English – Page 350 – MIL Submissions Engine

October 13, 2025

The disasters we talk about shape our priorities and determine our preparedness

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Fatma Ozdogan, PhD Candidate & Researcher, Université de Montréal

In December 1989, the United Nations declared Oct. 13 International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction. At the time, the aim was to make disaster-risk reduction part of everyday thinking worldwide.

Today, this mission is more urgent than ever as disasters strike more often and with greater force.

And although substantial progress has been made, there is still much to achieve in reducing disaster risks and their impacts.

One of the main culprits for overlooking certain disasters is the way we talk about them. We tend to focus more on the narratives surrounding rapid-onset events — wildfires, earthquakes, hurricanes — versus long-term crises like climate change.

Punishment from the gods

Historically, people saw disasters as unpredictable forces beyond human control.

Earthquakes, floods and famines were often explained as punishment from the gods. Communities believed these events reflected moral failings or divine judgment, rooted in cultural and religious traditions.

For instance, the Epic of Gilgamesh tells of a great flood sent to cleanse humanity of its sins. Early Islamic traditions interpreted disasters as tests of faith or signs of divine displeasure, with references in the Qur’an. Other major religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism have similar divine-based interpretations.

The Lisbon earthquake of 1755, however, marked a turning point, prompting a shift towards human-centred explanations of disasters.

Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire, Rousseau and Kant challenged purely religious interpretations, advocating rational and scientific reasoning and a better understanding of nature, ushering in a new view of disasters as acts of nature.

Disasters as human-induced

This intellectual shift marked the beginning of a more secular and scientific understanding of disasters. It suggested that disasters could be studied, anticipated and potentially prevented through human action.

Building on this foundation, the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century introduced new risks associated directly with human activities, such as factory accidents and railway crashes. By statistically analyzing these incidents, experts identified predictable patterns, prompting the creation of specialized institutions to manage and mitigate these emerging hazards.

As the understanding of human influence on disasters evolved further in the early 20th century, scholars began exploring how social behaviours, industrial practices and preparedness levels shaped disaster outcomes.

This expanded perspective underscored the crucial role of societal structures and human decisions, demonstrating that disasters were not just natural events but deeply intertwined with human factors. Although religious interpretations still exist in some communities, the consensus has shifted toward viewing disasters as human-induced.

By the 1960s, research turned to the social, political and economic roots of disasters. Scholars showed that poverty, weak governance, poor infrastructure and inequality made communities far more vulnerable.

As a result, attention shifted from reacting after disasters to tackling their root causes in advance. This regarded disasters as acts of social systems and structures.

Politics and equity meet

More recently, vulnerability and resilience have become core concepts in disaster management practice and policy-making.

International frameworks such as the Hyogo Framework (2005–2015) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030) reflect this shift. These frameworks define disasters as a global issue requiring international collaboration, systematic risk management and proactive strategies.

Today, scholars widely recognize disasters not as purely natural events but as results of human actions, including negligence, poor planning and inadequate governance.

Defining what exactly constitutes a disaster, however, remains contested: Who decides what qualifies as a disaster, and according to which criteria? Which ones are more important and deserve more attention?

This distinction is especially clear in media and political discussions, which tend to highlight rapid-onset events like earthquakes, floods or hurricanes. In contrast, slower, long-term crises related to climate change or environmental degradation often receive far less attention

What media coverage misses

Our understanding and management of disasters is biased.

A recent analysis of Canadian media highlights a significant imbalance in the attention given to sudden and slow-onset disasters.

Sudden disasters like wildfires consistently receive far greater media coverage in comparison to slower-developing events like droughts or environmental degradation.

For example, CBC devoted up to eight hours in a single day to covering the immediate aftermath of the 2010 Haiti earthquake. In contrast, the 2011 Horn of Africa drought typically received less than two minutes of daily coverage. Yet the cumulative impacts of these slow-onset crises are substantial, often surpassing the effects of rapid-onset disasters.

According to a report by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, although droughts accounted for only 15 per cent of natural hazard-induced disasters from 1970 to 2019, they exacted the highest human toll, causing approximately 650,000 deaths globally.

During this period, weather-, climate- and water-related hazards comprised half of all disasters and 45 per cent of disaster-related deaths, disproportionately affecting developing countries. Additionally, between 1998 and 2017 alone, droughts led to economic losses roughly US$124 billion.

The World Bank further underscores this critical issue, estimating that climate-related, slow-onset disasters could displace about 216 million people globally by 2050. Such displacement carries extensive humanitarian and geopolitical consequences.

Recent events highlight the serious consequences of slow-onset disasters. Global soil degradation, for example, currently affects nearly 3.2 billion people. Between 2015 and 2019, 100 million hectares of land were lost each year, cutting food production and worsening hunger.

Rising sea levels threaten nearly 900 million people globally in low-lying coastal areas. Flooding, saltwater intrusion and soil salinization are damaging homes, farmland and public health.

Building a better future

Addressing what we pay attention to requires a fundamental shift in approaches to disasters.

This involves critically recognizing human accountability in exacerbating hazards and scrutinizing structural vulnerabilities — poverty, inadequate infrastructure, ineffective governance — which increase disaster impacts.

As a society, we need to re-evaluate our priorities and adopt a holistic perspective that equally acknowledges all disaster forms.

With sustained investment in prevention, stronger infrastructure and greater social equity, communities in Canada and around the world can strengthen their capacity to face the future.

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. The disasters we talk about shape our priorities and determine our preparedness – https://theconversation.com/the-disasters-we-talk-about-shape-our-priorities-and-determine-our-preparedness-266200

October 13, 2025

Climate tipping points sound scary, especially for ice sheets and oceans – here’s why there’s still room for optimism

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Alexandra A Phillips, Assistant Teaching Professor in Environmental Communication, University of California, Santa Barbara

Meltwater runs across the Greenland ice sheet in rivers. The ice sheet is already losing mass and could soon reach a tipping point. Maria-José Viñas/NASA

As the planet warms, it risks crossing catastrophic tipping points: thresholds where Earth systems, such as ice sheets and rain forests, change irreversibly over human lifetimes.

Scientists have long warned that if global temperatures warmed more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) compared with before the Industrial Revolution, and stayed high, they would increase the risk of passing multiple tipping points. For each of these elements, like the Amazon rain forest or the Greenland ice sheet, hotter temperatures lead to melting ice or drier forests that leave the system more vulnerable to further changes.

Worse, these systems can interact. Freshwater melting from the Greenland ice sheet can weaken ocean currents in the North Atlantic, disrupting air and ocean temperature patterns and marine food chains.

World map showing locations for potential tipping points. — Pink circles show the systems closest to tipping points. Some would have regional effects, such as loss of coral reefs. Others are global, such as the beginning of the collapse of the Greenland ice sheet.
Global Tipping Points Report, CC BY-ND

With these warnings in mind, 194 countries a decade ago set 1.5 C as a goal they would try not to cross. Yet in 2024, the planet temporarily breached that threshold.

The term “tipping point” is often used to illustrate these problems, but apocalyptic messages can leave people feeling helpless, wondering if it’s pointless to slam the brakes. As a geoscientist who has studied the ocean and climate for over a decade and recently spent a year on Capitol Hill working on bipartisan climate policy, I still see room for optimism.

It helps to understand what a tipping point is – and what’s known about when each might be reached.

Tipping points are not precise

A tipping point is a metaphor for runaway change. Small changes can push a system out of balance. Once past a threshold, the changes reinforce themselves, amplifying until the system transforms into something new.

Almost as soon as “tipping points” entered the climate science lexicon — following Malcolm Gladwell’s 2000 book, “The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference” — scientists warned the public not to confuse global warming policy benchmarks with precise thresholds.

A tall glacier front seen from above shows huge chunks of ice calving off into Disko Bay. — The Greenland ice sheet, which is 1.9 miles (3 kilometers) thick at its thickest point, has been losing mass for several years as temperatures rise and more of its ice is lost to the ocean. A tipping point would mean runaway ice loss, with the potential to eventually raise sea level 24 feet (7.4 meters) and shut down a crucial ocean circulation.
Sean Gallup/Getty Images

The scientific reality of tipping points is more complicated than crossing a temperature line. Instead, different elements in the climate system have risks of tipping that increase with each fraction of a degree of warming.

For example, the beginning of a slow collapse of the Greenland ice sheet, which could raise global sea level by about 24 feet (7.4 meters), is one of the most likely tipping elements in a world more than 1.5 C warmer than preindustrial times. Some models place the critical threshold at 1.6 C (2.9 F). More recent simulations estimate runaway conditions at 2.7 C (4.9 F) of warming. Both simulations consider when summer melt will outpace winter snow, but predicting the future is not an exact science.

Bars with gradients show the rising risk as temperatures rise that key systems, including Greenland ice sheet and Amazon rain forest, will reach tipping points. — Gradients show science-based estimates from the Global Tipping Points Report of when key global or regional climate tipping points are increasingly likely to be reached. Every fraction of a degree increases the likeliness, reflected in the warming color.
Global Tipping Points Report 2025, CC BY-ND

Forecasts like these are generated using powerful climate models that simulate how air, oceans, land and ice interact. These virtual laboratories allow scientists to run experiments, increasing the temperature bit by bit to see when each element might tip.

Climate scientist Timothy Lenton first identified climate tipping points in 2008. In 2022, he and his team revisited temperature collapse ranges, integrating over a decade of additional data and more sophisticated computer models.

Their nine core tipping elements include large-scale components of Earth’s climate, such as ice sheets, rain forests and ocean currents. They also simulated thresholds for smaller tipping elements that pack a large punch, including die-offs of coral reefs and widespread thawing of permafrost.

A few fish swim among branches of a white coral skeleton during a bleaching event. — The world may have already passed one tipping point, according to the 2025 Global Tipping Points Report: Corals reefs are dying as marine temperatures rise. Healthy reefs are essential fish nurseries and habitat and also help protect coastlines from storm erosion. Once they die, their structures begin to disintegrate.
Vardhan Patankar/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Some tipping elements, such as the East Antarctic ice sheet, aren’t in immediate danger. The ice sheet’s stability is due to its massive size – nearly six times that of the Greenland ice sheet – making it much harder to push out of equilibrium. Model results vary, but they generally place its tipping threshold between 5 C (9 F) and 10 C (18 F) of warming.

Other elements, however, are closer to the edge.

Alarm bells sounding in forests and oceans

In the Amazon, self-perpetuating feedback loops threaten the stability of the Earth’s largest rain forest, an ecosystem that influences global climate. As temperatures rise, drought and wildfire activity increase, killing trees and releasing more carbon into the atmosphere, which in turn makes the forest hotter and drier still.

By 2050, scientists warn, nearly half of the Amazon rain forest could face multiple stressors. That pressure may trigger a tipping point with mass tree die-offs. The once-damp rainforest canopy could shift to a dry savanna for at least several centuries.

Rising temperatures also threaten biodiversity underwater.

The second Global Tipping Points Report, released Oct. 12, 2025, by a team of 160 scientists including Lenton, suggests tropical reefs may have passed a tipping point that will wipe out all but isolated patches.

Coral loss on the Great Barrier Reef. Australian Institute of Marine Science.

Corals rely on algae called zooxanthellae to thrive. Under heat stress, the algae leave their coral homes, draining reefs of nutrition and color. These mass bleaching events can kill corals, stripping the ecosystem of vital biodiversity that millions of people rely on for food and tourism.

Low-latitude reefs have the highest risk of tipping, with the upper threshold at just 1.5 C, the report found. Above this amount of warming, there is a 99% chance that these coral reefs tip past their breaking point.

Similar alarms are ringing for ocean currents, where freshwater ice melt is slowing down a major marine highway that circulates heat, known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, or AMOC.

Two illustrations show how the AMOC looks today and its expected weaker state in the future — How the Atlantic Ocean circulation would change as it slows.
IPCC 6th Assessment Report

The AMOC carries warm water northward from the tropics. In the North Atlantic, as sea ice forms, the surface gets colder and saltier, and this dense water sinks. The sinking action drives the return flow of cold, salty water southward, completing the circulation’s loop. But melting land ice from Greenland threatens the density-driven motor of this ocean conveyor belt by dilution: Fresher water doesn’t sink as easily.

A weaker current could create a feedback loop, slowing the circulation further and leading to a shutdown within a century once it begins, according to one estimate. Like a domino, the climate changes that would accompany an AMOC collapse could worsen drought in the Amazon and accelerate ice loss in the Antarctic.

There is still room for hope

Not all scientists agree that an AMOC collapse is close. For the Amazon rain forest and the North Atlantic, some cite a lack of evidence to declare the forest is collapsing or currents are weakening.

In the Amazon, researchers have questioned whether modeled vegetation data that underpins tipping point concerns is accurate. In the North Atlantic, there are similar concerns about data showing a long-term trend.

A map of the Amazon shows large areas along its edges and rivers in particular losing tree cover — The Amazon forest has been losing tree cover to logging, farming, ranching, wildfires and a changing climate. Pink shows areas with greater than 75% tree canopy loss from 2001 to 2024. Blue is tree cover gain from 2000 to 2020.
Global Forest Watch, CC BY

Climate models that predict collapses are also less accurate when forecasting interactions between multiple tipping points. Some interactions can push systems out of balance, while others pull an ecosystem closer to equilibrium.

Other changes driven by rising global temperatures, like melting permafrost, likely don’t meet the criteria for tipping points because they aren’t self-sustaining. Permafrost could refreeze if temperatures drop again.

Risks are too high to ignore

Despite the uncertainty, tipping points are too risky to ignore. Rising temperatures put people and economies around the world at greater risk of dangerous conditions.

But there is still room for preventive actions – every fraction of a degree in warming that humans prevent reduces the risk of runaway climate conditions. For example, a full reversal of coral bleaching may no longer be possible, but reducing emissions and pollution can allow reefs that still support life to survive.

Tipping points highlight the stakes, but they also underscore the climate choices humanity can still make to stop the damage.

Alexandra A Phillips 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. Climate tipping points sound scary, especially for ice sheets and oceans – here’s why there’s still room for optimism – https://theconversation.com/climate-tipping-points-sound-scary-especially-for-ice-sheets-and-oceans-heres-why-theres-still-room-for-optimism-265183

October 13, 2025

Unusual red rocks in Australia are rewriting the rules on exceptional fossil sites

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Tara Djokic, Scientific Officer, Palaeontology, Australian Museum; UNSW Sydney

Fossilised fish from McGraths Flat. Salty Dingo

Hidden beneath farmland in the central tablelands of New South Wales lies one of Australia’s most extraordinary fossil sites – McGraths Flat. It dates back between 11 million and 16 million years into the Miocene epoch, a time when many of today’s familiar plants and animals evolved.

It is here that palaentologists and geologists from the Australian Museum Research Institute have made remarkable fossil discoveries. Where dust and drought now dominate, a lush rainforest once flourished. In stunning ecological detail, fossils at McGraths Flat reveal this ancient ecosystem.

Strikingly red in appearance, the sedimentary rocks here are composed entirely of goethite – a fine-grained mineral that contains iron. This iron has preserved a range of plants, insects, spiders, fish and feathers with exceptional detail.

Our new study, published in the journal Gondwana Research, shows there’s another reason these rocks are so intriguing. They fundamentally challenge ideas about where well-preserved fossil sites on Earth can be found, and why.

Large trapdoor spider fossil preserved on a red rock — A large trapdoor spider preserved in McGraths Flat.
Michael Frese

Beyond shale and sandstone

Traditionally, the most exceptionally well-preserved fossil sites are from rocks dominated by shale, sandstone, limestone, or volcanic ash.

Consider Germany’s Messel Pit or Canada’s Burgess Shale. At these sites, organisms were rapidly buried in fine-grained sediments, allowing the exceptional preservation of soft tissues, not just hard parts.

Messel Pit has preserved roughly 47 million-year-old fossils showing the outlines of feathers, fur and skin. Meanwhile, the Burgess Shale contains soft tissues from some of Earth’s earliest animal life, dating back about 500 million years.

By contrast, sedimentary rocks made entirely of iron are the last place you’d expect to find well-preserved remains of land-based (terrestrial) animal and plant life.

That’s because iron-rich sedimentary rocks are predominantly known from banded iron formations. These massive iron deposits largely formed around 2.5 billion years ago in Earth’s ancient oxygen-depleted oceans, long before complex animal and plant life evolved.

In more recent history, iron is considered a mere weathering product, forming rust on the continents when exposed to our oxygen-rich atmosphere. Just look at Australia’s iconic red-rocked outback landscape that preserves these million- to billion-year-old features.

Yet the discovery of McGraths Flat has defied these expectations.

Large rectangular block of red rock composed of goethite, an iron-rich mineral. — Strikingly red fossil-bearing rocks of McGraths Flat, composed of an iron-oxyhydroxide mineral called goethite.
Tara Djokic

Terrestrial life entombed in iron

McGraths Flat is made from a very fine-grained, iron-rich rock called ferricrete. It’s essentially a cement made from iron.

The ferricrete consists almost entirely of microscopic iron-oxyhydroxide mineral particles, each just 0.005 millimetres across. When an animal died and was buried in the sediment, this minute scale is what allowed the iron particles to fill every cell. The result? Extraordinarily well-preserved soft tissue fossils.

Compared with marine life, fossil sites preserving terrestrial life are notoriously rare. Terrestrial sites that preserve soft tissues? Even rarer. The exceptional detail captured in the McGraths Flat fossils reveals new snapshots of past life we don’t often get to find.

These fossils are so perfectly preserved that individual pigment cells in fish eyes, internal organs of insects and fish, and even delicate spider hairs and nerve cells can be seen.

This level of preservation rivals other well-preserved fossil sites, such as those consisting of shale or sandstone. Except here, they are entombed in iron.

Three people, two men standing on either side of one woman, in a rural field wearing outdoor gear with work boots and wide brimmed hats. — Australian Museum Research Institute researchers Matthew McCurry, Tara Djokic and Patrick Smith (left to right), three of 15 co-authors who collaborated on this study published in Gondwana Research.
Salty Dingo

How did McGraths Flat form?

Our new study sheds light on how this fossil site came to be – a crucial step for finding similar terrestrial fossil troves in iron.

McGraths Flat began forming during the Miocene when iron leached from weathering basalt under warm, wet rainforest conditions.

Acidic groundwater then carried the dissolved iron underground until it reached a river system with an oxbow lake – an abandoned river channel. There, the iron became ultra-fine iron-oxyhydroxide sediment.

It rapidly coated dead organisms on the lake floor and replicated their soft tissue structures down to the cellular level.

A new fossil roadmap

Understanding how McGraths Flat formed could provide a roadmap for finding similar iron-rich fossil sites worldwide.

Key features to look for include very fine-grained and finely layered ferricrete in areas where:

ancient river channels cut through older iron-rich landscapes, such as basaltic rocks from volcanoes
ancient warm, humid conditions once promoted intense weathering, and
the surrounding geology lacks significant limestone or sulphur-containing minerals (such as pyrite), because these could interfere with the formation of the iron-oxyhydroxide mineral sediments.

The red rocks of McGraths Flat open an entirely new chapter in our understanding of how exceptionally well-preserved fossil sites can form.

The next breakthrough in understanding ancient terrestrial life might not come from traditional shale or sandstone fossil beds, but from rusty-red rocks hidden beneath our feet.

Four people kneeling on the ground over red rocks, with hammer and chisels spitting the rocks apart to search for fossils. — Palaeontologists from the Australian Museum Research institute at the McGraths Flat field site, splitting the red rocks apart with a hammer and chisel to search for fossils.
Tara Djokic

The study’s authors acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land and waterways on which McGraths Flat is located, the Wiradjuri Nation people.

Tara Djokic and co-authors received funding for this research from the Etheridge family descendants; Australian Museum Research Institute, Australian Museum Trust; and Australian Research Council (ARC). We acknowledge the scientific and technical assistance of Microscopy Australia, especially from the Centre for Advanced Microscopy, ANU (jointly funded by the ANU and the Australian Federal Government).
Tara is affiliated with the not-for-profit organisation Women in Earth and Environmental Sciences Australasia (WOMEESA).

– ref. Unusual red rocks in Australia are rewriting the rules on exceptional fossil sites – https://theconversation.com/unusual-red-rocks-in-australia-are-rewriting-the-rules-on-exceptional-fossil-sites-266904

October 13, 2025

Will Trump’s ceasefire plan really lead to lasting peace in the Middle East? There’s still a long way to go

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Andrew Thomas, Lecturer in Middle East Studies, Deakin University

The first steps of the peace plan for Gaza are underway. Now both parties have agreed to terms, Hamas is obligated to release all hostages within 72 hours and the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) will withdraw to an agreed-upon line within the strip.

Hopes are high, particularly on the ground in Gaza and in Israel after two years of brutal conflict. Some argue the parties are now closer than ever to an end to hostilities, and US President Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan may be an effective road-map.

But the truth is we have been here before. Hamas and Israel have now agreed to a road-map to peace in principle, but what is in place today is very similar to ceasefire deals in the past, and a ceasefire is not the same as a peace deal or an armistice.

The plan is also very light on specifics, and the devil is definitely in the detail. Will the IDF completely withdraw from Gaza and rule out annexation? Who will take on governance of the strip? Is Hamas going to be involved in this governance? There were signs of disagreement on these issues even before the fighting stopped.

So if the ceasefire steps hold in the short term – then what? What would it take for the peace plan to be successful?

First, the political pressures to refrain from resuming hostilities will need to hold. Once all the hostages are returned, which is expected to take place by Tuesday Australian time, Hamas effectively loses any remaining leverage for future negotiations if hostilities were to resume.

Once the hostage exchange is complete, it’s likely Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will see some pressure from his right to resume hostilities.

With Hamas relinquishing this leverage, it will be essential for the Israeli government to see these negotiations and the end of the war as fundamental to its long term interests and security for peace to hold. There must be a sincere desire to return to dialogue and compromise, not the pre-October 7 2023 complacency.

Second, Hamas will likely have to relinquish its arms and any political power in Gaza. Previously, Hamas has said it would only do this on the condition of recognition of a sovereign Palestinian state. As recently as October 10, factions in Gaza have said they would not accept foreign guardianship, a key part of the peace plan, with governance to be determined “by the national component of our people directly”.

Related to this, any interim governance or authority that takes shape in Gaza must reflect local needs. The proposed “body of peace” headed by Trump and former UK prime minister Tony Blair, could risk repeating previous mistakes of cutting Palestinians out of discussions over their own future.

Part of the peace deal is the resumption of humanitarian aid flows, but the fate of the Gaza blockade that has been effectively in place since 2007 is unclear. The land, sea and air blockade, which was imposed by Egypt and Israel following Hamas’ political takeover of Gaza, heavily restricts imports and the movement of Gazans.

Prior to October 2023, unemployment in the strip sat at 46%, and 62% of Gazans required food assistance as a result of the limits placed on imports, including basic food and agricultural items such as fertiliser.

Should the blockade continue, at best Israel will create the same humanitarian conditions in Gaza of food, medical and financial insecurity that existed prior to the October 7 attacks. While conditions and restrictions are orders of magnitude worse in Gaza today, NGOs called early incarnations of the blockade “collective punishment”. For peace to hold in the strip, security policy needs to be in line with global humanitarian principles and international law.

Most importantly, however, all parties involved must see peace in Gaza as fundamentally connected to broader peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Seeing the Gaza conflict as discrete and separate from the broader Palestinian-Israeli conflict would be a mistake. Discussions of Palestinian national self-determination in Gaza and the West Bank must be taken seriously and be a central part of the plan for peace to last.

While the 20-point plan mentions a “credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood”“, history tells us these pathways struggle to get past the rhetoric stage.

Many challenges stand in the way, including Israeli settlement and annexation, the status of Jerusalem and the question of demilitarisation.

A meaningful step would be for the US to refrain from using its veto power at the UN Security Council (UNSC) against votes supporting Palestinian statehood. While several states recognised a Palestinian state at the recent UN General Assembly, the US has blocked formal status at the UNSC every time.

Despite all these concerns, any pause in hostilities is undeniably a good thing. Deaths from October 7 2023 number nearly 70,000 in total, with 11% of Gaza’s population killed or injured and 465 Israeli soldiers killed. The resumption of aid delivery alone will go far in addressing the growing famine in the strip.

However, peace deals are incredibly difficult to negotiate at the best of times, requiring good faith, sustained commitment and trust. The roots of this conflict reach back decades, and mutual mistrust has been institutionalised and weaponised. Difficulties in negotiating the Oslo Accords in the 1990s showed just how deep the roots of the conflict are. The situation is now much worse.

It is not clear if any party involved in negotiation possesses the political will needed to reach an accord. However, an opportunity exists to reach one, and it should not be taken for granted.

Andrew Thomas 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. Will Trump’s ceasefire plan really lead to lasting peace in the Middle East? There’s still a long way to go – https://theconversation.com/will-trumps-ceasefire-plan-really-lead-to-lasting-peace-in-the-middle-east-theres-still-a-long-way-to-go-267112

October 13, 2025

Why Trump is not a death knell for global climate action

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Matt McDonald, Professor of International Relations, The University of Queensland

In his rambling speech to the United Nations last month, United States President Donald Trump described climate change as “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world”.

Of course, this claim was unfounded, ignoring the overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change is occurring.

It was also unlikely to convince gathered dignitaries, who appeared bemused by a speech better suited to a campaign rally than a presidential address to world leaders.

But coming on the eve of the crucial global COP30 climate talks in Brazil, the speech does raise the question: what does the second Trump administration mean mean for international climate action?

US President Donald Trump addresses the UN, while three dignitaries sit behind him — US President Donald Trump speaks during the United Nations General Assembly on September 23, 2025 in New York City.
Michael M. Santiago/Getty

Trump digs coal

Beyond enabling climate denialists and disinformation peddlers, Trump has ultimately delivered on his campaign promise to aggressively support the US fossil fuel sector. In his words: “drill, baby, drill”. Or, more recently: “mine, baby, mine”.

Soon after his inauguration, Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the US from the Paris Agreement, the legally binding UN treaty aimed at limiting global temperature rise well below 2°C degrees over pre-industrial levels.

Last month, Trump announced a plan to open up 13 million acres of federal land for coal mining, and offered hundreds of millions in federal subsidies for coal projects.

He has ordered the removal of climate data from government sites and all but eliminated direct government funding for climate science research and monitoring.

And he has gutted the Inflation Reduction Act, the signature climate initiative of the Biden administration that was designed to stimulate large-scale investment in renewable energy.

All told, Trump’s initiatives are likely to mean an additional 7 billion tonnes of emissions will be created compared to a scenario where the US met its Paris commitments.

This is bad news. But what implications will it have for international climate cooperation?

Dark clouds on the climate horizon

Clearly, 7 billion tonnes of additional emissions is a problem. By some accounts, this represents around one fifth of the global carbon budget if we are to keep to the Paris target of under 2°C.

And when the world’s most powerful state, largest economy and second-largest greenhouse gas emitter walks away from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), it does not bode well for international climate action.

Of course this raises the question of how the Brazilian climate talks organisers can motivate states to adopt strong emissions targets when wealthy, high-emitting countries walk away. There is a real risk the US position takes the pressure off other high-emitting countries, such as the Gulf States and Russia, who are disproportionately responsible for the problem.

Finally, climate finance – financial resources used to support action on climate change – looms once again as a crucial issue at climate negotiations. Securing sufficient funding will be far more complicated given Trump’s “America First” platform, which prioritises foreign and domestic policies serving US interests.

Despite this, there are still grounds to be optimistic.

A wind turbine stands in a foggy field in France. — Global emissions have likely peaked, driven by the increase in renewable energy.
Julian Stratenschulte/Getty Images

Leadership without the US

A first point in the case for cautious optimism is that global emissions have potentially peaked and are on the verge of decline for the first time since the Industrial Revolution.

This has been driven by unprecedented global investment in renewable energy. The energy market is changing rapidly despite aggressive US subsidies for the fossil fuel sector. Global energy investment is likely to top A$1.5 trillion in 2025. Meanwhile, coal, oil and natural gas will see the first decline in global investment since the COVID pandemic.

There are also signs other countries, like China, view the US position as an opportunity. Last month Beijing outlined a target for emissions reduction (7–10% by 2035) for the first time in its history. Even though China is still adding to its fleet of coal-fired power stations, it is also adding more solar and wind capacity than the rest of the world combined.

China may want to make a case for itself as a responsible global leader in contrast to the US. This could in turn advance China’s strategic interests in regions such as the Pacific which are acutely vulnerable to climate effects.

An aerial shot of a a huge swathe of solar panels in China. — Solar panels are seen on fields and hilltops in Yinchuan, China’s northern region. China – the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases – is rapidly expanding renewables.
AFP/Getty

So far, there’s no evidence countries have used US backsliding as an excuse to pull back from international cooperation. No country has left the Paris agreement since Trump’s withdrawal.

In 2001, when the Bush administration signalled the US wouldn’t ratify the Kyoto Protocol, Australia’s Prime Minister John Howard soon followed suit.

But in 2025, only months after the US withdrew from Paris, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese outlined an increased emissions target.

Even at home, Trump’s position has not amounted to a death knell for climate action. California, whose governor Gavin Newsom famously parodied Trump’s communication style on social media, already oversees one of the world’s largest emissions trading schemes and has entered into a climate partnership with Brazil to further cooperation ahead of COP30.

All in all, there are grounds for cautious optimism, even hope, that the rest of the world might band together without US leadership.

Eyes on COP

Negotiators at next month’s COP30 talks will face formidable challenges which have only become more pressing as a result of the Trump administration’s climate stance.

But past experience suggests hard-fought COP negotiations can build strong momentum for global action by focusing international attention.

Perhaps they can build pressure on the US to come back into the fold, or at least enable pro-climate actors within the US to pursue reform despite President Trump’s interference.

Matt McDonald has received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Economic and Social Research Council in the UK.

– ref. Why Trump is not a death knell for global climate action – https://theconversation.com/why-trump-is-not-a-death-knell-for-global-climate-action-266350

October 12, 2025

Wolves have returned to Denmark, and not everyone is happy about it

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Kristian Kongshøj, Associate Professor of Political Science, Aalborg University

After centuries of near-extinction, Europe’s wolves have made a remarkable comeback. Over the past decade, wolf populations have surged, increasing by nearly 60%. In 2022, more than 21,500 wolves were recorded across the continent.

Countries that have long been wolf-free are now home to thriving packs. Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and Romania each have more than 1,000 wolves. For scientists, this is a rare conservation success story: a large predator reclaiming landscapes dominated by human activity.

Where we live in Denmark, the comeback has been more modest. Wolves disappeared from Danish forests in 1813, when they were hunted to extinction – remembered only in stories and fairytales. Then, in 2012, a lone male wolf crossed the border from Germany into Jutland, Denmark’s peninsula bordering Germany. More followed. By 2017, Denmark celebrated its first confirmed breeding pack in more than 200 years.

Today, Denmark’s wolf population is estimated to be just over 40 wolves, with at least seven breeding pairs known to have produced cubs.

Yet even this small number has sparked fierce debates over livestock and public safety in one of Europe’s most intensively farmed countries, with views on wolves seeming to reflect wider political divides across Denmark.

The EU recently downgraded the protection status of wolves, moving them from “strictly protected” to simply “protected”. This change makes it easier for member states to authorise local culling.

Earlier this spring, the Danish government announced that “problem wolves” can be legally shot if they repeatedly stray into towns or attack livestock behind secure fencing. And the first legal licence to shoot a wolf guilty of several attacks was handed out in September.

Experts have already suggested that mysteriously high mortality rates and “disappearing” wolves are most likely the result of illegal hunting. And it’s feared by conservationists that quotas on wolf numbers could be introduced, as is the case in neighbouring Sweden.

As political scientists, we wanted to understand how Danes feel about the return of wolves. This summer, we included a question on wolves in a YouGov survey on climate and the environment. We asked: “Do you agree with the statement that breeding wolf packs are beneficial for Danish nature?”

close up shot of grey wolf looking at camera — The European grey wolf (*Canis lupus lupus*).
Rudmer Zwerver/Shutterstock

Of the 2,172 respondents, 43% disagreed, 30% agreed and 27% were neutral or unsure. Breaking the results down by politics reveals clear patterns. Supporters of left-leaning and green parties were the most positive, with nearly 45% agreeing that wolves are good for nature. Right-leaning voters were far more sceptical, with almost half of the supporters of new rightwing parties fully disagreeing. Even many Social Democrats voters (generally considered centre-left) leant toward disagreement, showing how this issue has become integrated into traditional political divides.

People in Copenhagen and other large cities were slightly more positive about the return of wolves than those in smaller towns or rural areas, but attitudes remain mixed everywhere. Living in the countryside does not automatically make someone a wolf sceptic, nor does city life guarantee support.

Age, however, was the strongest predictor of support. Young Danes (18–34) were overwhelmingly supportive, with over 50% agreeing that wolves benefit nature. Support declines steadily with age, however, with the majority of those over 55 – and nearly 60% of those over 73 – expressing outright disagreement.

We have spent more than a decade looking into more traditional political issues and have never seen age differences like these. In this way, the resurgence of wolves seems to have become more than just a wildlife issue.

Wolves, myths and reality

Few animals stir the imagination like wolves. They appear as villains in fairytales, sacred protectors as well as harbingers of apocalypse in Norse myths, and ecological superheroes in biology textbooks. Some wolves became intimately involved with humans as “man’s best friend”, while others became our worst enemy – see the big bad wolf.

Conservationists call wolves a “keystone species”. This means that because they naturally control numbers of deer and other prey, their presence can allow forests and grasslands to recover. Yellowstone Park in the US is a prime example: after wolves were reintroduced, aspen and willow trees flourished for the first time in decades.

But Denmark is not Yellowstone. Its countryside is a patchwork of farms, towns and highways with small, heavily managed nature reserves. Whether wolves can restore “wild balance” here is uncertain – and Danes’ views reflect that uncertainty. Indeed, for some farmers and rural residents, wolves are not symbols of rewilding – they are real predators, threatening livestock and livelihoods.

Fear also plays a role: parents worry about children walking in the forest, and dog owners worry about their pets. Statistically,wolf attacks on humans are extremely rare, yet perception often outweighs facts.

Incidents in neighbouring countries can add to the unease. Earlier this year, a wolf attacked a six-year-old boy in the Netherlands. And in Denmark this summer, two young boys spent hours up a tree after thinking an “aggressive wolf” was nearby. The story grabbed headlines, only for it to turn out that the animal was actually a large cat. It’s a reminder of how quickly fear spreads, whether the danger is real or not.

Our findings suggest that fears and myths about wolves are not mere folklore. They are expressed in real attitudes, reflecting deeply held values and cultural identities.

Wolves have come to represent much more than just wildlife. They are potent symbols of environmental ideals and societal perspectives – with attitudes toward them shaped less by geography and more by political beliefs and generational outlooks. For policymakers and conservationists, understanding these perceptions is essential to navigating the delicate balance between species recovery and public acceptance.

This article was commissioned by Videnskab.dk as part of a partnership collaboration with The Conversation. You can read the Danish version of this article here.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Kristian Kongshøj currently receives funding from Green Societies, a faculty-funded research programme at the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH), Aalborg University, Denmark

Troels Fage Hedegaard 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. Wolves have returned to Denmark, and not everyone is happy about it – https://theconversation.com/wolves-have-returned-to-denmark-and-not-everyone-is-happy-about-it-266276

October 12, 2025

China and the US are in a race for critical minerals. African countries need to make the rules

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By James Boafo, Lecturer in Sustainability and Fellow of Indo Pacific Research Centre, Murdoch University

Critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, rare earth elements, and platinum group metals are essential for modern technologies. They are key to industries ranging from electronics and telecommunications to renewable energy, defence, and aerospace systems.

The global demand for these minerals has been growing, as has the competition for them.

The supply and production of these minerals is largely concentrated in the global South. Most of the world’s cobalt is produced in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It produces almost three-quarters of the global cobalt output. Australia produces nearly half of the world’s lithium. Chile accounts for another quarter of global lithium production, with China following at 18%.

China dominates the supply chain through massive investments in mining operations, particularly in Africa. It is responsible for refining 90% of rare earth elements and graphite, and 60-70% of lithium and cobalt. The United States and European Union — long-term trading partners with African nations — have also adopted policies to secure access to Africa’s resources.

The question is what African countries are doing to take advantage of this demand for these critical minerals, especially to drive their own development.

As development researchers we address this question in a special publication on the rising significance of critical minerals in Africa by the Indian Council of World Affairs. In another publication, we look at how emerging resource diplomacy may reinforce Africa’s position in the global economy as a mere source of raw materials.

We recommend that African countries determine for themselves how to benefit from this global competition. This includes developing national strategies that emphasise local value addition and benefits. Also, national strategies should begin positioning African countries to gain from their resources beyond value addition.

The competition for Africa’s critical minerals underscores the urgency of governance reforms and regional cooperation to transform mineral wealth into sustainable prosperity, avoiding another “resource curse.”

The emerging ‘New World Order’

A Chinese-led ‘New World Order’ is emerging to counter the US-led Western influence. Eastern and global South countries demonstrate this shift through groupings like BRICS and South-South cooperation in technology and development. China has strengthened its influence in the global South through initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative.

Launched in 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative is an ambitious infrastructure project that connects continents by land and sea. Since then, over 200 agreements have been signed with over 150 countries and 30 international organisations. The initiative has expanded China’s access to resources. This is often in exchange for infrastructure development that links mining regions to ports.

In Africa, China has invested heavily in mining and infrastructure. Its firms have spent about US$4.5 billion in lithium projects in Zimbabwe, the DRC, Mali, and Namibia. China’s strategic focus includes resource-rich countries such as the DRC, Zimbabwe, Zambia, South Africa and Ghana.

China recently marked the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with a military parade. The parade projected China’s military strength with President Xi warning that China is “unstoppable.”

China is emboldened by its influence and access to critical minerals. This has strengthened its ability to acquire military hardware and other advanced technologies.

Competition for Africa’s critical minerals

Africa holds about 30% of the world’s critical mineral deposits, making it central to geopolitical contest. The US and EU have sought agreements to secure supplies and reduce reliance on China.

The EU has strategic partnerships on minerals with the DRC, Rwanda, Namibia and Zambia. China has bilateral agreements with eleven African countries in the mining sector. The US also has a trilateral agreement with the DRC and Zambia. Its purpose is to support an integrated value chain for electric vehicle (EV) batteries. It also recently signed a ‘Minerals for Peace’ deal with the DRC and Rwanda to help end decades of conflict in eastern Congo.

Although African countries need support to turn their resources into prosperity, our research found that these partnerships risk reinforcing Africa’s marginal position in the global value chain. They often reproduce conditions reminiscent of colonialism: dependency, resource extraction, and power imbalances.

The way forward

Our research argues that the struggle between the US-led and Chinese-led world orders will hinge on a few things. One is control over emerging technologies. These include renewable energy, defence, aerospace, and AI — all of which depend on critical minerals. Expanded access to, and control of, these minerals and their supply chains will be a key determinant of global power.

Competition between the US and China for critical minerals will intensify. Yet it is crucial that African countries remain neutral. They must engage only in meaningful, mutually beneficial partnerships that genuinely advance their countries and its economies.

African countries must explicitly define their priorities in the extractives sector. Without clear strategies, external powers will continue to dictate Africa’s future. The continent will be locked into dependency rather than enabling it to capture real value from its mineral wealth.

Finally, rather than just competing for Africa’s critical minerals, China, the US, and the EU should equitably engage with African countries in the extractives sector to ensure just development across the continent.

– ref. China and the US are in a race for critical minerals. African countries need to make the rules – https://theconversation.com/china-and-the-us-are-in-a-race-for-critical-minerals-african-countries-need-to-make-the-rules-265318

October 12, 2025

Diane Keaton thrived in the world of humour – and had the dramatic acting chops to back it up

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Chris Thompson, Lecturer in Theatre, Australian Catholic University

In the chilling final scene of Francis Ford Coppola’s 1972 masterpiece, The Godfather, the door to Michael Corleone’s office is closed in the face of his wife, Kay. It simultaneously signified the opening of many more doors for the career of actor Diane Keaton.

In that film, so heavily dominated by male actors, Keaton more than holds her own. For someone who would become known for her daffy, comic style, it showed us she also had serious dramatic acting chops.

The multi-award-winning actor, producer and director has died at the age of 79. She leaves behind a legacy of memorable roles in films that include classics such as The Godfather and Annie Hall, spanning genres from comedy to drama.

First steps on stage

Keaton started life in Los Angeles as Diane Hall on January 5 1946. The eldest child of Dorothy and Jack Hall, she was the only one of her siblings – brother Randy and sisters Robin and Dorrie – to show interest in the theatre. It came about in an unconventional way.

When she was “eight or nine”, she told NPR’s Fresh Air in 2004, her mother won “Mrs Los Angeles”

I remember sitting down [in the audience] watching her being crowned. It was that she was the perfect homemaker. […] I did not want to be a happy homemaker, that did not appeal to me. But I did want to go on stage. I saw that that was something that did appeal to me. There she was in the theatre, and I saw the curtain open and there was my mother. And I thought, ‘I think I like that for myself’.

Her career began as a teenage Blanche in Santa Ana High School’s production of A Streetcar Named Desire.

In her 2011 memoir, Then Again, she remembers her father coming backstage:

I could tell he was surprised by his awkward daughter – the one who’d flunked algebra and smashed the new Ford station wagon. For one thrilling moment, I was his Seabiscuit, Audrey Hepburn, and Wonder Woman rolled into one.

She began drama studies at nearby Santa Ana College but soon dropped out, took her mother’s maiden name – Keaton – and travelled to New York to study at the Neighbourhood Playhouse.

In a mini-dress wearing a beret. — Diane Keaton photographed in 1969.
Nick Machalaba/WWD/Penske Media via Getty Images

In 1968, after a stint in summer stock, she was cast as an understudy in Hair on Broadway. She was 19 and famously refused to do the nude scene.

“It wasn’t for any sort of philosophical reason,” she told the New York Times in 1972, “It was just that I was too scared.”

Silver screen breakout

Her heart was set on the big screen which, of course, meant starting out on the small screen in shows like The FBI (“The worst thing I have ever done,” she told the New York Times. “I was unanimously, resoundingly bad!”) and Night Gallery.

Instead, it was theatre that led to her breakout screen roles.

In 2023, Francis Ford Coppola revealed to Hollywood Reporter he had seen Keaton in Hair.

He later told Keaton he cast her in The Godfather because,

although you were to play the more straight/vanilla wife, there was something more about you, deeper, funnier, and very interesting. (I was right).

Allen plays a guitar while Keaton watches. — Woody Allen and Diane Keaton in a scene from Allen’s 1971 film Play It Again, Sam.
FilmPublicityArchive/United Archives via Getty Images

Then she auditioned for a new theatrical comedy, Play it Again, Sam, by up-and-coming comedian Woody Allen. That turned out to be what’s known in romantic comedies as a meet cute.

It led not only to their much-publicised relationship, but to a significant collaboration in eight films including the 1977 hit Annie Hall.

For that role, Keaton won the Oscar for best actress. And her costume, designed by Ruth Morley, made her a fashion icon of the 70s. She also gave us the whimsical phrase, “la di dah”.

It’s often thought that Annie Hall was about her relationship with Allen, but as she told the New York Times, “It’s not true, but there are elements of truth in it”.

A force

For the next five decades, Keaton would become a Hollywood force.

She had comic roles in films like The First Wives Club (1996), Something’s Gotta Give (2003) and the Father of the Bride franchise. Alongside these comedies were remarkable dramatic roles in Looking for Mister Goodbar (1977), Reds (1981), The Little Drummer Girl (1984), Crimes of the Heart (1986), Marvin’s Room (1996) and two more Godfather films.

She was also a notable director of films like Unstrung Heroes (1995), Hanging Up (2000), Heaven (1987) and even an episode of Twin Peaks.

Keaton smiles while Gould gestures. — Diane Keaton and Elliott Gould in a scene from the 1989 movie The Lemon Sisters.
Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

In addition to Annie Hall’s Oscar, BAFTA and Golden Globe, she received Oscar nominations for Reds, Marvin’s Room and Something’s Gotta Give (for which she won her second Golden Globe). She was also nominated for a Tony, two Emmys and another seven Golden Globes.

Despite much-publicised relationships with Al Pacino, Woody Allen and Warren Beatty, Keaton chose to remain single her whole life. In her 50s, she adopted two children, Dexter and Duke.

On the red carpet. — Keaton with her co-stars in 2023’s Book Club: The Next Chapter, L-R Mary Steenburgen, Jane Fonda, Candice Bergen and Keaton.
Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images

A rich creative life

Keaton made comedy look easy but told the New York Times in 1977 that “both comedy and drama are equally difficult”.

She later told Fresh Air,

You’re constantly battling with yourself when you’re acting in a [dramatic] part, at least I am. Because it’s just not that easy for me. I think I’m more inclined to live comfortably in the world of humour.

Either way, we were the richer for her creative life and are the poorer for her loss.

Chris Thompson 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. Diane Keaton thrived in the world of humour – and had the dramatic acting chops to back it up – https://theconversation.com/diane-keaton-thrived-in-the-world-of-humour-and-had-the-dramatic-acting-chops-to-back-it-up-267293

October 11, 2025

Wild honeybees now officially listed as endangered in the EU

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Arrigo Moro, Postdoctoral Researcher, Galway Honey Bee Research Center, University of Galway

It can be hard to distinguish between a wild and a managed honeybee. SanderMeertinsPhotography / shutterstock

You might think honeybees are thriving – after all, the honey industry is growing and its bees are well looked after by beekeepers. But not all honeybees live in hives. Across Europe, colonies still live in the wild, nesting in tree cavities and other natural spaces, just as their ancestors did for millions of years.

Now, for the first time, these wild honeybee populations have been officially categorised as endangered within the European Union. That’s according to the latest update to the IUCN Red List, the world’s official database of species conservation statuses.

The western honeybee has a long history with humans. People have kept honeybee colonies for thousands of years, dating back to the ancient Egyptians who kept them in rudimentary hives to harvest honey. But it’s modern beekeeping, with its mobile hives and commercial pollination, that has had the widest impact on the species.

Because of that, today the western honeybee exists in two forms: the managed colonies kept in hives, and the wild ones that live independently of people. Both belong to the same species, Apis mellifera, but their lives and their prospects are radically different.

Managed honeybees have faced widely reported crises since the 2000s, when beekeepers around the world started noticing alarming losses in their hives. Since then, scientists have been working with beekeepers to investigate the causes and reduce colony mortality.

Because of this, the species as a whole is generally perceived as being under threat. But the reality is more complex than that. While it is true that managed colonies continue to suffer high losses, they are actively cared for by beekeepers and studied by researchers. The same cannot be said for their wild counterparts, which, until recently were relatively unstudied, especially in Europe.

The gap in knowledge led several European researchers to start investigating honeybees living freely in the wild. Such colonies have now been documented throughout Ireland and the UK, in national parks in France, the forests of Germany, Switzerland, and Poland, up and down Italy, and even in cities such as Belgrade in Serbia. These now are under study to understand if they can form self-sustaining populations capable of living without human help.

Tracking bees across Europe

To connect these independent research projects, a global initiative called Honey Bee Watch was formed in 2020. Its goal: to better understand how honeybees live in the wild. Under this coalition, I have been part of a team of 14 scientists and experts, who have worked with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to reassess the conservation status of wild A. mellifera populations.

honeybees in tree cavity — A wild colony of honeybees the author discovered in Ireland.
Arrigo Moro

This formed part of a monumental effort to update the European Red List of Bees, led by researchers at the University of Mons in Belgium, which examined the conservation status of almost 2,000 species – many for the first time.

Back in 2014, wild A. mellifera populations had been listed as “data deficient” in Europe because there wasn’t enough information to answer a question that seemed simple enough: if a colony is found living in a tree, how can we tell whether it’s truly wild or has escaped from a managed hive?

A new definition of ‘wild’

Our new assessment took a different approach. Honeybees are not truly domesticated, since beekeepers have never been able to completely prevent them from breeding with other colonies, whether wild or managed. This means genetic differences between managed and wild colonies are often blurred.

Instead of trying to draw a genetic line separating the two, we adapted the IUCN’s definition of “wild” as it relates to honeybees. This meant we defined wild honeybee populations based on two criteria:

First, they live freely without management. And second, they can sustain their numbers independently without relying on the introduction of new colonies, such as those that escaped from managed hives.

Using ecology rather than genetics to define wild honeybees meant we could better evaluate their conservation status.

Endangered in the EU

Europe has the lowest density of free-living colonies in the world, as managed hives far outnumber wild ones. And, thanks to a recent analysis provided by our fellow assessors, we know that their numbers are declining.

Combined with evidence of habitat loss, invasive parasites, diseases, and human-mediated hybridisation, the picture that emerged was clear: wild honeybees are indeed in trouble.

That’s why their Red List status has now been updated to “endangered within the European Union.” However, for the wider pan-European region, they remain “data deficient” due to scarce data for areas such as the Balkans, the Baltics, Scandinavia and eastern Europe.

Protecting wild honeybees isn’t just about saving an iconic species – it’s about safeguarding our food security, biodiversity and ecosystems for the future. Populations surviving in the wild are those that naturally evolved the ability to cope with parasites, diseases and other harsh conditions that can devastate managed hives. They represent a vital genetic reservoir that could help make both wild and managed bees more resilient to future threats.

The new endangered assessment is a formal recognition that wild honeybees are native wildlife in need of conservation. We can no longer afford to leave them understudied and unprotected.

Arrigo Moro 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. Wild honeybees now officially listed as endangered in the EU – https://theconversation.com/wild-honeybees-now-officially-listed-as-endangered-in-the-eu-267239

October 11, 2025

María Corina Machado’s peace prize follows Nobel tradition of awarding recipients for complex reasons

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By David Smilde, Professor of Sociology, Tulane University

Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado gestures during a protest in Caracas on Jan. 9, 2025. Juan Barreto/AFP via Getty Images

Few can doubt the courage María Corina Machado has shown in fighting for a return to democracy in Venezuela.

The 58-year-old politician and activist is the undisputed leader of the opposition to Nicolás Maduro – a man widely seen as a dictator who has taken Venezuela down the path of repression, human rights violations and increasing poverty since becoming president in 2013.

Maduro is widely believed to have lost the 2024 presidential election to rival Edmundo González, a candidate substituting Machado, yet still claimed victory.

Machado has been in hiding since the fraudulent vote. And her courage in having participated in an unfair contest and in exposing Maduro’s fraud by publishing the true vote tallies on the internet, surely made Machado stand out to the Nobel committee.

Indeed, in making Machado the 2025 recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, organizers stated they were recognizing her “tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.”

But as a scholar of Venezuela’s political process, I know that is only part of the story. Machado is in many ways a controversial pick, less a peace activist than a political operator willing to use some of the trade’s dark arts for the greater democratic good.

Joining a controversial list of laureates

Of course, many Nobel Peace Prize awards generate controversy.

It has often been bestowed on great politicians over activists. And sometimes the prize’s winners can have complex pasts and very non-peaceful resumes.

Past recipients include Henry Kissinger, who as U.S. secretary of state and Richard Nixon’s security adviser was responsible for the illegal bombing of Cambodia, supporting Indonesia’s brutal invasion of East Timor and propping up dictators in Latin America, among many other morally dubious actions. Similarly, former Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin were both awarded the prize, in 1994 and 1978 respectively, despite their past association with violent activities in the Middle East.

Three men stand, two shaking hands. — Yasser Arafat, Henry Kissinger and Yitzhak Rabin – all Nobel Peace Prize laureates.
Duclos/Merillon/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images

The Nobel Committee often seems to use these awards not to celebrate past achievements but to affect the future course of events. The nods to Begin and Arafat were, in this way, used for encouragement of the Middle East peace process.

In fact, sometimes, the peace prize is seemingly bestowed as a sign of approval for a break from the past.

Barack Obama won his in 2009 despite only being nine months into his presidency. It was taken by many as a rejection of the previous presidency of George W. Bush, rather than recognition of Obama’s limited achievements at that time.

In 2016, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize just days after his peace plan was rejected in a referendum. In that instance, the committee seemed to want to give his efforts a push just after a major setback.

Democratic path or dark arts?

So what should be made of the Nobel Peace Prize committee’s decision to recognize opposition to Maduro now?

Certainly Machado’s profile is ascendant. In her political career, she has participated in elections – winning a seat in the National Assembly in 2010 – but boycotted many more. She also boycotted negotiation processes, suggesting instead that foreign intervention was the only way to remove Maduro.

In 2023 she returned to the electoral path and steadfastly mobilized the Venezuelan population for opposition primaries and presidential elections, even after her candidacy was disqualified by the government-controlled electoral authority, and innumerable other obstacles were put in her path.

The campaign included spearheading caravans and events across the country at significant personal risk.

However, much of her fight since then has been via less-democratic means.

Machado has shunned local and regional elections suggesting there was no sense in participating until the government honored the results of the 2024 presidential election. She has also again sought international intervention to remove Maduro.

Over the past year she has aggressively promoted the discredited theory that Maduro is in control of the Tren de Aragua gang and is using it to invade the United States – a narrative gladly accepted and repurposed by U.S. President Donald Trump.

In addition to being the expressed motivation for a U.S. military buildup off the coasts of Venezuela, this theory has also been the central justification cited by the Trump administration for using the Alien Enemies Act to deport, without due process, 238 Venezuelan men to a horrific prison in El Salvador.

A large painting of a man is held aloft. — Nicolas Maduro continues to loom large and rule Venezuela despite María Corina Machado’s efforts.
Jesus Vargas/Getty Images

Relations with Trump

The Nobel Peace Prize could help unify the Venezuelan opposition movement, which over the past year has begun to fray over differences in strategy, especially with respect to Machado’s return to electoral boycotts.

And it will certainly draw more international attention to Venezuelans’ struggle for democracy and could galvanize international stakeholders to push for change.

What it will mean in terms of Trump’s relationship to Machado and Venezuela is yet to be seen. Her main connection with the administration is through Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has aggressively represented her views and is pushing for U.S. military intervention to depose Maduro

Awarding Machado the prize could strengthen Trump’s resolve to seek regime change in Venezuela. Or, if he feels snubbed by the Nobel committee after very vocally lobbying to be awarded the peace prize himself, it could be a wedge between the U.S. president and Machado.

Machado seems to understand this. After not mentioning him in her first statement after the award was announced, she has since mentioned him multiple times, even dedicating the prize to both the Venezuelan people and Trump.

Trump has subsequently called to congratulate her.

A game changer? Perhaps not

To the degree that the Nobel Peace Prize is not just a model of change but a model for change, the decision to award it to Machado could conceivably affect the nature of Venezuela’s struggle against authoritarianism, leading her to continue to seek the restoration of democracy with a greater focus on reconciliation and coexistence among all Venezuelans, including the still politically relevant followers of the late Hugo Chávez.

Whatever the impact, it probably will not be game-changing. As we have seen with other winners, the initial glow of public recognition is quickly consumed by political conflict.

And in Venezuela, there is no easy way to translate this prize into real democratic progress.

While Machado and other Venezuelan democrats may have more support than ever among global democrats, Nicolás Maduro controls all of Venezuela’s institutions including the armed forces and the state oil company, which, even when sanctioned, provides substantial resources. Maduro also has forged strategic alliances with China, Russia and Iran.

The only way one can imagine the restoration of democracy in Venezuela, with or without military action, is through an extensive process of negotiation, reconciliation, disarmament and justice that could lay the groundwork for coexistence. This Nobel Peace Prize could position Machado for this task.

David Smilde 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. María Corina Machado’s peace prize follows Nobel tradition of awarding recipients for complex reasons – https://theconversation.com/maria-corina-machados-peace-prize-follows-nobel-tradition-of-awarding-recipients-for-complex-reasons-267268