Analysis – Page 927 – MIL Submissions Engine

November 5, 2025

Housing asylum seekers in military barracks will be hugely expensive – and politically costly

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Melanie Griffiths, Associate Professor, School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham

In an effort to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers, the UK government has announced that 900 people will be moved to military sites. Though this is a small fraction of the 32,000 currently housed in hotels, the Home Office hopes that up to 10,000 people might soon be accommodated in ex-military sites.

The first two sites are Crowborough army training camp in East Sussex, and Cameron Barracks in Inverness, where MPs and local councillors have already raised concerns about community safety and cohesion.

It wasn’t long ago that the previous Conservative government moved hundreds of asylum seekers to “large sites”, including ex-military facilities and the Bibby Stockholm barge.

Back then, Labour was in opposition and highly critical of the scheme. Now in power, Labour is not only adopting the policy but planning a significant expansion. But they are likely to face the same issues as previous efforts to move asylum seekers to large sites: dangerous conditions, community unrest and ballooning costs.

Before it closed in 2024, the Bibby Stockholm was plagued with accusations of physical and mental health harm, outbreaks of disease, and suicide.

According to Médecins Sans Frontières, Wethersfield asylum centre – opened on a former RAF airfield in 2023 – caused people “severe mental health distress”. Asylum seekers were moved out of the site after being exposed to risks of unexploded ordnance, radiological contamination, and poisonous gases.

Conditions in Napier Barracks in Folkestone were found to be unsanitary and overcrowded. The independent immigration watchdog described “decrepit” buildings unfit for habitation. Conditions were so poor that in 2021 the High Court ruled that the Home Office had employed unlawful practices housing people there during the pandemic.

Plans to close Napier and Wethersfield have been repeatedly postponed and it appears that there are growing numbers of residents again.

Barracks are extremely expensive. Whitehall’s spending watchdog found that they cost significantly more than expected, even exceeding the costs of asylum hotels. Although the Home Office originally estimated they would provide marginal savings, later estimates suggested that large sites could cost £46 million more than using hotels over the same period.

The watchdog found that this was due to high set-up and refurbishment costs coupled with the millions wasted on failed plans, such as RAF Scampton which had £60 million spent on it before the plan was scrapped.

Barracks also segregate and marginalise those who live there from communities, stoking tensions. Using barracks echoes earlier use of military sites to intern “enemy aliens” during the world wars. This imagery further demonises asylum seekers and is likely to compound community fears, opening the door to far-right exploitation, and anti-immigrant protests and violence.

Privatisation of asylum accommodation

The government is legally obliged to house asylum seekers in need while they await refugee decisions. Given the large backlog, this often now takes over a year.

Previously, such housing was predominantly provided through relatively cheap multiple-occupancy, self-caterered “dispersal” accommodation. This cost about £27 per person per night, compared to £170 for hotels.

The system was privatised 13 years ago, leading to prioritisation of profits and spiralling accommodation costs.

Although the privatised contracts were intended for the cheaper dispersal accommodation, a clause allowing short-term use of “contingency” accommodation such as hotels has been used by providers. With hotels offering companies lower financial risk and greater profit than dispersal accommodation, this costly “contingency” practice quickly became normalised.

Privatisation also meant that local authorities lost their power to manage and inspect accommodation, leading to poor conditions in hotels and other housing.

Although barracks and hotels have proven disastrous for people living in them, a handful of property tycoons have made fortunes. This includes repeat scandal-hit Serco, and the Essex businessman Graham King, whose £750 million fortune makes him one of the 350 richest people in the UK.

King founded Clearsprings Ready Homes, which in 2019 won 10-year contracts for providing asylum accommodation and transportation in Wales and the South. Clearsprings runs Napier and Wethersfield barracks, where security staff walked out over pay and work conditions just a few weeks ago.

The contract’s value has grown tenfold since being signed: from £0.7 billion to a whopping £7 billion. The company has seen a meteoric rise in profits; from under £800,000 in 2020, to £28 million in 2022, and £90 million in 2024.

Clearsprings’ profits are ballooning despite being accused of running squalid flats and providing accommodation under “terrible conditions”, with poor food and hygiene, and rationed period products and toilet paper. (The Conversation has approached Clearsprings for comment.)

It seems that, however poor the provision of accommodation by private providers, little scuppers the arrangements. Contracts are almost never terminated, and fines or penalties are rare. The Home Office has also done little to reclaim millions of pounds in excess profits owed by some providers.

What are the alternatives?

Moving asylum seekers to military sites is likely to prove as financially and politically costly to Labour as previous governments. So, what are the alternatives?

If large sites must be used, they should be neutral places such as empty student accommodation and office blocks, rather than punitive or contentious spaces like barracks and hotels. They must also provide kitchen access, to improve wellbeing and reduce catering costs.

Better would be a return to dispersal accommodation, which would save money and end the ghettoisation of asylum seekers. Beyond this, letting asylum seekers work would reduce their financial dependency on the state.

Ending the privatisation experiment and bringing asylum accommodation back into public management would restore accountability and oversight, improving both taxpayers’ value for money and conditions for asylum seekers.

Ultimately, the vilification of asylum seekers is happening in the context of a wider housing crisis. Unless the problems around overall housing supply and exorbitant rents are addressed, divisive politics around asylum housing will continue.

Melanie Griffiths has received funding from the ESRC and British Academy for migration-related research. She sits on the trustee boards of the NGOs Right to Remain and Open Door.

– ref. Housing asylum seekers in military barracks will be hugely expensive – and politically costly – https://theconversation.com/housing-asylum-seekers-in-military-barracks-will-be-hugely-expensive-and-politically-costly-268696

November 5, 2025

Why the UK’s grooming gangs inquiry is in turmoil – and what needs to happen now

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anne-Marie McAlinden, Professor, School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast

The UK’s grooming gangs inquiry appears to be in turmoil before it has even started, following the resignation of several women from its victim liaison panel. Their complaints related mainly to appointments to chair the inquiry and the potential for its focus to be widened.

The difficulties facing the inquiry have led Reform UK’s Nigel Farage to describe it as “dead in the water”. After years of investigation and controversy over this topic, how did it come to this?

The issue of grooming gangs – referring here to predominantly Asian men grooming and sexually exploiting white girls across a range of English cities – first came to light from the early 2000s. The first prosecutions and convictions occurred from 2010. Hundreds of perpetrators have been convicted in cases involving thousands of victims across the UK. Other trials are ongoing.

There have been numerous inquiries or reviews into grooming gangs and child sexual exploitation at both local and national level. Local inquiries and serious case reviews have included those in Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford and Oldham.

At the national level, child sexual abuse was also examined more broadly by the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, chaired by Professor Alexis Jay, which reported in October 2022. Some survivors and their advocates claimed the inquiry’s findings were not specific enough on grooming gangs. The government also faced criticism that survivors had been “let down” due to the lack of enactment of the inquiry’s core recommendations.

One recurring allegation has been that police and social workers failed to properly investigate and prosecute grooming gangs perpetrators, for fear of being labelled as racist.

Public and political pressure for a separate national statutory inquiry grew from January 2025, when Elon Musk intervened. Musk accused Prime Minister Keir Starmer of being complicit in a cover-up of grooming gangs when he was director of public prosecutions. The then home secretary, Yvette Cooper, announced a “rapid” review of evidence of the nature and scale of group-based sexual abuse to be led by Baroness Louise Casey.

The Casey report was published in June 2025. It concluded that the issues of race and ethnicity of those involved in grooming gangs had been “shied away from” by the authorities and advocated the need for a separate inquiry.

The government accepted this and Casey’s other recommendations, and announced a new national inquiry.

But the inquiry is now facing delays, after four survivors resigned from the victim liaison panel in protest of the government’s handling of the inquiry. They accused safeguarding minister Jess Phillips of contradicting them on the scope of the inquiry, and called for her resignation. Others on the panel, however, have said that Phillips remaining in post is a condition of their participation.

The women who resigned also expressed concerns over the two shortlisted candidates to chair the inquiry, who had backgrounds in social work and policing. Both candidates have now resigned.

What the inquiry needs now

In setting up inquiries, one of the most important principles is the need for an effective independent investigation of the facts. This means that panel members need to be appointed by open competition and must be independent of government.

For victims, the appointment of inquiry panellists with social work and policing backgrounds calls into question the inquiry’s independence from the state. This is especially significant given that social worker and police concerns with race and ethnicity have, historically, impeded investigations. At the same time, the composition of an inquiry panel needs to draw from a wide range of expertise – including legal and human rights backgrounds – to be effective.

Any inquiry should be cognisant of the trauma experienced by victims in both being groomed and abused, and not being believed. Survivors’ concerns could be addressed by appointing academics with expertise in policing and social work, rather than police officers or social workers themselves.

A well-established principle of abuse inquiries is that there must be a victim-centric approach. For survivors, the process of the inquiry matters as much as the outcome. Involving survivors in the process of selecting a chair, and as part of a consultative role, ensures their “buy-in” and establishes trust and credibility. The victim liaison panel helps to fulfil this role.

However, there is also a need to inform and manage survivor expectations about what inquiries can hope to achieve. In particular, as my research has established, inquiries are usually focused on broad, systemic institutional failings rather than on the accountability of individuals that many survivors want.

While the victim liaison panel was designed to give survivors a role in advising on the inquiry’s terms of reference, there are currently no terms of reference for the liaison panel itself. Setting out clear terms of reference for both the inquiry and the panel itself is essential for the inquiry to run smoothly.

Farage has called on the government to replace the statutory public inquiry with a parliamentary inquiry. Yet, this would not solve any of these issues and might even cement them. Parliamentary inquiries are usually small investigations, conducted by cross-party MPs who have powers to gather written and oral evidence.

A parliamentary inquiry would likely face criticisms from survivors about lack of independence – survivors would also have a very limited role in the process. Moreover, any recommendations for policy change from a parliamentary inquiry are not binding, so outcomes are substantially reduced.

More broadly, this controversy highlights the need for a comprehensive and thorough investigation of the facts from the outset, rather than the series of separate investigations which we have had to date. It is not too late for the grooming gangs inquiry to get back on track. But it needs to be focused, impartial and properly resourced.

Anne-Marie McAlinden has previously received funding from the ESRC, the AHRC, The British Academy, and the North South Research Programme

– ref. Why the UK’s grooming gangs inquiry is in turmoil – and what needs to happen now – https://theconversation.com/why-the-uks-grooming-gangs-inquiry-is-in-turmoil-and-what-needs-to-happen-now-268708

November 5, 2025

Why people don’t demand data privacy – even as governments and corporations collect more personal information

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Rohan Grover, Assistant Professor of AI and Media, American University

People feeling that their data is being collected at every turn leaves many numb to the issue of data privacy. J Studios/DigitalVision via Getty Images

When the Trump administration gave Immigration and Customs Enforcement access to a massive database of information about Medicaid recipients in June 2025, privacy and medical justice advocates sounded the alarm. They warned that the move could trigger all kinds of public health and human rights harms.

But most people likely shrugged and moved on with their day. Why is that? It’s not that people don’t care. According to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey, 81% of American adults said they were concerned about how companies use their data, and 71% said they were concerned about how the government uses their data.

At the same time, though, 61% expressed skepticism that anything they do makes much difference. This is because people have come to expect that their data will be captured, shared and misused by state and corporate entities alike. For example, many people are now accustomed to instinctively hitting “accept” on terms of service agreements, privacy policies and cookie banners regardless of what the policies actually say.

At the same time, data breaches have become a regular occurrence, and private digital conversations exposing everything from infidelity to military attacks have become the stuff of public scrutiny. The cumulative effect is that people are loath to change their behaviors to better protect their data − not because they don’t care, but because they’ve been conditioned to think that they can’t make a difference.

As scholars of data, technology and culture, we find that when people are made to feel as if data collection and abuse are inevitable, they are more likely to accept it – even if it jeopardizes their safety or basic rights.

a computer screen displaying text and a button labelled 'submit' — How often do you give your consent to have your data collected?
Sean Gladwell/Moment via Getty Images

Where regulation falls short

Policy reforms could help to change this perception, but they haven’t yet. In contrast to a growing number of countries that have comprehensive data protection or privacy laws, the United States offers only a patchwork of policies covering the issue.

At the federal level, the most comprehensive data privacy laws are nearly 40 years old. The Privacy Act of 1974, passed in the wake of federal wiretapping in the Watergate and the Counterintelligence Program scandals, limited how federal agencies collected and shared data. At the time government surveillance was unexpected and unpopular.

But it also left open a number of exceptions – including for law enforcement – and did not affect private companies. These gaps mean that data collected by private companies can end up in the hands of the government, and there is no good regulation protecting people from this loophole.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 extended protections against telephone wire tapping to include electronic communications, which included services such as email. But the law did not account for the possibility that most digital data would one day be stored on cloud servers.

Since 2018, 19 U.S. states have passed data privacy laws that limit companies’ data collection activities and enshrine new privacy rights for individuals. However, many of these laws also include exceptions for law enforcement access.

These laws predominantly take a consent-based approach – think of the pesky banner beckoning you to “accept all cookies” – that encourages you to give up your personal information even when it’s not necessary. These laws put the onus on individuals to protect their privacy, rather than simply barring companies from collecting certain kinds of information from their customers.

The privacy paradox

For years, studies have shown that people claim to care about privacy but do not take steps to actively protect it. Researchers call this the privacy paradox. It shows up when people use products that track them in invasive ways, or when they consent to data collection, even when they could opt out. The privacy paradox often elicits appeals to transparency: If only people knew that they had a choice, or how the data would be used, or how the technology works, they would opt out.

But this logic downplays the fact that options for limiting data collection are often intentionally designed to be convoluted, confusing and inconvenient, and they can leave users feeling discouraged about making these choices, as communication scholars Nora Draper and Joseph Turow have shown. This suggests that the discrepancy between users’ opinions on data privacy and their actions is hardly a contradiction at all. When people are conditioned to feel helpless, nudging them into different decisions isn’t likely to be as effective as tackling what makes them feel helpless in the first place.

Resisting data disaffection

The experience of feeling helpless in the face of data collection is a condition we call data disaffection. Disaffection is not the same as apathy. It is not a lack of feeling but rather an unfeeling – an intentional numbness. People manifest this numbness to sustain themselves in the face of seemingly inevitable datafication, the process of turning human behavior into data by monitoring and measuring it.

It is similar to how people choose to avoid the news, disengage from politics or ignore the effects of climate change. They turn away because data collection makes them feel overwhelmed and anxious – not because they don’t care.

Taking data disaffection into consideration, digital privacy is a cultural issue – not an individual responsibility – and one that cannot be addressed with personal choice and consent. To be clear, comprehensive data privacy law and changing behavior are both important. But storytelling can also play a powerful role in shaping how people think and feel about the world around them.

We believe that a change in popular narratives about privacy could go a long way toward changing people’s behavior around their data. Talk of “the end of privacy” helps create the world the phrase describes. Philosopher of language J.L. Austin called those sorts of expressions performative utterances. This kind of language confirms that data collection, surveillance and abuse are inevitable so that people feel like they have no choice

Cultural institutions have a role to play here, too. Narratives reinforcing the idea of data collection as being inevitable come not only from tech companies’ PR machines but also mass media and entertainment, including journalists. The regular cadence of stories about the federal government accessing personal data, with no mention of recourse or justice, contributes to the sense of helplessness.

Alternatively, it’s possible to tell stories that highlight the alarming growth of digital surveillance and frame data governance practices as controversial and political rather than innocuous and technocratic. The way stories are told affects people’s capacity to act on the information that the stories convey. It shapes people’s expectations and demands of the world around them.

The ICE-Medicaid data-sharing agreement is hardly the last threat to data privacy. But the way people talk and feel about it can make it easier – or more difficult – to ignore data abuses the next time around.

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

– ref. Why people don’t demand data privacy – even as governments and corporations collect more personal information – https://theconversation.com/why-people-dont-demand-data-privacy-even-as-governments-and-corporations-collect-more-personal-information-262197

November 5, 2025

An innovative tool coating could improve the way products — from aerospace to medical devices — are made

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Qianxi He, Faculty Lecturer, McGill University

Have you ever wondered how airplanes, cars, oil and gas pipelines or medical devices are made? It’s not just the materials they’re composed of that’s so important, but also the high-speed machining that shapes them. Improving those processes can improve the industries that use them and the products they make.

Aerospace, automotive, medical devices and oil and gas industries all require materials that resist corrosion and have low thermal conductivity, meaning they don’t transfer heat easily. That’s why materials like austenitic stainless steels, titanium alloys and Inconel super-alloys are crucial to these industries.

But the same properties that make these materials so useful also make them difficult to machine at high speeds, leading to rapid tool wear and shortening the lifespan of cutting tools. Machining refers to a manufacturing process where material is selectively removed from a work piece — typically a raw material in the form of a bar, sheet or block — using cutting tools to achieve the desired shape, dimensions and surface finish.

An innovation in tool coating could solve these machining challenges. The development of what’s known as a bi-layer AlTiN PVD coating enhances cutting-tool performance, improves wear resistance and extends the life of the tool life during ultra-high-speed machining of hard-to-machine materials.

This breakthrough won’t just benefit manufacturers. The development of advanced cutting tool coatings can significantly enhance tool performance under extreme machining conditions and improve the surface quality of the finished work piece. Let’s dive into what makes this discovery so important.

Why it matters

Traditionally, tools have been coated with an AlTiN layer — a hard ceramic coating composed of aluminum (Al), titanium (Ti), and nitrogen (N) — to enhance wear resistance during machining. The coating is applied as an extremely thin film (typically three to five micrometres) through a process called physical vapour deposition (PVD), in which the coating material is vapourized in a vacuum chamber and condensed onto the tool surface.

A single AlTiN layer can improve oxidation resistance and make tools more durable, but these coatings often struggle to balance the hardness, toughness and frictional properties required for demanding machining environments.

The bi-layer coating used in this study overcomes these limitations by optimizing the mechanical properties of each layer. This approach enables the coating to withstand the extreme heat and mechanical loads during the machining of stainless steel.

How does the bi-layer coating work?

A novel coating system was designed: a bi-layer consisting of two AlTiN layers with different ratios of aluminum and titanium. The bi-layer AlTiN coating stands out due to its unique combination of properties.

The top layer, with a higher ratio of aluminum to titanium, reduces friction and improves oxidation resistance. The sub-layer, with an equal ratio of aluminum to titanium, enhances hardness and provides better adhesion to the tungsten carbide substrate used in cutting tools. This combination enables the tool to withstand higher temperatures and mechanical stresses, resulting in longer tool life and more efficient machining.

This bi-layer coating was tested against single-layer coatings on tungsten carbide cutting tools under ultra-high-speed turning of austenitic stainless steel 304 (SS304) — a high-performance material commonly used in the automotive and aerospace industries. The bi-layer coating demonstrated remarkable results, increasing tool life by 33 per cent.

The improved wear resistance is due to the combination of the two layers. It reduced the type of wear caused by high temperatures — known as crater wear — as well as the type of wear caused by mechanical stress — known as flank wear. This balance of properties resulted in longer tool life during high-speed machining.

Better cutting conditions between tool and workpiece

One of the standout features of the bi-layer coating was its improvement in friction, wear and lubrication — three key properties studied in the science of tribology. During machining, these effects were evident in the way chips were formed. Chip formation — the process by which small pieces of material are removed from the whole workpiece by the cutting tool — serves as an important indicator of friction and cutting conditions at the tool–workpiece interface.

In this study, the bi-layer tool produced chips with a smoother surface and a more regular shape compared to the chips produced by single-layer tools.

The smoother chips indicate better frictional conditions, meaning that the cutting tool experienced less resistance as it machined the stainless steel. This reduced friction not only extended tool life but also contributed to a more efficient cutting process, as less energy was required to perform the machining.

The bi-layer coating’s ability to reduce friction was evident in the lower cutting forces recorded during tests. The bi-layer tool consistently showed lower forces, indicating it required less energy to cut through material. This efficiency could lead to energy savings in industrial settings where high-speed machining is frequently used, making the process more cost-effective and sustainable.

Evidence of superior wear resistance

The study used several advanced techniques to analyze the wear mechanisms affecting the tools, which showed how the bi-layer coating effectively reduced both crater and flank wear.

Crater wear occurs on the tool’s rake face — the surface of the cutting tool that comes into direct contact with the chip as it is formed — due to the intense heat generated in the cutting zone, while flank wear happens on the tool’s side, typically as a result of mechanical abrasion. The combination of properties in the bi-layer coating helped reduce both forms of wear. This allows the tool to last longer even under the harsh conditions of ultra-high-speed turning.

The impact of high-speed machining

The development of this bi-layer AlTiN coating represents a significant advancement in cutting tool technology. By enhancing wear resistance and reducing friction, the coating extends tool life and improves the efficiency of machining difficult materials like SS304. For industries that rely on high-speed, precision machining, this innovation could lead to cost savings, reduced downtime and greater productivity.

By enhancing wear resistance and reducing friction, the bi-layer AlTiN coating extends tool life and improves the efficiency of machining difficult materials like austenitic stainless steel 304 (SS304). SS304 is widely used in products that require high strength, corrosion resistance and a smooth surface finish — such as automotive exhaust systems, aerospace components, food-processing equipment and medical instruments. For industries that rely on high-speed, precision machining, this innovation could translate into significant cost savings, reduced downtime and greater productivity.

This research highlights the exciting possibilities of advanced coatings in machining and manufacturing technologies. Innovations like this demonstrate how materials science and mechanical engineering can drive progress across industries such as aerospace, automotive, energy, and medical device manufacturing — where precision, durability and efficiency are critical to performance.

Qianxi He 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. An innovative tool coating could improve the way products — from aerospace to medical devices — are made – https://theconversation.com/an-innovative-tool-coating-could-improve-the-way-products-from-aerospace-to-medical-devices-are-made-238186

November 5, 2025

Bad Bunny and Puerto Rican Muslims: How both remix what it means to be Boricua

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ken Chitwood, Affiliate Researcher, Religion and Civic Culture Center, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences; Bayreuth University

The Mezquita Al-Madinah in Hatillo, Puerto Rico, about an hour west of San Juan, is one of several mosques and Islamic centers on the island. Ken Chitwood

Bad Bunny, born Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio, is more than a global music phenomenon; he’s a bona fide symbol of Puerto Rico.

The church choir boy turned “King of Latin Trap” has songs, style and swagger that reflect the island’s mix of pride, pain and creative resilience. His music mixes reggaetón beats with the sounds of Puerto Rican history and everyday life, where devotion and defiance often live side by side.

Bad Bunny has been called one of Puerto Rico’s “loudest and proudest voices.” Songs like “El Apagón” – “The Blackout” – celebrate joy and protest together, honoring everyday acts of resistance to colonial rule and injustice in Puerto Rican life. Others, like “NUEVAYoL,” celebrate the sounds and vibrancy of its diaspora – especially in New York City. Some songs, like “RLNDT,” mention spiritual searching – featuring allusions to his own Catholic upbringing, sacred and secular divides, New Age astrology and Spiritism.

As a scholar of religion who recently wrote a book about Puerto Rican Muslims, I find echoes of that same strength and artistry in their stories. Although marginalized among Muslims, Puerto Ricans and other U.S. citizens, they find fresh ways to express their cultural heritage and practice their faith, creating new communities and connections along the way. Similar to Bad Bunny’s music, Puerto Rican Muslims’ lives challenge how we think about race, religion and belonging in the Americas.

A man in a white costume holds his hand up to his ear, looking off stage, as dancers in white outfits move behind him and beat drums. — Bad Bunny performs during his ‘No Me Quiero Ir De Aqui’ residency on July 11, 2025, in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Kevin Mazur/Getty Images

Stories of struggle

There are no exact numbers, but before recent crises, Puerto Rico – an archipelago of 3.2. million people – had about 3,500 to 5,000 Muslims, many of them Palestinian. Economic hardship, natural disasters such as hurricanes Irma and Maria, and government neglect have since forced many to leave, however.

As of 2017, there were also an estimated 11,000 to 15,400 Puerto Rican Muslims among the nearly 6 million Puerto Ricans and nearly 4 million Muslims in the United States.

Like any Puerto Rican, these Muslims know the struggles of colonialism’s ongoing impact, from blackouts and economic inequality to racism. For example, in the viral 23-minute video for “El Apagón,” journalist Bianca Graulau outlines how tax incentives for external investors are displacing locals – a theme reinforced in Bad Bunny’s later song, “Lo Que Le Pasó a Hawaii.”

The video for “El Apagón” includes a short documentary about gentrification on the archipelago.

Converts to Islam also face unique challenges – and not just Islamophobia. Many are told they are “not real Puerto Ricans” because of their newfound faith. Some are treated as foreigners in their own families and friend groups, often asked whether they are abandoning their culture to “become Arab.”

To be a Puerto Rican Muslim, then, is to negotiate being and belonging at numerous intersections of diversity and difference.

Still, some connect their Muslim identity to moments in Puerto Rican history. In interviews, they told me how they identify with Muslims who came with Spanish conquistadors during colonial times. Others draw inspiration from enslaved Africans brought to the Caribbean. Many of them were Muslim and resisted their condition in ways large and small: fleeing to the forest to pray, for example, or living as “maroons” – people who escaped and formed their own communities.

Many ways to be Puerto Rican

Puerto Rican culture cannot be neatly mapped onto a single tradition. The archipelago’s religion, music and art blend together influences from Indigenous Taíno, African, Spanish and American cultures. Religious processions pass by cars blasting reggaetón. Shrines to Our Lady of Divine Providence stand beside U.S. chain restaurants and murals demanding independence.

Bad Bunny embodies this fusion. He is rebellious yet rooted, irreverent yet deeply Puerto Rican. His music blends contemporary sounds from reggaetón and Latin trap with traditional “bomba y plena.” It all adds up to something distinctly “Boricua,” a term for Puerto Ricans drawn from the Indigenous Taíno name for the island, “Borikén.”

A man walks past a wall with several different political murals painted on it. — A mural in San Juan, Puerto Rico, photographed in 2017, says, ‘We don’t understand this democracy.’
Mark Ralston/AFP via Getty Images

Puerto Rican Muslims wrestle with what it means to be authentically Boricua, though. In particular, their lives reveal how religion is both a boundary and a bridge: defining belonging while creating new ways to imagine it.

Since Spanish colonization in the 1500s, most Puerto Ricans have been Roman Catholic. But over the past two centuries, many other Christian groups have arrived, including Seventh-day Adventists, Lutherans and Pentecostals. Today, more than half of Puerto Ricans identify as Catholic and about one-third as Protestant.

Alongside these traditions, Afro-Caribbean traditions such as Santería, Espiritismo and Santerismo – a mix of the two – remain active. There are also small communities of Jews, Rastafari and Muslims.

Even with this diversity, converts to Islam are sometimes accused of betraying their culture. One young man told me that when he became Muslim, his mother said he had not only betrayed Christ but also “our culture.”

Yet Puerto Rican Muslims point to Arabic influences in Spanish words. They celebrate traces of Islamic design in colonial and revival architecture that reflects Muslims’ multicentury presence in Spain, from the 700s until the fall of the last Muslim kingdom in Granada in 1492. They also cook up halal versions of classic Puerto Rican dishes.

Like Bad Bunny, these converts remix what it means to be Puerto Rican, showing how Puerto Rico’s sense of identity – or “puertorriqueñidad” – is not exclusively Christian, but complex and constantly evolving.

A man in a feather headdress blows into a large shell, standing in front of a Puerto Rican flag. — A member of the Council in Defense of the Indigenous Rights of Boriken, dressed in Taino traditional clothing, sounds a conch during a march through San Juan, Puerto Rico, on July 11, 2020.
Ricardo Arduengo/AFP via Getty Images

In solidarity

Many Puerto Rican converts frame their faith as a counternarrative, rejecting the Christianity imposed by Spanish colonizers. They also resist Islamophobia, racism and foreign domination, with some converts drawn to the religion as a way to oppose these forces. Similar to Bad Bunny’s music, which often critiques colonialism and social constraints, they push back against systems that try to define who they can be.

To that end, Puerto Rican Muslims also build connections with other groups facing injustice. In reggaetón terms, they form their own “corillos” – groups of friends – united by shared struggles.

They demonstrate on behalf of Palestinians, seeing them as another colonized people without a nation. The first Latino Muslim organization, Alianza Islámica – founded by Puerto Rican converts in 1987 – emerged out of the era’s push for minorities’ rights around the New York City metro area. And after the 2016 Pulse Nightclub shooting, where about half of the 49 victims killed were Puerto Rican, and the mosque attended by the shooter was intentionally set on fire, Boricua Muslims joined with LGBTQ+, Muslim and Latino communities to grieve and demand justice.

A man in a red shirt, standing amid a crowd, holds a sign that says, in Spanish, 'Puerto Rico with Palestine.' — Pro-Palestine supporters attend a rally to end the war on Nov. 12, 2023, in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Miguel J. Rodríguez Carrillo/VIEWpress via Getty Images

In these ways, Puerto Rican Muslims remind me that notions of community, identity or justice do not stand on their own. For many people, they are linked – parts of the same fight for dignity and freedom.

That is why, when I listen to songs like “NUEVAYoL” or “El Apagón,” I think of the Puerto Rican Muslims I know in places such as Puerto Rico, Florida, New Jersey, Texas and New York. Their stories, like Bad Bunny’s music, show how being Puerto Rican today means constantly negotiating who you are and where you belong. And that religion, like music, can carry the sound of struggle – but also the hope of one day overcoming the injustices and inequalities of everyday life.

Ken Chitwood received funding from the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, the Muslim Philanthropy Initiative, and the Spalding Trust to conduct research related to this article.

– ref. Bad Bunny and Puerto Rican Muslims: How both remix what it means to be Boricua – https://theconversation.com/bad-bunny-and-puerto-rican-muslims-how-both-remix-what-it-means-to-be-boricua-267164

November 5, 2025

Democratic election wins send Trump – and Republicans – a message: Americans blame them for government shutdown

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Bruce Wolpe, Non-resident Senior Fellow, United States Study Centre, University of Sydney

One year and a day after Donald Trump won a second term as president – and on the 35th day of the US government shutdown, which has tied a record for the longest in history – the Democrats swept to victory in key races across the county.

Democratic candidates won the governorships in the states of Virginia and New Jersey, while Zohran Mamdani became New York City’s next mayor.

The Democrats may have just become the winners of the fight to reopen the government, too.

Trump’s ratings dropping sharply

Sixteen years ago, then-President Barack Obama was staggered by Republicans winning the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey in the 2009 elections.

The message was indelible: voters wanted to put a check on Obama and his wide-ranging agenda, from health care to global warming. Many Americans wanted him to cool his jets, including on what would become his signature achievement, Obamacare.

The following year, in the 2010 midterm elections, the Democrats lost more than 60 seats and their majority in the House. For the next six years, Republicans had a veto over whatever bills Obama wanted Congress to enact.

With Democrats now winning the governorships in those two states, Trump and his Republican allies in Congress have just been sent the same message: you need to be checked, too.

Going into Tuesday’s elections, Trump’s approval rating in one major poll was just above 40%, and his disapproval rating just under 60% – the highest it’s been since the January 6 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Independent voters, who swung Trump’s way in last year’s election, are now disapproving of his performance by a 69–30% margin.

Trump’s leadership of what he calls the “hottest country in the world” is falling short in voters’ eyes on a number of key issues: inflation, management of the economy, tariffs, crime, immigration, Ukraine and Gaza.

What’s at the heart of the continued stalemate?

The US government has also been shuttered since October 1. Government agencies have been closed to the public, and hundreds of thousands of government employees are going without paychecks, while thousands of others have been laid off.

Millions of Americans have been affected by flight delays or cancellations due to air traffic controller staffing issues. And food stamps to 42 million Americans have been suspended, with the Trump administration only relenting to provide partial payments in response to a court order.

Closing the government was not solely the doing of Trump and the Republicans in Congress. After nearly a year of laying prostrate and appearing pathetically ineffective in responding to Trump and his agenda, the Democrats finally got off the mat to fight back.

Of all the issues with Trump’s so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” – which contained huge tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, huge spending cuts for Medicaid, huge increases in spending to control immigration, more funding for fossil fuels and an increase in the debt ceiling – Democrats seized on one glaring omission from the legislation.

At the end of this year, subsidies are due to expire that more than 24 million Americans rely on to purchase health insurance under Obamacare. As a result, millions are projected to lose their health care coverage.

That is the cross Democrats chose to die on. They’ve told the Trump administration: you want to keep the government open? Keep the insurance subsidies flowing. Fix it now.

Republicans in Congress have had no interest in caving to Democratic demands. They’ve argued Democrats must agree to reopen the government before discussing the subsidies. Their calculation: voters will turn on the Democrats for the turmoil caused by the shutdown.

Trump wanted nothing to do with any such negotiations either. Two days before the elections, he said he “won’t be extorted”.

But a recent poll shows 52% of Americans blame Trump and the Republicans for the shutdown, compared to 42% who blame Democrats.

The wins in Virginia and New Jersey drove this message home. Yes, the Democrats triggered the current shutdown. But the president owns the economy. For better or worse, Trump will own the economy going into next year’s midterm elections, too.

What happens next?

How can the Democrats get out of the shutdown box with a win? With the leverage they just gained in the elections. Republican stonewalling after these election defeats will hurt them even more.

There are two routes forward.

First, Democrats could reach an agreement with the Republicans on a fix to the health insurance issue, with a vote in Congress by Christmas to get the subsidies restored. A bipartisan compromise appears now to be in the works.

Second, if such an agreement cannot be reached, the Democrats can introduce a bill to restore the subsidies on their own, with an up-or-down vote in both the House and Senate. If this was voted down, the Democrats would then have a winning issue to take to the midterm elections next November. The voters would know who to blame – and who to reward.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has prevented the House from meeting for more than six weeks, but it has to come back in session to vote to reopen the government at some point.

Trump is also insisting the Senate change its rules to allow a simple majority to be able to reopen the government – without any compromises on health insurance subsidies. But this is not a viable political option after these election results.

Two other Democrats take centre stage

There were two other big Democratic winners on Tuesday. California voters approved a redistricting plan intended to partially offset Republicans’ gerrymandering of congressional electorates across the country for the midterm elections.

It was a high-risk strategy by California Governor Gavin Newsom, and it paid off handsomely: Newsom is now considered the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028.

And Mamdani, a Muslim socialist, was elected the Democratic mayor of New York City. Trump will no doubt continue to rubbish him as a communist radical extremist and follow through on his threats to cut federal funding for the largest city in the US.

Mamdani’s victory also places him on the national stage, but not centre stage. The Sinatra doctrine from his hit song New York, New York — “If I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere” — does not quite apply in this situation.

To take back Congress next year and the White House in 2028, the Democrats will need all kinds of flowers to bloom — not just Mamdani’s bouquet. In 2028, the party is going to have to shop in a bigger greenhouse.

Bruce Wolpe has served on the staffs of Democrats in Congress and former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

– ref. Democratic election wins send Trump – and Republicans – a message: Americans blame them for government shutdown – https://theconversation.com/democratic-election-wins-send-trump-and-republicans-a-message-americans-blame-them-for-government-shutdown-269094

November 5, 2025

China’s new 5-year plan: A high-stakes bet on self-reliance that won’t fix an unbalanced economy

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Shaoyu Yuan, Adjunct Professor, New York University; Rutgers University

Every few years since 1953, the Chinese government has unveiled a new master strategy for its economy: the all-important five-year plan.

For the most part, these blueprints have been geared at spurring growth and unity as the nation transformed from a rural, agrarian economy to an urbanized, developed powerhouse.

The task that faced China’s leaders as they met in early October 2025 to map out their 15th such plan was, however, complicated by two main factors: sluggish domestic growth and intensifying geopolitical rivalry.

Their solution? More of the same. In pledging to deliver “high-quality development” through technological self-reliance, industrial modernization and expanded domestic demand, Beijing is doubling down on a state-led model that has powered its rise in recent years. President Xi Jinping and others who ironed out the 2026-2030 plan are betting that innovation-driven industrial growth might secure China’s future, even as questions loom about underpowered consumer spending and mounting economic risks.

As an expert on China’s political economy, I view China’s new five-year plan as being as much about power as it is about economics. Indeed, it is primarily a blueprint for navigating a new era of competition. As such, it risks failing to address the widening gap between surging industrial capacity and tepid domestic demand.

High-tech dreams

At the heart of the new plan are recommendations that put advanced manufacturing and tech innovation front and center. In practice, this means upgrading old-line factories, automating and “greening” heavy industry and fostering “emerging and future industries” such as aerospace, renewable energy and quantum computing.

By moving the economy up the value chain, Beijing hopes to escape the middle-income trap and cement its status as a self-reliant tech superpower.

To insulate China from export controls put in place by other countries to slow China’s ascent, Beijing is doubling down on efforts to “indigenize” critical technologies by pumping money into domestic companies while reducing dependence on foreign suppliers.

This quest for self-reliance is not just about economics but explicitly tied to national security.

Under Xi, China has aggressively pursued what the Chinese Communist Party calls “military-civil fusion” – that is, the integration of civilian innovation with military needs.

The new five-year plan is poised to institutionalize this fusion as the primary mechanism for defense modernization, ensuring that any breakthroughs in civilian artificial intelligence or supercomputing automatically benefit the People’s Liberation Army.

Reshaping global trade

China’s state-led push in high-tech industries is already yielding dividends that the new five-year plan seeks to extend. In the past decade, China has surged to global leadership in green technologies such as solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles thanks to hefty government support. Now, Beijing intends to replicate that success in semiconductors, advanced machinery, biotechnology and quantum computing.

Such ambition, if realized, could reshape global supply chains and standards.

But it also raises the stakes in China’s economic rivalry with advanced economies. Chinese prowess in building entire supply chains has spurred the United States and Europe to talk of reindustrialization to avoid any overreliance on Beijing.

By pledging to build “a modern industrial system with advanced manufacturing as the backbone” and to accelerate “high-level scientific and technological self-reliance,” the new plan telegraphs that China will not back down from its bid for tech dominance.

An elusive rebalancing

What the plan gives comparatively modest attention, however, is the lack of strong domestic demand.

Boosting consumer spending and livelihoods gets little more than lip service in the communiqué that followed the plenum at which the five-year plan was mapped out.

Chinese leaders did promise efforts to “vigorously boost consumption” and build a “strong domestic market,” alongside improvements to education, health care and social security. But these goals were listed only after the calls for industrial upgrading and tech self-sufficiency – suggesting old priorities still prevail.

And this will disappoint economists who have long urged Beijing to shift from an overt, export-led model and toward a growth model driven more by household consumption.

Men and women look at boxed goods in a store. — Consumer spending in China remains a little soft.
Yang He/VCG via Getty Images

Household consumption still accounts for only about 40% of gross domestic product, far below advanced-economy norms. The reality is that Chinese households are still reeling from a series of recent economic blows: the COVID-19 lockdowns that shattered consumer confidence, a property market collapse that wiped out trillions in wealth, and rising youth unemployment that hit a record high before officials halted the publication of that data.

With local governments mired in debt and facing fiscal strain, there is skepticism that bold social spending or pro-consumption reforms will materialize anytime soon.

With Beijing reinforcing manufacturing even as domestic demand stays weak, the likelihood is extra output will be pushed abroad – especially when it comes to EVs, batteries and solar technologies – rather than be absorbed at home.

The new plan is cognizant of the need to maintain a strong manufacturing base, particularly among beleaguered industrial farms and other older industries struggling to stay afloat. As such, this approach may prevent painful downsizing in the short run, but it delays the rebalancing toward services and consumption that many economists argue China needs.

Ripple effects

Beijing has traditionally portrayed its five-year plans as a boon not only for China but for the world. The official narrative, echoed by state media, emphasizes that a stable, growing China remains an “engine” of global growth and a “stabilizer” amid worldwide uncertainty.

Notably, the new plan calls for “high-level opening-up,” aligning with international trade rules, expanding free-trade zones and encouraging inbound investment – even as it pursues self-reliance.

Yet China’s drive to climb the technological ladder and support its industries will likely intensify competition in global markets – potentially at the expense of other countries’ manufacturers. In recent years, China’s exports have surged to record levels. This flood of cheap Chinese goods has squeezed manufacturers among trading partners from Mexico to Europe, which have begun contemplating protective measures. If Beijing now doubles down on subsidizing both cutting-edge and traditional industries, the result could be an even greater glut of Chinese products globally, exacerbating trade frictions.

Two men in suits walk toward the camera, one waving. — U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping meet at Gimhae Air Base on Oct. 30, 2025, in Busan, South Korea.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

In other words, the world may feel more of China’s industrial might but not enough of its buying power – a combination that could strain international economic relations.

A high-stakes bet on the future

With China’s 15th five-year plan, Xi Jinping is making a strategic bet on his long-term vision. There is no doubt that the plan is ambitious and comprehensive. And if successful, it could guide China to technological heights and bolster its claim to great-power status.

But the plan also reveals Beijing’s reluctance to depart from a formula that has yielded growth at the cost of imbalances that have hurt many households across the vast country.

Rather than fundamentally shift course, China is trying to have it all ways: pursuing self-reliance and global integration, professing openness while fortifying itself, and promising prosperity for the people while pouring resources into industry and defense.

But Chinese citizens, whose welfare is ostensibly the plan’s focus, will ultimately judge its success by whether their incomes rise and lives improve by 2030. And that bet faces long odds.

Shaoyu Yuan 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. China’s new 5-year plan: A high-stakes bet on self-reliance that won’t fix an unbalanced economy – https://theconversation.com/chinas-new-5-year-plan-a-high-stakes-bet-on-self-reliance-that-wont-fix-an-unbalanced-economy-268699

November 5, 2025

Cyclists may be right to run stop signs and red lights. Here’s why

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Steve Lorteau, Long-Term Appointment Law Professor, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

The Idaho stop does not allow cyclists to proceed through a red light if there are cars moving. (La Conversation Canada), CC BY

Interactions between different users on roads are often a source of frustration, the most prominent being those between motorists and cyclists.

For example, many motorists are frustrated when they see bicycles cross an intersection without coming to a complete stop, which drivers are required to do.

Many motorists consider this behaviour a sign of cyclists’ lack of discipline or even a double standard. In fact, cyclists don’t seem to run any real risk just slowing down at stop signs instead of making a complete stop.

By comparison, motorists risk a hefty fine for dangerous driving if they run a stop sign.

So should cyclists be required to follow the same traffic rules as motorists, or should we recognize that these rules do not always reflect the reality of cycling in a city?

As a professor of law at the University of Ottawa who specializes in urban law issues, I have studied various regulatory approaches that have been adopted around the world, each with different advantages and disadvantages.

This article is part of La Conversation’s series Our Cities: From yesterday to tomorrow. Urban life is going through many transformations, each with cultural, economic, social implications. To shed light on these diverse issues, La Conversation is inviting researchers to discuss the current state of our cities.

Strict equality between cyclists and drivers

In Québec, as in many other jurisdictions, traffic laws apply to all users, whether they are motorists or cyclists.

For example, all users must come to a complete stop at stop signs and red lights. If cyclists break these rules, they have the “same rights and duties as a driver of a vehicle,” in the words of the Supreme Court of Canada.

In other words, regardless of the differences between a car and a bicycle, the law treats them equally. Of course, this equality often remains theoretical, as the application of the rules can vary depending on context and behaviour.

Deceptive equality

The uniform application of traffic rules may seem fair, but in reality, it can create a false sense of equality.

On the one hand, the risks associated with different modes of transport are incommensurate. A car that runs a red light can cause serious or even fatal injuries. A cyclist, on the other hand, is unlikely to cause the same degree of damage.

An election poster along a cycling path — The issue of bike paths is at the heart of the election campaign in Montréal.
(The Conversation Canada), CC BY

Furthermore, the efficiency of cycling depends on maintaining speed. Having to stop completely over and over discourages people from cycling, despite its many benefits for health, the environment and traffic flow.

Treating two such different modes of transport the same way, therefore, amounts to implicitly favouring cars, something akin to imposing the same speed limit on pedestrians and trucks.

The Idaho stop rule

Rather than treating bicycles and cars as equals, some jurisdictions have opted for a different approach. The state of Idaho is one good example.

Since 1982, cyclists in Idaho have been able to treat a stop sign as a yield sign and a red light as a stop sign. Several American states (such as Arkansas, Colorado, and Oregon) and countries, such as France and Belgium, have adopted similar regulations.

In Canada and Québec, discussions are underway to adopt such regulations.

It’s important to note that the goal of the Idaho stop rule is not to legalize chaos on the roads. Cyclists must still yield to cars ahead of them at stop signs, as well as to pedestrians at all times, and may only enter the intersection when it is clear.

The Idaho stop has three main advantages.

First, the rule recognizes that the dynamics of cycling are fundamentally different than those of driving, and therefore cannot be treated equally.

Second, the Idaho stop rule takes the burden of issuing fines off the courts and police.

Third, the efficiency of cycling depends on maintaining momentum. Coming to a complete stop over and over again discourages cycling, despite its many benefits for health, the environment and traffic flow.

The effects of the reform

Faced with these two very different approaches for bicycles, one may wonder which is the most appropriate.

Several empirical studies show that adopting the Idaho stop rule does not lead to an increase in road collisions.

Some studies even suggest a modest decrease in collisions with the Idaho stop regulation. This is because cyclists clear intersections more quickly, reducing their exposure to cars. In addition, motorists become more attentive to cyclists’ movements.

In fact, the majority of road users, both motorists and cyclists, often do not strictly obey stop signs. According to a study conducted by the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ), only 35 per cent of motorists stop correctly. Also according to the SAAQ, only 27 per cent of cyclists report coming to a complete stop at mandatory stop signs.

In short, adopting the Idaho stop rule would not create chaos, but would regulate an already common practice without compromising public safety, contrary to some concerns. Cyclists who rarely come to a complete stop when there is no traffic generally slow down before crossing because they are aware of their vulnerability.

A cultural shift

Furthermore, the question of introducing the Idaho stop rule in Québec invites broader reflection.

For decades, our laws and road infrastructure have been designed primarily for cars. Many motorists still consider cyclists to be dangerous and engage in reckless behaviour.

However, it’s important to remember that cars are the main structural hazard on our roads and that cyclists are in fact vulnerable. This structural danger has increased with the growth of sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and pick-up trucks, which increases the risks for pedestrians and cyclists.

Adopting the Idaho stop rule would not give cyclists a free pass, but it would recognize their realities and legitimize cycling as a mode of transport, with traffic regulations adapted to its risks and benefits. This modest but symbolic reform could be part of a broader set of changes that would offer citizens true freedom and safety when travelling.

Steve Lorteau has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canadian Bar Association, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

– ref. Cyclists may be right to run stop signs and red lights. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/cyclists-may-be-right-to-run-stop-signs-and-red-lights-heres-why-268724

November 5, 2025

After 2 years of devastating war, will Arab countries now turn their backs on Israel?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, Professor of International Law, La Trobe University

The Middle East has long been riddled by instability. This makes getting a sense of the broader, long-term trends in the aftermath of the Gaza war particularly challenging.

The significance of Trump’s 20-point peace deal that has (hopefully) brought an end to the Gaza war cannot be overstated.

However, this deal – and what comes next – will not change the Middle East. Rather, the wars of the past two years merely consolidated trends that were already under way. They didn’t serve as a radical break from the past.

The impact of October 7 on the region

Before October 2023, Israel’s place in the region seemed to be improving, despite the formidable “axis of resistance” Iran and its allies had built to counter it.

On top of its earlier peace agreements with Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994, Israel had normalised relations with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan under the Abraham Accords. It looked set to normalise relations with Saudi Arabia, too.

However, once Iran and Saudi Arabia reached a detente in their long-simmering rivalry in March 2023, the urgency of closer ties with Israel faded.

Then came October 7. One of Hamas’ apparent aims in launching the attack was to refocus the region’s attention on Palestinian liberation.

At the beginning, it looked like Hamas had partially succeeded. Among Arab states, only the UAE and Bahrain condemned the attack.

The remainder of the region either chose to join the fight against Israel (Iran, the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon) or maintain a duplicitous dance in between – not making the US angry by speaking out too forcefully against Israel, while placating (or repressing) their angry pro-Palestinian citizens at home.

Two years later, the “resistance” camp led by Iran and its proxies has been significantly weakened – an undeniable victory for Israel.

And while Arab popular opinion still largely supports armed Palestinian resistance to Israel, regional leaders do not. In a significant step in August, the Arab League officially condemned Hamas’ October 7 attacks and called for its disarmament.

Why Arab states are now backing Trump’s plan

Historically, even when the Palestinians have seemed at their weakest, they have had an outsize effect on the stability and legitimacy of Arab regimes in the Middle East.

A case in point is the wave of coups in the region that followed the Nakba in 1948, when around 750,000 Palestinians were either expelled or forced to flee during the war that created the state of Israel.

Today’s peace deal is no different. Israel’s neighbours are backing Trump’s 20-point plan because they have learned from history – rather than out of any sense of moral obligation.

For these states, the plan is not perfect. In fact, it makes a mockery of more robust peace proposals from the past, such as the 2002 Saudi-led Arab Peace Initiative to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Though Trump’s plan recognises the continued Palestinian presence in Gaza, it denies them political agency or accountability for alleged Israeli crimes. The plan only pays lip-service to the idea of a two-state solution. And given the facts on the ground and the prevailing political sensibilities in the US and Israel, Palestinian statehood seems highly unlikely.

Yet, regional states are aware that ongoing conflict is in no one’s interests, save for the Israeli far right.

Trump’s plan therefore represents a fig leaf for a region desperate to be seen to be ameliorating Palestinian suffering, while ensuring more robust US support. Such a concern became existential for the Gulf countries in the wake of Israel’s attacks on Hamas’ leadership in Qatar in September.

What comes next?

If the ceasefire holds and the peace plan proceeds, Trump sees an expanded Abraham Accords in the future, with other states lining up to normalise diplomatic relations with Israel (including possibly Saudi Arabia).

But other deals may get under way first. Israel and the United States are moving ahead with a series of initiatives. These include the India-Middle-East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) (a rail-sea link to transport goods between India, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Europe), and the Abraham shield plan (a proposed security and infrastructure partnership between the Gulf countries, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Israel).

Currently, it is unclear which land routes will be preferred for linking India and China with Europe. The Gulf states are prioritising Israel, while Turkey is positioning itself as an alternative northern route that extends China’s Belt and Road rail and road projects through Central Asia.

As the US has strengthened its military ties with Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, this will probably tilt the balance in favour of Israel and the Gulf countries, in spite of Turkey’s regional importance and NATO membership.

Given the huge public and private sums and geostrategic stakes involved, this is really where the region’s focus lies now.

So, even if the ceasefire falters and popular anger around the region intensifies, most Arab leaders will continue to expand and embrace Israeli cooperation.

Michelle Burgis-Kasthala has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. After 2 years of devastating war, will Arab countries now turn their backs on Israel? – https://theconversation.com/after-2-years-of-devastating-war-will-arab-countries-now-turn-their-backs-on-israel-267869

November 5, 2025

Is there a Christian genocide in Nigeria? Evidence shows all faiths are under attack by terrorists

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Olayinka Ajala, Associate professor in Politics and International Relations, Leeds Beckett University

Terrorism and insurgency have ravaged parts of Nigeria since 2009, especially in the northern regions. Tens of thousands of Nigerians have been killed and millions have been displaced by the violence. Nigeria was ranked sixth in the 2025 Global Terrorism Index, with a score of 7.658, moving up from eighth place in 2023 and 2024.

US president Donald Trump declared Nigeria a “country of particular concern” in November 2025.

This was the result of a campaign by US congressman Riley Moore, who alleged that there was an “alarming and ongoing persecution of Christians” in the west African country. The congressman stated that 7,000 Nigerian Christians had been killed in 2025 alone, an average of 35 a day.

Trump also threatened to take direct military action against Islamist militant groups operating in Nigeria.

In response, Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu objected, stating that the US characterisation of Nigeria did not reflect the country’s reality or values. He said successive governments had made efforts to uphold peaceful existence among diverse faith communities.

I have been researching conflicts, terrorism and the formation of insurgent groups in Nigeria for over a decade.

To understand the degree and intensity of terrorist and insurgency activities in Nigeria in the last 10 years, I analysed data from Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), an independent violence monitor.

The analysis shows it is difficult, if not impossible, to delineate the killings based on religious affiliations. All the religions in the country have been affected, and there have been fatalities across several ethnic and religious lines.

Is there a religious genocide in Nigeria?

Religious violence started in Nigeria in 1953, seven years before the country gained independence.

Successive military and civilian regimes have since struggled to curtail the string of religious violence, which is often linked to issues such as ethnicity, resource management, competition for resources and colonial boundaries. (British colonialists placed different ethnic groups with sometimes different values in one country.)

Figure 1 shows that while the number of attacks carried out by terrorist and insurgent groups have been roughly similar in the last four years, the number of fatalities has declined.

This chart does not explain the categories of people attacked. To understand whether there is a disproportionate attack on Christians, I compared the number of attacks on churches and mosques in Nigeria in the last 10 years.

The data shows that non-state actors have attacked both churches and mosques in Nigeria. While there have been more attacks on churches in the last six years, the data reveals that there were more attacks on mosques in 2015 and 2017.

Generally, Nigeria’s population is considered to be roughly evenly split between the two religions, with only around 0.6% adhering to traditional African religions or other beliefs.

Although it is difficult to extract the number of fatalities in these cases, the number of attacks on places of worship is an indication that both Christians and Muslims are under attack by terrorist and insurgent groups in Nigeria.

Trump’s history with Nigeria

This is the second time Trump has designated Nigeria as a country of particular concern. The first time was in December 2020, when he stated that the government of Nigeria was not doing enough to protect the safety of Nigerians, especially Christians. This was under the regime of former president Muhammadu Buhari.

Events leading to the designation of Nigeria as a country of particular concern this time started in March 2025, two months after Trump was sworn in for a second term. The US House foreign affairs sub-committee on Africa approved measures urging the president to impose sanctions on Nigeria due to the widespread persecution of Christians.

In addition, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom report on Nigeria (2025) argued that religious freedom in Nigeria remains poor. It said the federal and state governments in Nigeria continue to “tolerate attacks or failed to respond to violent actions” by non-state actors on Christians in the country.

The commission recommended that the US government designate Nigeria as a country of particular concern for “engaging in and tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom, as defined by the International Religious Freedom Act”.

What the designation means for Nigeria

The “country of particular concern” status is an official classification under the US International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The act requires the president of the US to declare this status where the government of a country has “engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom”.

Such violations include arbitrary execution based on faith, torture or inhuman treatment based on religion as well as other denials of the rights to life, liberty, or security because of a person’s religion.

In the case of Nigeria, there is no evidence that any of these acts have been carried out by the government.

The designation of a country as country of particular concern requires the US government to consider a range of options for ending the violations identified. The first steps include diplomatic or direct engagement, public condemnation or withdrawal of assistance. This could be followed by further actions such as economic sanctions and withdrawal of aid or other forms of economic assistance.

The US government, rather than engaging in diplomatic or direct engagement with the Nigerian government as a first step, has already threatened sanctions such as the withdrawal of aid and direct military action.

What should the US do to support Nigeria?

To assist the country in its fight against terrorism, the US needs to reconsider the classification of Nigeria and revert to the first step identified earlier: diplomacy and direct engagement.

Second, the US should support Nigeria’s effort to identify the sponsors of these groups and their sources of finance within and outside the country.

Third, there is a need for a regional and international approach to curb the menace of terrorism in Nigeria and the west African and Sahel region. The US could play a significant role in supporting organisations such as the Multi-National Joint Task Force which was set up to fight terrorism in the region.

Olayinka Ajala 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. Is there a Christian genocide in Nigeria? Evidence shows all faiths are under attack by terrorists – https://theconversation.com/is-there-a-christian-genocide-in-nigeria-evidence-shows-all-faiths-are-under-attack-by-terrorists-268929