English – Page 311 – MIL Submissions Engine

October 27, 2025

In the Middle East, women journalists and activists have been driving crucial change

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Farinaz Basmechi, Doctoral researcher, Feminist and Gender Studies, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

Last month marked the third anniversary of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement in Iran, an uprising that has been described as the country’s most significant movement since the establishment of the Islamic Republic.

Though authoritarian powers and patriarchal systems continue to oppress, women journalists in the Middle East have combined reporting and activism. Many of these professionals operate under regimes that criminalize dissent. For them, reporting isn’t just a profession, it merges with acts of resistance.

Across the region, journalists like Egypt’s Lina Attalah, who continues to publish investigative reports despite state repression, and Yemen’s Afrah Nasser, whose exile hasn’t silenced her voice, act as catalysts for change, using their platforms to amplify marginalized voices, challenge oppressive systems and mobilize communities in liberation-focused movements.

Through the years, their work has gone far beyond reporting news and has become a vital force for truth, justice and social transformation in the region.

Telling the truth under threat

Ever since social media and blogs became widely accessible, women journalists have stood at the forefront, playing a crucial role in raising awareness of inequality, often in competition with predominantly male-dominated mainstream news outlets that are heavily censored or operate under tight government influence.

My Stealthy Freedom (MSF), for example, one of the most prominent social movements in Iran, was launched in 2014 by exiled Iranian journalist Masih Alinejad. What started as a Facebook page supporting Iranian women’s autonomy in making personal choices about their dress quickly gained more than one million followers.

In May 2017, MSF launched the #WhiteWednesdays campaign, encouraging participants to wear white headscarves or other symbols on Wednesdays as a visible form of protest against the mandatory hijab law. The campaign later expanded through tactical hashtags like #MarchingWithoutHijab and #OurCameraIsOurWeapon.

While Alinejad was working abroad, the government arrested her brother to pressure her to end her activism. In addition, New York police arrested two men involved in a murder-for-hire plot against her.

In Lebanon, independent journalist Luna Safwan, who covers corruption, gender-based violence and protest movements, has experienced co-ordinated online harassment for her critical reporting on Hezbollah and gender inequality. She faced two defamation SLAPP suits from her harasser and his lawyer after she and six other women publicly accused activist Jaafar al-Attar of sexual misconduct in 2021.

Lina Attalah, editor-in-chief of Mada Masr, one of the few remaining independent media outlets in Egypt, has been detained several times for publishing investigative reports on government corruption and women’s rights. She continues to advocate for press freedom and digital security for journalists under authoritarian regimes.

Award-winning Yemeni journalist and blogger Afrah Nasser was forced to flee into exile after documenting human rights violations and gender-based violence during Yemen’s civil war. As a researcher with Human Rights Watch, she continues to advocate for accountability, freedom of expression and justice for victims of war crimes in Yemen.

Yara Bader, a Syrian Journalist and human rights advocate who leads the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression, has exposed state-led detentions, torture and media suppression. Despite facing arrest and exile, she continues to advocate for press freedom and the protection of detained journalists in Syria.

In Tunisia, Lina Ben Mhenni — a blogger, digital activist and journalist — used her blog, A Tunisian Girl, during the Arab Spring to report on rural and under-covered regions. She documented police brutality and government repression and helped expose injustices to both the Tunisian public and the international community. She later became an advocate for human rights and freedom of expression in Tunisia.

Al Jazeera Palestinian journalist Bisan Owda has used her Instagram account to issue calls for global solidarity since 2023. The reporting of Owda and others from Gaza, like Hind Khoudary and Youmna ElSayed, have led to worldwide demonstrations, including a global strike on university campuses in 2024 and, more recently, the global strike in August 2025.

Middle Eastern women journalists like these have been crucial in documenting on-the-ground realities and mobilizing resistance against colonial, authoritarian and patriarchal violence.

Reclaiming the narrative digitally

The truth is that Middle Eastern women journalists have been actively reporting in places like Palestine and covering other conflict zones, often under dangerous conditions, for a long time.

While on the job, for example, veteran Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh was fatally shot by an Israeli soldier during a military operation in Jenin despite wearing a clearly marked “press” flak jacket.

Social media and blogging sites have given women journalists the platforms needed to spread messages of resistance.

And although Middle Eastern women journalists face a dual struggle — against patriarchal state structures and lingering colonial forces — they persist, fighting for a more equitable world and to mobilize others toward that goal.

In today’s world, where human rights seem increasingly fragile, Middle Eastern women journalists demonstrate determination and resilience. They advocate for human rights and fight against gender-based violence while shaping narratives and striving for social transformation within their geopolitical contexts and beyond.

In many Middle Eastern countries, access to official news channels is often reserved for reinforcing authoritarian narratives, while feminist journalists act as agents of change, using widely accessible platforms — particularly social media — to create spaces for awareness and reform.

Women journalists resist oversimplified portrayals of women as oppressed by family, state or colonial power. They reveal women’s role as active agents of change, exposing injustice and advancing movements for equality.

Farinaz Basmechi 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. In the Middle East, women journalists and activists have been driving crucial change – https://theconversation.com/in-the-middle-east-women-journalists-and-activists-have-been-driving-crucial-change-265273

October 27, 2025

Remote work reduced gender discrimination — returning to the office may change that

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Laura Doering, Associate Professor of Strategic Management, University of Toronto

Return-to-office mandates are spreading across North America, with Canada’s major banks, the Ontario government, Amazon and Facebook calling employees back into the office.

These moves reverse the flexibility that became widespread during the COVID-19 pandemic, when remote work became the new norm as public health measures emphasized staying home and avoiding large gatherings.

Supporters of these policies often cite collaboration, innovation and mentorship as reasons to bring workers together in person.

But our research shows that these mandates don’t affect everyone equally. For many women, returning to the office means stepping back into environments where gender bias is more pronounced.

Everyday discrimination at work

When people think about gender discrimination, many imagine pay gaps or barriers to promotion. But discrimination also plays out in routine interactions — what we refer to as “everyday gender discrimination” in our study.

These are regular slights and offences that can chip away at women’s confidence and sense of belonging over time. They might include being ignored in meetings, being asked to perform administrative tasks outside one’s role, receiving inappropriate comments or having one’s ideas credited to others.

While each single incident might seem trivial, their cumulative effect can make women feel frustrated, dissatisfied with their jobs and more likely to leave their organizations.

As organizations reassess where and how people work in the wake of the pandemic, we decided to examine whether everyday discrimination looks different in remote versus in-person settings.

Clear differences by location

To investigate how location shapes everyday gender discrimination, we surveyed 1,091 professional women in the United States with hybrid jobs, or roles that involved both in-person and remote work. Our design allowed us to compare the same person’s experiences across work locations and pinpoint the impact of location itself.

The results were striking. Women were significantly more likely to experience everyday gender discrimination when working on-site than when working remotely.

In a typical month, 29 per cent of respondents reported experiencing discrimination in the office, compared to just 18 per cent when working from home. These patterns held across types of discrimination, from being underestimated to being excluded from social activities and experiencing sexual harassment.

The contrast was especially sharp for two groups: younger women (under 30) and women who worked mostly with men. Among younger women, the likelihood of experiencing discrimination dropped from 31 per cent on site to just 14 per cent when remote.

Similarly, women who interacted primarily with men saw their likelihood of experiencing discrimination fall from 58 per cent on site to 26 per cent remotely. For these groups, remote work provides a meaningful reduction in exposure to everyday gender discrimination.

The trade-offs of remote work

Still, remote work is no silver bullet for gender inequality. Our findings highlight a key advantage — reduced exposure to everyday discrimination — but there are important trade-offs that need to be considered.

One challenge is that working remotely can limit informal interactions that are crucial for building relationships. It can also reduce access to mentors and feedback and make it harder for women to be considered for high-profile assignments.

Remote work can also make it harder to tell where the office ends and home begins, pulling family duties into the workday and intensifying family obligations even during work hours.

These factors are crucial for career advancement, especially for women. While remote work offers an environment with less everyday gender discrimination, working off-site may also limit women’s professional opportunities.

Understanding these trade-offs is essential as organizations craft return-to-office policies. Rather than treating remote work as inherently good or bad, leaders need nuanced strategies that combine the benefits of both in-person and remote work.

What employers and policymakers can do

As companies and governments push employees to return to the office, they risk overlooking how much location matters for women’s workplace experiences. Here are three steps organizations can take to address this issue:

1. Offer flexibility where possible.

Giving employees the option to work remotely empowers women to choose the environment where they feel most respected and productive. Some companies have adopted remote-first policies, framing them as tools for talent retention. Such policies allow employees to make decisions about the work location that suits them best.

2. Import best practices from remote meetings.

While virtual meetings tend to be less engaging, they are also more efficient and focused, with fewer opportunities for offhand comments or interruptions. Applying that same structure to in-person meetings could reduce discrimination while improving productivity.

Companies should consider formal agendas, structured turn-taking and asynchronous feedback to create fairer, more professional discussions. Amazon, for example, applied this principle by centring in-person meetings around “six-page memos” rather than open-ended discussions.

3. Acknowledge the trade-offs.

Leaders should recognize that, while on-site work can accelerate skill development, it can also magnify gender bias. A frank acknowledgement of this tension is the first step toward creating systems that minimize harm while maximizing opportunity.

One bank we studied in separate research, which hasn’t been published yet, overcame this challenge by pairing junior staff with senior mentors and implementing a project-tracking system to ensure equitable assignment of opportunities.

Location, location, location

Workplace discrimination is not only an ethical problem — it also undermines performance, fuels turnover and exposes firms to legal risks.

Our study shows that where work happens — remotely or on site — plays a central role in shaping women’s exposure to everyday gender discrimination.

As organizations roll back the remote work practices adopted during the pandemic, it’s important to recognize that decisions about location can powerfully shape employees’ experiences and professional opportunities at work.

Thoughtful policies that balance the benefits of in-person interaction with the protections afforded by remote work can help ensure that women face less everyday discrimination and experience greater equality at work.

Laura Doering receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Institute for Gender and the Economy at Rotman, and the Lee-Chin Institute.

András Tilcsik has received research funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the University of Toronto’s Institute for Pandemics, and the Institute for Gender and the Economy at the Rotman School of Management.

– ref. Remote work reduced gender discrimination — returning to the office may change that – https://theconversation.com/remote-work-reduced-gender-discrimination-returning-to-the-office-may-change-that-265945

October 27, 2025

Major Canadian banks’ digital emissions stay massive while they disclose less and less

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sylvain Amoros, Adjunct Professor, Department of Marketing, HEC Montréal

In early 2025, some of Canada’s largest banks — including those with the highest digital emissions and greatest responsibility — withdrew from the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative.

These major institutions, with digital carbon footprints that are disproportionately large, cited regulatory complexity and competitive pressures for their departure. This move has intensified questions from investors, policymakers and the public about their commitment to sustainability.

At the same time, Bill C-59, adopted in late 2024, introduced new provisions under the Competition Act to strengthen accountability for greenwashing and misleading environmental claims.

The timing is striking: as Ottawa tightens disclosure rules, the same large banks that dominate digital emissions are stepping away from voluntary climate commitments. This tension between voluntary pledges and federal accountability underscores the growing pressure on financial institutions to prove — rather than simply promote — their environmental performance.

Digital carbon footprint

For decades, banks have presented themselves as leaders in sustainability through renewable energy financing and ambitious environmental, social and governance commitments. Yet their recent departure from climate coalitions — coupled with their outsized digital carbon footprints — represents an alarming reversal.

We recently conducted a study of the environmental impact of nine Canadian banks including the big five: CIBC, TD Bank, Scotiabank, Royal Bank of Canada and BMO. Our recent study sought to quantify banks’ environmental impact through their digital carbon footprint.

Banks are pillars of our economy and society, possessing both the power and responsibility to lead the transition toward a more sustainable economy. However, their recent withdrawal from the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, coupled with ongoing concerns about greenwashing, raises legitimate questions about their true commitment to sustainability.

In this context, our goal as researchers is to provide both bank clients and financial institutions with crucial information about their environmental impact. Understanding the environmental footprint of banks’ digital operations is essential, as this often-overlooked aspect constitutes a significant portion of their overall carbon footprint.

We analyzed public data from 2024 to measure the carbon impact of Canadian banks’ digital practices. Our study examined two main dimensions:

1) Website usage (the energy consumed by website loading, data transfers and hosting) and;

2) Traffic acquisition, which includes all marketing activities that bring visitors to these sites, such as email marketing, paid advertising search engine optimization and social media campaigns.

The objective was to compare carbon emissions among different banks, assess their efficiency per visit and provide transparent information to the public. By identifying the most polluting areas in digital operations, we provide recommendations for improvement.

Social media activity

Our study uncovered significant findings about Canadian banks’ digital environmental impact. Most strikingly, we found a performance gap where the worst bank emits twice as much carbon per visitor as the best; just three banks account for two-thirds of total emissions.

To clarify, “traffic acquisition” refers to the process of attracting visitors to a website — whether through paid ads, organic search results, or social media content. Organic traffic comes from users who find a bank’s site naturally through search engines, social media or content marketing, while paid traffic is generated through advertising placements.

The data reveals that 77 per cent of digital emissions come from traffic acquisition versus only 23 per cent from website usage. Paid traffic drives 95 per cent of traffic emissions despite being a small fraction of total traffic, while organic traffic accounts for just five per cent of emissions.

Paid social media is particularly problematic — responsible for 58 per cent of emissions while generating only one per cent of total traffic.

In other words, social media ads are highly inefficient from a carbon perspective: a visitor coming from online advertising emits 418 times more carbon dioxide than one coming from organic sources.

These results expose online advertising — especially social media campaigns — as major hidden pollution sources.

A hidden source of pollution

These findings highlight how online advertising — particularly social media campaigns — can become a major source of digital pollution. The reality is clear: every click has a carbon cost.

Banks can improve their inbound marketing, meaning strategies that attract users organically through relevant content, search optimization and user experience improvements rather than through paid ads.

Transparency and sustainable digital practices are essential for greener banking — practices that reduce emissions without sacrificing innovation or competitiveness.

After withdrawing from the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative and maintaining public net-zero commitments, many banks continue to generate significant emissions through their digital operations.

This raises a critical question for regulators, investors and consumers alike: will banks leverage their considerable resources to lead on sustainability, or continue to delay meaningful action?

Our next study will assess whether these institutions uphold their commitments or persist in their current practices, despite the escalating climate urgency.

Victor Prouteau, who at the time of this study was an M. Sc. student at HEC Montréal, co-authored this article.

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. Major Canadian banks’ digital emissions stay massive while they disclose less and less – https://theconversation.com/major-canadian-banks-digital-emissions-stay-massive-while-they-disclose-less-and-less-260768

October 27, 2025

Seven things Halloween and Hollywood get wrong about bats

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Veronica Zamora-Gutierrez, Lecturer in Ecology, University of Southampton

October is bats’ time in the spotlight, although they are mostly portrayed as spooky and creepy. The truth is, bats are more likely to help you than harm you.

Since I first saw a bat as an undergraduate student more than 20 years ago, I was captivated by these enigmatic and “weird” animals. The more I learn, the more I am amazed by their uniqueness and extraordinary adaptations. Here are seven fascinating facts that reveal the truth behind the many misunderstandings people still have about bats.

1. Fear of bats is not universal, it’s cultural

In western cultures, bats tend to be associated with witches, vampires, night and fear. Literature, films and Halloween imagery lean on these themes. In contrast, in many parts of the world bats are viewed positively. In Mesoamerica, bats were woven into sacred stories. The Maya revered Camazotz, the bat god of the underworld, associated with night, death and sacrifice. In the Popol Vuh (the sacred book of the K’iche’ Maya), Camazotz dwells in the House of Bats in Xibalba (the Maya underworld). Even today, the Popol Vuh remains alive in Maya culture.

Sculpture of Mayan bat god Camazotz.
Tracy Barnett/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA

In 1946, at Monte Albán, an important archaeological site in southern Mexico, archaeologists discovered the so-called mask of the bat God, a jade artefact dated to around 100BC-AD200. Researchers interpret it as evidence that bats were revered in cultures inhabiting these regions, symbolising fertility, death and the sacred world of caves and night.

Caves in Mesoamerica were often seen as portals to the underworld, and bats emerging from these dark spaces became associated with ancestors and divine forces. Rather than mere harbingers of fear, they embodied the powerful link between life, death and renewal. Today, caves and sinkholes are still regarded as sacred spaces, where rituals that blend ancient traditions with Catholic influences are performed.

2. Bats don’t attack humans

From Dracula to Morbius, bats in movies are often cast as villains or responsible for terrible disease outbreaks. The story of Dracula depicts bats as bloodsucking creatures from hell. But in reality, only three out of the 1,500 or so bat species feed on blood and they do not live in the UK or Europe. They prefer warmer climates and are found in the tropical areas of the Americas.

Even vampire bats target mostly livestock or other animals, not humans. Far more common are bats that feed on insects, fruit, nectar or even fish. These varied diets make bats essential to ecosystems.

3. Bats don’t deserve the rap they get for disease

Yes, bats can carry viruses and pathogens (as many animals do). But disease spillover to humans usually happens when bats are stressed by habitat loss, disturbance, or forced into closer contact with us or other animals. If blame is to be cast, it lies with us humans.

As for the COVID pandemic, it’s possible a person rather than an animal brought the virus to the live animal market in Wuhan.

4. Bats aren’t blind

Have you ever heard someone say that bats are blind? Maybe this idea comes from the fact that bats fly in unusual ways and are completely nocturnal in some regions. But bats have good vision supplemented by a sixth sense: echolocation. It helps them “see” the details of their environment.

Bat sonar navigation is fine-tuned to help them avoid obstacles such as trees and vegetation, and it helps them find food such as insects flying in the air or resting on plants. This system is comparable to some of our most advanced technology, such as the sonar submarines use to navigate in the darkness of the ocean.

Bat flying and trying to catch moth in mid air. — Insect-eating bats are vital to their ecosystems.
Rudmer Zwerver/Shutterstock

5. Bats are givers, not takers

In the UK, bats eat insects – and a lot of them. This natural pest suppression helps reduce crop damage, control mosquito populations and relieve pressure on farmers to use chemical insecticides. But in tropical regions, bats do even more. They offer pollination, seed dispersal and vegetation regeneration services that are critical to ecosystems and agriculture.

In 2021 my colleagues and I conducted a study in Mexico showing that bats improve both yield and fruit quality of an important cactus fruit crop in Mexico. This was the first direct evidence of the economic value of bat pollination services, estimated at US$2,500 (£1,8060) per crop hectare.

We can taste their benefits here in the UK too. Do you drink tequila or mezcal? Well, bats are the main pollinators of that group of plants, called agaves.

6. Bats aren’t pests

You may have got the wrong idea from those depictions of bats as hellish creatures but these animals are closely entwined with their environment. Bats use weather cues to time key life cycles (hibernation, migration, reproduction). And these activities need to coincide with the availability of food. For example, insectivorous bats rely on insects emerging at predictable times. But as climate change makes spring warmer and shifts rainfall patterns, insects may appear earlier or in altered numbers.

These risks are especially relevant for insect eaters in temperate zones like the UK, where seasonality is strongly marked. A European study from 2025 of temperate bats warns that weather changes could push bat activity out of sync with prey availability.

We don’t yet know how severe the consequences will be. But if bats can’t feed on insects anymore, pest outbreaks and crop losses could rise.

7. Bats are lovers, not loners

Many bats are highly social and cooperative. Female vampire bats, for instance, are known to share blood meals with roost-mates that failed to feed that night, even when those bats are not related to them. They also spend large amounts of time social grooming, which not only helps with hygiene but also strengthens bonds between bats.

In other cave-roosting species, mothers form large nurseries and help care for each other’s young. They share grooming and protection duties and help with the thermoregulation of newborns.

Recent research on the spectral bat (Vampyrum spectrum), a carnivorous bat and one of the largest in the Americas (with a wingspan of about one metre), shows that these carnivores live in close family groups like parents and pups. Using cameras inside tree roosts, scientists observed adults bringing prey to their young, grooming, greeting each other, and even leaving and returning together, a level of cooperation rarely seen in carnivorous mammals.

These social bonds challenge the Hollywood image of bats as eerie loners of the night. Instead, bats live in rich communities built on cooperation and social bonding.

Veronica Zamora-Gutierrez receives funding from The Royal Society, British Cactus and Succulent Society.

– ref. Seven things Halloween and Hollywood get wrong about bats – https://theconversation.com/seven-things-halloween-and-hollywood-get-wrong-about-bats-267341

October 27, 2025

Ukraine: another week of diplomatic wrangling leaves Kyiv short of defensive options

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Whitman, Member of the Conflict Analysis Research Centre, University of Kent; Royal United Services Institute

Following another week of diplomatic flip-flopping in the United States, Ukraine’s European allies did not disappoint when it came to the fulsomeness of their diplomatic rhetoric. Yet concrete action to strengthen the capabilities Ukraine needs to win the war remained at a snail’s pace.

After a less than successful meeting in the White House on October 17 between the American and Ukrainian presidents, Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine and its European allies once again scrambled to respond to US equivocation with public affirmations of support for Kyiv.

A meeting of EU foreign ministers on Monday October 20, a summit of EU leaders on Thursday October 23, and a gathering of the coalition of the willing on Friday October 24, provided plenty of opportunities for such statements. For good measure, the Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte, paid a visit to Washington on October 21 and 22 before joining the leaders of the coalition of the willing on Friday.

The core message from all these meetings was that where the Trump administration sends ambiguous signals, Ukraine’s more steadfast European supporters are still keen to demonstrate their mettle.

When they met on Monday in Brussels, EU foreign ministers had a packed agenda. On Ukraine, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, Kaja Kallas, reiterated the bloc’s support for what she described as “Trump’s efforts to end the war” and condemned Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

The following day, Tuesday October 21, brought diplomatic whiplash, when it transpired that there had been another apparent shift in the White House. The Budapest summit between Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, was postponed until further notice. The supposed host, Hungary’s Kremlin-friendly prime minister, Viktor Orban, and Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, maintained that preparations for the meeting were continuing. But Trump was unequivocal. He would not waste time on a meeting if a peace deal was not a realistic prospect.

In an unusual moment of clarity, the US president then appeared to realise that he needed to demonstrate actual consequences for Russia obstructing a peace agreement. On October 22 the US announced sanctions on two of Russia’s largest oil companies – Rosneft and Lukoil – the first sanctions package imposed on Russia in Trump’s second term.

There is a grace period until November 21 to allow for the necessary winding down of transactions with, and divestment from, the two companies. Nonetheless, the mere announcement of the sanctions has already led to major Indian and Chinese clients beginning to pull out from their deals with Russia’s energy giants. Additional sanctions against the Russian banking sector and companies involved in oil infrastructure are apparently also being contemplated in the White House.

After much deliberation to overcome internal divisions, the EU followed suit. On October 23, it announced its 19th package of sanctions against Russia. This also targeted an oil trader and two refineries in China and banks in Central Asia.

In addition, the EU confirmed that a decision had been taken on the rules of the transition to a complete ban on any Russian gas imports. This will take full effect at the end of 2027.

All these efforts are critical to increasing pressure on Russia and are long overdue. But their immediate effect is uncertain. Russia has responded with the usual performative defiance. It has tested a new nuclear-powered missile and carried out a readiness drill for the country’s nuclear forces, overseen directly by Putin.

More help needed

With Russia’s air and ground wars against Ukraine continuing unabated, the other major challenge for Kyiv’s allies is providing assistance.

ISW map whsing the state of the conflict in Ukraine as at October 26 2025. — The state of the conflict in Ukraine as at October 26 2025.
Institute for the Study of War

Here, progress has stalled. The US continues to withhold permission for Ukraine to use long-range missiles against targets deep inside of Russia. The mooted supply of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine by the US has been scotched. Meeting with coalition leaders on Friday, Zelensky kept pressing for deep-strike weapons, stressing that when the US threatened to supply Tomahawks to Ukraine, Putin was willing to negotiate.

Even more pressing is the issue of how to cover Ukraine’s financial needs. Kyiv’s most recent estimate of the country’s unmet external financing needs for 2026-27 stands at US$60 billion (£45 billion).

At the European Council meeting on October 23, leaders reiterated their commitment to “continue to provide, in coordination with like-minded partners and allies, comprehensive political, financial, economic, humanitarian, military and diplomatic support to Ukraine and its people”. However, crucially, no agreement was reached on how the necessary funds would be mobilised.

There is strong support for using frozen Russian assets to assist Ukraine, including from the coalition of the willing and the US. A proposal to provide Ukraine with a loan secured by these frozen Russian assets has been around for some time.

It has not been finalised due to two major obstacles. The first was Ukraine’s refusal to accept EU conditions that while some of the money could be used to buy weapons, none of the funds should be spent on procuring them from the US. The second, more critical, issue was a demand from Belgium – where most of the frozen Russian assets are held at the Euroclear securities depository – for robust guarantees that the burden for any Russian litigation and retaliation be collectively shared by EU members.

Despite all the signalling from the EU’s leadership in the run-up to last week’s gathering in Brussels that these two major obstacles to approving the loan were being overcome, the meeting ended with EU leaders postponing a decision to their next meeting in December.

At the end of a week of concentrated attention on Russia’s war against Ukraine, the outcome was therefore a repetition of recent behaviour. The Trump administration flip-flopped and the coalition of the willing produced little more than a statement of intent to continue their support for Ukraine. The track record of Kyiv’s European partners to slow-walk the necessary goods for Ukraine’s defence continues. There’s mounting evidence suggesting that they will not stretch themselves to go beyond securing Ukraine’s immediate survival.

Unsurprisingly, a credible pathway to ending the war with a just and stable peace is still lacking.

Richard Whitman has received funding from the Economic and Research Council of the UK as a Senior Fellow of the UK in a Changing Europe initiative. He is a past recipient of grant funding from the British Academy of the UK, EU Erasmus+ and Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Senior Associate Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), and an Academic Fellow of the European Policy Centre in Brussels. He is a past Associate Fellow and Head of the Europe Programme of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House).

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

– ref. Ukraine: another week of diplomatic wrangling leaves Kyiv short of defensive options – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-another-week-of-diplomatic-wrangling-leaves-kyiv-short-of-defensive-options-268023

October 27, 2025

ICJ tells Israel to let UN aid flow into Gaza – but UN’s own failures throughout the war loom large

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ben L Murphy, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Liverpool

The UN’s top court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), demanded that Israel allow aid into Gaza in an advisory opinion on October 22. It held that Israel is in breach of its obligations as a UN member state by having failed to do so adequately over the past two years.

The opinion was requested ten months ago by the UN general assembly after Israel’s parliament banned the UN Relief and Works Agency (Unrwa) from operating in territories occupied by the country. Unrwa has long played a pivotal role in delivering humanitarian aid to Palestinians.

In its verdict, the ICJ unanimously reaffirmed that the use of starvation as a method of warfare is prohibited under international law. The court also ordered Israel, by ten votes to one, to agree to and facilitate humanitarian relief in Gaza provided by the UN and its entities.

This aspect of the opinion should be celebrated. The precarious ceasefire in Gaza has not been accompanied by a simultaneous influx of aid. Conditions of famine, destitution and death continue to define the day-to-day experience of those living in Gaza.

However, some observers will be sceptical about whether the ICJ’s advisory opinion will have any tangible impact. A collection of judicial and institutional pronouncements on the illegality of Israel’s conduct in Gaza over the past two years has fallen on deaf ears.

These include the ICJ’s January 2024 order for Israel to take all measures to prevent genocide in Gaza, which a recent UN human rights council commission of inquiry report concluded it is committing.

The International Criminal Court also has outstanding arrest warrants for the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Issued for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza, these warrants have not been enforced.

The ICJ’s recent opinion will be added to this list. Israel did not participate in the oral proceedings for the opinion, and in a post on social media immediately after the verdict, the country’s foreign ministry stated that it “categorically rejects” the court’s findings.

UN falling short

In its advisory opinion, the ICJ held that “Israel has an obligation to cooperate in good faith with the United Nations by providing every assistance in any action it takes”. Here, the court was referring to action by Unrwa to assist Palestinians in Gaza. But this statement should prompt consideration of other types of “action” the UN has failed to take over the past two years of war.

As the ICJ said in its recent verdict, self-determination for the Palestinian people should include the “right to an independent and sovereign state”. However, Palestine continues to be denied full UN membership – a key element of statehood.

In May 2024, a majority of states in the UN general assembly determined that Palestine qualified for membership in accordance with the UN charter. But, despite only nine states voting against the resolution from a total of 193, Palestine was not granted membership.

This was a result of the UN’s dysfunctional structure. The five permanent members of the UN security council (China, France, Russia, the UK and US), the organ that is tasked with maintaining international peace and security, have veto power to block a resolution from being adopted.

And as Israel’s strongest military and diplomatic backer, the US has used its veto power continuously to defend Israeli interests. As long as Israel effectively wields a proxy veto at the security council through its alliance with the US, the UN’s ability to take action in support of the Palestinian people will be restricted and this never-ending loop will continue.

Judicial and institutional pronouncements on Israel’s conduct can have a broader cumulative effect in the pursuit of the realisation of Palestinian self-determination. A timely pronouncement can also be an important rhetorical tool in the quest for concrete goals, such as the reopening of humanitarian routes in Gaza.

But it is important to be aware of the fact that the UN is not a neutral arbiter of rights and obligations. In its current form, which allows members of the security council to block resolutions based on their own national interests, it is complicit in the current humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.

Ben L Murphy 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. ICJ tells Israel to let UN aid flow into Gaza – but UN’s own failures throughout the war loom large – https://theconversation.com/icj-tells-israel-to-let-un-aid-flow-into-gaza-but-uns-own-failures-throughout-the-war-loom-large-268222

October 27, 2025

From grooming gangs to Virginia Giuffre, this is the common thread in abuse

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rebecca Hamer, Research associate, Sheffield Hallam University

Two stories of abuse have repeatedly captured the nation’s attention. The first relates to Prince Andrew’s friendship with financier Jeffrey Epstein, even after Epstein was convicted for sex offences. The second is the group-based child sexual abuse in Rotherham, Rochdale and other cities.

Prince Andrew has come under mounting pressure over the posthumous publication of a memoir by Virginia Giuffre a victim of Epstein’s who also accused Andrew of abuse. In 2022, Andrew settled a civil sexual assault case brought by Giuffre, for an undisclosed sum.

At the same time, the victims of grooming gangs have accused the government of failing them by mishandling an inquiry into the crimes committed against them.

I work with survivors of childhood sexual abuse, including in Rotherham, and the services that support them. While it would be disingenuous to claim that all survivors’ experiences are the same, there are important similarities in these stories, as well as their abusers.

Their backgrounds may differ – wealthy financier or Pakistani taxi driver from Yorkshire – but sexual abusers of children, especially where group grooming is involved, share some traits.

In her memoir, Giuffre accused Andrew of being “entitled – as if he believed having sex with me was his birthright”.

Entitlement, underpinned by misogyny, and the othering and denigration of particular girls and women, is evident in many cases of child sexual abuse. Abusers may have close relationships with some women, but have a set of criteria – conscious or subconscious – that render the girls they abuse as “other”, and deserving of being exploited or used.

Another common thread is commodification of women and girls. Epstein trafficked underage girls via private jet to his island where he “entertained” other high-profile men. He leveraged his wealth and power to exploit girls to impress his peers.

Grooming victims in Rotherham and other cities in the UK were also trafficked, often by networks of taxi drivers. They were taken to dilapidated flats above takeaways, where they were also forced or coerced into sex with associates of men who had manipulated their way into being trusted by vulnerable girls.

Regardless of the sums involved or the nature of the currency (fiscal, kudos, business arrangements), abusers often view the women and girls they abuse as a means to improve their own personal lot.

That may be money changing hands, or a sense of brotherhood and respect from other powerful men. Investigations into Epstein have revealed fawning letters to him, allegedly written by high-profile politicians including Donald Trump and Peter Mandelson.

The legacy of trauma

All survivors of child sexual exploitation have suffered highly traumatic experiences in their formative years. This impacts their sense of who they are, what they are worth and can do, and their perception of other people.

It also affects their psychological health. PTSD is frequently misdiagnosed as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and other chronic mental health conditions. They may become further stigmatised and othered, feeling blamed for their abuse, as the symptoms of their trauma are treated as individual dysfunction.

Trauma shows itself in physical symptoms too – chronic fatigue and chronic pain, or affecting the heart, brain and nervous system. Many now-adult survivors I have spoken to have described the physical and psychological injuries that their experiences of abuse inflicted upon them. They have felt unable to leave the house, or injured themselves to try and overcome the physical flashbacks of their abuse.

When Giuffre died by suicide earlier this year, her family said: “In the end, the toll of abuse is so heavy that it became unbearable for Virginia to handle its weight.”

The trauma of being dismissed

The UK government’s inquiry into grooming gangs now faces months of delays, after candidates to lead the inquiry pulled out, and multiple women resigned from the inquiry’s victims liaison panel.

It’s not surprising to see survivors questioning the validity of an inquiry overseen by professionals with backgrounds in the police and social work – organisations that they feel have abandoned them.

Survivors of childhood sexual abuse regularly describe feeling “gaslit”, diminished and silenced by people with more power than them. In a way, it is a replication of the trauma they experienced at the hands of predatory abusers in their childhood.

Abuse survivors also have different notions of justice, or what they want from speaking out. But whether it’s through an inquiry, the courts, campaigning or a memoir, survivors want to be heard and believed when they share their story.

Giuffre and the UK grooming gangs survivors have this in common, too. They have all been doubted, intimidated and abused for their bravery of speaking out.

Police are looking into claims that Prince Andrew asked his bodyguard to uncover information on Giuffre, although there is no suggestion that individual took any such action. But the Met reportedly did not investigate allegations against Andrew that were released as part of the Epstein files.

Many survivors in Rotherham had frequent contact with police, who viewed them as disruptive and problematic. Survivors were dismissed as “child prostitutes”, a grossly inaccurate term that blames the victim of child sexual exploitation. Grown men were referred to as their “boyfriends”, rather than identified as criminals and abusers.

Often, survivors feel let down by organisations whose duty it is to protect. Their hesitance to be represented by these same services again is understandable.

But there is a possibility for positive change. I have heard many stories of the enormous benefits of trauma-focused work, including physical and cognitive techniques to ground the mind and body in the present and to soothe the nervous system. Survivors value being supported by professionals who understand their experiences and the impact through a trauma-informed lens.

Survivors who have been able to access support like this describe being able to stand proud in their community, to speak up for themselves, set boundaries and recognise themselves as important, capable and worthy of respect.

Rebecca Hamer receives funding from Innovate UK for a pilot developing an equine based trauma-stabilisation pathway for women with substance use problems.

– ref. From grooming gangs to Virginia Giuffre, this is the common thread in abuse – https://theconversation.com/from-grooming-gangs-to-virginia-giuffre-this-is-the-common-thread-in-abuse-268153

October 27, 2025

Javier Milei’s victory in Argentina’s midterm elections is also a win for Trump

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Juan Pablo Ferrero, Senior Lecturer in Latin American Politics, University of Bath

Javier Milei, Argentina’s self-styled anarcho-capitalist president, has secured a resounding victory in legislative midterm elections. Following a year marked by radical austerity, economic upheaval and political scandals, this outcome is nothing short of extraordinary.

Milei’s La Libertad Avanza coalition defied expectations to secure more than 40% of the nationwide vote, substantially outperforming the main opposition Fuerza Patria coalition’s roughly 32%. This triumph bolsters the president’s legislative power and, critically, positions him as a strong contender for reelection in 2027.

The elections were widely interpreted as a referendum on Milei’s tenure, which began in December 2023. His victory is a testament to his successful strategy of polarisation and his ability to present himself as the sole purveyor of hope and “redemption” amid prolonged economic stagnation and declining real incomes.

Yet the narrative of this win is also inextricably linked to a dramatic intervention by the US government to stabilise Argentina’s shaky economy. This intervention transformed a local legislative contest into a global geopolitical flashpoint.

Milei’s first year as president was characterised by a “chainsaw” approach to public spending, cutting tens of thousands of government jobs and freezing public investments. These measures were painful, contributing to business closures and job losses. But they also delivered tangible – albeit fragile – macroeconomic gains.

Annual inflation, which peaked at 289% in April 2024, was brought down to about 32% by October 2025. The country also achieved its first fiscal surplus in more than a decade. However, the more immediate electoral lifeline was the government’s intense focus on managing the price of the US dollar.

The longstanding instability of Argentina’s own currency, the peso, coupled with frequent high inflation has created a dual system where the peso is used for daily transactions there but the dollar is preferred for savings and larger purchases, like real estate.

And Milei’s administration has gone to great lengths to control the exchange rate, thereby engineering a temporary but palpable sense of stability just ahead of the polls. This stability was crucial for voters battered by volatility.

It also came at a high cost: a heavy reliance on Washington’s financial backing. As Argentina’s central bank reserves dwindled and a currency crisis loomed, the US government – under President Donald Trump – moved with speed to rescue the situation.

A US$20 billion (£15 billion) currency swap agreement between the US Treasury and Argentina’s central bank was formalised on October 20. This financial assistance, which was quickly followed by an additional announced facility of up to US$20 billion sourced from private banks and sovereign funds, was undeniably timed to shore up Milei’s position before the election.

Trump explicitly linked the continuation of this aid to a Milei victory, warning: “If he loses, we are not going to be generous with Argentina”. Milei’s win is a clear victory for his ideological ally in Washington, who championed the financial lifeline as a strategic move to support a “great philosophy” and “make Argentina great again”.

The US government’s overt and decisive intervention marks a shift not seen in Latin America since perhaps the cold war. It signals that Argentina, and Latin America more broadly, is back on the geopolitical chessboard.

For the US, this is less about ideological affinity and more about strategic resource competition. Latin America holds vast reserves of natural resources, including critical minerals such as lithium that are essential components of the global clean energy supply chain.

Washington’s support for Milei is a move to challenge China’s expanding economic and political foothold in the region. It ensures that a key resource provider and trade partner remains firmly within the US orbit. Milei is, in turn, keen to facilitate American investment in key sectors such as oil, gas and mining. These sectors are all central to his economic recovery plans.

A lithium field in the highlands of northern Argentina.
Freedom_wanted / Shutterstock

A reckoning for the opposition

The election results have definitively confirmed a deep and persistent political polarisation in Argentina. The centre-left opposition’s traditional strategy – waiting for the incumbent’s austerity and scandals to generate discontent – failed to deliver a victory. This should force a period of fundamental soul-searching for the opposition.

But, in my opinion, Milei’s success is not simply the product of a “crisis of representation”, where traditional parties are failing. He instead appears to be a faithful representative of a new, reactive global society. This society is deeply sceptical of institutional mediation, preferring strong executive leaders and perceived “problem solvers” over consensus-based politics.

Milei’s radical experiment has survived its first great electoral test. His party, despite its limited base in the Argentine Congress, secured enough seats to be a formidable legislative force. This means it is now capable of upholding presidential vetoes and advancing critical tax and labour reforms.

He has also set a powerful new trajectory for the country – one that is tightly bound to the geopolitical strategies of the US, its indispensable new partner. As I have argued before, Milei’s politics are here to stay in Argentina and Latin America.

Juan Pablo Ferrero 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. Javier Milei’s victory in Argentina’s midterm elections is also a win for Trump – https://theconversation.com/javier-mileis-victory-in-argentinas-midterm-elections-is-also-a-win-for-trump-268339

October 27, 2025

The hidden military pressures behind the new push for small nuclear reactors

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Phil Johnstone, Visiting Fellow, School of Global Studies, University of Sussex; University of Tartu; Utrecht University

Donald Trump’s recent visit to the UK saw a so-called “landmark partnership” on nuclear energy. London and Washington announced plans to build 20 small modular reactors and also develop microreactor technology – despite the fact no such plants have yet been built commercially anywhere in the world.

The UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, promised these plans will deliver a “golden age” of nuclear energy that will also “drive down bills”. Yet the history of nuclear power has been decades of overhype, soaring costs and constant delays. Around the world, the trends point the wrong way.

So why the renewed excitement about going nuclear? The real reasons have less to do with energy security, or climate change – and far more to do with military power.

At first sight, the case may seem obvious. Nuclear supporters frame small modular reactors, or SMRs, as vital for cutting emissions, meeting rising demand for electricity from cars and data centres. With large nuclear plants now prohibitively expensive, smaller reactors are billed as an exciting new alternative.

But these days even the most optimistic industry analyses concede that nuclear – even SMRs – is unlikely to compete with renewables. One analysis in New Civil Engineer published earlier this year concluded that SMRs are “the most expensive source per kilowatt of electricity generated when compared with natural gas, traditional nuclear and renewables”.

Independent assessments – for instance by the formerly pro-nuclear Royal Society – find that 100% renewable systems outperform any energy system including nuclear on cost, flexibility and security. This helps explain why worldwide statistical analysis shows nuclear power is not generally linked to carbon emissions reductions, while renewables are.

Partly, the enthusiasm for SMRs can be explained by the loudest institutional voices tending to have formal pro-nuclear remits or interests: they include the industry itself and its suppliers, nuclear agencies, and governments with entrenched military nuclear programmes. For these interests, the only question is which kinds of nuclear reactors to develop, and how fast. They don’t wonder if we should build reactors in the first place: the need is seen as self-evident.

At least big nuclear reactors have benefited from economies of scale and decades of technological optimisation. Many SMR designs are just “powerpoint reactors”, existing only in slides and feasibility studies. Claims these unbuilt designs “will cost less” are speculative at best.

Investment markets know this. While financiers see SMR hype as a way to profit from billions in government subsidies, their own analyses are less enthusiastic about the technology itself.

So why then, all this attention to nuclear in general and smaller reactors in particular? There is clearly more to this than meets the eye.

The hidden link

The neglected factor is the military dependence on civil nuclear industries. Maintaining a nuclear armed navy or weapons programme requires constant access to generic reactor technologies, skilled workers and special materials. Without a civilian nuclear industry, military nuclear capabilities are significantly more challenging and costly to sustain.

Nuclear submarines are especially important here as they would very likely require national reactor industries and their supply chains even if there was no civil nuclear power. Barely affordable even vessel by vessel, nuclear submarines become even more expensive when the costs of this “submarine industrial base” is factored in.

Rolls-Royce is an important link here, as it already builds the UK’s submarine reactors and is set to build the newly announced civil SMRs. The company said openly in 2017 that a civil SMR programme would “relieve the Ministry of Defence of the burden of developing and retaining skills and capability”.

Here, as emphasised by Nuclear Intelligence Weekly in 2020, the Rolls-Royce SMR programme has an important “symbiosis with UK military needs”. It is this dependency that allows military costs (in the words of a former executive with submarine builders BAE Systems), to be “masked” behind civilian programmes.

By funding civil nuclear projects, taxpayers and consumers cover military uses of nuclear power in subsidies and higher bills – without the added spending appearing in defence budgets.

When the UK government funded us to investigate the value of this transfer, we put it at around £5 billion per year in the UK alone. These costs are masked from public view, covered by revenues from higher electricity prices and the budgets of supposedly civilian government agencies.

This is not a conspiracy but a kind of political gravitational field. Once governments see nuclear weapons as a marker of global status, the funding and political support becomes self-perpetuating.

The result is a strange sort of circularity: nuclear power is justified by energy security and cost arguments that don’t stand up, but is in reality sustained for strategic reasons that remain unacknowledged.

A global pattern

The UK is not unique, though other nuclear powers are much more candid. US energy secretary Chris Wright described the US-UK nuclear deal as important for “securing nuclear supply chains across the Atlantic”. Around US$25 billion a year (£18.7 billion) flows from civil to military nuclear activity in the US.

Russia and China are both quite open about their own inseparable civil-military links. French president Emmanuel Macron put it clearly: “Without civilian nuclear, no military nuclear, without military nuclear, no civilian nuclear.”

Across these states, military nuclear capabilities are seen as a way to stay at the world’s “top table”. An end to their civilian programme would threaten not just jobs and energy, but their great power status.

The next frontier

Beyond submarines, the development of “microreactors” is opening up new military uses for nuclear power. Microreactors are even smaller and more experimental than SMRs. Though they can make profits by milking military procurement budgets, they make no sense from a commercial energy standpoint.

However, microreactors are seen as essential in US plans for battlefield power, space infrastructure and new “high energy” anti-drone and missile weaponry. Prepare to see them become ever more prominent in “civil” debates – precisely because they serve military goals.

Whatever view is taken of these military developments, it makes no sense to pretend they are unrelated to the civil nuclear sector. The real drivers of the recent US-UK nuclear agreement lie in military projection of force, not civilian power production. Yet this remains absent from most discussions of energy policy.

It is a crucial matter of democracy that there be honesty about what is really going on.

Phil Johnstone is a Visiting Professor at the University of Tartu, Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Utrecht, and Visiting Fellow at the University of Sussex. He is an unpaid member of the Sussex Energy Group, the Nuclear Consultation Group, a Patron of the Nuclear Information Service, and serves on the advisory board of the Medact Nuclear Weapons group.

He and Andy Stirling previously received funding from the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) for research that underpins some of the insights in this blog.

Andy Stirling is Emeritus Professor at the University of Sussex. Among many previous government and intergovernmental policy advisory appointments, he currently serves on the sociology sub-panel of the UK Research Excellence Framework 2029 and the Research Council for the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. He is an unpaid member of the Sussex Energy Group, the Nuclear Consultation Group, a Patron of the Nuclear Information Service and Nuclear Education Trust and a trustee for Greenpeace UK. He served in 2022-3 as an expert advisor for the official UK Government review of the DESNZ Nuclear Innovation Programme and (with Phil Johnstone) received funding from the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) for research that underpins some of the insights in this blog.

– ref. The hidden military pressures behind the new push for small nuclear reactors – https://theconversation.com/the-hidden-military-pressures-behind-the-new-push-for-small-nuclear-reactors-266301

October 27, 2025

Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere is an underwhelming ode to ‘the boss’

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Glenn Fosbraey, Associate Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Winchester

In the last ten years, Bruce Springsteen has cemented his status as a bona fide music legend.

In that time, he has won the Presidential Medal of Freedom, had a worldwide bestselling book been the subject of the acclaimed film Blinded By The Light (2019), and seen his studio albums continue to scale the higher reaches of the charts.

It’s as a live act, though, that Springsteen has flourished the most. Known for a relentless work ethic which has seen him touring almost non-stop since the early 1970s, Springsteen’s recent world tour has been his most lucrative, best-selling, and longest to date. On the back of all this, it’s no real surprise that “the boss” (as fans call him) has now been given the biopic treatment.

Bruce Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere stars Jeremy Allen White in the title role. The majority of the film focuses on the period between 1981 and 1982, where, in the aftermath of number one LP The River and a sold-out world tour, a disenchanted Springsteen channelled his inner turmoil into the songs that would eventually form his next album, Nebraska (1982).

As well as a lyrical shift from his earlier work, Nebraska was a sonic departure, recorded on a four-track tape machine in his bedroom. Released on September 30 1982, Nebraska was as stark and minimalist as any album from a major rock star. Coming at the peak of Springsteen’s commercial success so far, it was an enormous risk.

The trailer for Springsteen: Deliver Me From Nowhere.

Devotees will undoubtedly appreciate the deep-dive into a cult favourite album. But for the casual fan or interested cinema-goer, Deliver Me from Nowhere will likely feel underwhelming.

Despite getting the thumbs up form The Boss himself, White never quite convinces in the role. While he does an admirable job depicting the gentler side of Springsteen, he lacks the jutting-jawed physical presence that so defines the star’s stage persona.

The film is interspersed with black and white flashbacks to Freehold New Jersey 1957, where an eight-year-old Springsteen struggled to get attention from his disengaged, hard-drinking father (played by Stephen Graham). The distant father trope is well-worn ground in the music biopic genre (see Bohemian Rhapsody, Rocket Man and Love and Mercy) and it falls to Graham to pull off the unenviable task of providing context for why our titular rock star is so fragile, broken and unstable.

That Graham manages to achieve this in minimal screen-time is one of his finest acting achievements yet. His nuanced performance brings a complexity to what, in other hands, may have merely been a paint-by-numbers character.

Sadly, others didn’t escape this fate. Springsteen’s friend Matt Delia (Harrison Gilbertson) is ridiculously underdeveloped. Sound engineer Mike Batlan (Paul Walter Hauser) is a glorified delivery man, first bringing the four-track recorder to Springsteen’s house, then the cassette it produces to manager Jon Landau (Jeremy Strong) and doing little else in between. Love interest Faye Romano (Odessa Young), meanwhile, seemingly only exists as a vehicle to deliver a series of cliché-heavy lines such as “I just wish you’d let me in” and “until you’re honest with yourself, you’ll never be honest with me”.

Sadly, the clichés aren’t exclusive to Faye. Towards the end of the film, Delia is saying goodbye to Springsteen after driving him to his new home in Los Angeles. As he turns to leave, Delia calls his name, Springsteen turns, Delia goes to say something but can’t seem to get the words out. Springsteen waits expectantly, Delia starts to speak, then thinks better of it and walks out. The implication, of course, is that Delia had something heartfelt to say, but for whatever reason was unable. Had I not seen the same technique used a hundred times already on screen (though never in real life), it might have been emotional.

Perhaps the biggest sledgehammer of a line, though, and one which very much laughs in the face of the old “show don’t tell” writing adage, comes when John Landau informs record executive Al Teller (David Krumholtz) that “it’s like Bruce is channelling something deeply personal”. Yes – we’ve been seeing that for the last hour, John, but thank you for the glaring neon arrow just in case we missed it.

In contrast, though, the depiction of depression is extremely well handled. The film manages to avoid stereotypes such as hysteria, violent outbursts, or sufferers who are represented as always sad or depressed (in real life depression is not necessarily a constant state of mind).

Depression is demonstrated by Springsteen letting people down, being unable to articulate his feelings, and withdrawing from social situations. And even if the film does fall short in many ways, the music is always there to rescue it. I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who was unable to resist playing Nebraska on repeat the second I was outside.

For everyone but the most hardcore fans, skipping the film altogether might be the best option. Especially as the album that inspired it has been given the box-set treatment, with five-disc set Nebraska ’82: Expanded Edition released last week (a coincidence, I’m sure).

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.

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

Glenn Fosbraey 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. Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere is an underwhelming ode to ‘the boss’ – https://theconversation.com/springsteen-deliver-me-from-nowhere-is-an-underwhelming-ode-to-the-boss-268426