is fair to argue that these inaccuracies did not trigger the required urgency or institutional reflex because they concerned Africa. The corrections would most likely have been immediate, accompanied by formal apologies and internal reviews, if they had involved more powerful or closely watched regions. For example, if such a report had a map combining North and South Korea as one country or mislabelled Germany as France.

The reputational stakes would have been too high for the rating agency to ignore.

Way forward

Africa should not remain on the sidelines while its narrative is being driven by institutions that keep demonstrating a superficial understanding of its fundamentals.

One clear solution, in my view, is the establishment of an African credit rating agency to rebalance the narrative.




Read more:
Africa’s new credit rating agency could change the rules of the game. Here’s how


But more needs to be done. Here are three solutions.

First, African governments must move from being passive recipients of ratings to active engagement with analysts. Where justified, they must contest assumptions, methodologies and errors. Engagement should not begin after a downgrade. It must be continuous, technical and evidence-based with credible and timely data about their economies.

Second, global institutions such as S&P Global must recalibrate their approach in dealing with Africa. Credibility is derived from consistent accuracy and timely responsiveness. They must invest in permanent senior research and analytical presence on the continent, not episodic visits. It means expanding consultation beyond a narrow set of stakeholders to include local economists, market practitioners and independent researchers. More important, strengthening internal quality controls so that basic errors do not undermine the integrity of complex analytical outputs.

Perception continues to move faster than data, and negative narratives travel further than positive fundamentals. That is why African countries must insist on analytical rigour, demand accountability and build their own capacity to interpret risk.

The Conversation

Misheck Mutize is affiliated with the African Union – African Peer Review Mechanism as a Lead Expert on credit ratings

ref. Credit and credibility: rating agency errors come with a cost – https://theconversation.com/credit-and-credibility-rating-agency-errors-come-with-a-cost-279672

Countries suffer when credit rating agencies lack data: how to fix the problem at source

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Daniel Cash, Senior Fellow, United Nations University; Aston University

Some developing country governments spend years making the reforms that international financial institutions want – only to find that their efforts are not rewarded.

They may make budgets more transparent, publish their debt obligations, set up independent bodies to monitor government spending, and complete an International Monetary Fund programme, but still receive the same ratings from credit agencies. Borrowing costs remain high.

The gap between what countries have built and how that progress is reflected in credit ratings and market pricing is persistent and has consequences. It translates into higher borrowing costs, tighter fiscal space, and fewer resources for public investment.

The standard explanation points to bias in method – that credit rating agencies undervalue developing country institutions or rely on indicators that favour the global north.

There is some truth in this observation, and reformers have tried solutions like more agencies, methodology reviews and transparency codes. But these don’t tackle a deeper structural problem.

Based on my work as a researcher on the working of rating agencies, it’s clear that in practice, assessments of developing countries are often made on the basis of incomplete or fragmented information. Data sits in different institutions across the country, is not always produced to a common standard, and is frequently assembled under time pressure ahead of rating reviews. What reaches external assessors is therefore, at best, a partial view of the country’s institutional and fiscal position.

The issue was a major point of discussion at the United Nations in late March 2026 when delegates convened for the inaugural special meeting on credit ratings.

A recurring theme across the discussions was the need to look upstream – at what needs to exist before the rating process actually begins. Then assessments might more accurately reflect the infrastructure that developing countries have built.

That is a meaningful shift. It moves away from demanding that credit rating agencies behave differently, and towards asking what the system as a whole needs to provide. Upstream is where the problem originates and where the most concrete action is possible.

The debate suggests a shift in how key actors, including the United Nations, multilateral development banks and sovereign borrowers themselves, are approaching the problem. This could begin to change how institutional progress is translated into credit assessments and, over time, into borrowing costs.

Constructing a country’s credit story

A sovereign credit rating is not solely formed inside a credit rating agency. It takes shape in the months and years before an analyst arrives. It happens across finance ministries, central banks, statistical offices, debt management offices and audit institutions. It’s a process of data assembly, verification and presentation that most developing country governments have never had the capacity to manage systematically.

Before a rating is issued, a country’s credit story must be constructed. Fiscal data must be gathered, reform trajectories documented, institutional changes verified and contingent liabilities disclosed. A debt management office holds one part of the picture. A central bank holds another. A statistical office holds a third.

When those parts are properly coordinated, the credit story arrives at the assessment stage in verifiable form. When they are not, documentation has to be pulled together reactively before a rating deadline, and the story arrives incomplete.

Put simply, the analyst cannot reconstruct what was never assembled. Facing incomplete information, even where the core data required is broadly similar across countries, the rational response is often conservative assessment. The uncertainty premium stays elevated, and any reforms go unrecognised – not because they did not happen, but because the system required to make it visible was never built.

This upstream process can be understood as sovereign credit formation. If it’s weak, and external assessors can’t see what genuine progress has been made, there’s a formation gap. The formation gap does not mean that all low ratings are unwarranted. It simply means the system currently has no reliable way to tell the difference between a sovereign with weak fundamentals and one with strong yet largely invisible institutions.

No actor in the current system has the mandate or the incentive to build that upstream infrastructure on behalf of the countries that need it most. That is the problem.

On top of this, developing country governments are being asked to reform in ways that will take sustained investment in institutional capacity. Better data systems; coordinated institutions; clearer evidence. That investment takes years, diverts scarce resources, and demands political commitment across electoral cycles. It is being asked of governments that don’t have the fiscal space to do it – because their borrowing costs are high.

They are being asked to solve a problem they did not necessarily create, using resources that the problem itself is consuming.

The intervention that fits

Multilateral institutions, including the United Nations and multilateral development banks, cannot change what credit rating agencies do inside their own methodologies. Assessments are made independently. Interfering with the way they do it would undermine that independence.

Recent evidence in the multilateral development bank system shows that coordination is the prerequisite to movement.

Coordination across multilateral development banks and their shareholders led first to the creation of an emerging markets credit risk database, then to the formal review of multilateral development bank lending by an expert panel appointed during Indonesia’s presidency of the G20, and then to major credit rating agencies changing their methodological processes.

The infrastructure that makes governance reforms legible to credit markets is a public good. Public goods require public investment. This is not a call for a new institution. It is a reorientation of existing ones towards a gap that nobody is currently filling.

Every sovereign that has undertaken genuine reform and watched its credit conditions remain unchanged knows the problem this article describes. They are being assessed before a full appreciation of their credit worthiness is possible. Building the upstream infrastructure to close this gap is the multilateral system’s most important contribution to sovereign credit reform.

The Conversation

Daniel Cash 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. Countries suffer when credit rating agencies lack data: how to fix the problem at source – https://theconversation.com/countries-suffer-when-credit-rating-agencies-lack-data-how-to-fix-the-problem-at-source-279671

Canada’s cybersecurity sector has a pipeline problem — and a glass ceiling

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sepideh Borzoo, Postdoctoral Fellow, Toronto Metropolitan University

Canada is facing a well-documented shortage of cybersecurity workers, with estimates suggesting a shortfall of 25,000 to 30,000 qualified professionals — a figure projected to grow to 100,000 by 2035. The persistence of this labour shortage weakens Canada’s capacity to defend itself against cybersecurity threats.

One possible way to address the shortage is to expand the recruitment of skilled foreign workers.

Although Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) announced in 2025 that the Express Entry system will shift its focus from the technology sector toward fields like health care and francophone immigration, cybersecurity remains one of the few technology occupations still considered in high demand for foreign applicants.

Meanwhile, organizations are developing diversity initiatives to attract a broader workforce, including women and racialized women, to the sector. While racialized immigrants account for the majority of information technology sector workers in Canada, they remain underrepresented in cybersecurity.

Cybersecurity historically originated from the military and has been shaped by national security priorities; as a result, it remains a field predominantly composed of white men. The problem is more acute in the upper echelons of security leadership.

In 2023, non-white men made up only 15 per cent of the global cybersecurity workforce. Racialized women are even less represented. Only two per cent of racialized women are in senior management positions.

As researchers who study the experiences of immigrant tech workers in cybersecurity in Canada, we have found that while racialized immigrant women are vital to the workforce, they continue to encounter barriers that limit their integration and career progression.

Ensuring equity and improving retention will require more than superficial diversity initiatives; the sector must adopt deeper, systemic changes that meaningfully support immigrant employees.

Strong qualifications, constrained careers

To understand how this labour shortage is experienced on the ground, we conducted 55 in-depth interviews between 2023 and 2025 with foreign-born cybersecurity professionals in Canada. Participants represented 13 countries, with most orginating from India, Iran, Brazil and Venezuela. The majority had attained Canadian permanent residency and had at least two years of experience in the Canadian cybersecurity sector.

These interviews help explain how the structural dynamics play out in everyday work.

Most of these cybersecurity professionals came to Canada with strong educational backgrounds in technology and skills that are highly transferable. While high human capital facilitated their entrance into the cybersecurity labour market, their career progression was often constrained by the absence of mentorship and professional networks, by language and cultural adjustment challenges, as well as a disproportionately heavy workload.

These barriers are even more difficult for immigrant women to navigate in an industry shaped by traditionally masculine principles, where competition and aggressive growth have long been celebrated as markers of success. The complexity of all these barriers often keeps immigrants, and racialized immigrant women in particular, in entry-level positions.

Interviewees described daily work experiences structured by systemic barriers and stereotypical expectations.

Many reported struggling to achieve a balance between their professional and personal lives as their roles require working long hours and constant investment in updating their technical knowledge. Experiences of discriminatory behaviour from male colleagues toward women were common. Women with foreign accents, in particular, discussed feeling interrupted or unheard during team meetings.

The layered realities of exclusion

Participants in our study described facing challenges shaped by overlapping forms of discrimination.

Some highlighted that their citizenship status played a role in limiting their access to certain positions. For example, participants on temporary work visas — specifically those from countries experiencing geopolitical tensions with Canada, such as Iran — reported greater difficulty entering the sector.

When they did find work, they were often placed in the most arduous positions, such as incident response and security operations centres, with minimal control over their schedule or tasks. Foreign accents or cultural backgrounds often led to exclusion from non-technical roles that require interaction and relationship-building connections with clients in the cybersecurity sector and contributed to marginalization in day-to-day work interactions.

For women participants, these experiences were often compounded by an industry defined by masculine norms — characterized by heavy workloads, long hours and an implicit requirement to avoid any display of weakness. They described experiencing strain in having to prioritize work over family while navigating workplace relationships in which they were frequently talked over and silenced.

The burden of being a minority in an overwhelmingly white, male-dominated workplace varied depending on the women’s race and ethnic background.

Asian and white immigrant women often felt compelled to speak more assertively and loudly to challenge assumptions that cast them as submissive or unassertive. And Black women described having to carefully manage their frustration and tone of voice to avoid triggering stereotypes that label them as inherently angry.

The weight of stereotypes often left them feeling isolated or uncertain about their place.

Change requires a collaborative approach

Removing the barriers that hinder immigrants in their career progression means addressing both the stereotypical behaviours and the systemic factors holding them back.

This would involve changing the workplace culture and adjusting policies at both immigration and organizational levels. Changing hiring, training and mentoring processes can shift how competency is defined and evaluated within organizations.

Our findings suggest that while diversity programs may reduce overt discrimination and encourage the hiring of women and ethnically diverse employees, this doesn’t guarantee that minority groups will be treated equally or have the same career advancement opportunities as other employees.




Read more:
How hiring more women IT experts improves cybersecurity risk management


Encouragingly, our findings also show that employees treat one another fairly in workplaces where leaders demonstrate fairness in their behaviour. Women in leadership positions, particularly, play an important role in changing workplace culture and advocating for underrepresented groups.

Enhancing diversity in the top leadership positions may also contribute to a more equitable work environment.

Hiring more gender and racially diverse people, and integrating them in leadership positions, can help create a workplace where every employee has access to mentorship that reflects their identity.

Federal and provincial governments can support these changes by embedding equity goals into immigrant selection and labour standards. Strengthening early and predictable pathways to permanent residence would also reduce immigrants’ vulnerability to precarious work and exploitation.

Together, these measures can help ensure diversity initiatives translate into genuine inclusion rather than merely masking persistent inequities. But without addressing the structural issues, Canada risks relying on immigrant talent to fill labour shortages while systematically limiting their success.

The Conversation

This project receives funding from SSHRC

This project was supported in part by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the Canada Research Chair (CRC) program, Canada First Research Excellence (CFREF) through the Bridging Divides program.

Rupa Banerjee 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. Canada’s cybersecurity sector has a pipeline problem — and a glass ceiling – https://theconversation.com/canadas-cybersecurity-sector-has-a-pipeline-problem-and-a-glass-ceiling-270764

Le prédateur et les proies : ce que l’étude des animaux nous apprend sur les climats toxiques au travail

Source: The Conversation – in French – By Jean Poitras, Professeur titulaire en gestion de conflits, HEC Montréal

Les tensions interpersonnelles entre collègues ont un coût important pour les entreprises : elles grugent la concentration, minent la collaboration et détournent une partie massive de l’énergie mentale vers la défense plutôt que vers le travail. Les écologistes ont observé comment les animaux gèrent la peur, la menace et la cohabitation avec les prédateurs dans un écosystème. Ils ont ainsi mis au jour des mécanismes surprenants qui éclairent nos propres réactions au sein des équipes de travail.


Dans la nature, un constat surprenant s’est imposé : les prédateurs contrôlent la population des proies non seulement en les mangeant, mais par la peur qu’ils instaurent. En effet, cette peur chronique force les proies à investir une quantité immense d’énergie dans la vigilance et l’évitement, plutôt que dans l’alimentation ou la reproduction. Autrement dit, ce n’est pas la prédation elle-même qui limite la croissance des proies, mais l’anticipation constante de ce qui pourrait leur arriver.

Un phénomène très similaire apparaît dans les groupes humains confrontés à de l’incivilité chronique. Lorsqu’un membre du groupe adopte parfois des comportements agressifs, les collègues vivent dans un climat d’incertitude relationnelle. Leur cerveau interprète celle-ci comme un risque social potentiel. L’énergie du groupe se détourne alors du travail vers la protection. Ce n’est donc pas tant le conflit qui épuise une équipe, mais l’énergie qu’elle dépense à l’anticiper et à l’éviter.

Les stratégies des proies

Les proies utilisent trois stratégies pour survivre à cette pression, que l’on retrouve aussi dans les groupes humains.

La première consiste à synchroniser leurs comportements avec le danger. Si le prédateur est actif à certaines heures ou dans certains lieux, les proies ajustent leurs déplacements et leurs activités. En milieu de travail, on observe des adaptations similaires : les employés évitent certaines réunions ou réduisent leurs interactions avec certaines personnes.

Avec la deuxième stratégie, les proies se retirent dans des zones où la menace est plus faible afin de faire baisser leur niveau de vigilance. Dans les organisations, ce refuge peut prendre la forme du retrait des interactions sociales ou du repli sur des tâches plus solitaires. Aujourd’hui, on pourrait penser que le télétravail devient un outil d’évitement dans certains cas. Ce n’est pas du désengagement : c’est une manière de réguler le coût psychologique du danger.




À lire aussi :
Les réseaux sociaux vous incitent à adopter ces trois comportements primitifs et violents


La troisième stratégie est la protection collective. Les proies se regroupent en troupeaux de manière à partager la surveillance et le risque. Dans les équipes humaines, ce phénomène peut se traduire par la formation d’alliances informelles ou de sous-groupes qui cherchent à réduire ensemble le stress par le soutien collectif.

Réguler l’incivilité

Ces réactions sont compréhensibles, mais elles ont un coût pour l’organisation. L’énergie se déplace vers la gestion du risque social plutôt que vers la tâche. Autrement dit, ce n’est pas seulement l’incivilité qui pose problème, mais une dynamique collective qui perturbe le fonctionnement du groupe. C’est pourquoi la régulation de l’incivilité doit être pensée à l’échelle du groupe et devenir proactive plutôt que réactive.

Un gestionnaire peut contrôler certains comportements, mais il ne peut pas imposer la civilité à lui seul. La stratégie la plus efficace consiste généralement à organiser une consolidation d’équipe, c’est-à-dire une discussion structurée sur le fonctionnement du groupe et la qualité des relations.




À lire aussi :
Le commérage de bureau : un moyen précieux – mais risqué – de nouer des relations


L’un des premiers objectifs est de créer une stabilité dans les échanges collectifs. Il s’agit d’un espace de discussion où la réactivité est suspendue, où l’on parle des enjeux plutôt que de formuler des reproches, et où l’intensité émotionnelle peut redescendre avant qu’elle ne s’envenime. La sécurité psychologique n’élimine pas les conflits, mais elle crée les conditions nécessaires pour les affronter de manière constructive.

En effet, l’incivilité au travail amène les employés à anticiper et éviter certaines interactions, ce qui augmente la charge cognitive et le stress. Structurer les rencontres et clarifier les règles de discussion peut alors réduire cette incertitude et la vigilance associée. Structurer les rencontres, clarifier les règles de discussion et expliciter les critères de décision réduit immédiatement la charge de vigilance.


Déjà des milliers d’abonnés à l’infolettre de La Conversation. Et vous ? Abonnez-vous gratuitement à notre infolettre pour mieux comprendre les grands enjeux contemporains.


Interroger les normes du groupe

Pour ce faire, le groupe doit identifier les sources de l’incivilité. Les comportements problématiques peuvent être liés à des facteurs organisationnels tels que des exigences de travail élevées, un manque de soutien entre collègues, une insécurité d’emploi ou des changements organisationnels. La bonne volonté seule est rarement suffisante : il faut parfois corriger des irritants structurels ou ajuster la manière dont le travail est organisé.

Il ne suffit pas de dire que le climat est difficile : le groupe doit identifier les habitudes qui rendent probable l’incivilité. Comment le groupe contribue, souvent malgré lui, à créer un climat perpétuant l’incivilité ? Quand personne ne réagit à l’incivilité, ne donne-t-on pas carte blanche à ce type de comportement ?




À lire aussi :
Comment les Z s’épanouissent au travail dans un marché de l’emploi dominé par la « culture de l’agitation »


Dans une perspective inspirée de l’écologie des comportements sociaux, l’enjeu central concerne la régulation des normes du groupe. Dans plusieurs équipes, les comportements incivils persistent parce que les individus hésitent à intervenir seuls, le fait de sanctionner étant coûteux et exposant à des risques. La personne qui intervient assume ainsi des coûts sociaux et émotionnels importants, notamment en raison des réactions défensives ou des représailles possibles. Lorsque personne ne prend ce rôle, les comportements opportunistes tendent à se multiplier, ce qui fragilise la coopération et les normes collectives.

On peut ainsi imaginer qu’en contexte organisationnel, une personne en position d’autorité tente d’assumer seule ce rôle de régulation. Toutefois, en l’absence de soutien du groupe, le coût associé à cette intervention devient difficile à maintenir, ce qui peut l’amener progressivement à se délester de cette responsabilité.

La solution n’est donc pas d’augmenter la surveillance, mais de partager le coût de la régulation. Soutenir visiblement la personne qui intervient change immédiatement la dynamique. Un simple appui – « il a raison », « merci de l’avoir dit », « on est d’accord » – peut transformer une intervention individuelle en régulation collective. Il est souvent utile de formaliser les engagements du groupe dans un code de vie ou une charte de collégialité, puis de prévoir des rencontres de suivi pour vérifier si les résolutions tiennent dans le temps.

En somme, un groupe ne peut dépendre que de la bonne volonté de ses membres pour modérer l’incivilité. Il doit viser le partage du coût de la défense de ses normes. Comme dans les écosystèmes naturels, la stabilité d’un système repose moins sur la disparition du danger que sur la capacité collective à en réguler la prévalence et les effets.

La Conversation Canada

Jean Poitras ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

ref. Le prédateur et les proies : ce que l’étude des animaux nous apprend sur les climats toxiques au travail – https://theconversation.com/le-predateur-et-les-proies-ce-que-letude-des-animaux-nous-apprend-sur-les-climats-toxiques-au-travail-278162

Le cas Trump : comprendre l’imposture pour penser la fragilité démocratique

Source: The Conversation – in French – By Christophe Premat, Professor, Canadian and Cultural Studies, Stockholm University

Que reste-t-il à dire sur Donald Trump ? Depuis près d’une décennie, livres, enquêtes et témoignages se succèdent pour tenter de cerner une figure politique hors norme. Avec Le cas Trump. Portrait d’un imposteur paru aux éditions Écosociété en 2025, l’essayiste québécois Alain Roy propose une lecture psychopolitique du phénomène Trump.

Publié en 2025, l’ouvrage s’appuie sur une documentation abondante et sur une immersion dans un meeting trumpiste pour interroger l’émergence de ce phénomène. Comme l’écrivain le rappelle au début de son ouvrage, Trump lui-même ne croyait pas à sa victoire électorale de 2016.




À lire aussi :
Victoire de Trump : le genre a joué un rôle prépondérant. Les menaces à la liberté de procréer n’ont pas fait le poids


C’est à partir de ce paradoxe que Roy analyse la manière dont le trumpisme a été moins le fruit d’un projet politique structuré que le résultat d’une dynamique opportuniste, nourrie par les failles du système médiatique, la défiance envers les élites et la puissance des récits simplificateurs capables de capter un électorat en quête de rupture.

Cet article fait partie de notre série Des livres qui comptent, dans laquelle des experts de différents domaines abordent ou décortiquent les ouvrages qu’ils jugent pertinents. Ces livres sont ceux, parmi tous, qu’ils retiennent lorsque vient le temps de comprendre les transformations et les bouleversements de notre époque.


Le livre s’organise autour de trois notions structurantes : mensonge, narcissisme et destructivité. Ce triptyque permet à Roy de proposer une analyse cohérente d’une personnalité politique qui semble, à première vue, échapper à toute rationalité.

Mentir jusqu’à ce que ça devienne vrai

D’abord, le mensonge n’est pas un accident, il constitue le cœur du dispositif trumpien. L’image du self-made man relève d’une construction fictionnelle soigneusement entretenue. Donald Trump se présente comme l’archétype de la réussite individuelle, alors qu’il hérite en réalité d’un empire immobilier familial et enchaîne, au fil des décennies, faillites et restructurations.

Lorsque Trump martèle que les élections de 2020 ont été volées, il pratique le « big lie ». Ce concept renvoie à l’idée qu’un mensonge peut finir par être accepté s’il est répété suffisamment et s’il revêt une telle ampleur que les gens en viennent à penser qu’il est trop énorme pour être entièrement faux.

L’ouvrage de Roy a le mérite de rassembler les faits pour permettre de comprendre cette dynamique des mensonges : selon The Washington Post, Trump aurait ainsi proféré 30 573 mensonges lors de son premier mandat présidentiel soit plus de 21 par jours.

Estamper son patronyme aussi souvent que possible

Ensuite, le narcissisme apparaît comme une clé centrale. Il ne s’agit pas simplement d’un trait de caractère, mais d’une structure psychique marquée par une quête incessante de reconnaissance. La signature et la volonté de privatiser le monde extérieur en témoignent selon Alain Roy : Trump Tower, Trump Castle, Trump Air, Trump University, Trump Vodka, Trump Steak.

Le narcissisme de Trump se manifeste dans le rapport obsessionnel à l’image et dans la réaction immédiate à toute critique, perçue comme une attaque personnelle. Les prises de parole publiques, souvent improvisées et centrées sur sa propre personne, illustrent cette incapacité à se décentrer et à intégrer la contradiction dans un cadre démocratique.




À lire aussi :
L’intersectionnalité des haines permet de comprendre l’idéologie de Donald Trump et de l’extrême droite


Miner les contre-pouvoirs de la démocratie

Enfin, la destructivité éclaire le rapport de Trump au pouvoir. Roy montre que certaines décisions ou déclarations ne visent pas tant à construire qu’à affronter, voire à désorganiser.

Les attaques répétées contre les institutions, les médias ou les processus électoraux participent d’une logique de confrontation permanente. Dans cette perspective, le pouvoir n’est plus un espace de régulation, mais un terrain de lutte où la conflictualité devient une fin en soi, au risque d’éroder les fondements mêmes du cadre démocratique.

Le tweet remplace alors tous les rouages de pouvoir qui ne l’intéressent pas, d’où cette vision enfantine et personnalisée des liens politiques.


Déjà des milliers d’abonnés à l’infolettre de La Conversation. Et vous ? Abonnez-vous gratuitement à notre infolettre pour mieux comprendre les grands enjeux contemporains.


L’imposture comme mode d’existence politique

L’une des thèses les plus stimulantes de l’ouvrage est que Trump ne doit pas être compris comme une anomalie, mais comme une imposture réussie. Loin d’être marginalisé par ses contradictions, il les transforme en ressource politique. Ses faillites deviennent des preuves de résilience, ses outrances des marqueurs d’authenticité, ses mensonges des instruments de mobilisation.

Comme l’écrit Roy, « Trump a justifié de temps à autre ces vantardises en disant qu’elles étaient le produit de “l’hyperbole véridique”. La notion d”hyperbole véridique’ constitue cependant une contradiction dans les termes […] elle n’est qu’une autre conception mensongère parmi toutes celles qu’il produit infatigablement ».




À lire aussi :
« C’est un malade ! » Voici ce que l’on perd à pathologiser la politique


Cette formule d’« hyperbole véridique » éclaire bien le fonctionnement de son discours : elle permet de transformer l’exagération en gage d’authenticité, en déplaçant la question de la vérité vers celle de l’impact. Peu importe l’exactitude des faits, ce qui compte est la capacité du récit à convaincre et à mobiliser.

Dans cette perspective, Donald Trump incarne une mutation du discours politique contemporain, où la cohérence factuelle cède le pas à l’efficacité narrative.

Une démocratie mise à l’épreuve

L’intérêt majeur du livre tient précisément à ce déplacement du regard : Donald Trump n’y apparaît pas seulement comme un individu problématique, mais comme un révélateur des fragilités démocratiques contemporaines. La question qui traverse l’ouvrage est alors moins celle de sa personnalité que celle des conditions ayant rendu possible son accession au pouvoir. Comment un tel personnage peut-il s’imposer durablement dans un système censé reposer sur des garde-fous institutionnels et informationnels ?

Roy montre que cette ascension s’inscrit dans un contexte marqué par une défiance croissante envers les élites, une transformation profonde des écosystèmes médiatiques et une polarisation politique de plus en plus accentuée. Ces dynamiques, loin d’être propres aux États-Unis, dessinent un cadre plus large dans lequel les figures transgressives trouvent un terrain favorable.

Le paradoxe vient du fait que Trump a pu réveiller un profond sentiment nationaliste alors que lui-même aurait voulu faire partie de l’élite new-yorkaise en vantant sa fortune pour montrer sa valeur et son pouvoir. « Quand on considère la façon dont Donald Trump s’est comporté dans la “jungle des affaires”, on a ainsi l’impression que tous ses deals étaient menés moins pour s’enrichir ».

Trump 2.0 : la radicalisation d’une logique

L’actualité récente confère une résonance particulière à l’essai. Dans ses prises de parole, Roy évoque l’émergence d’un « Trump 2.0 », mû par une logique de revanche et désormais mieux structuré sur le plan politique. Il s’agit d’une nouvelle phase, plus cohérente dans ses objectifs et plus assumée dans ses méthodes.

Cette évolution prolonge et accentue les dynamiques déjà à l’œuvre lors du premier mandat de Donald Trump. La progression par « petits pas », la remise en cause des institutions et l’affirmation d’une volonté de puissance s’inscrivent désormais dans un projet plus systématique, moins improvisé et davantage organisé.

Pourquoi ce livre compte aujourd’hui

En proposant une lecture transversale, à la croisée de la psychologie, du politique et de la culture, l’ouvrage permet de saisir la cohérence d’un phénomène souvent réduit à ses excès. Dans cette perspective, comprendre Trump revient moins à traquer une dérive individuelle qu’à analyser les conditions ayant permis son émergence : effacement du politique comme espace de médiation rationnelle, au profit d’un rapport au pouvoir de type quasi religieux, structuré par la transgression, la croyance et l’incarnation d’un destin collectif dans la figure du leader.

Enfin, le livre invite à repenser les démocraties contemporaines comme des équilibres instables, exposés à des dynamiques de personnalisation extrême. À ce titre, l’intérêt qu’il suscite dépasse déjà le cadre francophone. Une traduction en suédois est en préparation, signe que les questions soulevées par Roy trouvent un écho dans d’autres contextes politiques. Cette circulation à venir confirme la portée plus large de l’ouvrage : au-delà du cas de Donald Trump, il propose des outils pour penser les transformations contemporaines du pouvoir et les recompositions du lien démocratique.

La Conversation Canada

Christophe Premat déclare avoir participé à l’organisation d’une conférence en ligne le 20 mars 2026 avec Alain Roy. Cette conférence s’inscrit dans les activités du Centre d’études canadiennes de l’Université de Stockholm, en collaboration avec l’Université de Dalécarlie (https://www.su.se/enheter/centrum-for-kanadastudier/kalender/kalenderartiklar/2026-03-13-att-forsta-fenomenet-trump—ett-samtal-med-den-kanadensiske-forfattaren-alain-roy). Cet événement visait notamment à annoncer la parution prochaine en suédois de l’ouvrage d’Alain Roy consacré au phénomène Trump, dans une traduction de Mats Forsgren publiée aux éditions Fri Tanke.

ref. Le cas Trump : comprendre l’imposture pour penser la fragilité démocratique – https://theconversation.com/le-cas-trump-comprendre-limposture-pour-penser-la-fragilite-democratique-279803

Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia emerge as a new regional power bloc amid Iran war

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natasha Lindstaedt, Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex

Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, announced that a two-week ceasefire had been agreed between the US and Iran in the early hours of April 8. Delegates from both sides are expected to attend further talks in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad on Friday.

This comes less than two weeks after Pakistan hosted talks with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey in which the four countries called for an end to hostilities in the Gulf. The meeting established the quartet as the primary negotiating channel between Tehran and Washington, and may signal the beginning of a new regional order designed to curb Israeli and Iranian dominance after the war.

Even before the war began in late February, Israel and Iran were both isolated in the region. There is no chance of any rapprochement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which was the original goal of the 2020 Abraham accords. These accords sought to normalise relations between Israel and other countries in the Middle East.

The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain signed agreements with Israel as part of the accords. But the Saudis have long said they will not normalise ties with Israel before the establishment of a Palestinian state, which was ruled out by the Israeli parliament in a 2024 vote. Reports suggest that Saudi Arabia now wants to replace Israel with Syria as the transit country for a fiber-optic cable connecting the kingdom to Greece.

Turkey also halted its relationship with Israel in 2024 over the conflict in Gaza. And relations between Israel and Qatar soured in September 2025 after an Israeli strike on Hamas leaders in Doha, which drew unanimous condemnation from the UN security council.

Iran’s only main allies are Russia and, to a much lesser extent, China and the Houthi rebel group in Yemen. Since the conflict with the US and Israel began, China has distanced itself from Iran. The Houthis recently became involved in the war in support of Iran, but they have been weakened by Israeli attacks in recent years.

The solid relationship between Qatar and Iran has been severed after Iranian missiles struck the country’s main gas facility, Ras Laffan, on March 18. And Iran’s partial detente with Saudi Arabia, which was brokered by China in 2023 after years of hostility, has now been destroyed following Iranian attacks on Saudi energy facilities.

It is against this backdrop, in which both Iran and Israel are considered regional pariahs, that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt have ramped up their efforts to secure stability in the Middle East.

A new order?

These four countries share some common areas of interest that help explain their desire to reshape the region. They all have political and economic ties with the US and are members of Donald Trump’s Board of Peace. Established in 2026, the board aims to tackle global conflicts and achieve lasting peace and reconstruction in Gaza.

Each country also brings important contributions to their burgeoning alliance. Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia has the world’s second-largest oil reserves, Egypt controls access to the vital Suez canal waterway and Turkey is a member of the Nato alliance. All have fairly advanced defence industries and a combined population of 500 million people. Taken together, they represent the most politically and militarily influential Muslim-majority countries in the world.

But these four nations are not necessarily natural allies, and their relationships have experienced turbulence over the years. Egypt’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, for example, has often been described as a “difficult marriage”. Egypt was once the driver of pan-Arab nationalism, a movement that promotes a secular and unified Arab political identity.

The Saudi kingdom has historically viewed this movement as a threat. But since Abdel Fattah el-Sisi came to power as Egypt’s president in 2014, their differences have been overcome. Sisi offered political and military support to the Saudi operation against the Houthis in 2015, with Egypt and Saudi Arabia subsequently deepening their defence ties.

Particularly under the leadership of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey has positioned itself as a regional leader and problem solver. But Turkey, too, has endured periods of frosty relations with other regional powers. Ankara’s relations with Cairo deteriorated sharply after the Egyptian president, Mohammed Morsi, a close ally of Turkey, was ousted in a 2013 coup.

Similarly, tensions between Turkey and Saudi Arabia became particularly acute following the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. A 2021 US intelligence report found that Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman approved the murder, though he denies this allegation.

A process of rapprochement took place between Turkey and Saudi Arabia in 2022, and then between Turkey and Egypt in 2025. Erdoğan visited Cairo and Riyadh in February 2026 and has proposed several different geoeconomic frameworks to connect Asia with Europe. These include the so-called Middle East Corridor, a planned economic corridor aimed at fostering economic integration between Asia, the Persian Gulf and Europe.

Pakistan, meanwhile, has so far not come to Saudi Arabia’s aid when it has come under attack from Iran in the current conflict. This is despite the signing of a strategic mutual defence agreement between the two countries in 2025.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey have not always seen eye to eye. But their relationships of convenience are now becoming increasingly significant as Israel and Iran’s regional isolation grows.

The Conversation

Natasha Lindstaedt 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. Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia emerge as a new regional power bloc amid Iran war – https://theconversation.com/pakistan-turkey-egypt-and-saudi-arabia-emerge-as-a-new-regional-power-bloc-amid-iran-war-279782