Category: English

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Martin Farr, Senior Lecturer in Contemporary British History, Newcastle University

It is unlikely that within the first few days of a great global event – one moreover triggered by its closest ally launching a coup and kidnapping a head of state – a British government has said so little. It took 16 hours for it to say anything at all, and then, not much. And it has said not much thereafter.

So little said, at such length: the prime minister, in his Sunday morning BBC TV interview; James Kariuki, chargé d’affaires in the UK Mission to the United Nations at Monday morning’s Security Council emergency session; and Yvette Cooper, foreign secretary, for over two hours in the House of Commons on Monday evening.

This is both explicable and arguable. For Britain, Venezuela is not particularly significant. There are trade interests but it is far away, of foreign tongue; absent from domestic political discourse. The last time a British prime minister and a Venezuelan president met – Tony Blair and Hugo Chavez – was in 2001.

However, other than in times of actual war (1812) the nadir in US-UK relations concerned Venezuela. A long-forgotten crisis was triggered in 1895 by a dispute over the border between it and British Guiana. The spat elicited the equally forgotten Olney corollary – a proposition from the US government which nonetheless repays reacquaintance in light of recent developments: “Today the United States is practically sovereign on this continent.”

The present crisis similarly concerns hemispheric hegemony. It evokes the better-known 1823 Monroe doctrine, as a warning to the old world to stay out of the new. It adds resource competition (oil: Venezuela has rather a lot, much of it exported to China), while challenging the post-1945 “rules-based order” (reminding us that it was only ever convention-based) and threatening to replace it with one based largely on power. And there’s the upending of the 1648 Westphalian states system, which found fulfilment 300 years later in the creation of the UN.

Hence fears as to what precedent the president has set. Outrage at the Security Council from Russia and China was purely performative given that Trump could not have done more to legitimise their plans for Ukraine and Taiwan. Moscow was almost wistful, admiring how the Americans had managed with Venezuela in an hour what they had failed to do with Ukraine in four years.

Channelling James Monroe and Richard Olney, but with Ukrainian ally Volodymyr Zelenskyy in mind much more than either, Keir Starmer would never break publicly with Trump over something in the Americas. Canada is the exception, as was made clear in the pushback against the US when Trump suggested a Commonwealth realm should become America’s “51st state”.

Silence buys influence?

Insofar as the UK government has a distinct response, it’s that there should be a transition to democracy in Venezuela, ideally by including opposition figures. Trump has said he won’t pursue so left-field an option.

The lack of contact with the president – Starmer unwisely saying publicly that he was seeking it – is embarrassing, and summoned the inevitable clichés about puppets and poodles. The hope (increasingly more than the expectation) is that silence buys influence.

If that was not a green light from the UK, there is one red line. Greenland. The clarity of the government’s response to Trump’s predations is surprising, if the reason for it is not. Denmark has long been a close UK ally, not least over Ukraine. But siding publicly with Copenhagen over Washington is something else Starmer would not ordinarily have been expecting to have to do.

But American-led international crises have upended other Labour premiers. In 1950, Clement Attlee rearmed for the Korean War, with cuts in public spending to pay for it. Labour was out of office the following year.

The next decade, Harold Wilson declined to have a public opinion over the Vietnam war, thereby infuriating both the Americans and the young he enfranchised in 1969. Labour was out of office the following year.

The best known example remains Iraq. On the back of two landslide election triumphs in 2003, Blair split his party and inflamed the public. Labour’s parliamentary majority was slashed two years later. Unquestioning support for an American president became Blair’s nemesis.

He was comfortable with that. But Trump has transgressed the only recognisable facet of what political identity Starmer actually has: adherence to the rule of law, and international law at that. Yet he can only be mute.

The apparent inconsistencies between Starmer’s past and present can be reconciled by the elemental fact that he’s prime minister. What animated the student, the activist, the lawyer, the MP, cannot in office.

But it is that failure – that refusal – to opine that most exasperates MPs. Cooper’s fractious Venezuela statement highlighted fissures within Labour that are evident whenever the US, or Israel, is concerned.

Maduro was the kind of leader who gives leftwing governments a bad name, which is why only the hard left – Richard Burgon, John McDonnell – are incensed. The main threats to Starmer’s leadership come from the soft left – Angela Rayner, Andy Burnham – where such affairs have less salience, and the right – Wes Streeting, Al Carns – where they’re merely awkward.

For May’s impending local and national elections the impact may be clearer, and graver. The Liberal Democrats, Greens, Your Party, SNP and Plaid Cymru accept gratefully a gift that will go on giving on innumerable doorsteps throughout the spring.

The Conservatives happen to agree with the government’s policy, if not necessarily its delivery. Few of their voters will care about recondite international law. Fewer still, Reform UK voters. Almost unheard of, Nigel Farage, too, has been mute.

Desperate to engineer a narrative reset in 2026, Starmer, this mildest of prime ministers – politically, temperamentally – now finds himself faced with the so-called Donroe doctrine, Trump’s “update” to the Monroe doctrine.

It would be somewhat to understate to say that this was not the start to the year for which Starmer was hoping. As we gaze upon the most imperial of presidencies, he can only dream of a similar premiership.

Martin Farr 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 Keir Starmer’s silence on Venezuela a mistake? What history tells us – https://theconversation.com/is-keir-starmers-silence-on-venezuela-a-mistake-what-history-tells-us-272837

Source: The Conversation – UK – By James Muldoon, Associate Professor in Management, University of Essex

When Roro (not her real name) lost her mother to cancer, the grief felt bottomless. In her mid-20s and working as a content creator in China, she was haunted by the unfinished nature of their relationship. Their bond had always been complicated – shaped by unspoken resentments and a childhood in which care was often followed closely by criticism.

After her mother’s death, Roro found herself unable to reconcile the messiness of their past with the silence that followed. She shared her struggles with her followers on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (meaning “Little Red Book”), hoping to help them with their own journeys of healing.

Her writing caught the attention of the operators of AI character generator Xingye, who invited her to create an AI version of her mother as a public chatbot.

“I wrote about my mother, documenting all the important events in her life and then creating a story where she was resurrected in an AI world,” Roro told me through a translator. “You write out the major life events that shape the protagonist’s personality, and you define their behavioural patterns. Once you’ve done that, the AI can generate responses on its own. After it generates outputs, you can continue adjusting it based on what you want it to be.”

During the training process, Roro began to reinterpret her past with her mother, altering elements of their story to create a more idealised figure – a gentler and more attentive version of her. This helped her to process the loss, resulting in the creation of Xia (霞), a public chatbot with which her followers could also interact.

After its release, Roro received a message from a friend saying her mum would be so proud of her. “I broke down in tears,” Roro said. “It was incredibly healing. That’s why I wanted to create something like this – not just to heal myself, but also to provide others with something that might say the words they needed to hear.”

Grief in the age of deathbots

As I recount in my new book Love Machines, Roro’s story reflects the new possibilities technology has opened for people to cope with grief through conversational AI. Large language models can be trained using personal material including emails, texts, voice notes and social media posts to mimic the conversational style of a deceased loved one.

These “deathbots” or “griefbots” are one of the more controversial use cases of AI chatbots. Some are text-based, while others also depict the person through a video avatar. US “grieftech” company You, Only Virtual, for example, creates a chatbot from conversations (both spoken and written) between the deceased and one of their living friends or relatives, producing a version of how they appeared to that particular person.

While some deathbots remain static representations of a person at the time of their death, others are given access to the internet and can “evolve” through conversations. You, Only Virtual’s CEO, Justin Harrison, argues it would not be an authentic version of a deceased person if their AI could not keep up with the times and respond to new information.

But this raises a host of difficult questions about whether estimating the development of a human personality is even possible with current technology, and what effect interacting with such an entity could have on a deceased person’s loved ones.

Xingye, the platform on which Roro created her late mother’s chatbot, is one of the key prompts for proposed new regulations from China’s Cyberspace Administration, the national internet content regulator and censor, which seek to reduce the potential emotional harm of “human-like interactive AI services”.

What does digital resurrection do to grief?

Deathbots fundamentally change the process of mourning because, unlike seeing old letters or photos of the deceased, interacting with generative AI can introduce new and unexpected elements into the grieving process. For Roro, creating and interacting with an AI version of her mother felt surprisingly therapeutic, allowing her to articulate feelings she never voiced and achieve a sense of closure.

But not everyone shares this experience, including London-based journalist Lottie Hayton, who lost both her parents suddenly in 2022 and wrote about her experiences recreating them with AI. She said she found the simulations uncanny and distressing: the technology wasn’t quite there, and the clumsy imitations felt as if they cheapened her real memories rather than honoured them.

There are also important ethical questions about whose consent is required for the creation of a deathbot, where they would be allowed to be displayed and what impact they could have on other family members and friends.

Does one relative’s desire to create a symbolic companion who helps them make sense of their loss give them the right to display a deathbot publicly on their social media account, where others will see it – potentially exacerbating their grief? What happens when different relatives disagree about whether a parent or partner would have wanted to be digitally resurrected at all?

The companies creating these deathbots are not neutral grief counsellors; they are commercial platforms driven by familiar incentives around growth, engagement and data harvesting. This creates a tension between what is emotionally healthy for users and what is profitable for firms. A deathbot that people visit compulsively, or struggle to stop talking to, may be a business success but a psychological trap.

These risks don’t mean we should ban all experiments with AI-mediated grief or dismiss the genuine comfort some people, like Roro, find in them. But they do mean that decisions about “resurrecting” the dead can’t be left solely to start-ups and venture capital.

The industry needs clear rules about consent, limits on how posthumous data can be used, and design standards that prioritise psychological wellbeing over endless engagement. Ultimately, the question is not just whether AI should be allowed to resurrect the dead, but who gets to do so, on what terms, and at what cost.

This article includes a link to bookshop.org. If you click the link and go on to buy from bookshop.org, The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

James Muldoon 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. James is the author of Love Machines: How Artificial Intelligence is Transforming Our Relationships (Faber).

– ref. Should AI be allowed to resurrect the dead? – https://theconversation.com/should-ai-be-allowed-to-resurrect-the-dead-272643

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jen Wilson, Senior Exercise and Health Practitioner, Nottingham Trent University

Exercising in the cold weather can be refreshing and invigorating. But it can also come with a unique set of risks – including the potential for slips, falls and injuries. This is why it’s especially important to look after your body before and after an outdoor workout in the winter.

There are a few reasons why the cold increases your risk of suffering an injury while exercising.

First, the cold can significantly affect muscle function. When the temperature of the muscles falls below the body’s core temperature of 37°C, muscle tissue becomes stiffer, less elastic and more susceptible to damage.

And for every 1°C reduction in muscle temperature, there’s a 4–6% decline in our ability to produce force and power. This is particularly relevant for dynamic activities such as running, where explosive force and rapid movement are required.

Second, cold temperatures cause the blood vessels in our arms, legs, hands and feet to narrow (known as vasoconstriction). This limits the amount of oxygenated blood that’s being circulated to the working muscles.

---

Read more:
Winter exercise is important for maintaining physical and mental health

---

This reduced blood flow may impair performance and slow metabolic processes, causing it to take longer for you to recover after a workout. In more extreme cold temperatures, you can lose coordination and experience numbness in the extremities, further elevating risk of slips, missteps and injury.

Even if the temperatures are well above freezing, you’re still at risk of injury. Prolonged exposure to cold, wet conditions can lead to microvascular damage (injury to the body’s smallest blood vessels) due to sustained reductions in blood flow. This can reduce tissue and nerve function, affecting everything from coordination and reaction time and further increasing risk of injury.

But while exercising in the cold may come with risks, there are also many things we can do before and after workouts to lower our risk of suffering an injury.

1. Warm-up thoroughly

Because colder muscles are stiffer and more vulnerable to strain, a good warm-up is essential.

Before your workout, aim to do a 20-minute warm-up. This should start with some brisk walking, jogging, light cycling – or any other activity that gets your heart rate up gradually but isn’t so intense you couldn’t still hold a conversation.

You should also perform dynamic movements such as leg swings, walking lunges and arm circles help elevate both core and muscle temperature.

Static stretching is best left for later in the session, once tissues have warmed and are more pliable.

2. Layer up

Clothing plays a significant role in regulating body temperature and protecting against cold-related stress. But it’s important not to wear clothing that’s bulky or restrictive, as this may cause overheating or limit your natural movement patterns and increase injury risk.

It’s recommended instead that you layer properly. Start with a moisture-wicking base layer made of natural fibres (such as wool, which can help prevent heat loss even if your clothes get damp), an insulating middle layer (such as a light fleece) and a breathable, wind-resistant outer layer.

Special attention should be given to the extremities, as they’re most vulnerable to heat loss. Gloves, hats and thermal socks will help preserve warmth.

Make sure to wear shoes that have good traction or even use walking sticks to reduce risk of slipping on wet or icy surfaces. If you’re working out in low-light conditions, make sure to wear a reflective outer layer for visibility.

3. Fuel for your workout

Drinking plenty of water is just as important in the cold as it is in hot weather. But the cold weather may cause people to drink less water. Cold weather may also make it appear as though we aren’t sweating as much. This may mask dehydration, making it even more important you’re hydrating properly.

Energy demands may also rise in cold weather. Shivering, wearing heavier clothing and increased effort when exercising in snowy or icy condition can all make us burn more calories. So make sure you’re eating enough food to maintain energy levels, preserve performance and help the body cope with the bold temperatures.

Foods rich in carbohydrates should be eaten before exercise, whereas protein and carbohydrates should be eaten within 30 minutes to 2 hours after a workout.

4. Check the weather

Before starting any cold-weather session, it’s important to check the temperature, wind chill, moisture levels and ground conditions.

If conditions are particularly severe (such as the winds are very strong, it’s very cold, icy or raining heavily), it’s best you modify the session or workout indoors instead to avoid an injury.

5. Cool down gradually

After your workout, aim to cool down gradually. Maintain circulation and prevent a sudden drop in blood flow to the extremities by doing some light aerobic activity, such as brisk walking. This is to ensure that blood is still being properly circulated back toward the heart.

Once your heart rate has decreased, aim to do some static stretching (such as holding a hamstring stretch) to help reduce muscle stiffness and aid recovery. This might also help you feel looser after exercise.

6. Change out of wet clothes immediately

Wet clothing accelerates heat loss dramatically. Wet skin also cools much faster than dry skin, increasing susceptibility to hypothermia and other cold-related injuries, such as frostbite.

Be sure to change into dry, warm layers as soon as possible after a workout to avoid injury and warm-up effectively.

7. Stay alert for signs of an injury

Persistent shivering, confusion and lethargy can be signs of hypothermia. Numbness or waxy, pale skin can be signs of frostbite. If you have any of these symptoms after your workout, it’s key you address them promptly or seek medical advice.

Cold weather exercise can be both invigorating and beneficial. Taking the right steps to mitigate risks and avoid injury can ensure training outdoors during the colder months can remain safe, productive and enjoyable.

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

– ref. How to avoid an injury when exercising outdoors this winter – https://theconversation.com/how-to-avoid-an-injury-when-exercising-outdoors-this-winter-271424

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Robyn Atcheson, Open Learning Tutor in Social History, Queen’s University Belfast

Sunday January 6 1839 signalled the end of the festive season, the last of the 12 days of Christmas. The people of Ireland woke to light snow and many were looking forward to the evening’s celebrations.

January 6 was known as Nollaig na mBan – “women’s Christmas” when womenfolk across the country took a day off from their traditional domestic chores as a reward for all their efforts, and visited friends and family.

The temperature rose dramatically by mid-afternoon before rain started around 3pm. The Ordnance Survey had been carrying out observations at Phoenix Park in Dublin for a decade and their readings showed how quickly the atmosphere was changing during the day. As evening approached, people were aware of an approaching storm.

By 10pm Ireland was hit with the full force of a hurricane that would last at least eight hours. It had travelled over the Atlantic Ocean, gathering momentum, before crashing over the west coast. Waves even broke over the top of the Cliffs of Moher. And so the destruction began.

A perfect storm

The Enniskillen Chronicle wrote the next day: “The gale increased in violence until it became a perfect hurricane, unroofing houses, blowing down chimneys, prostrating boundary walls, and almost everything that offered resistance.”

As windows shattered and the thatch on rooftops blew away, the people of Ireland were in darkness, only able to see in the flashes of lightning and the light of an apparent aurora borealis. In recorded memories of the event, the main sensory experience was the sheer noise of the storm – “the deafening roar of a thousand pieces of artillery”, a reporter wrote on January 10.

Thousands of trees were blown down across Ireland. Fires broke out, fanned by the fierce winds. Along the Tyrone-Monaghan border there was a fire in almost every townland (the name for settlements before modern towns were established). In Dublin, the Bethesda Chapel caught on fire, burning the church, its attached school, six town houses and the House of Refuge for “reclaimed females”.

The river Liffey overflowed, there were flash floods in Strabane and all the water was reportedly blown out of a canal near Tuam. The earth was stripped alongside the river Boyne, exposing the bones of soldiers killed in battle 150 years earlier. Fish were found six miles inland while vegetation even 40 miles inland tasted of brine.

It is difficult to calculate the number of lives lost that night. Estimates put the death toll between 250 and 300 people. Many sailors died at sea, including the captain and entire crew of the Andrew Nugent, wrecked off Arranmore Island. Lord Castlemaine was fastening his bedroom window at Moydrum Castle in Athlone when the storm blew it open, hurling him across the room and killing him instantly.

Those who died in the aftermath, from injuries, pneumonia, frostbite or other related consequences of the storm, have never been counted. Stacks of hay and corn were devastated by fire. The houses that suffered the most were those of the lower classes.

Storm then famine

Some families and communities were only just recovering from the effects of the storm by 1845 when Ireland faced another national catastrophe with the first failure of the potato crop.

As they sought to make sense of the seemingly apocalyptic event they had lived through, people turned to religion and superstition. The storm was variously interpreted as a battle between English and Irish fairy folk, the devil causing havoc, and as a warning from God that the day of judgement would soon arrive. With the onslaught of the Great Hunger six years later, it is no wonder that people were afraid to name this terrible event.

By the end of the century, the “Night of the Big Wind” had become the most common name used by the poor to discuss the trauma of January 1839. It had become easier to discuss this freak occurrence than the more traumatic An Gorta Mór, the Irish term for the Great Hunger of the late 1840s.

In a strange twist, cultural memories of the night were also to become very lucrative in the next century. In 1909 the Old Age Pension Act was implemented in the United Kingdom. Old age was deemed to include those 70 years old and above.

In Ireland – still part of the UK at this point – this was a problem, as birth registration had not been made compulsory until 1864. Many old people, particularly Catholics, had no way to prove they were over the threshold. Memories and anecdotal evidence were turned to as a means of establishing whether someone was eligible.

Being able to give an account of your memory of “the Big Wind” was a sure-fire way of establishing you were over 70. Pension bureaucracy noted that quite a lot of people had the same memory and even recounted it in the same phrase: “I was able to eat a potato out of my hand on the ‘Night of the Big Wind’.”

This was an expression that was easy for people to remember, and showed the individual was old enough to feed themselves in 1839. By March 1909, 80,000 people in the United Kingdom had applied for the pension – 70,000 of them were Irish.

One such pensioner was Tim Joyce from Co. Limerick who cheerfully recounted: “I always thought I was 60. But my friends came to me and told me they were certain sure I was 70, and as there were three or four of them against me, the evidence was too strong for me. I put in for the pension and got it.”

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Robyn Atcheson 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. How a ferocious 19th-century hurricane helped Irish people get their British pension – https://theconversation.com/how-a-ferocious-19th-century-hurricane-helped-irish-people-get-their-british-pension-271653

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pablo Uchoa, PhD Candidate in International Politics, Institute of the Americas, UCL

Shortly after US special forces captured and extracted Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, on November 3, Donald Trump said that the US would now “run” Venezuela.

Whatever Washington’s plans for the future of Venezuelan governance, this show of US force in Latin America looks like the first manifestation of a more assertive American foreign policy outlined in the national security strategy published in November 2025. This plainly asserted the Trump administration’s intention to “reassert and enforce the Monroe doctrine to restore American pre-eminence in the Western Hemisphere”.

Rather than force regime change at this point, Trump has indicated that he is willing to work with Maduro’s vice-president, Delcy Rodriguez, who has been sworn in as president. Rodríguez has adopted a conciliatory tone, inviting the US government to “work together on a cooperative agenda”. For the US president, “cooperation” will involve giving US oil companies unfettered access to Venezuela’s oil reserves, the largest in the world.

Announcing the raid at a press conference held hours after American forces snatched Maduro, Trump appeared to issue threats of similar interventions in Colombia, which he said was run by a “sick man who likes to make cocaine and sell it to the US”. His secretary of state, Marco Rubio – the child of Cuban exiles – also hinted at US intentions towards Cuba, saying: “If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned at least a little bit.”

The US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, was perhaps most revealing of the three, talking about the administration’s goal of “reestablishing American deterrence and dominance in the Western Hemisphere”. In a clear warning to US foes, Hegseth said that no other country could have pulled this operation off, adding: “Our adversaries remain on notice. America can project our will anywhere, anytime.”

This is worrying in terms of geopolitics for two reasons.

First, the administration has shown a remarkable lack of engagement with international law. It has chosen instead to frame the raid as a police action to apprehend Maduro as a “narco-terrorist” responsible flooding the US with drugs.

This thin veil of legality has proved successful in the past. In 1989, the administration of George H.W. Bush ordered the invasion of Panama to capture the strongman dictator Manuel Noriega. Noriega was tried in Miami and jailed for 20 years on charges of being a sponsor of illicit drug trafficking.

Despite the UN passing a resolution condemning the invasion as a “flagrant violation of international law” (vetoed by the US, UK and France) the invasion enabled the US to take control of the canal. It held the canal for a decade before handing over operations to the Panama Canal Authority on December 31 1999.

The success of Bush’s invasion could explain why the Trump administration is taking a similar approach with Venezuela. Washington’s official line been to focus on Maduro’s alleged criminality rather than any US ambition to affect regime change in Venezuela.

---

Read more:
How US intervention in Venezuela mirrors its actions in Panama in 1989

---

Hegseth also insisted that the raid was about “safety, security, freedom and prosperity for the American people”. This assertion succinctly captures how the parameters of US national security have evolved to be much broader than defence. They now appear effectively inseparable from advancing US economic interests globally.

It’s an updated version of the Monroe doctrine, which the national security strategy described as the “Trump corollary”, but which the president himself has referred to as the “Donroe doctrine”. The term, which appears to have been coined by the New York Post (but which Trump nonetheless appears to have taken a liking to – as with most things that bear his name) is a vision of geopolitics which projects US power across the Americas.

And it looks set to be used to grab whatever resources the US perceives as beneficial to its interests, from Greenland’s minerals and strategic position to the Panama canal and Venezuelan oil.

A new era of interventionism?

Naturally, it is in Latin America where these threats become more palpable. The 1823 Monroe doctrine – developed under the then president, James Monroe – designated the western hemisphere as an area of US influence in which the European powers of the time were explicitly warned not to interfere. Seven decades later, the 1904 “Roosevelt corollary” added the principle that the US could interfere in any Latin American countries plagued by “wrongdoing or impotence” and “requiring intervention by some civilized nation”.

This principle was invoked to justify direct occupation of Latin American countries contrary to US interests in the early 20th century. In this century, China’s growing links in Latin America have prompted a resurgence of references to the Monroe doctrine – particularly by Republican Congress members.

In 2026, these developments highlight the Trump administration’s willingness to enhance the capabilities of this outlook. It is not clear how the Donroe doctrine differs from its predecessors. But like them, it seems to subordinate international law to national interest.

And while it is aimed at a global audience, it also appears to entitle powerful countries with the right of having spheres of influence. Commentators have referred to this as an era of “rogue superpowers” and the “Putinisation” of US foreign policy.

The absence of conspicuous military support for Maduro from either Russia or China reinforces those arguments. China reportedly buys 76% of Venezuelan oil, while Moscow has in recent years had strong military ties with Caracas. The two countries have also cooperated closely to help each other avoid US oil sanctions.

The new US foreign policy stance as exemplified by the snatching of Maduro means the world is more dangerous – and Latin America considerably more vulnerable. But for now it’s Venezuela, which appears to be the laboratory where Trump has decided to flex America’s geopolitical muscles.

And it looks as if Maduro is the unlucky guinea pig, whose fate is designed to indicate what the world’s most powerful military can and will do to advance its economic and national security interests around the world.

Pablo Uchoa was funded by UKRI, through LAHP, to complete his PhD in Political Science at the UCL Institute of the Americas.

– ref. The ‘Donroe doctrine’: Maduro is the guinea pig for Donald Trump’s new world order – https://theconversation.com/the-donroe-doctrine-maduro-is-the-guinea-pig-for-donald-trumps-new-world-order-272687

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ioannis Kratsiotis, Lecturer in Organisational Psychology, Manchester Metropolitan University

Most people know what a difficult day at work feels like. It can be tiring, draining and tense, leaving you unable to switch off. But there are also days when work feels lighter and more energising.

These good days are not necessarily defined by big wins or major achievements. In fact, they tend to come from harmonious experiences in the workplace that support our psychological needs.

Research I carried out with colleagues suggests that when people feel genuinely supported by the people around them, it helps to meet three basic needs: a sense of autonomy, a sense of competency and a sense of connection.

Meeting these needs is often what makes some days feel better than others. And workers can create these better days for themselves and for the people around them with these five simple suggestions.

1. Ask for help and offer it in return

Support does not need to be formal or time consuming. A brief check in, a quick question or an offer to share advice can make a real difference.

These small interactions help people feel connected and supported, which lifts mood and motivation throughout the day. Support works best when it goes both ways, so look for opportunities to both ask for help and offer it when you can.

2. Recognise the small wins

Feeling effective is one of the strongest drivers of wellbeing, so take a moment to notice the small things that went well.

Perhaps you made progress on a task or finally completed something on your to do list that you’d been avoiding. Recognising these small wins builds a sense of competence that carries into the rest of the day and into life outside work.

3. Give people (and yourself) some space

A sense of freedom in how we approach our work plays an important role in how we feel each day. Give yourself permission to make small choices about how you complete your tasks and allow colleagues this same freedom when possible.

Showing trust in others can strengthen your relationships, while giving yourself space can help you maintain focus and motivation.

4. Reach out before the end of the day

Short moments of genuine connection can change the tone of the entire day. A simple thank you, a message of appreciation or a short conversation with a colleague can lift your mood more than you might expect.

Reaching out to someone before you finish your day can help you leave work feeling lighter and more energised. Building positive workplace relationships not only feels good but also provides a reliable support network you can draw on when needed.

5. Stay balanced

Sometimes we feel drained because one of our basic needs is not being met. Perhaps we have had too little freedom in our work, too few moments of progress or not enough human connection.

Restoring balance matters more than maximising any one need, so taking a moment to notice what feels low is the first step towards bringing back a sense of equilibrium. The next step is to do one small thing to address it.

Choose the order of your upcoming tasks if you need a greater sense of autonomy, complete a manageable task if you need a sense of progress and check in with a colleague if you feel isolated. Encouraging others to do the same helps build a team climate where balance and support are shared responsibilities. When this happens, good days become more common.

Small changes, big differences

The main message of our research is simple. Good days at work do not require major changes or perfect conditions. They are created through small everyday moments of support that help us feel free, capable and connected.

When these needs are in balance, people feel better during the workday and have more energy when they get home. Work will always have its difficult moments, but we have more influence over our daily experience than we sometimes realise.

By paying attention to the small moments that shape our day, and by supporting each other in simple but meaningful ways, we can create more days that leave us feeling fulfilled at work and refreshed at home.

Ioannis Kratsiotis 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. Five ways to make your day at work feel better – https://theconversation.com/five-ways-to-make-your-day-at-work-feel-better-272217