Category: English

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Basil Germond, Professor of International Security, School of Global Affairs, Lancaster University

The dramatic seizure of the Russian-flagged tanker Marinera/Bella 1 in the north Atlantic, carried out by the US coastguard with British support, underscores the collision between maritime law and power politics.

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), ships on the high seas enjoy freedom of navigation and fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of their flag state. (However, boarding a vessel without consent is lawful in exceptional cases such as piracy, statelessness, hot pursuit or under a UN mandate.)

The US has justified the operation through domestic sanctions law and a federal warrant. These sanctions were part of a broader US oil-export blockade targeting shipments of Venezuelan crude, specifically sanctioning tankers involved in transporting oil for the Venezuelan government and affiliated entities. They were not directed at Russia generally.

The US and the UK emphasised the vessel’s “statelessness”. Indeed, the tanker’s mid-voyage switch to a Russian flag raises questions about the regularity of its re-registration.

Under maritime law, fraudulent reflagging is a violation that can render a vessel stateless and open the door to enforcement. In this case, this position is obviously contested by Russia, which claims that a proper re-registration happened.

Moscow’s protest and reported naval shadowing – Russia reportedly dispatched a submarine and at least one surface vessel in proximity but did not engage – highlight the geopolitical stakes. When legal ambiguity meets strategic rivalry, the high seas become a stage for confrontation.

But the Marinera affair is more than a clash over a sanctioned vessel. It exposes the fragility of maritime law. Unclos was designed for a world of consensus, not for shadow fleets and geopolitical rivalries. Yet, from the Middle East to Venezuela to Ukraine, enforcement is moving from courtrooms to contested waters – and the risk of miscalculation and escalation is growing.

What is striking is how quickly “shadow fleets” – that is, clandestine vessels operating outside normal maritime governance to move sanctioned or high-risk commodities while concealing their true origin, ownership, or destination – have become central to global geopolitical tensions.

Their operations raise serious safety, insurance and accountability concerns. But for countries facing western sanctions, they are vital. Russia, for instance, is using its shadow fleet to generate revenue for its war effort by selling oil in defiance of international sanctions.

Russia and its war against Ukraine is one of two major flashpoints, the other being the various measures being taken by the US against Venezuela and Iran. In both cases, one side (Venezuela, Iran and Russia) uses shadow fleets to bypass American or western sanctions.

The other (US and Ukraine) meanwhile – each for their own reasons – aims to disrupt these operations. And they do so increasingly through the use of force.

For Ukraine, this is happening in the context of an open armed conflict (outside the remit of Unclos, a peacetime instrument). This arguably makes its attacks on commercial assets that aid Russia’s war machine legitimate under the logic of war.

For the US, enforcement stems from the sanctions regime and domestic law. So, the boarding of the Marinera signals Washington’s willingness to enforce sanctions outside its own territory, even at the risk of provoking Moscow. Although the re-registration might arguably be non-compliant with Unclos, the vessel was de facto sailing under the Russian flag.

Kremlin humiliated

In less than a week, the US has arrested Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro
(a Kremlin ally), announced its withdrawal from numerous international organisations, boarded a vessel displaying the Russian flag, and issued bold statements of aggressive intent about other sovereign nations.

This suggests the Trump administration has entered a new phase of implementing the 2025 national security strategy. The strategy is to challenge the status quo through a calculated shift in risk management. It is clearly willing to accept short-term geopolitical uncertainty in exchange for what the administration frames as long-term national resilience.

The US decision to board a vessel sailing under a Russian flag is deeply embarrassing for the Kremlin. This humiliation comes just days after successful US strikes on Venezuela, an ally of Russia, underscoring Moscow’s inability to shield its partners. The episode follows similar failures with Assad in Syria and with Iran – the latter also exposing the ineffectiveness of Russian-supplied air defence systems.

The repercussions are global. Russia’s war in Ukraine now reaches beyond the Black Sea, extending into the Mediterranean – even possibly as far as west Africa – with strikes on suspected Russian sanctions‑evading vessels. The attack in the Mediterranean has been officially claimed by Ukraine, while the one off Senegal remains unacknowledged, though it appears to follow similar patterns.

The US–Venezuela crisis combines regime politics, narcotics and shadow fleet dynamics. And two of the world’s biggest economies, India and China, which are major consumers of Russian oil, are deeply entangled, giving these maritime developments a truly international scope.

The question remains as to whether the use of force will deter shadow fleet operations. These operate within a now well-established business model, with unscrupulous owners and captains willing to make easy money out of illegal and dodgy operations.

These are backed by Russia, Iran and, until now, Venezuela and enabled by willing buyers and open registries (national ship registries that allow foreign-owned vessels to register under their flag with minimal requirements, often for lower costs and fewer regulations).

That makes prospects for deterrence bleak. Yet the use of force against civilian shipping in neutral or international waters, almost unprecedented outside major wars, could mark a turning point.

On one hand, it demonstrates that Unclos cannot serve as a shield for sanctions evasion. On the other, it reinforces power politics at sea, opening the door to more hybrid warfare in the maritime domain. This dynamic could ultimately play into Moscow’s hands, given Russia’s proven expertise in hybrid and grey zone warfare.

Basil Germond 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. The boarding of the Marinera and the rise of the shadow fleet in hybrid warfare – https://theconversation.com/the-boarding-of-the-marinera-and-the-rise-of-the-shadow-fleet-in-hybrid-warfare-273024

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Will Shüler, Vice-Dean of Education and Senior Lecturer, School of Performing and Digital Arts, Royal Holloway, University of London

Belgian theatre director Ivo Van Hove is no stranger to American playwright Arthur Miller, directing acclaimed productions of A View From the Bridge at the Young Vic in 2014, with a transfer to London’s West End in 2015, and The Crucible on Broadway in 2016. Now he has another hit on his hands with his latest production of Miller’s All My Sons.

While Van Hove is known for using technology such as video screens on stage, this stripped-back production at the Wyndham Theatre allows the intensity of the play to reveal itself unfiltered.

Written in 1946, Miller’s play is set in a small nondescript post-war American town, and revolves around Joe Keller (Bryan Cranston), a former manufacturer of military aircraft parts, who has built a comfortable life and established himself as a respected figure in the community.

When only one of his sons, Chris (Paapa Esseidu), comes home from the war, it leaves their mother Kate (Marianne Jean-Baptiste) pining for news of her missing son, Larry. Four years later, Kate is forced to confront the possibility that Larry is never coming home when his former girlfriend Ann (Hayley Squires) gets engaged to Chris.

Ann is also the daughter of Joe’s former business partner, imprisoned during the war for selling faulty aircraft components that led to the deaths of American soldiers. Ann’s brother George arrives to stop her from marrying Chris and accuses Joe of being the one responsible for the defective parts – and by extension the reason Larry is missing. What unfolds is a relentless investigation of what we choose to believe and what we choose to take responsibility for within families and society.

The stripped-back nature of the production allows for the captivating performances to sing. Cranston, Esseidu, Jean-Baptiste and Squires all give faultless performances that keep audiences captivated throughout. The play’s climax, when Cranston utters the line the play is named for, is genuinely heartwrenching.

Power of the Greek tradition

In the programme notes, Van Hove articulates his distaste for Miller being performed “very realistically and very naturalistically”. Instead, he points to Miller’s works as “more akin to the emotional savagery of a Greek tragedy”. In many ways, this staging recalls strong Greek theatre roots and engages imaginatively with the ancient form.

The scenery and lighting design by Jan Versweyveld mirror the space in ancient Greek theatre, an area I explore in my work. Historically, Greek tragedies were mostly set outside of a house and the stage consisted of a facade structure with one central door.

In All My Sons, the main characters come from the house to have their familial and social discussions and disagreements in public. The only glimpses of indoors are through a large circle above the door – less a window and more a cutaway into the interior, echoing the way ancient Greek theatre would stage elements of plays on top of the central house structure.

Scenically, the play begins with a striking image of Kate outside at night, beneath an imposing tree that topples in a storm and comes crashing to the earth. The tree remains unrooted but fixed in the centre of the stage throughout the play, a silent tribute to the missing son, still at the centre of their lives.

This echoes the opening of Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound, which begins with the protagonist being nailed to rock where he stays throughout the tragedy. These scenic choices pick up on the influence of ancient tragic structure on Miller’s piece.

All My Sons charts the downfall of Joe, a pillar of the community, who is brought low through his own hubris – reminiscent of Sophocles’ Oedipus, Aeschylus’ Agamemnon, and Euripides’ Bacchae.

The plot involves other classic Greek tragedy tropes, such as a long-lost figure returning with news about the past, and children being polluted by the sins of their parents. The denouement is precisely as Aristotle prescribes for a tragedy: a simultaneous discovery of information and a reversal of fortunes.

An essential component to Greek tragedy is the chorus. While we do not get a singing-dancing one in Miller’s play, the neighbour characters (Jim and Sue Bayliss, Lydia and Frank Lubey, and little Bert) function like a Greek chorus.

They observe and comment on the action, push the storyline forward and are there to listen to the characters articulate their thoughts. Importantly, their presence is felt when they are offstage, as Joe, Chris, and Ann are all consumed by how the neighbourhood perceives them.

Most striking is the play’s engagement with a mythic past. First staged in 1947, in All My Sons Miller was referencing the second world war. In this production, no specific war is mentioned, nor is a specific time period evoked by the scenery design or costumes. As such, the play feels set in a different and unspecified time, creating distance between the world of the play and the spectator.

This technique is employed by Miller in The Crucible, which critiques 1950s McCarthyism by setting a play during the Salem witch trials in late 17th-century Massachusetts.

This is precisely how Greek tragedies were set: in a distant, mythic past. This allowed spectators in ancient times to reflect on the themes and ideas of the play in relation to their own world, without the play coming across as too on the nose or moralising.

With All My Sons, what becomes striking is how apposite the play is in relation to our world: to what extent will we allow capitalism to go unchecked? How does the society work if people are not accountable for their actions? And to what extent can other people’s bad decisions be used to justify our own?

Like a Greek tragedy, this production picks at a societal scab and forces us to confront the raw wound beneath. All My Sons is an excellent example of contemporary theatre engaging with historic theatre traditions to mesmerising effect.

All My Sons is on at the Wyndham Theatre, London until March 7 2026.

---

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.

---

Will Shüler 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. All My Sons: director Ivo Van Hove powers up Arthur Miller’s post-war play with a Greek tragedy staging – https://theconversation.com/all-my-sons-director-ivo-van-hove-powers-up-arthur-millers-post-war-play-with-a-greek-tragedy-staging-272917

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Wilkinson, Professor of Orthopaedics, University of Sheffield

Around 117,000 people living in England and Wales had a hip replacement in 2024. Although hip replacements are often thought of as a surgery that mainly older people need, reports from previous years show that around 43% of these operations are done in people aged 50 to 69 years old.

There are many reasons someone in their 50s might need to have a hip replacement. Having the operation done when necessary – regardless of how young you may be – can help you get back to a pain free, active lifestyle.

Why would someone in their 50s need a hip replacement?

The main reason a person in their 50s would need to have a hip replacement is due to arthritis. Although this condition is more common as people get older, it can still happen in younger people. Take Liam Gallagher, for instance. The 53-year-old underwent hip surgery in 2023 due to arthritis.

Arthritis occurs when the cartilage surrounding a joint begins wearing down over time – leading to pain, stiffness and reduced mobility.

Usually, arthritis of the hip is caused by a problem with the shape of the hip joint. For some this is due to hip dysplasia – a problem with the hip that can be evident at birth, where the joint hasn’t developed properly.

Problems with the hip joint can also emerge as young children grow – a condition known as Perthes’ disease.

The hip joint can become misshapen in teenage years as well, developing a bump where the joint meets the thigh bone. This is called a cam lesion and is a very common cause of early arthritis in men.

The other type of hip damage that can occur in younger people is joint inflammation caused by inflammatory arthritis – though this is less common. Inflammatory arthritis occurs when the body mistakenly attacks the hip joint, leading to symptoms such as pain, stiffness and weakness in the joint.

Although most people with inflammatory arthritis will be prescribed medication to treat it, sometimes symptoms can worsen. In such instances, a hip replacement may be performed to help reduce symptoms.

Are more young people having hip replacements?

Hip arthritis isn’t becoming more common in younger people. However, as hip replacements continue to improve and patient demand changes, surgeons are offering it to patients at a younger age.

The surgery is safe and reliable, so we can treat younger patients with greater confidence of long-term success.

Recent improvements in materials and surgical techniques also means a modern hip replacement can last for at least 20 to 30 years in patients – meaning many years of pain relief and mobility.

Is it better to have a hip replacement when you’re younger?

The right time to have surgery depends less on your age and more on your general health – considering the amount of pain and disability your hip is causing. You need to carefully weigh the benefits and risks of surgery against the problems arthritis causes for your life.

Younger patients don’t necessarily have a faster recovery or achieve better outcomes than older patients. It depends, in part, on why they needed surgery.

Younger patients can also have different expectations of what they’ll be able to do with their hip replacement. For example, some may want to get back to high levels of physical activity that just might not be possible. Although a hip replacement can improve mobility and reduce pain, it can’t give you back the joints you had when you were a teen.

It’s true as well that joint replacements don’t tend to last as long in younger patients compared to older patients. This is partly because young people are generally more active – and also because they simply have longer to live and more time to wear out the implant.

Does the surgery differ in younger patients?

In principle, hip replacement surgery is the same operation no matter your age. But there are some slight variations.

In patients aged 70 and older, the prosthesis components are usually glued to fix them to the bone, commonly called a cemented hip. The moving parts are typically made of metal and plastic.

But in younger people, the surgeon may use implants that rely on bone growing onto the surface to fix the replacement joint in place – commonly called a cementless (or uncemented) hip. The moving part of the joint will also be separate to the part that fixes onto the bone. This means they can easily be changed if they become very worn over the years without having to change the whole joint replacement.

In younger people, the moving parts may also be made of different materials – such as ceramic, as it’s more hard-wearing than metal.

How have hip replacements changed over the years?

The biggest advance in joint replacement materials came about with the development of very hard-wearing plastics and ceramics about 15 to 20 years ago.

These have transformed the life expectancy of a joint replacement which means that the majority of modern replacements now last decades. This is quite a different expectation to hip replacement surgery done in the 1980s or 1990s, which only lasted around ten years.

Could new therapies reduce the need for hip replacements someday?

New surgical techniques and therapies are being explored to see whether they may improve hip replacement outcomes.

For instance, a clinical trial is currently underway to understand whether robotic-assisted surgery leads to better hip replacement outcomes compared to conventional surgery techniques.

The use of 3D printing also appears to be promising. This technology allows for complicated implant shapes to be made. This would be beneficial in rare instances where a standard prosthesis wouldn’t fit properly.

Stem cell therapy may hold promise too. This therapy could reduce or eliminate the need for joint replacement entirely by treating arthritis itself. However, we don’t yet have clear clinical evidence showing this treatment works. It will still be years before researchers know if it’s a safe and reliable therapy for arthritis.

Hip replacement surgery is very safe and effective and current implants should last several decades. While new technologies and treatments are emerging, the bar is set very high to achieve better outcomes than conventional hip replacement surgery.

Mark Wilkinson receives funding from Arthritis UK, Medical Research Council, UKRI, and the Health Quality Improvement Partnership.

– ref. People as young as 50 can need a hip replacement – here’s everything you need to know about this common surgery – https://theconversation.com/people-as-young-as-50-can-need-a-hip-replacement-heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-this-common-surgery-269051

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Kate Davies, PhD candidate, Nottingham Trent University

Hedgehogs have been part of human culture for thousands of years. Across different societies, they’ve been symbols of fertility, protection and healing, as well as fear, superstition and suspicion.

Today, 17 species of hedgehog are found across Europe, Africa and Asia, many of which live in close proximity to people, a closeness that has helped shape the stories told about them.

Long before written history, hedgehog-like imagery could be found in symbolic art linked to fertility and renewal, suggesting these animals mattered to people for far longer than written records can reveal.

In ancient Egypt, they were seen as guides and protectors, admired for their ability to survive winter through hibernation, a powerful symbol of rebirth. However, the Egyptians also hunted them for sport and used their spines in folk remedies, including those thought to cure baldness.

Hedgehogs also historically took on more unsettling roles. In parts of China, early stories described hedgehog spirits that could shapeshift into human form and bring misfortune. Later traditions, however, recast them as sacred household protectors and healers.

Hedgehogs’ horrible history

In Britain, hedgehogs were viewed largely as negative until relatively recently. During the middle ages, they were closely associated with witchcraft. One widespread belief was that witches could transform into hedgehogs to cause harm and mischief. They were also thought to sneak into fields at night to steal milk directly from cows’ udders.

Another long standing belief was that hedgehogs carried stolen fruit on their spines. Medieval illustrations often showed them sneaking through orchards with apples skewered on their backs, an image that still appears in children’s books and birthday party treats today. Some long-standing myths also persist, with well meaning people offering them milk, despite hedgehogs being lactose intolerant.

Although some of these stories survive today as charming curiosities, others had more serious consequences. Hedgehogs were officially classed as “vermin” under the Preservation of Grain Act 1532, alongside a long list of other animals.

Parishes were required to kill them, with bounties of three pence paid for each hedgehog, a significant sum at the time. Communities that failed to meet their quotas could even be fined. Hedgehogs remained on these vermin lists for centuries.

It’s estimated that over the 140 years from 1660 to 1800, around half a million hedgehogs were destroyed in this way – a figure comparable to a substantial proportion of the UK’s current population. And they weren’t alone, wildcats, otters and pine marten (to name but a few) were all once persecuted in the same way, and are now among the UK’s most legally protected species, after suffering significant population declines.

Persecution and protection

Although this act was eventually repealed, the killing of hedgehogs continued well into the 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly on shooting estates. Records suggest that tens of thousands were destroyed each year during this period, with the numbers killed declining between the 1960s and early 1980s. This may reflect changing attitudes and the introduction of wildlife protection legislation, but it is also possible that hedgehogs were becoming scarcer.

Today, hedgehogs are seen very differently in the UK at least. In 2016 they were voted Britain’s favourite mammal, beating red foxes, which came in second place, by a considerable margin. Public affection for hedgehogs has fuelled garden conservation campaigns, dedicated charities and a growing network of rehabilitation centres, caring for sick and injured animals – often supported by members of the public who actively manage gardens with hedgehogs in mind.

While attitudes towards hedgehogs have improved dramatically in recent decades, this has not been enough to halt their decline, with the species recently reclassified as “near threatened” on the International Union for Conservation of Nature red list. Understanding our cultural journey and changing attitudes towards hedgehogs helps explain both our desire to protect them and some of the mistakes we still make.

It also offers a warning, other species once dismissed as pests only gained serious protection once their declines became impossible to ignore. Species such as badgers and foxes continue to provoke strong and divided public opinion, much as hedgehogs once did – a reminder of how strongly stories shape which animals we choose to protect.

The hedgehogs journey from feared pest to beloved garden icon shows how powerful human stories can be, both in harming wildlife and in motivating protection. But affection alone isn’t enough.

Myths that once justified persecution still linger in softer forms, shaping well-meaning but sometimes harmful behaviour. Right now hedgehogs need protection. Simple actions, such as offering a shallow dish of water, creating hedgehog-friendly gardens, providing escape routes from garden ponds and reducing pesticide use, will all help to save this now much-loved mammal.

Kate Davies 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. Why hedgehogs used to be hated – https://theconversation.com/why-hedgehogs-used-to-be-hated-272376