English – Page 289 – MIL Submissions Engine

August 10, 2025

As the status quo shifts, we’re becoming more forgiving when algorithms mess up

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hamza Tariq, PhD Student, Cognitive Psychology, University of Waterloo

New inventions — like the printing press, magnetic compasses, steam engines, calculators and the internet — can create radical shifts in our everyday lives. Many of these new technologies were met with some degree of skepticism by those who lived through the transition.

Over the past 30 years alone, we’ve seen our relationship with the internet transform dramatically — it’s fundamentally changed how we search for, remember and learn information; how we evaluate and trust information; and, more recently, how we encounter and interact with artificial intelligence.

As new technologies and ways of doing things emerge, we fixate on their flaws and errors, and judge them more harshly than what we’re already familiar with. These apprehensions are not unwarranted. Today, important debates continue around accountability, ethics, transparency and fairness in the use of AI.

But how much of our aversion is really about the technology itself, and how much is driven by the discomfort of moving away from the status quo?

Algorithm aversion

As a PhD student in cognitive psychology, I study human judgment and decision-making, with a focus on how we evaluate mistakes, and how context, like the status quo, can shape our biases.

In my research with cognitive psychologists Jonathan A. Fugelsang and Derek J. Koehler, we tested how people evaluate errors made by humans versus algorithms depending on what they saw as the norm.

Despite algorithms’ track record of consistently outperforming humans in several prediction and judgment tasks, people have been hesitant to use algorithms. This mistrust goes back as far as the 1950s, when psychologist Paul Meehl argued that simple statistical models could make more accurate predictions than trained clinicians. Yet the response from experts at the time was far from welcoming. As psychologist Daniel Kahneman would later put it, the reaction was marked by “hostility and disbelief.”

That early resistance continues to echo in more recent research, which shows that when an algorithm makes a mistake, people tend to judge and punish it more harshly than when a human makes the same error. This phenomenon is now called algorithm aversion.

Defining convention

We examined this bias by asking participants to evaluate mistakes made by either a human or by an algorithm. Before seeing the error, we told them which option was considered the conventional one — described as being historically dominant, widely used and typically relied upon in that scenario.

In half the trials, the task was said to be traditionally done by humans. In the other half, we reversed the roles, indicating that the role had traditionally been done by an algorithmic agent.

When humans were framed as the norm, people judged algorithmic errors more harshly. But when algorithms were framed as the norm, people’s evaluations shifted. They were now more forgiving of algorithmic mistakes, and harsher on humans making the same mistakes.

This suggests that people’s reactions may have less to do with algorithms versus humans, and more to do with whether something fits their mental picture of how things are supposed to be done. In other words, we’re more tolerant when the culprit is also the status quo. And we’re tougher on mistakes that come from what feels new or unfamiliar.

Intuition, nuance and skepticism

Yet, explanations for algorithm aversion continue to make intuitive sense. A human decision-maker, for instance, might be able to consider the nuances of real life like an algorithmic system never could.

But is this aversion really just about the non-human limitations of algorithmic technologies? Or is part of the resistance rooted in something broader — something about shifting from one status quo to another?

These questions, viewed through the historic lens of human relationships with past technologies, led us to revisit common assumptions about why people are often skeptical and less forgiving of algorithms.

Signs of that transition are all around us. After all, debates around AI haven’t slowed its adoption. And for a few decades now, algorithmic tech has already been helping us navigate traffic, find dates, detect fraud, recommend music and movies, and even help diagnose illnesses.

And while many studies document algorithm aversion, recent ones also show algorithm appreciation — where people actually prefer or defer to algorithmic advice in a variety of different situations.

We’re increasingly leaning on algorithms, especially when they’re faster, easier and appear just as (or more) reliable. As that reliance grows, a shift in how we view technologies like AI — and their errors — seems inevitable.

This shift from outright aversion to increasing tolerance suggests that how we judge mistakes may have less to do with who makes them and more to do with what we’re accustomed to.

Hamza Tariq has received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council (NSERC) of Canada.

– ref. As the status quo shifts, we’re becoming more forgiving when algorithms mess up – https://theconversation.com/as-the-status-quo-shifts-were-becoming-more-forgiving-when-algorithms-mess-up-261166

August 10, 2025

The bacteria killing sea stars in the Pacific: How our team uncovered a decade-long mystery

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Melanie Prentice, Research Associate, University of British Columbia

A sunflower sea star in Knight Inlet on the British Columbia coast. (Grant Callegari/Hakai Institute)

In 2013, a mysterious epidemic swept across the Pacific Coast of North America, rapidly turning billions of sea stars from Mexico to Alaska into goo.

Its name, sea star wasting disease (SSWD), describes what you might have seen if you wandered the shores of the Pacific Northwest at that time: contorted sea star bodies and fragmented arms littered the sea floor, as the tissues of sea stars melted away within a matter of days.

In the more than 10 years that has followed, SSWD has been described as the largest epidemic ever recorded in a wild marine species, and one of the 10 greatest unsolved ocean mysteries. Attempts to identify the pathogen responsible have turned up more questions than answers, until now.

We have recently published the findings of our five-year research project into the cause of SSWD.

Our team included multi-national and multi-disciplinary researchers from academic, government and non-profit institutions, a collaboration that was critical for the success of this work.

Together, we conducted laboratory experiments and analyzed data from wild outbreaks of SSWD to identify the pathogen responsible: a novel strain of the bacterium Vibrio pectenicida.

The significance of sea stars

An explainer on sea star wasting disease. (Hakai Institute).

Aside from the devastating loss of these charismatic rocky-shore inhabitants, the implications of this epidemic reverberate throughout the ecosystems sea stars inhabit.

More than two dozen species appear to be afflicted by SSWD, which vary in their susceptibility to the disease. Most susceptible is the sunflower sea star, a voracious marine predator and the largest species of sea star. They can grow to the size of a bicycle tire and have as many as 24 arms.

Almost six billion sunflower sea stars have been lost to SSWD, placing them on the critically endangered species list. With them, the kelp forest ecosystems they help to regulate have disappeared.

Sunflower sea stars keep kelp forests thriving by preying on sea urchins. With the rapid disappearance of these predators, unchecked urchin populations increased rapidly, mowing down kelp forests and replacing these lush, biodiverse ecosystems with urchin barrens.

The loss of kelp has had knock-on effects for the numerous species that rely on it for food and habitat. Alongside this staggering loss of biodiversity, millions of dollars from fishing and tourism are lost to impacted communities.

Although harder to quantify, the ecosystem services of kelp forests are also impacted, including water filtration which improves water quality, sediment stabilization that protects coastlines from erosion and storms, and carbon capture that helps mitigate the effects of climate change.

Recovery of kelp forests, and the species reliant upon them, requires a deeper understanding of SSWD and the sea stars devastated by it. The first step in our research was to identify the culprit responsible, however, the task proved more difficult than we initially anticipated.

a group or large starfish with several arms — A group of sunflower sea stars with SSWD in Knight Inlet, B.C.
(Grant Callegari/Hakai Institute)

A pathogen is revealed

Among the many possible pathogens suspected of causing the SSWD epidemic, it is unsurprising that the culprit turned out to be in the Vibrio species group.

From multiple diseases in corals to cholera in humans, the abundance of harmful Vibrio species in our oceans is on the rise with climate change as these bacteria favour warmer waters.

However, narrowing in on the specific culprit was not an easy undertaking. Vibrio pectenicida has some unusual characteristics not observed in other Vibrio species, allowing it to evade detection for more than a decade.

This was originally considered a risky and potentially unanswerable question. However, years of laboratory experiments and field sampling recently culminated in successful mortality-inducing experiments using a pure culture isolated by Amy Chan, a research scientist at the University of British Columbia, of the novel Vibrio pectenicida strain.

Named FHCF-3, it stands apart from previously identified strains (different genetic variants) by less than three per cent of its genome. Such strains have been isolated from diseased scallop larvae in France, crabs in the United Kingdom and, most recently, geoduck larvae from the Pacific Northwest.

Whether or not these strains can cause SSWD remains to be answered, but the potential implications are clear; with a large host range, broad geographic distribution, and propensity for warm seawater temperatures anticipated with advancing climate change, this pathogen is one to watch.

a five armed starfish on a rock underwater, some of its arms are disintegrating. — A cookie sea star with SSWD near Calvert Island, B.C.
(Grant Callegari/Hakai Institute)

No time to waste

Like removing a blindfold, the identification of the pathogen causing SSWD unveils new opportunities for research and management of the species and ecosystems affected.

First on the list is developing a diagnostic test that can detect the genetic sequence of the pathogen. This would allow researchers to test sea star or seawater samples for its presence.

Much like the COVID-19 test eased humanity out of lockdowns, this test will help inform marine management by helping diagnose healthy versus sick sea stars, and identifying locations best suited for reintroduction efforts.

Another target of future research is to identify resilient sea stars (those that can either prevent infection entirely or fight it off once it takes hold) for conservation breeding.

Resilient individuals, particularly of highly vulnerable species like sunflower sea stars, will be vital for recovery efforts in a warming ocean where Vibrio pectenicida is already widespread.

Despite the odds, the identification of the SSWD pathogen provides a new hopeful vision for our oceans and their inhabitants; one where disease-resilient sunflower sea stars once again roam the sea floor among thriving kelp forests replete with vibrant marine life.

Melanie Prentice receives funding from The Tula Foundation and The Nature Conservancy of California.

Alyssa-Lois Gehman receives funding from the Tula Foundation and The Nature Conservancy. She is affiliated with the Hakai Institute

Drew Harvell receives funding from The Nature Conservancy.

Grace Crandall receives funding from The Nature Conservancy.

– ref. The bacteria killing sea stars in the Pacific: How our team uncovered a decade-long mystery – https://theconversation.com/the-bacteria-killing-sea-stars-in-the-pacific-how-our-team-uncovered-a-decade-long-mystery-259875

August 10, 2025

South Sudan’s new chief justice has a chance to reform the judiciary – if he’s allowed to do his job

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Mark Deng, McKenzie Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne

South Sudan’s chief justice, Chan Reec Madut, was sacked in late May 2025 after more than 13 years on the bench. Madut leaves behind a legacy of inefficiency and accusations of judicial graft. But the sacking violated South Sudan’s 2011 transitional constitution and the law. Ultimately, the president’s decision threatens the rule of law and judicial independence. Constitutional scholar Mark Deng discusses this worrying development.

What was envisaged for South Sudan’s post-independence judiciary?

South Sudan won independent statehood following an internationally supervised referendum in 2011. The transitional constitution, drafted after the referendum, is the country’s founding law. It provides for the establishment of the three arms of government – legislature, executive and judiciary – with distinct powers and functions. The judiciary exercises judicial power and enforces the rule of law in the country. It has five levels of courts, the Supreme Court of South Sudan being the highest.

To shield courts from political whims, judges are appointed to, and removed from, office by the president of the republic only on the recommendation of the judicial service commission. There are constitutional grounds for removing a judge, relating to gross misconduct or incompetence or mental infirmity. Subject to these grounds and others, a judge may serve until the age of 70.

The chief justice is the head of the judiciary of South Sudan. His responsibilities include administering and supervising lower courts. He has power to issue judicial circulars and directives to lower courts to ensure proper and efficient administration of justice in the country.

What challenges are facing the judiciary?

The judiciary has been facing many challenges that threaten its independence and, by extension, the proper administration of justice. The most notable is political interference.

This has manifested itself in at least two ways. The first is that courts or individual judges face constant threats by the members of the executive branch and the military seeking to get rulings in their favour. For example, a report by the International Commission of Jurists cited a case in which a military general used a threat of force to obtain an outcome favourable to him.

The second is President Salva Kiir’s behaviour towards judges. He has, for example, been sacking judges without following the constitutional procedures that require the judicial service commission to conduct a full and proper investigation before a judge may be removed. This has rendered courts powerless, particularly in relation to enforcing the constitutional limits of power and the rule of law on the political branches of the government.

The sacking of chief justice Madut is the latest and most alarming. It implies that judges serve at the president’s pleasure, much like the government ministers. It also divests the judicial service commission of its constitutional functions.

What’s known about the outgoing chief justice?

Madut had worked as a judge in Sudan prior to South Sudan’s independence in 2011. He also served as the deputy chair of Southern Sudan referendum commission. Kiir appointed him as the chief justice of South Sudan on 15 August 2011, replacing John Wuol Makec.

Madut’s tenure was characterised by corruption through nepotism and favouritism. In 2013, for example, he appointed 78 legal assistants, including his daughter, without following the formal recruitment process.

Perhaps of most concern to many people in South Sudan was Madut’s meddling in purely political matters. In 2015, for example, he wrote a letter to Kiir to congratulate him for expanding the number of states from 10 to 28. The letter was inappropriate for three reasons. First, the creation of the 28 states was a political matter for parliament. Second, it was contentious because the president lacked power to create more states in the country at the time. Third, it was apparent that the president’s decision was going to be challenged in the Supreme Court, over which Madut was presiding.

Indeed, opposition parties challenged it as unconstitutional. Because of his expressed support for the creation of the 28 states, Madut was deemed to have a conflict in the case. Consequently, he was asked to recuse himself from the constitutional panel set up to hear the case but he refused. The majority of the Supreme Court judges upheld the president’s decision.

Kiir did not explain what prompted Madut’s sacking. However, it could be the sum of all these accusations that led to this course of action. Whatever the case, the end result of the president’s sacking of judges unilaterally is the erosion of the rule of law and undermining of judicial independence. In short, it is his will that matters now, not the constitution.

Who is the new chief justice and what is his record?

Benjamin Baak Deng is the new chief justice. Kiir appointed him on 28 May 2025 from within the Supreme Court of South Sudan, on which he was also serving as a judge. He has a PhD in international environmental law and had worked as a judge in Sudan from the 1980s to the early 2000s. Like all the South Sudanese who were working in Sudan, he relocated to Southern Sudan during the interim period (2005–2011).

In June 2022, he was appointed to the judicial reform committee mandated by the 2018 revitalised agreement. The committee was mandated with a comprehensive review of the judiciary and its performance and to recommend measures to address the challenges facing it. It finalised its work in March 2024 and submitted its report (yet to be made public) to the president of the republic. Deng is widely regarded as a man of integrity, competence and hard work.

What are the top priorities for the new chief justice?

There are at least four. The first is to resolve the massive case backlog and improve efficiency in deciding cases. The second is to improve working conditions for judges. This would include ensuring a safe workplace and providing judges with modern work equipment.

The third is to uncompromisingly maintain and protect the independence of the judiciary from the political branches. The former chief justice lost public trust and confidence because of his pandering to the executive government, which he did in the most overt way in some instances.

The challenge is that he will be dealing with the same president who has shown little interest in observing his constitutional limits. But the president spoke during Deng’s swearing-in and pledged his commitment to respecting and protecting the independence of the judiciary:

the judiciary must operate independently and remain free from political interference.

It remains to be seen whether the president will put his words into action this time round.

The final area of immediate focus is addressing the under-representation of women in the judiciary. Of the 117 judges in the country, only 21 are women. Women’s under-representation in the judiciary is largely a product of patriarchy, particularly customary practices that traditionally do not allow women to be in a position of authority and to have access to education.

The transitional constitution and the 2018 revitalised agreement obligate the government to take affirmative action to address gender imbalances. At least 35% must be women in every institution of government in South Sudan. The 21 women judges equate to 18%. There are many young women lawyers or law graduates within and outside South Sudan who could be trained and appointed as judges.

The new chief justice has the opportunity to reform the judiciary into an institution that effectively enforces the rule of law and administers justice impartially and efficiently. However, his success will also depend on the commitment of the government to provide the resources required and the space to exercise independence.

Mark Deng 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. South Sudan’s new chief justice has a chance to reform the judiciary – if he’s allowed to do his job – https://theconversation.com/south-sudans-new-chief-justice-has-a-chance-to-reform-the-judiciary-if-hes-allowed-to-do-his-job-262351

August 10, 2025

Are African countries aware of their own mineral wealth? Ghana and Rwanda offer two very different answers

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Gerald Arhin, Research Fellow in the Political Economy of Climate Compatible Development , UCL

Imagine running a business for over a century without knowing what’s in your warehouse. That’s essentially what many African countries are doing with their mineral wealth. Governments across the continent still have very little knowledge of what lies beneath their soil.

Between the 18th and 20th centuries, European colonial powers exploited African mineral wealth for their industrialisation. Post-independence, many African nations nationalised their mining sectors. International pressure led to privatisation in the 1980s. This weakened the motivation and capacity of governments to develop long-term strategies. They have more incentive to export minerals for foreign exchange in the short term.

As political economists, we have been researching the governance of Ghana’s and Rwanda’s minerals sectors for over a decade. We conducted research into why some African nations are investing more than others in geological investigations. These are studies that examine where minerals can be found and what their economic potential is. We focused on Ghana and Rwanda because of their different levels of commitment to investing in geological investigations.

We found that intense political competition forces Ghanaian governments to have short-term priorities. This makes geological investigations (a long-term, risky venture) unappealing to ruling elites. In contrast, the Rwandan Patriotic Front government has invested in geological surveys over the last decade.

Beyond economic and technical costs, context-specific political dynamics – interests, ideas and power relations – shape the decision to invest in geological mapping.

A mixed search

Ghana is rich in several minerals and is Africa’s largest producer of gold, which is its highest export earner. Minerals generated US$11 billion in revenue in 2024.

The country is also rich in diamonds, manganese and bauxite. It recently discovered lithium in commercial quantities. Lithium is a “critical mineral” for the energy transition and this discovery will be of interest to investors.

Rwanda is a producer of tin, tantalum and tungsten. It also has commercial deposits of gemstones, silica sands, kaolin, vermiculite, diatomite, clays, limestone and gold.

Policy experts and international organisations often encourage governments to invest in geological mapping of their minerals. This is to enhance greater investment in the sector and boost the country’s gains from its resources. But these investigations are costly and lucrative findings aren’t guaranteed.

Some African governments have limited commitment to investing in geological mapping. Others, such as Uganda, Morocco, Botswana and South Africa, have put resources into it. For example, the Ugandan government announced its intention to expand national geological mapping coverage from 50% to 100%.

Ghana’s lack of geological knowledge

The roots of the knowledge gap stretch back to colonialism. European powers meticulously mapped African minerals, but kept the data for themselves. Today, the British Geological Survey holds over 300,000 geological reports and maps from other countries. Much of it is gathering dust in archives rather than helping African governments understand their own resources.

Even basic geological knowledge often sits in London, Paris or Brussels rather than in Accra, Kigali or Nairobi.

Take Ghana, which has been mining gold for over a century yet still lacks comprehensive geological surveys.

We found that the country’s competitive political system, where power alternates between two main parties almost every eight years, stands in the way of long-term planning. Successive Ghanaian governments have relied on private mining companies to conduct geological investigations. There is limited monitoring of whether investigations are carried out before extracting minerals. This approach has obvious flaws. Firstly, companies may not share all their findings. Secondly, the government doesn’t have control over information about its own resources.

We also found evidence of a darker political calculation. Through licensing, political elites are able to maintain lucrative relationships with mining companies. Comprehensive geological mapping might force more transparent, competitive bidding processes that could disrupt these arrangements. This includes vested political interests extending into the small scale and artisanal mining space.

Rwanda’s different path

Rwanda tells a different story. Since 1994, the governing Rwandan Patriotic Front has increasingly taken control of all aspects of the society. As part of this drive it has developed longer-term ambitions in relation to its development strategies.

The country has chosen to know more about what lies beneath its land and has taken steps to improve its capabilities.

Firstly, it revised its mining law. The Rwandan government had initially invited foreign mining companies to obtain permits on a first come, first served basis. Though permit holders were required to invest in geological investigations before extraction, there was limited monitoring of what firms were doing. This is similar to what was taking place in Ghana.

Secondly, the Rwandan government even established its own mining company, Ngali Mining, to invest directly in exploration.

Thirdly, it has attracted investment in geological surveys, with some support from donors. In this way, it directly employs geological investigation firms rather than relying on mining firms to invest in investigations themselves.

The results are impressive: between 2012 and 2016, the government attracted four different sets of North American and European firms to conduct extensive mapping studies.

Fourth, as a result of these surveys, the government re-categorised existing mining areas into 52 separate areas for mineral exploration. As a result, the Rwandan government now attracts investment to these areas because there is more understanding of which minerals exist there.

It’s important to note that Rwanda imports many of its minerals from neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo and then re-exports them. Importing and re-exporting DRC minerals earns Rwanda immediate foreign exchange earnings. This is particularly evident in rising Rwandan gold exports in recent years. Thus, even where governments may be keen to invest in geological investigations, when other short-term priorities exist it is less easy to sustain long-horizon goals in domestic mining sectors.

Breaking the knowledge barrier

The global demand for minerals is soaring.

This has made developing comprehensive knowledge of underground resources more urgent for African countries. However, our research suggests that simply throwing more money at geological surveys won’t reorganise domestic minerals sectors if political incentives favour short-term interests.

Understanding the political dynamics is the first step towards unlocking Africa’s mineral potential. Only by learning more about the power structures that shape these decisions can countries begin to map their way to more sustainable mineral wealth.

Gerald Arhin is currently a Research Fellow in the Political Economy of Climate Compatible Development at University College London (UCL) where he works on the FCDO funded Climate Compatible Growth (CCG) project.

Pritish Behuria is currently a recipient of a British Academy Mid-Career Fellowship Grant (MFSS24/240043).

– ref. Are African countries aware of their own mineral wealth? Ghana and Rwanda offer two very different answers – https://theconversation.com/are-african-countries-aware-of-their-own-mineral-wealth-ghana-and-rwanda-offer-two-very-different-answers-261703

August 10, 2025

As Netanyahu moves toward full takeover of Gaza, Israel faces a crisis of international credibility

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, Australian National University; Vice Chancellor’s Strategic Fellow, Victoria University; Adjunct Professor of Social Sciences, The University of Western Australia

For all its claims of being a democracy that adheres to international law and the rules of war, Israel’s global reputation is in tatters.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s latest plan for a full military takeover of Gaza, along with the expanding starvation crisis in the strip and Israel’s repressive measures in the West Bank, underline the country’s predicament.

Notwithstanding US support, the Jewish state faces a crisis of international credibility, from which it may not be able to recover for a long time.

According to a recent Pew poll, the international view of Israel is now more negative than positive. The majority of those polled in early 2025 in countries such as the Netherlands (78%), Japan (79%), Spain (75%), Australia (74%), Turkey (93%) and Sweden (75%) said they have an unfavourable view of Israel.

The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Israel’s former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Many international law experts, genocide scholars and human rights groups have also accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza.

Israel’s traditional supporters have also harshly criticised the Netanyahu government’s actions, from both inside and outside the country. These include
former prime ministers Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak, the Israeli literary giant David Grossman, and Masorti Judaism Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg and Rabbi Delphine Horvilleur.

In addition, hundreds of retired Israeli security officials have appealed to US President Donald Trump to push Netanyahu to end the war.

Israel’s global partners distancing themselves

With images of starving children in Gaza dominating the news in recent weeks, many of Israel’s friends in the Western alliance have similarly reached the point at which they can no longer tolerate its policy actions.

In a major shift in global opinion, France announced it would recognise Palestinian statehood in September. The United Kingdom and Canada vowed to follow suit. Even Germany has now begun the process for recognition. And Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has indicated his country’s recognition of Palestine was only a matter of time.

Spain and Sweden have called for the suspension of the European Union’s trade agreement with Israel, while the Netherlands has officially labelled Israel a “security threat”, citing attempts to influence Dutch public opinion.

Israel and the US have rejected all these accusations and moves. The momentum against Israel in the international community, however, has left it with the US as its only major global supporter.

Israel’s sovereignty, security and prosperity now ride on the back of America’s continued support. Without US assistance, in particular its billions of dollars worth of arms exports, Israel would have struggled to maintain its devastating Gaza campaign or repressive occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

Yet, despite Trump’s deep commitment to Israel, many in the US electorate are seriously questioning the depth of Netanyahu’s influence in Washington and the value of US aid to Israel.

According to a Gallup poll in March, fewer than half of Americans are sympathetic toward Israel.

This discontent has also been voiced by some of Trump’s MAGA ideologues and devotees, such as political strategist Steve Bannon and congressional hardliner Marjorie Taylor Greene. Even Trump publicly questioned Netanyahu on his claim there was no starvation in Gaza.

Israelis have dim view of two-state solution

Many Israelis would like to see the back of Netanyahu and his extremist right-wing ruling cohort, especially given his failure to secure the release of all the hostages from Hamas.

Many want the war to end, too. Recent polling by Israel’s Channel 12 found that 74% of Israelis back a deal to end the war in exchange for the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas.

However, a majority of Israelis maintain a dim view of a future Palestinian state.

One poll commissioned by a US academic showed 82% of Jewish Israeli respondents backed the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza. And a Pew poll in early 2025 showed that just 16% of Jewish Israelis believe peaceful coexistence with a Palestinian state is possible, the lowest percentage since the pollsters began asking the question in 2013.

This indicates that not only the Israeli state, but also its electorate, has moved to the extreme of the political spectrum in relation to acknowledging the right of the Palestinians to an independent state of their own.

Under international pressure, Netanyahu has expediently allowed a little more humanitarian aid to flow into Gaza. However, his new plan for a full military takeover of Gaza indicates he is not prepared to change course in the war, as long as US support remains steady.

His government is bent on eliminating Hamas and potentially depopulating and annexing Gaza, followed possibly by the West Bank. Such a move would render the idea of a two-state solution totally defunct.

To stop this happening, Washington needs to align with the rest of the global community. Otherwise, an unrestrained and isolated Israel will only widen the rift between the US and its traditional allies in a highly polarised world.

Amin Saikal 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. As Netanyahu moves toward full takeover of Gaza, Israel faces a crisis of international credibility – https://theconversation.com/as-netanyahu-moves-toward-full-takeover-of-gaza-israel-faces-a-crisis-of-international-credibility-262864

August 10, 2025

Israel is deepening its war in Gaza – here are 5 big questions about Netanyahu’s ill-advised next phase

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ian Parmeter, Research Scholar, Middle East Studies, Australian National University

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is moving forward with his plan to take full control of Gaza, expanding his war efforts amid a deepening starvation crisis in the strip and intensifying international condemnation.

In the plan, Netanyahu’s government also announced it would only end the war once five “principles” were met. These included the demilitarisation of the strip, the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas, and the disarmament of the group.

This new phase of the war follows a familiar pattern of poorly devised strategy-making on Netanyahu’s part, without sufficient reasoning or apparent forward planning. Given his new stated goal of taking full control of Gaza City, an end to the war does not feel likely, or imminent.

Here are five questions about whether the plan makes sense.

1. Is it necessary, or wise, militarily?

Significantly, the chief of staff of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, has opposed the decision to expand operations in Gaza. He has warned that any plan to occupy the Gaza Strip would “drag Israel into a black hole”.

For one, Zamir believes expanding the military campaign is not necessary – he says the IDF has “met and even exceeded the operation’s objectives” in Gaza.

Hamas has been substantially degraded as a military force and its senior leadership has been killed. It is no longer an organised force in Gaza – it is now embracing guerrilla-style tactics.

This makes an expanded campaign in an urban environment such as Gaza City risky. Hamas will be able to use its vast tunnel network to mount surprise attacks on Israeli soldiers and place booby-traps in buildings.

As such, Netanyahu’s plan will inevitably lead to more IDF casualties. Nearly 900 IDF personnel have been killed so far in the war.

Moreover, taking full control of the strip would take months to complete and lead to countless more Palestinian civilian deaths.

Zamir has also warned it could endanger the lives of the remaining living Israeli hostages, which are believed to number around 20.

The freeing of Israeli hostages has only occurred during ceasefires – not as the result of military action. Hamas murdered six hostages in late 2024 when Israeli forces seemed to be getting close. Why wouldn’t it do so again if it was cornered?

2. Does Israel have enough military personnel for such an operation?

Israel has a relatively small army totalling about 169,000. It relies on more than 400,000 reservists, who have completed their military service, to augment the IDF during emergencies.

But taking reservists from their normal jobs for lengthy periods has adverse effects on the economy and harms Israel in the long term.

Netanyahu’s goal of degrading Hamas’ control of Gaza follows a basic strategy of
“clear, hold and build”. First, the IDF clears an area of Hamas fighters, then it holds the area with sufficient military personnel to prevent their return, and finally it builds an environment in which Hamas cannot function, for example, by destroying their tunnels and encouraging the return of civilian governance.

Israel does not have sufficient IDF personnel and reservists to deploy this strategy for the entire strip. It also needs soldiers in the West Bank, where clashes between Jewish settlers and Palestinian residents have become increasingly violent in recent years.

Netanyahu says he doesn’t want to permanently occupy Gaza, yet the far-right members of his cabinet do. They have made clear they want Israeli settlements re-established in Gaza and also to annex most, if not all, of the West Bank.

The mixed messages out of Netanyahu’s government make it very difficult to know what his actual long-term plan is for Gaza, if he even has one.

3. What kind of ‘Arab force’ would eventually come in?

In an interview this week, Netanyahu said he envisions the future security control of the strip would eventually pass to “Arab forces”. But which Arab states would contribute military personnel to such a force?

Arab states have long held the position that they will not solve Israel’s Palestinian problem for it, nor will they agree to any outcome in Gaza or the West Bank that Palestinians oppose. In short, while they oppose Hamas, they refuse to do Israel’s dirty work on its behalf.

A Hamas official, Osama Hamdan, also warned this week that his group would treat any force formed to govern Gaza as an “occupying” force linked to Israel. Any personnel policing Gaza on Israel’s behalf would have targets on their back.

4. What is the plan for Gaza’s civilian population?

In July, Defence Minister Israel Katz announced a plan to force Gaza’s entire population of two million people into a “humanitarian city” in the southern part of the strip. Former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert likened it to a “concentration camp”.

Little has been said about the plan in recent weeks, but implementing it would no doubt exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in the strip even further and draw even more international condemnation of Israel.

Earlier this year, Israel’s security cabinet also approved a plan to facilitate the “voluntary transfer” of Gazans from the strip to third countries. This plan, too, was decried as an attempt to ethnically cleanse the enclave.

Certainly, no states in the Arab League would have any willingness to receive more than two million Palestinian refugees.

5. Is Netanyahu willing to deepen Israel’s isolation?

In a piece for The Conversation on Friday, Middle East expert Amin Saikal pointed out just how much of a hit Israel’s international credibility has taken since the start of the war – even among Americans.

Israelis are becoming aware that travel outside their country could involve risks. Two Israelis were recently detained and questioned in Belgium after attending a music festival and allegedly waving the flag of their army brigade. A human rights group accused the pair of being complicit in war crimes in Gaza.

In addition, the international community has immediately responded to Netanyahu’s decision to expand the war. Germany, in a major step, announced it would halt all arms exports to Israel. The country is the second-largest supplier of arms to the Jewish state.

Netanyahu has responded to international criticism and moves by Israel’s allies to recognise a Palestinian state by accusing them of stoking antisemitism and rewarding Hamas.

However, the Israeli leader seems to be varying his strategy to deal with developments as they occur. He and others in his government probably feel they can continue weathering the international storm over their actions in Gaza until after the war and then work on rehabilitating relationships.

The final and biggest question, however, is: when will be the war be over?

Ian Parmeter 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. Israel is deepening its war in Gaza – here are 5 big questions about Netanyahu’s ill-advised next phase – https://theconversation.com/israel-is-deepening-its-war-in-gaza-here-are-5-big-questions-about-netanyahus-ill-advised-next-phase-262918

August 9, 2025

South Africa’s earliest newspapers made money from slavery: book offers new evidence

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Gawie Botma, Associate Professor of Journalism, Stellenbosch University

In a recently published book, Reconsidering the History of South African Journalism: The Ghost of the Slave Press (2025 Routledge), author and journalism professor Gawie Botma explores the gap in the country’s understanding about the complicity of South African journalism in slavery. He spoke to The Conversation about what he found.

Slavery and journalism: what’s the connection?

In the US and Britain a few newspapers have issued apologies for their complicity in the slave trade. These include the Hartford Courant in Connecticut, considered to be the oldest continuously published publication in the US. In 2000 it apologised for its complicity in the slave trade nearly two centuries earlier. In 2023 The Guardian in the UK apologised for the fact that its founders had had links to the transatlantic slave trade.

The South African media have remained silent about their historical role in Cape slavery. Slavery in the country lasted for more than 170 years between 1652 and 1838. Precise numbers are difficult to calculate. But according to the historian Robert Shell, approximately 63,000 enslaved people were imported to the Cape from four main areas: the rest of Africa (26.4%), India (25.9%), Indonesia (22.7%) and Madagascar (25.1%). In 1838 around 37,000 were emancipated.

The first newspaper in the Cape colony – including parts of what are now the Western and Eastern Cape provinces – appeared in Cape Town four decades before slavery was abolished in 1838. No other publishing activities existed in what is now South Africa. The Cape, then a colony of the British Empire, was the only formal European settlement and only a few printing presses operated at scattered mission stations in the interior of southern Africa.

What I found during my research was the sobering fact that several of the owners, editors, publishers and printers of around 16 early newspapers and magazines between 1800 and 1838 were slave owners themselves. In addition, the publications they were involved with regularly published advertisements and notices to enable the slave trade as well as to recapture enslaved people who absconded.

These facts are omitted or under-emphasised in academic and popular accounts of how South African journalism was founded. Instead, the focus is often on the establishment of press freedom through the heroic efforts of a few white (British) men.

Who were the early players in the newspaper space?

British slave traders Alexander Walker and John Robertson founded the first newspaper, The Cape Town Gazette and African Advertiser / Kaapsche Stads Courant en Afrikaansche Berigter (CTG/KSC), in 1800. Acccording to historian A.C.G. Lloyd in his book The Birth of Printing in South Africa, Walker and Robertson were

men of many interests, who in addition to being wholesale merchants on a large scale, were slave-dealers dealing in as many as six hundred slaves in a single consignment.

The public received their first copies on Saturday 16 August 1800. Separate, identical editions in English and Dutch were produced. Even the advertisements were translated. The format, which became a template for future newspapers, was a mixture of official government news, commercial advertising and public announcements, with snippets of international and local news. Enslaved persons worked as assistants of the press.

Twenty-four years later the second paper, The South African Commercial Advertiser, was founded under the editorship of immigrants George Greig, Thomas Pringle and John Fairbairn. Pringle and Fairbairn displayed entrepreneurship as well as idealism about the role of the press. As part of this they rather gradually positioned themselves against slavery.

Opposition to “liberal” ideas inspired the founding of De Zuid-Afrikaan in 1830. The newspaper reported in detail about slavery from the perspective of slave owners. Several prominent individuals involved with this newspaper were the owners of multiple enslaved people. These included the editor (after emancipation) Christoffel J. Brand. After he retired from the editorship in 1845, he became the first speaker of the Cape parliament in 1854 and was later awarded a British knighthood.

The printed press’s relationship with slavery

South African media historiography often cites The South African Commercial Advertiser as the first journalistic enterprise in the country. It also positions the paper as being a “liberal champion” of its time.

But on close inspection this newspaper’s positioning towards slavery is much more complex.

My research shows that the paper actively contributed to the slave trade by allowing the publication of slave advertisements from the start. It continued to do so until slavery was abolished in 1838. The founding owner and editor/printer Greig owned at least one enslaved person.

In the telling of the history of the time, comparisons are made between the first two endeavours. On the one hand CTG/KSC is more generally described as being an outlier as “a slave press” founded by a few “bad apples”. The South African Commercial Advertiser is positioned as being a liberal champion of the “free press” and founder of South African journalism.

Media historian Wessel de Kock in his book on the origins of the South African press makes this comment:

What manner of free press would have emerged from the grubby commercialism of Walker and Robertson instead of the fiery idealism of Pringle and Fairbairn remains an intriguing question.

But should the “grubby commercialism” of CTG/KSC be regarded as an outlier in the history of the early colonial press? Or did it set a trend which was followed by contemporaries and influenced the development of South African newspapers for decades and perhaps even centuries to come?

The old dictum that the press promotes the views of those who own and support it was as true during slavery and apartheid as it is now.

Past evaluations of De Zuid-Afrikaan as one-sidedly reactionary should probably also be revisited.

For one, slave ownership also existed among other English newspaper pioneers like William Bridekirk, printer and editor of several publications, including The South African Chronicle and Mercantile Advertiser, and Louis Henri Meurant, founder of The Graham’s Town Journal, the first newspaper outside Cape Town.

This too has been largely ignored in established journalism history as the focus for involvement in slavery often remained on the “conservative” Cape Dutch.

The result is that a simple dualistic view of South African newspaper history has been passed down. The two poles are then seen as representative of respectively Afrikaans and English journalism as it developed in the 19th and 20th centuries.

What’s the legacy?

Some elements in the developing press in the Cape colony certainly played a role in the demise of slavery by frequently publishing government announcements, news, editorial and readers’ comments about slavery. They enabled a public debate and the development of a measure of consensus that slavery should be abolished.

Nevertheless, all the papers made compromises as they juggled interests, including political and economic factors. These decisions often worked against liberation. In that case the press was often following and not leading the momentum towards greater civic freedoms.

This was generated elsewhere, such as in the British parliament where the campaign to abolish slavery finally succeeded after decades of struggle.

Gawie Botma 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. South Africa’s earliest newspapers made money from slavery: book offers new evidence – https://theconversation.com/south-africas-earliest-newspapers-made-money-from-slavery-book-offers-new-evidence-262376

August 8, 2025

3 reasons Republicans’ redistricting power grab might backfire

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Charlie Hunt, Associate Professor of Political Science, Boise State University

Texas state lawmakers board a bus following a press conference at the DuPage County Democratic Party headquarters in Carol Stream, Ill., on Aug. 3, 2025. Scott Olson/Getty Images

The gerrymandering drama in Texas – and beyond – has continued to unfold after Democratic state legislators fled the state. The Democrats want to prevent the Republican-controlled government from enacting a mid-decade gerrymander aimed at giving Republicans several more seats in Congress.

The Texas GOP move was pushed by President Donald Trump, who’s aiming to ensure he has a GOP-controlled Congress to work with after the 2026 midterm elections.

Other Republican states such as Missouri and Ohio may also follow the Texas playbook; and Democratic states such as California and Illinois seem open to responding in kind.

But there are a few factors that make this process more complicated than just grabbing a few House seats. They may even make Republicans regret their hardball gerrymandering tactics, if the party ends up with districts that political scientists like me call “dummymandered.”

President Trump asserts that his party is ‘entitled’ to five more congressional districts in Texas.

Democrats can finally fight back

Unlike at the federal level, where Democrats are almost completely shut out of power, Republicans are already facing potentially consequential retaliation for their gerrymandering attempts from Democratic leaders in other states.

Democrats in California, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, are pushing for a special election later this year, in which the voters could vote on new congressional maps in that state, aiming to balance out Democrats’ losses in Texas. If successful, these changes would take effect prior to next year’s midterm elections.

Other large Democratic-controlled states, such as Illinois and New York – led by Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Gov. Kathy Hochul, respectively – have also indicated openness to enacting their own new gerrymanders to pick up seats on the Democratic side.

New York and California both currently use nonpartisan redistricting commissions to draw their boundaries. But Hochul recently said she is “sick and tired of being pushed around” while other states refuse to adopt redistricting reforms and gerrymander to their full advantage. Hochul said she’d even be open to amending the state constitution to eliminate the nonpartisan redistricting commission.

It’s unclear whether these blue states will be successful in their efforts to fight fire with fire; but in the meantime, governors like Hochul and Pritzker have welcomed the protesting Democratic legislators from Texas, in many cases arranging for their housing during their self-imposed exile.

Dummymandering

Another possible problem for either party looking to gain some seats in this process stems from greediness.

In responding to Democrats’ continued absence from Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott threatened even more drastic gerrymanders. “If they don’t start showing up, I may start expanding,” Abbott said. “We may make it six or seven or eight new seats we’re going to be adding on the Republican side.”

But Abbott might think twice about this strategy.

Parties that gerrymander their states’ districts are drawing lines to maximize their own advantage, either in state legislatures or, in this case, congressional delegations.

When parties gerrymander districts, they don’t usually try to make them all as lopsided as possible for their own side. Instead, they try to make as many districts as possible that they are likely to win. They do this by spreading groups of supportive voters across several districts so they can help the party win more of these districts.

But sometimes the effort backfires: In trying to maximize their seats, a party spreads its voters too thin and fails to make some districts safe enough. These vulnerable districts can then flip to the other party in future elections, and the opposing party ends up winning more seats than expected.

This phenomenon, commonly referred to as “dummymandering,” has happened before. It even happened in Texas, where Republicans lost a large handful of poorly drawn state legislative districts in the Dallas suburbs in 2018, a strong year for Democrats nationwide.

With Democrats poised for a strong 2026 midterm election against an unpopular president, this is a lesson Republicans might need to pay attention to.

There’s not much left to gerrymander

One of the main reasons dummymandering happens is that there has been so much gerrymandering that there are few remaining districts competitive enough for a controlling party to pick off for themselves. This important development has unfolded for two big reasons.

First, in terms of gerrymandering, the low-hanging fruit is already picked over. States controlled by either Democrats or Republicans have already undertaken pretty egregious gerrymanders during previous regular redistricting processes, particularly following the 2010 and 2020 censuses.

Republicans have generally been more adept at the process, particularly in maximizing their seat shares in relatively competitive states such as Wisconsin and North Carolina that they happen to control.

But Democrats have also been successful in states such as Maryland, where only one Republican serves out of nine seats, despite the party winning 35% of the presidential vote in 2024. In Massachusetts, where Democrats hold all eight seats, Republicans won 37% of the presidential vote in 2024.

There’s also the fact that over the past half-century, “gerrymanderable” territory has become more difficult to find regardless of how you draw the boundaries. That’s because the voting electorate is more geographically sorted between the parties.

This means that Democratic and Republican voters are segregated from each other geographically, with Democrats tending toward big cities and suburbs, and Republicans occupying rural areas.

As a result, it’s become less geographically possible than ever to draw reasonable-looking districts that split up the other party’s voters in order to diminish the opponents’ ability to elect one of their own.

Regardless of how far either party is willing to go, today’s clash over Texas redistricting represents largely uncharted territory. Mid-decade redistricting does sometimes happen, either at the hands of legislatures or the courts, but not usually in such a brazen fashion.

And this time, the Texas attempt could spark chaos and a race to the bottom, where every state picks up the challenge and tries to rewrite their electoral maps – not in the usual once-a-decade manner, but whenever they’re unsatisfied with the odds in the next election.

Charlie Hunt 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. 3 reasons Republicans’ redistricting power grab might backfire – https://theconversation.com/3-reasons-republicans-redistricting-power-grab-might-backfire-262553

August 8, 2025

Trump’s tariffs have finally kicked in, so what happens next?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow

Donald Trump’s new international trade tariffs have landed. Some are lower than others, some deals have been done, but overall they are the highest they have been in 100 years.

They are also unprecedented in the era of the rules-based trade system that has been in place since 1945.

So what happens next? That’s a tricky question to answer given that the US president has already pressed the pause button on this economic policy before.

But assuming that doesn’t happen again straight away, we can make some confident predictions about the consequences.

First off, the immediate economic effect will be felt by American consumers. JP Morgan, the biggest bank in the US, estimates that 60% of the cost of Trump’s tariffs will be passed directly on to his fellow citizens.

And that’s just the start. Most goods bought in the US, whether they’re electrical items, cars, medical devices, processed foods or makeup sets, are made up of dozens of components, sourced from multiple countries. A finished product may therefore be “tariffed” several times before it reaches the shelf, adding to the final price rise.

Medium-sized businesses are likely to feel the most pain. They have neither the global reach to reorganise their supply chains quickly nor the deep margins to absorb new costs. That means higher prices for the goods they produce.

As a result of all of this, things will get more expensive and consumer spending will fall. It’s too early to quantify the drop, but survey data shows that households are already cutting back.

Businesses will also cut or delay investment in new plants, staff and product lines, as more of their revenue goes on covering higher import taxes.

These effects will be inflationary, pushing prices up. They will also be “recessionary” – in other words, they could cause a recession by cooling demand and investment.

Trump card

The political irony here is striking. Trump’s election victory was fuelled in part by voter frustration over high inflation early in Joe Biden’s presidency.

By the time of the election in November 2024, inflation had eased – but the perception that Biden was linked to higher prices (often discussed with reference to the price of eggs in the grocery store) lingered.

Now Trump’s policy choices look set to drive up prices again, while also risking a significant economic downturn.

A US recession would have global consequences. Mexico, China, Canada, Germany and Japan – the countries which export the most goods to the US – are particularly exposed. Together with the US, these economies account for roughly half of global GDP. If US economic activity slows, and its key suppliers follow, that would be enough to trigger a global contraction.

Eggs in an egg box. — The price of eggs can rise and fall.
ArturTona/Shutterstock

There’s also the risk of renewed supply chain delays. Faced with uncertainty about demand, companies will slow or stop new orders.

Then, when consumers start buying again, the components needed may not be in stock, delaying production and pushing up costs further. These disruptions tend to cascade through multiple sectors, meaning the impact will be widely felt around the globe.

So how long can this tariff regime hold? In April, Trump’s so-called “liberation day” tariffs were rolled back within days under pressure from American businesses that were suddenly paying more for vital imports.

Since then, very few countries have signed deals with the US, and the ones that have secured broad agreements rather than binding treaties. That means the political backlash from businesses and consumers could once again force the administration to retreat.

For now, the US is testing how far it can push this experiment in protectionism. But the risks are clear: higher prices at home, slower global growth, and a political gamble that may prove costly.

Maha Rafi Atal 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. Trump’s tariffs have finally kicked in, so what happens next? – https://theconversation.com/trumps-tariffs-have-finally-kicked-in-so-what-happens-next-262843

August 8, 2025

Donald Trump to chair new Olympic taskforce in bid to allay international visitor concerns ahead of 2028 Los Angeles Games

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Hargy, Visiting Research Fellow in International Studies, Queen’s University Belfast

The US president, Donald Trump, signed an executive order on August 5 to set up a government taskforce to manage the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. During the White House announcement, Trump said: “We’ll do anything necessary to keep the Olympics safe, including using our National Guard or military.”

This move may go some way to addressing international concern over the Trump administration’s tough immigration polices, which include a travel ban on 12 countries. There were fears that this could make it difficult for some international supporters to attend the games (although athletes and coaches are exempt).

A report earlier this year by the US Travel Association also flagged concerns over the US’s ability to logistically manage an event on this scale.

The upcoming Fifa World Cup in 2026 will be seen as a dry run for the Olympics in terms of handling large numbers of international visitors. Thousands of supporters are likely to travel between co-hosts, the US, Canada and Mexico, to attend different matches.

Victor Matheson, a professor at College of Holy Cross in Massachusetts, who specialises in sports economics, has said: “You could have significant immigration problems with fans and players going across borders.”

There are, however, a number of political factors at play in Trump’s decision to create a special task force. Its formation comes in the wake of Trump’s contentious decision in June 2025 to order the deployment of National Guard troops and US Marines onto the streets of Los Angeles. This was in response to protests against immigration raids launched by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) across the city.

Since then, relations between the Trump administration and Los Angeles municipal officials, including the mayor Karen Bass, have been fairly frosty. After arrests by federal authorities in LA, Bass accused Trump of “ratcheting up chaos”, and perpetuating a “political agenda of provoking fear and terror”. Trump referred to Bass as “not very competent” during the recent White House event.

At a separate event, administration spokesperson Tammy Bruce said the task force would “coordinate across federal, state and local agencies to ensure streamlined visa processes, robust security and efficient transportation”.

It is not unprecedented for a US administration to assume this type of role over a major event. The military and National Guard have previously provided support to state and municipal agencies when US cities have hosted major sporting fixtures.

This will partly be about the memory of what happened at the Altanta games in 1996, when a bomb attack killed two people and injured 111. The 2028 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games had already been designated a “national security event”.

The scale of security planning for the Los Angeles Olympics will be huge. And Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act has already set aside US$1 billion (£745,190,000) in federal government funding for security at the 2028 games.

Trump announces the task force for the Olympics.

Jules Boykoff, a professor of politics and government at Pacific University, has said that designating Los Angeles 2028 a national security special event gives the federal government broader latitude to have control over the organisation of the games, and that he expects to see “President Trump flexing like that more and more, the closer that we get to the Olympic Games”.

Boykoff also warned that the national special security event status now given to the LA Olympics may provide an opportunity for further crackdowns in the city.

There are also political risks for the Trump administration if immigration policies throw up issues for people attending the games, or it is not seen as successful. The president has made reducing immigration a priority policy, but his way of doing this and sending in masked Ice agents is losing support.

William A. Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, pointed out recently that the way it is being carried out is not necessarily popular. Galston pointed to a YouGov poll taken in July which found that 52% of Americans said Trump’s immigration policy was “too harsh”, while 54% said Ice agents have gone “too far” in enforcing immigration laws.

In dealing with international apprehension about who can attend and travel restrictions, the White House has said that the new task force will “streamline visa processing and credentialing” for participants and media. Despite this assurance, there are concerns from some Los Angeles officials that the administration’s immigration policies could deter tourists and complicate the issuing of visas for Olympic teams.

Earlier this year, the man in charge of the Los Angeles Olympics, Casey Wasserman, sought to allay these worries. In an address to the International Olympic Committee in Pylos, Greece, Wasserman said that he had received assurances from Trump and the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and that he did not “anticipate any problems from any country to come and participate and have their delegations in full force.”

Trump clearly wants to host a triumphant Los Angeles 2028, and hopes that a successful games will boost his popularity. He will expect his new task force to smooth the way for that to happen.

Richard Hargy 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. Donald Trump to chair new Olympic taskforce in bid to allay international visitor concerns ahead of 2028 Los Angeles Games – https://theconversation.com/donald-trump-to-chair-new-olympic-taskforce-in-bid-to-allay-international-visitor-concerns-ahead-of-2028-los-angeles-games-262831