The 5 big problems with Trump’s Gaza peace plan

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

The 20-point plan announced by US President Donald Trump at a joint news conference with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu comes close to living up to Trump’s hype. It is a bold attempt to address all of the issues that need to be resolved if there is to be lasting peace in Gaza.

Could it work? Both sides are tired of the war. Throughout history, quite a number of wars have simply come to an end when both sides were too exhausted to continue. Two-thirds of Israelis want the war to end, and though polling of Palestinians is difficult, they clearly want the devastation and suffering in Gaza to stop, too.

So, this plan, despite its limitations, could come at the right time.

However, there are many outstanding questions about the feasibility of the plan and to what extent it is likely to be successful. Given the Middle East’s violent history, it’s impossible to be optimistic at this point.

Here are five main reasons for concern.

1. Trust is lacking

There’s zero trust between both sides right now. And several aspects of the plan are so vague, there is a big risk both sides could accuse the other of breaking their promises.

The last ceasefire between the two sides only lasted two months before Netanyahu backed out, blaming Hamas for not releasing more hostages before negotiations on the next phase could proceed.

2. The plan is asymmetrical

The deal favours Israel more than it does Hamas. Hamas is essentially being asked to give up all of the remaining Israeli hostages it holds and all of its weapons at the same time, rendering it entirely defenceless.

Hamas, with its lack of trust in Israel and Netanyahu, in particular, may fear the Israeli leader could use this as an opportunity to attack it again without worrying about harming the hostages.

Hamas was also not invited to negotiate the terms of the agreement. And it now faces an ultimatum: accept the terms or Israel will “finish the job”.

Given the asymmetry of the plan, Hamas may decide the risks of accepting it outweigh the potential benefits, despite its offer of amnesty for Hamas fighters who lay down their arms.

Israel is being asked to make some compromises in the plan. But how realistic are these?

For example, the deal envisions a future when the Palestinian Authority (PA) can “securely and effectively take back control of Gaza”. Netanyahu has previously said he would not accept this.

Likewise, it would also be very difficult for Netanyahu to accept “a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood”, as outlined in the plan. He has firmly rejected this in the past, most recently in his defiant address to the UN General Assembly last week.

3. Important details are lacking

The implementation strategy of the plan is extraordinarily vague. We know nothing at this stage about the “International Stabilisation Force” that would take the place of the Israeli military after it withdraws from Gaza.

Which countries would participate? It would obviously be a mission fraught with danger to the personnel involved. Netanyahu has previously mentioned an Arab force taking over in Gaza, but no Arab states have yet put their hands up for this.

There is also no timeframe in the plan for the Palestinian Authority reforms, nor any details on what these reforms would entail.

Presumably, there would need to be new elections to install a credible leader in place of current President Mahmoud Abbas. But how that would be done and whether the people of Gaza would be able to take part is still unknown.

In addition, the details of the civil authority that would oversee the reconstruction of Gaza are very unclear. All we know is that Trump would appoint himself chair of the “Board of Peace”, and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair would also somehow be involved.

This board would need the absolute confidence of the Netanyahu government and Hamas to be effective. Trust is always in short supply in the Middle East.




Read more:
The Palestinian Authority is facing a legitimacy crisis. Can it be reformed to govern a Palestinian state?


4. No mention of the West Bank

The West Bank is clearly a flashpoint. There are disputes and clashes every day between the Israeli settlers and Palestinian residents, which are only likely to get worse.

Just last month, the Israeli government gave final approval to a controversial plan to build a new settlement that would effectively divide the West Bank in two, making a future, contiguous Palestinian state unviable.

The West Bank must be central to any overall settlement between Israel and Palestine.

5. Israel’s right-wing cabinet remains an obstacle

This could be the ultimate deal breaker: the hardline right-wing members of Netanyahu’s cabinet, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, have said they will not accept anything less than the complete destruction and elimination of Hamas.

And although Hamas would be disarmed and politically sidelined under this plan, its ideology would remain intact, as would a significant number of its fighters.

So, does it have a chance?

If Hamas accepts Trump’s plan, we could soon have the answers to several of these questions.

But it is going to require a great deal of work by the United States to maintain the pressure on Israel to stick to the deal. The chief Palestinian mediators, Qatar and Egypt, would also need to maintain pressure on Hamas so it doesn’t breach the conditions, as well.

Netanyahu is likely assuming there will be sufficient off-ramps for him to get out of the agreement if Hamas doesn’t live up to it. Netanyahu has already done this once when he backed out of the ceasefire in March and resumed Israel’s military operations.

In his forceful speech to a partially empty UN General Assembly hall last week, Netanyahu didn’t indicate he was thinking of walking away from any of the red lines he had previously set to end the war. In fact, he condemned the states recognising a Palestinian state and vowed, “Israel will not allow you to shove a terror state down our throats.”

Given this, Netanyahu would not have agreed to Trump’s plan at all if the US leader hadn’t put pressure on him. At the same time, Trump said at his news conference with Netanyahu that if Hamas fails to live up to the agreement or refuses to accept it, Israel would have his full backing to finish the job against Hamas.

This promise may be enough for Netanyahu to be able to persuade Smotrich and Ben-Gvir to support the plan – for now.

The Conversation

Ian Parmeter does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

ref. The 5 big problems with Trump’s Gaza peace plan – https://theconversation.com/the-5-big-problems-with-trumps-gaza-peace-plan-266355

12,000-year-old rock art marked ancient water sources in Arabia’s desert

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Maria Guagnin, Director, Ha’il Archaeology Identification Project, University of Sydney; Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology

Sahout Rock Art and Archaeology Project

About 12,000 years ago, high up on a cliff in the desert of northern Arabia, an artist – or perhaps artists – was hard at work.

Standing on a narrow ledge and with primitive tools, they engraved into the rock an image of a life-sized camel. This wasn’t the first artwork of its kind: in fact, there was already an entire row of fresh camel engravings on the 39-metre-high cliff face, below which a shallow lake sparkled in the sunshine.

Over thousands of years, these engravings weathered the elements. They gradually eroded until they were almost invisible and had been forgotten.

That is, until our international team discovered them and more than 170 others while on a field trip to the region, which sits near the southern edge of the Nefud Desert in Saudi Arabia, roughly two years ago.

As we explain in a new study, published today in Nature Communications, the engravings would have marked important desert water sources – and demonstrate the resilience and innovation of people who lived in such a harsh, arid environment.

A barren, rocky desert under a clear blue sky.
The engravings are near the southern edge of the Nefud Desert in Saudi Arabia.
Sahout Rock Art and Archaeology Project

Searching for clues

Our earlier research had shown that between 10,000 and 6,000 years ago Arabia was much wetter than it is today.

Grasslands had spread into areas that are now desert, and cattle herders used these pastures for their herds.

The rock art they left behind is well known from two UNESCO World Heritage sites.

We could see there was also older rock art at these UNESCO sites. It was much larger and more detailed, showing life-sized and naturalistic camels and wild donkeys. But it was not clear how old it was. So in May 2023 we set out to find more of this ancient rock art in the hope of finding clues about its age.

A sand-coloured rock face, featuring an engraving of a large camel.
The newly discovered engravings include 130 images of large, life-sized animals – camels, ibex, wild donkeys, gazelles and aurochs.
Sahout Rock Art and Archaeology Project

Life-sized engravings

In total, we identified more than 60 rock art panels containing 176 engravings in three previously unexplored areas – Jebel Arnaan, Jebel Mleiha and Jebel Misma. The engravings include 130 images of large, life-sized animals – camels, ibex, wild donkeys, gazelles and aurochs. Some are almost three metres long and more than two metres high.

We reached the first panel via a long off-road track which cut through a beautiful mountain landscape. A cool breeze made the heat of the emerging Saudi summer bearable.

The rock art panel showed two large camels, one on top of the other. The older camel looked as though it was in motion and about to stand up, the other like it was striding across the rock surface.

We were excited to find undisturbed archaeological layers directly beneath the engraved camels. In one sealed layer we even found an engraving tool that was once used to make rock art.

Luminescence dating – a dating method that measures when sediment was last exposed to sunlight – revealed the layer in which the tool was found is about 12,000 years old.

The same layer also contained artefacts that are typical for this time, including small arrowheads, stone beads and even a bead made from a seashell.

A hand holding a small arrowhead.
An arrowhead uncovered during excavations.
Michael Petraglia

A far-reaching network

These artefacts tell us the people who made the rock art were part of a far-reaching network. They used the same stone tools and jewellery as communities in the Levant, 400 kilometres further north.

Significantly, our team also discovered the rock art was placed near ancient seasonal lakes.

At the end of the last ice age, during the Last Glacial Maximum, the climate was extremely dry.

These lakes, dated at roughly 15,000 years, are the first evidence of surface water returning to Arabia following the extremely arid period. And they move the timeline of the returning humid conditions back thousands of years, enlarging the opportunity window for humans to settle in these dry inland conditions.

Our results show 12,000 years ago, humans were able to use these seasonal lakes to survive in the desert. They marked these water sources, and the paths leading to them, with monumental rock art.

We don’t know why they did this. But even for us today, the camel is a striking symbol for survival in the desert.

The Conversation

Maria Guagnin received funding from a British Academy/Leverhulme Small Research Grant (SRG2223231473) for fieldwork and research.

Ceri Shipton, Frans van Buchem, and Michael Petraglia 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. 12,000-year-old rock art marked ancient water sources in Arabia’s desert – https://theconversation.com/12-000-year-old-rock-art-marked-ancient-water-sources-in-arabias-desert-266144

We teach young people to write. In the age of AI, we must teach them how to see

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT University

Vikas Anand Dev/Unsplash

From the earliest year of school, children begin learning how to express ideas in different ways. Lines across a page, a wobbly letter, or a simple drawing form the foundation for how we share meaning beyond spoken language.

Over time, those first marks evolve into complex ideas. Children learn to combine words with visuals, express abstract concepts, and recognise how images, symbols and design carry meaning in different situations.

But generative artificial intelligence (AI), software that creates content based on user prompts, is reshaping these fundamental skills. AI is changing how people create, edit and present both text and images. In other words, it changes how we see – and how we decide what’s real.

Take photos, for example. They were once seen as a “mirror” of reality. Now, more people recognise their constructed nature.

Similarly, generative AI is disrupting long-held assumptions about the authenticity of images. These can appear photorealistic but can depict things or events that never existed.

Our latest research, published in the Journal of Visual Literacy, identifies key literacies at each stage of the AI image generation process, from selecting an AI image generator to creating and refining content.

As the way people make images changes, knowing how generative AI works will let you better understand and critically assess its outputs.

Textual and visual literacy

Literacy today extends beyond reading and writing. The Australian Curriculum defines literacy as the ability to “use language confidently for learning and communicating in and out of school”. The European Union broadens this to include navigating visual, audio and digital materials. These are essential skills not only in school, but for active citizenship.

These abilities span making meaning, communicating and creating through words, visuals and other forms. These abilities also require adapting expression to different audiences. You might text a friend informally but email a public official with more care, for example. Computers, too, demand different forms of literacy.

In the 1960s, users interacted with computers through written commands. By the 1970s, graphical elements like icons and menus emerged, making interaction more visual.

Generative AI is often a mix between these two approaches. Some technologies, like ChatGPT, rely on text prompts. Others, like Adobe’s Firefly, use both text commands and button controls.

The user interface of Adobe Firefly shows eight photorealistic images, generated by AI, seemingly depicting the Sydney Opera House in Sydney Harbour.
Adobe Firefly provides a suite of options for adjusting visual output, including whether the visual style is photorealistic, whether the image orientation is square, horizontal, or vertical, and whether any visual effects are desired.
T.J. Thomson

Software often interprets or guesses user intent. This is especially true for minimalistic prompts, such as a single word or even an emoji. When these are used for prompts, the AI system often returns a stereotypical representation based on its training data or the way it’s been programmed.

Being more specific in your prompt helps to arrive at a result more aligned with what you envisioned. This highlights that we need “multimodal” literacies: knowledge and skills that cut across writing and visual modes.

What are some key literacies in AI generation?

One of the first generative AI literacies is knowing which system to use.

Some are free. Others are paid. Some might be free but built on unethical datasets. Some have been trained on particular datasets that make the outputs more representative or less risky from a copyright infringement perspective. Some support a wider range of inputs, including images, documents, spreadsheets and other files. Others might support text-only inputs.

After selecting an image generator, you need to be able to work with it productively.

If you’re trying to make a square image for an Instagram post, you’re in luck. This is because many AI systems produce images with a square orientation by default. But what if you need a horizontal or vertical image? You’ll have to ask for that or know how to modify that setting.

What if you want text included in your image? AI still struggles with rendering text, similarly to how early AI systems struggled with accurately representing human fingers and ears. In these cases, you might be better off adding text in a different software, such as Canva or Adobe InDesign.

Many AI systems also create images that lack specific cultural context. This lets them be easily used in wider contexts. Yet it might decrease the emotional appeal or engagement among audiences who perceive these images as inauthentic.

A humanoid robot holds a newspaper with a headline about the economy.
AI often struggles with rendering text. Here’s how AI did with a request to create an image that included this headline, ‘Give the A.I. Economy a Human Touch.’
The authors via Midjourney, CC BY-NC-SA

Working with AI is a moving target

Learning AI means keeping pace with constant change. New generative AI products appear regularly, while existing platforms rapidly evolve.

Earlier this year, OpenAI integrated image generation into ChatGPT and TikTok launched its AI Alive tool to animate photos. Meanwhile, Google’s Veo 3 made cinematic video with sound accessible to Canva users, and Midjourney introduced video outputs.

These examples show where things are headed. Users will be able to create and edit text, images, sound and video in one place rather than having to use separate tools for each.

Building multimodal literacies means developing the skills to adapt, evaluate and co-create as technology evolves.

If you want to start building those literacies now, begin with a few simple questions.

What do I want my audience to see or understand? Should I use AI for creating this content? What is the AI tool producing and how can I shape the outcome?

Approaching visual generative AI with curiosity, but also critical thinking is the first step toward having the skills to use these technologies intentionally and effectively. Doing so can help us tell visual stories that carry human rather than machine values.

The Conversation

T.J. Thomson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is an affiliate with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

Daniel Pfurtscheller previously received funding from the Tyrolean Science Fund and the Austrian Science Fund, for research unrelated to this article.

Katharina Christ works in a project funded by the Klaus Tschira Foundation. This research is unrelated to the content of this article.

Katharina Lobinger has previously received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Federal Office of Communications in Switzerland.

Nataliia Laba has previously received Research Training Program funding from the Australian Government Department of Education.

ref. We teach young people to write. In the age of AI, we must teach them how to see – https://theconversation.com/we-teach-young-people-to-write-in-the-age-of-ai-we-must-teach-them-how-to-see-259283

Kamala Harris’ candid memoir reveals her ‘ideal’ vice president – and why she thinks she lost

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Bruce Wolpe, Non-resident Senior Fellow, United States Study Centre, University of Sydney

It is downright eerie to read, right now, Kamala Harris’ memoir of her 2024 presidential campaign. These events feel so far away now, when we read them from within the frequent shocks of the Trump presidency, from troops on the streets of Washington to the indictment of former FBI director James Comey. But the chapter titles – beginning “July 21. 107 Days to the Election” – remind us the election was just last year.

“It says a lot about how traumatised we both were by what happened that night that Doug and I never discussed it with each other until I sat down to write this book,” Harris reflects about election night: her campaign at an end and Trump triumphant.

The book is not the whole story – not by a long shot. But her words about these events resonate with a ring of truth.


Book review: 107 Days – Kamala Harris (Simon & Schuster)


The first chapter, Sunday July 21, covers the day Joe Biden – who disintegrated before our eyes in his catastrophic debate with Trump – withdrew from the race, with no road to victory.

He did want to endorse Harris, but “not for a day, maybe two”. She told him that would be “ruinous”. She argued that she was not just “the candidate in the strongest position to win”, but “the only person” who would preserve Biden’s legacy. “At this point, anyone else was bound to throw him – and all the good he had achieved – under the bus.”

She draws on her call notes to supply the reactions of various senior Democrats to the news that day, from Bill Clinton (“Oh my god, I’m so relieved!”) to Gavin Newsom:

Hiking. Will call back. (He never did.)

Throughout, Harris is relentlessly sharp in recollecting the campaign – and very candid on all the principals, including the love of her husband, Doug Emhoff.

It takes courage to write about such an agonising, devastating defeat – after an historic, exhilarating campaign – so quickly and so personally. Memoirs are rarely written this quickly. (We are still waiting, five years later, for the second volume of Barack Obama’s memoirs.)

In writing this book, she got by with a little help from a “special friend”: Pulitzer prize winning Australian author Geraldine Brooks. Harris’ acknowledgements note her deep appreciation of working with Brooks, whose “ferocious and brilliant artistic insights were indispensable.”

The book fully reflects that. And who knows? Brooks one day might collaborate with Kamala on an inaugural address.

Candid, but loyal about Biden

Harris is candid about Biden’s decline, but still essentially loyal.

“On his worst day, he was more deeply knowledgeable, more capable of exercising judgment, and far more compassionate than Donald Trump at his best,” she writes. “There was a distinction between his ability to campaign and his ability to govern.”

Bob Woodward, the dean of presidential journalists, reached the same conclusion in his last book, War.

Harris writes:

of all the people in the White House, I was in the worst position to make the case that he should drop out. I knew it would come off to him as incredibly self-serving if I advised him not to run. He would see it as naked ambition.

The choice, she says, should not “have been left to an individual’s ego, an individual’s ambition. It should have been more than a personal decision.”

In other words, this was a decision his family and associates did not want to make. But it was imperative the national interest be placed above Biden’s personal interest.

The Harris campaign kept the core of Team Biden. “I didn’t have time to build a new plane; I had to fly the aircraft available.”

One of Biden’s closest advisors, Mike Donilon (criticised in Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson’s recent Biden book, Original Sin) left Harris’ campaign two weeks in.

She describes him, during Biden’s 2024 campaign, filtering poll data and presenting “the numbers in soothing terms […] really there was nothing to see here”. At these briefings (which “made no sense to me”), she writes, “Doug had wanted to stop sitting next to me because he got tired of me kicking him under the table when I asked a question and got a nonanswer.”

Pete Buttigieg ‘too big of a risk’ as VP

Harris delivers the goods on her vice-presidential search. She admits Pete Buttigieg (a personal friend) was her first choice and the “ideal partner” – but the then transportation secretary, with his husband and children, was “too big of a risk” for “a Black woman married to a Jewish man”.

Josh Shapiro, governor of Pennsylvania, came across to her as wanting a co-presidency. “At one point, he mused that he would want to be in the room for every decision […] I had a nagging concern that he would be unable to settle for a role as number two.”

She viewed senator and retired astronaut Mark Kelly of Arizona very favourably, but was afraid the Trump attack machine would try to take him down on his (excellent) military service record – just like the Republicans did to John Kerry in 2004. The man who led that effort, Chris LaCivita, was now a top Trump campaign aide.

Could a captain, used to deference and respect, adapt to an opponent’s national campaign specifically designed to disrespect him, to cut a hero down to something small?

Of course, the military service slander she feared with Kelly was employed against her eventual choice. Minnesota governor Tim Walz, who served in the National Guard for 24 years, was accused by vice president JD Vance of “stolen valor” for his misstatement, while arguing for an assault weapons ban, that “these weapons of war that I carried in war” had no place on civilian streets, though he didn’t serve in combat.

Harris found the chemistry she wanted with the “genuinely self-deprecating” Walz: an all-American decent guy next door, with great values and common sense. “He had no fixed ideas about what the role of vice president would be, saying he would do whatever I found was most useful for him to do.”

She writes that her senior staff favoured Walz, “to a person”, as did her sister – while husband Doug Emhoff, interestingly, leaned towards Shapiro.

We will never know if Shapiro or Kelly would have carried their swing states, perhaps changing the outcome of the election.

‘Don’t ever let them make you cry’

Trump’s outrages on the campaign trail were rife. Harris takes us behind the scenes to reveal her reactions to key moments, like Trump’s infamous statement to the National Association with Black Journalists: “I didn’t know she was Black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn Black and now she wants to be known as Black.” (Her mother is Indian; her father Jamaican.)

To campaign aide Brian Fallon, who wanted her to “punch back with a big speech about my racial identity”, she retorted:

Today he wants me to prove my race. What next? He’ll say I’m not a woman and I’ll need to show my vagina?

Harris takes us into her July 25 meeting with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu during her campaign. She also tells us she believes Israel was right to respond to “the atrocities of October 7”, but criticises the “ferocity” of Netanyahu’s response, including “the number of innocent Palestinian women and children killed and his failure to prioritize the lives of the hostages”. She was tough.

“I interrupted to reiterate the need for an immediate ceasefire and a day-after plan that gave Palestinians some kind of political horizon.” Netanyahu did not like what he was hearing – especially from her. “He wanted Trump in the seat opposite him. Not Joe. Not me.”

Harris does acknowledge Biden gaffes, like when he put on the MAGA hat of a Trump supporter he was joking with, who offered it to him. Her internal monologue went: “Don’t take it […] Don’t put it on.” Then: “He put it on.” That photo carried the caption, “Biden endorses Trump over Harris.” A bad day on a trail that had only 107 days.

When Harris talks about being a woman in politics, she sounds a lot like Julia Gillard.

“As any woman in a public-facing job knows, it takes us longer,” she writes about the two hours she needed to get ready on the campaign trail – make-up, hairstyling, “more complicated apparel choices”. Women are still judged on these seeming trivialities, she writes, over “the consequential matters we’re engaged in”.

She relates a conversation with German chancellor Angela Merkel. “They used to call me this – this ugly bird. And at first it hurt me deeply.” Angela leant towards Kamala. “Don’t ever let them make you cry.”

Harris never does.

‘I know Donald Trump’s type’

Harris’ speeches hit Trump where it hurts. As California’s attorney general, she told crowds:

I took on predators of all kinds […] Predators who abused women, who ripped off consumers, cheaters who broke the rules for their own game. So hear me when I say […] I know Donald Trump’s type.

The crowds “exploded” at this line, she writes.

There are phrases in English that do a lot of work for you. “I know his type” is one of them. We’ve all said it about someone of low character whom we’ve personally known.

She had big rallies. And big money. She was fully competitive.

Harris told America what Day One of President Kamala Harris would look like. “When elected, I will walk in with a to-do list full of priorities on what I will get done for the American people.”

By contrast: “On day one, if elected, Donald Trump would walk into that office with an enemies list.” Does anyone following American politics today doubt that?

By her own account, the wisest advisor in her campaign was David Plouffe, who ran Barack Obama’s successful 2008 campaign. But like a Shakespearean ghost, Plouffe’s warnings haunt this play. He counselled her Trump was doing better than in 2016 and 2020, and the assassination attempt had pushed his turnout up 20%. “Whatever you think his turnout will be, add ten per cent.”

Her campaign strategists were not happy about Harris’ continued praise for Biden in her speeches, urging her to stop. Plouffe put it bluntly: “People hate Joe Biden.” Harris quotes those words twice.

Why does she believe she lost?

This is her verdict: “One hundred and seven days were not, in the end, long enough to accomplish the task of winning the presidency.”

Maybe.

Trump got three million more votes in 2024 than he did in 2020. Harris got six million fewer votes than she and Biden did in 2020.

All that Harris was proud of – the landmark legislation on infrastructure, health care and clean energy – would not deliver their full benefits before the election. In the run up to November, she writes, inflation and interest rates were high, and there was no immediate relief.

Harris wanted to talk directly to Trump supporters, but it never happened. She wrote:

I wished I could ask every one of them. What are you angry about? What about me makes you angry? Is it your health care, your grocery bills, a backbreaking job that doesn’t pay what you’re worth – and what can I do to help you?

She did not reach them.

She combated Trump’s strength on immigration and border issues, and the issue of Gen Z facing a future without good prospects. An anti-trans campaign ripped across the country: “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.” It was reported more than US$21 million was spent by Trump and Republicans on anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ television ads as of October 9 2024.

Harris peaked in mid-September. She never had a lead clear of the polls’ margin of error.

On election day, she believed she would win.

The Conversation

Bruce Wolpe donated to the Biden-Harris campaign. He has served on the staffs of the Democrats in Congress and former Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

ref. Kamala Harris’ candid memoir reveals her ‘ideal’ vice president – and why she thinks she lost – https://theconversation.com/kamala-harris-candid-memoir-reveals-her-ideal-vice-president-and-why-she-thinks-she-lost-266047

When China makes a climate pledge, the world should listen

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Myles Allen, Head of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, University of Oxford

A few years ago, one of us (Myles Allen) asked a Chinese delegate at a climate conference why Beijing had gone for “carbon neutrality” for its 2060 target rather than “climate neutrality” or “net zero”, both of which were more fashionable terms at the time.

Her response: “Because we know what it means.”

It was a revealing answer: China, unlike many other countries, tends not to make climate commitments that it doesn’t understand or intend to keep. And that’s why its latest pledge – cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 7%–10% by 2035, as part of its commitments under the Paris agreement – matters more than the underwhelmed response might suggest.

To be fair on those other countries, lofty goals have played a role in driving the climate conversation about what is possible: there is always the argument that it is better to aim for the moon and miss than aim for the gutter and hit it.

But the climate crisis needs more than aspirations. It needs concrete, plausible plans.

That’s what makes China’s pledge so significant: Beijing has form in only promising what it plans to deliver. Having promised to peak emissions this decade, barely 50 years after it began to industrialise in earnest, it looks set to achieve that. And in the process, become a world leader in wind power, solar energy and electric vehicles.

Meanwhile, in the scientific literature…

A paper appeared in the journal Nature Communications at the end of August that provides some context for China’s announcement and ought to have received much more attention.

In it, climate scientists Junting Zhong and co-authors describe what they call a “reality-aligned scenario”. This means a pathway for emissions over the coming century that is consistent with emissions to date and countries’ near-term commitments.

The paper is provocatively titled “Plausible global emissions scenario for 2°C aligned with China’s net-zero pathway” (provocative because of the implication that some other scenarios out there are, well, less plausible).

In their scenario, global carbon dioxide emissions peak this decade and reach net zero around 2070, accompanied by immediate, sustained but not particularly dramatic reductions in emissions of methane and other greenhouse gases. In response, global warming is expected to peak at just over 2°C towards the end of this century before declining below 2°C early in the next.

Crucially, Zhong and his colleagues break out China’s contribution. In their scenario, the country’s carbon dioxide emissions would peak in the next few years before a steady decline brings them close to zero by 2060. Methane emissions would begin to decline immediately.

Train carrying coal
China is the world’s biggest emitter of methane, a potent but short-lived greenhouse gas. Much of it comes from coal mines.
Jiaye Liu / shutterstock

There is much to discuss in the relationship between this scenario and China’s latest emission pledge. How much of that 7%-10% reduction in all greenhouse gases by 2035 will be delivered by (very welcome) cuts in methane emissions? Breaking out separate contributions of long-lived (CO₂) and short-lived (like methane) greenhouse gases would be helpful to understand the implications of China’s pledges for global temperature.

Zhong and colleagues see land use changes (such as reforestation) playing only a minimal role in China’s long-term climate plan. So why does Beijing’s new pledge put so much emphasis on planting trees? Is this just a stopgap, or the start of a bigger reliance on land-based carbon dioxide removal?

And while renewables are central to China’s strategy, the country will also need to store captured carbon (from power plants or factories) on a massive scale. The real question may be around how China is going to deliver all this.

That’s why the phrase “while striving to do better” in President Xi’s announcement is so important. The world has a keen interest in China over-delivering.

Why the silence?

But perhaps the most remarkable aspect of all this is how little discussion there has been of the work by Zhong and his colleagues. It was clearly relevant: it came out just as China was preparing its pledge, it was published in one of the world’s top scientific journals, and one co-author has a prominent role in the IPCC. Yet despite all that, it received almost no online attention.

Perhaps most climate commentators were too preoccupied with responding to a very different document: a “critical review” commissioned by the US Department of Energy of greenhouse gas impacts on the US climate.

Whether or not you agreed with their conclusions, Zhong and his team’s paper was rigorous, transparent and peer-reviewed. The US review was none of those things, and already widely criticised as flawed. Yet it dominated headlines and commentary for weeks.

While the world’s second-largest emitter was debating a dodgy dossier, a carefully presented and comprehensive scenario, directly relevant to the climate policies of the world’s largest emitter, passed largely unnoticed.

That’s a missed opportunity. China’s targets aren’t just slogans or aspirations – they are statements of intent, grounded in what the country believes it can deliver. And where China goes, others will follow. Paying attention to analyses like the one from Zhong and his colleagues help us understand both China’s role and the world’s chances of keeping warming below 2°C.

That’s why President Xi’s call to “do better” applies not just to countries, but to scientists, commentators and climate policy-watchers too. Don’t be distracted by the usual suspects flooding the zone.


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.


The Conversation

Myles Allen’s research receives funding from UKRI, the Oxford Martin School, Horizon Europe and VietJet Air. He chairs the scientific advisory board of Puro.Earth.

Kai Jiang 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. When China makes a climate pledge, the world should listen – https://theconversation.com/when-china-makes-a-climate-pledge-the-world-should-listen-266346

As mining returns to Cornwall, lithium ambitions tussle with local heritage

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jamie Hinch, PhD Candidate in Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford

Two remnants of Cornwall’s mining heritage, Flatty and Pointy loom over the village of St Dennis. Jamie Hinch, CC BY-NC-ND

The woman’s eyes blazed as I scanned the feedback form she was showing me. “UN-BELIEVE-ABLE”, read her last word in the form’s final section. It was underlined. An incensed crescendo stabbed and dragged across the page. “Flatty and Pointy are part of us. How could they think about destroying them?” she said, shaking her head in disbelief.

She, like me, had received the form at Cornish Lithium’s recent community consultation. This consultation provided updated details of the mineral exploration company’s plans to reopen Trelavour Pit, a former China clay mine at the top of the Cornish village of St Dennis.

Once mined for kaolin, this time, a new “white gold” is being extracted. Lithium is a critical mineral for the green transition, with demand expected to triple over the next decade due to the increasing electrification of the energy system and the electric vehicles sector.

In west Cornwall, Cornish Lithium are pioneering the mining of lithium from geothermal waters. Pumped from deep in the granite below, the company plans to use a technique known as direct lithium extraction to extract the lithium dissolved in the water, while also capturing the heat for geothermal energy.

Meanwhile, in mid-Cornwall’s Clay Country, Cornish Lithium is proposing more conventional hard rock mining in an existing open pit. However, in revealing the size of the expanded Trelavour Pit, the consultation confirmed the fears of many people in St Dennis: “To enable the proposed development of the site and deliver the economic benefits for Cornwall, these sky tips will need to be removed.”

quarry pit, mound in background, blue sky
A remnant of historic mining known as Pointy, viewed from the inside of Trelavour pit, Cornwall.
Jamie Hinch, CC BY-NC-ND

Sky tips are the sandy waste mounds formed by the China clay industry. But they are heritage as much as waste. Part of the “Cornish Alps”, the sky tips affectionately known as “Flatty” and “Pointy” are emblems for St Dennis, having loomed above the village since the 19th century.

These sky tips have also loomed over my PhD research, which looks at how local communities are experiencing the UK’s new dawn of mining. As the woman’s reaction exemplifies, strong sentiments attached to Flatty and Pointy mean their future is at the core of local responses to the Trelavour Lithium Project. They had been a source of speculation and contention throughout the eight months I lived in St Dennis in 2024.

Outside of the village, critical minerals are the subject of long overdue excitement. As the UK government prepares to release its new critical minerals strategy, there’s renewed enthusiasm for domestic exploration projects for critical minerals such as lithium, tin and tungsten.

Domestic extraction is increasingly considered by western nations as essential for the security and sustainability of mineral supply chains. The return or reshoring of mining to the UK also promises jobs in regions experiencing the decline of employment opportunities through the loss of industry, including Cornwall’s clay country.

As Cornish Lithium highlights, 300 jobs will be created over the Trelavour Lithium Project’s 20-year operation, plus 800 during the construction phase.

Job creation is appreciated in St Dennis, as is Cornish Lithium’s community fund which provides financial support for the vibrant community groups and initiatives in the area. While I lived in the village, locals often lamented the decline of the clay industry, once the primary employer and centre of the community.

This is one of Cornwall’s most deprived areas. Among some, I found a tempered optimism that lithium could rejuvenate the village.

Yet, it is Flatty and Pointy tempering this optimism. While the Clay Country has long been a shifting landscape of pits and tips, blasting and collapsing hills, and villages coming and going, Flatty and Pointy have seemingly transcended this dynamism. In St Dennis residents’ living memory, they have always been there.

mound of land in background, houses and street in cornish village
The sky tip ‘Flatty’, visible from St Dennis, Cornwall.
Jamie Hinch, CC BY-NC-ND

For some, the sky tips are dangerous, unsolicited waste. For others, they are gatekeepers to a valuable lithium resource. But in St Dennis, Flatty and Pointy represent unprotected heritage, iconic monuments, access to nature, and a wild, unruly playground. They may not be natural, but they’ve become naturalised within this clayscape as a much-loved landmark.

Yet, not removing the sky tips would present an “ongoing safety risk and make the project unviable”, Cornish Lithium explain. This justification makes sense.

But so too does the injustice felt by many in this village where “all the shit gets dumped in St Dennis” is an oft-repeated, ironic slogan. Lithium mining certainly presents opportunities, but with the loss of Flatty and Pointy, locals worry that it might contribute to this area’s demise too.

The hype for reshoring critical minerals extraction cannot wash over it’s very real consequences for local communities and landscapes. These need not be negative by default. If the mourning period for Flatty and Pointy can be sensitively navigated, a new, more sustainable, mining industry can be reinvigorated in tandem with local communities.


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.


The Conversation

Jamie Hinch receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council’s Grand Union Doctoral Training Partnership.

ref. As mining returns to Cornwall, lithium ambitions tussle with local heritage – https://theconversation.com/as-mining-returns-to-cornwall-lithium-ambitions-tussle-with-local-heritage-260525

A new exhibition explores John le Carré’s writing process and what it says about his political conscience

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jessica Douthwaite, Historian and curator, University of Oxford

To what do we owe our conscience? John le Carré once stated that all his fictional characters were, one way or another, navigating a world where duty to self is not necessarily duty to society.

A new exhibition at the Bodleian Library in Oxford explores John le Carré’s conscience – his personal, political and professional visions. Taking a global angle, the exhibition draws on an abundance of archival material bequeathed to the Bodleian Library special collections and made available to researchers, of whom I am one of the first.

The exhibition, which I curated with Professor of Criminology Federico Varese, takes le Carré’s methodology as a starting point, exploring how he built fictions from real events, people and places. Of the nine novels chosen for this exhibition, each sits within a broader global context and each – whether implicitly or explicitly – pursues a political or social debate.




Read more:
John Le Carré: authentic spy fiction that wrote the wrongs of post-war British intelligence


Reading le Carré towards the end of his career it’s hard to believe that he was once viewed as a mouthpiece of the British establishment: the upper class, Oxbridge-educated, writerly former spy. And yet, many fondly remember him in nostalgic sepia tones that hark back to an era of plummy post-war accents, tweed suits and quintessentially British (poorly-executed) spy manoeuvres.

However, as he aged, he was increasingly criticised for being too leftwing and outspoken. This was especially the case with Donald Trump’s first presidency and the Brexit referendum.

Le Carré’s privileged position as one of the UK’s best-known, most profitable spy authors made him a ripe target for criticism. Also, with increased publicising of his real past as a spy, working for both MI5 and MI6, came accusations of hypocrisy.

Despite his misdemeanours, le Carré has always questioned how global systems and structures facilitate immorality, profit the richest, exploit the poorest, promote self-interest, and destroy the liberties that are supposed to constitute a “free” society.

This exhibition showcases items and ephemera that have never been on public display. Visitors can see doodles and notes that reveal the inception of his characters and plots, and last minute amendments that chime with the designs of his book covers. Through photography, field notes, handwritten drafts, correspondence, sketches and illustrations it charts le Carré’s life and times through his practices.

Many have speculated on how his own experiences of betrayal, deceit and secrecy fuelled the imagined worlds of his novels. Yet, beyond those interpretations, while curating this exhibition, I realised that le Carré’s method embodied the political points he wanted to make. His worldview is borne out in the idiosyncrasies of his factual research, acute observations, obsession with accuracy, compulsion to travel and interest in the humans behind the news events.




Read more:
John le Carré’s archivist: papers reveal a painstaking literary craftsman


Le Carré embraced ambiguity: tension caused by ideological, political and romantic conflict was at the heart of the interactions between his characters. This blurring of moral lines was produced in part from the research that he did with expert collaborators. These experts were people who may not have agreed with each other, but through whom le Carré chose to accumulate and amalgamate knowledge in the lead up to drafting his novels.

His network comprised diverse informants, from corporate whistleblowers to humanitarian aid workers. Such breadth of intelligence, gave le Carré an unrivalled insight into the contentions and discord produced by topics like healthcare in the or war developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Weaving real life events with fantasy, le Carré gave equal weight to academic expertise and ordinary experience. Such an approach suggests that to an extent the realities of everyday life mattered more than theory.

His emphasis on interviewing people who knew more than him allowed their stories to reach a much larger audience. He made field trips to experience events and cultures himself. Travel was an exercise in humility, exposing gaps in his knowledge. The act of sharing his work with people for their thoughts and criticism was similarly humbling. Le Carré was glad to be told a description was wrong, a detail inaccurate or a dialogue phoney. He strove for credibility because it underscored the realities of his themes.

The integrity of le Carré’s writing approach was always consistent with his eye for immorality, injustice and lawlessness. Does it matter, then, that with age le Carré became progressively more passionate about the issues he deemed most threatening to global stability: health inequalities, financial transparency, or ethical resource mining, for example?




Read more:
John le Carré, MI6 and the fact and fiction of British secret intelligence


In 2003, le Carré marched with thousands of protestors against the British government’s decision to support the invasion of Iraq and wrote a polemical article in The Times decrying a new era of paranoid American warfare. For some time after the invasion of Afghanistan in 2004, le Carré even refused to visit the United States.

In a memo written around the same time, le Carré jotted down his thoughts on the purpose of a “political novel”, conversely, he wrote, a “non-political novel accepts the status quo”. Though he was thinking specifically of the contemporary moment of America’s foreign affairs, the status quo has always been under attack in his novels; so, in a sense they have all been political.

John le Carré: Tradecraft is open at The Bodleian Library in Oxford from October 1 2025 to April 6 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.


The Conversation

Jessica Douthwaite received funding from the AHRC from 2014-2017 and 2021-2024.

ref. A new exhibition explores John le Carré’s writing process and what it says about his political conscience – https://theconversation.com/a-new-exhibition-explores-john-le-carres-writing-process-and-what-it-says-about-his-political-conscience-264927

Calm in a can? Here’s what the evidence says about the chill-out drink craze

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dipa Kamdar, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacy Practice, Kingston University

Studio Romantic/Shutterstock

In a world that rarely slows down, a new wave of “functional beverages” is promising to help us do exactly that. So-called “chill-out drinks”, marketed as natural stress relievers, are appearing in supermarkets and online stores as a calming alternative to caffeinated energy drinks or alcohol. But do they work and are they safe?

These drinks typically combine herbal extracts, amino acids and adaptogens – compounds believed to help the body cope with stress. Popular ingredients include L-theanine, a naturally occurring amino acid in green tea, ashwagandha, lion’s mane mushroom and CBD (cannabidiol). Each has a different scientific story.

L-theanine has been shown to promote relaxation and reduce stress without causing drowsiness. Research suggests it influences brain chemicals such as serotonin and dopamine while lowering cortisol, the body’s primary stress hormone, creating a sense of calm that doesn’t blunt alertness.

Magnesium, a mineral essential for healthy heart and brain function, has also been linked to better sleep and reduced insomnia. Studies indicate that it supports melatonin production and binds to Gaba receptors, which help quiet nerve activity and promote relaxation. Low magnesium levels have been associated with a higher risk of depression, and several trials hint that supplementation may ease depressive symptoms, though more research is needed.

Ashwagandha, a traditional ayurvedic herb, has been shown in clinical trials to lower cortisol and reduce anxiety, though long-term safety data remain limited. The amounts used in those studies are also higher than the doses typically found in ready-to-drink products.

Lion’s mane, a mushroom native to east Asia, has demonstrated stress-reducing effects in small clinical studies, but the evidence base is still relatively slim.

Another popular ingredient, CBD, the non-psychoactive compound derived from cannabis, has shown early promise in reducing anxiety and stress scores compared with placebo, although large, high-quality trials are still lacking.

Part of the appeal of chill-out drinks is their branding. They present a natural, non-intoxicating way to unwind; designed for regular use without the crash of caffeine or the fog of alcohol. For young professionals or anyone seeking a midday mental reset, the idea of cracking open a can of calm can be tempting. And sometimes the ritual matters as much as the recipe: the very act of slowing down to enjoy a drink can create its own sense of pause.




Read more:
Why do smart people get hooked on wellness trends? Personality traits may play a role


Despite their wholesome image, these beverages are not risk-free. Herbal compounds can interact with prescription medicines or cause side-effects, especially when consumed in high doses or alongside other supplements.

Ashwagandha can interfere with thyroid medications and immunosuppressants. CBD may alter liver enzyme activity and interact with drugs such as antidepressants.

High intakes of magnesium can lead to diarrhoea and may clash with certain antibiotics or osteoporosis medicines. Lion’s mane appears to be well tolerated so far, but researchers still know little about its long-term effects.

Another concern is quality control. The functional beverage market is only lightly regulated, so the potency and purity of ingredients can vary considerably from brand to brand. That’s a particular worry for people who are pregnant, breastfeeding or managing chronic health conditions, and it underscores the importance of checking labels and seeking medical advice before making chill-out drinks part of a daily routine.




Read more:
Do wellness patches work? How to tell the good from the bad


A can of calm may offer a brief sense of relief, but these drinks are no substitute for professional mental health care. Chronic anxiety, depression or ongoing sleep problems require proper diagnosis and treatment. While chill-out drinks might help take the edge off a hectic day, they cannot address the underlying causes of stress.

These beverages tap into a broader wellness trend that reflects our collective desire to slow down and feel better. Their ingredients show some promise and, when used mindfully and in moderation, they may play a small part in managing everyday stress. Just don’t mistake them for a cure-all: a chilled drink can be a pleasant pause, but lasting calm still depends on the habits and support systems that lie beyond the can.

The Conversation

Dipa Kamdar 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. Calm in a can? Here’s what the evidence says about the chill-out drink craze – https://theconversation.com/calm-in-a-can-heres-what-the-evidence-says-about-the-chill-out-drink-craze-263934

As the UK plans to introduce digital IDs, what can it learn from pioneer Estonia?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alex Hardy, Postdoctoral research associate, University of Liverpool

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has announced that all UK citizens and legal residents are to have a mandatory digital ID to prove their right to live and work in the country.

Starmer and Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey have cited Estonia as an example of where digital IDs have proven successful. Davey noted that “times have changed” since the unsuccessful ID card plan under the Blair government.

He also enthused about the liberal Estonian government that had delivered digital IDs while maintaining liberal values. He has now chosen to row back on that position due to pressure from within his party.

The government has, driven by political necessity, led with claims about how the digital ID can minimise illegal working and misuse of public services as it seeks to build a consensus with the public for its plans.

Nevertheless, it needs to navigate concerns from both the political left and right. The Estonian case remains perhaps the leading example of digital ID in Europe, and is a particularly mature case, with more than two decades of success to highlight.

I have a long track record researching the politics of digitalisation, and spent several years living in Estonia. Drawing from that experience, there are various opportunities and pitfalls the UK government needs to be aware of.

Opportunities include enhanced public service delivery through efficiency. No more
arduous need to prove who you are with paper bills, driving licences and different
authentication processes for each service. In Estonia, a technology system, dubbed “X-Road”, allows all relevant organisations to securely interact with digital ID holders.

The UK could potentially emulate this model. It can minimise the grey economy (economic activities that are not taxed or monitored by the government). It can also prevent illegal work and tax avoidance, prevent false benefit claims and speed up interactions with the state.

Digital society

Estonia saves around 2% GDP annually thanks to the use of digital signatures to cut bureaucracy. “E-Estonia” (the Estonian term for their “digital society”) is closely associated with stimulating economic growth by empowering business creation.

Estonia has the highest per capita number of start-up unicorns – tech companies now valued at over US$1 billion (£743 million). Given the UK government’s focus on AI and the tech industry as a way to “turbocharge” the economy, there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the potential for digital IDs in Britain.

Amid widespread scepticism from the left and right, trust can be built through positive experience. If a service works, evidence from Estonia has suggested that it enhances public trust and can be expanded further.

A popular critique is that digital ID represents a security and privacy risk. Of course, any data can be potentially hacked or leaked. However, security and privacy is built into the system in the form of a decentralised data exchange, the X-Road, that provides timestamps and records of access.

This ensures only appropriate people have access to digital ID data and is designed to reassure the user. In Estonia, people can identify themselves in various ways, for example using a physical ID card inserted into a card reader or SmartID – another system for authenticating users online – using a mobile device.

There’s also plenty of evidence that shows this system works well. It can also be complimented by positive experiences once the system is actually working. General research on technological acceptance shows that users judge any given innovation on its perceived usefulness and attitudes toward it.

In Estonia, the public quickly adapted to services that made a demonstrable positive impact. However, Estonia proved that it could work with and adapt the technology at pace.

The UK government has promised to roll out the scheme by the “end of parliament”, which contrasts with Estonia passing a bill in the Riigikogu – Estonia’s unicameral parliament – in 2000, having a working pilot in 2001 and progressing to national deployment on December 17 2001. Ensuring that development does not run over time and budget could enhance trust, perhaps by adapting existing technology.

Transparency vital

Beyond usefulness, transparency is vital. Transparency in how the digital ID will
work, who will be able to access data and accountability for misuse must be carefully considered, communicated and rules rigorously enforced.

Estonia has established strong legislation to this effect and punished those who have broken these laws. It has also been transparent in events of failure. Ultimately, the devil will be in the detail and the success of Britain’s digital ID may be determined as much by politics as by the technology.

Nevertheless, key questions remain around authentication processes (to ensure people are who they say they are) and systems. Who will develop, implement and maintain the project? Crucially, how much will it cost and when will it be ready? The British state has a poor recent record of project delivery generally, including in the realm of major digital investment.

Public spending has frequently run over schedule and over budget. The NHS track and trace app, for example, was extremely costly, not widely used and marred by claims that it did not actually help prevent the spread of Covid-19.

Estonia is far from the only nation using digital ID, and much criticism in the UK relates to ID in general. Many functioning democracies across Europe and beyond
mandate ID in some form, often digitally. This will increase with the EU’s eIDAs (electronic identification, authentication and trust services) 2.0 regulation – which is designed to ensure secure cross-border monetary transactions, with a focus on electronic identification.

Yet in Estonia, users are not mandated to use it by law. In Estonia, you can throw your card in a drawer and not bother with any aspect of the digital state, if you like. Nor do you need to produce it on command.

The lesson from the Baltic nation is that a functional digital ID will not necessarily turn Britain into a police state. But if implemented quickly, efficiently and transparently, it could modernise the British state.

The Conversation

Alex Hardy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

ref. As the UK plans to introduce digital IDs, what can it learn from pioneer Estonia? – https://theconversation.com/as-the-uk-plans-to-introduce-digital-ids-what-can-it-learn-from-pioneer-estonia-266303

Where does the Arab and Muslim world stand on Trump’s Gaza peace plan? Expert Q&A

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Scott Lucas, Professor of International Politics, Clinton Institute, University College Dublin

The US president, Donald Trump, unveiled a 20-point proposal to end the war in Gaza on September 29. The plan proposes an immediate end to the fighting and the release of all Israeli hostages held by Hamas in exchange for hundreds of detained Gazans. It also includes the promise of humanitarian aid for Palestinians and reconstruction in Gaza.

Whether Israel and Hamas ultimately reach a deal remains to be seen. Trump’s proposal has been accepted by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, though it has been rejected by hard-right members of Israel’s governing coalition. Hamas is yet to respond.

More unanimous has been the response of leaders elsewhere in the Arab or Muslim world, who say they are ready to engage with the US to finalise and implement the agreement. We spoke to Scott Lucas, a Middle East expert at Dublin City University, about where these states fit into the peace plan.

Which Arab and Muslim countries support Trump’s peace plan?

Most Arab and Muslim countries are backing the 20-point sketch. Officials from these states reportedly met their US counterparts on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York last week to discuss Trump’s framework to end the war.

The foreign ministers of eight states – Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar and Egypt – then welcomed Trump’s “sincere efforts” towards ending the war in a joint statement on September 29. They asserted their “confidence in his ability to find a path to peace”.

There are multiple reasons for their backing. Arab and Muslim leaders may just want the mass killing of Gaza’s civilians to stop. The Gaza Health Ministry says over 66,000 Palestinians have now been killed since the war began two years ago.

At the same time, they are concerned about regional security. Israel has launched strikes on Lebanon, Syria and Yemen in recent weeks. And it smashed Qatar’s sovereignty on September 9 with an airstrike in the capital, Doha, trying to assassinate Hamas negotiators.

These leaders are not fans of Hamas, with some of them perceiving the organisation as a threat to internal stability in their countries. Privately, they may welcome the degradation of the group. But publicly they have to express solidarity with the Palestinian people.

So, how can these countries curb Israel’s military operations? The approach cannot come directly from them. Even as Qatar was mediating peace talks, Netanyahu’s ministers were declaring that it was a supporter of “terrorism” because of its role in hosting Hamas political leadership. Israel had to be reached through its essential backer: Donald Trump.

Feeding ideas to Trump officials such as his envoy, the real estate developer Steve Witkoff, the Arab and Muslim countries could get some leverage against Netanyahu. And chasing lucrative economic, technological and AI deals with the US, they could play up Trump’s self-declared image of peacemaker.

What role have these states agreed to play as part of the plan?

Like the 20-point sketch, the role of Arab and Muslim states in delivering peace to Gaza is far vaguer than their motives. They would have input into the international “Board of Peace”, nominally headed by Trump, supervising the “temporary, transitional government of Palestinian technocrats”.

They would also be involved in the development of an “international stabilisation force”. The Trump proposal states that this force will train and provide support to vetted Palestinian police forces in Gaza, and will work to secure border areas. But it is unclear if Arab states will contribute security personnel.

There could be economic benefits for these countries from the reconstruction of Gaza with a long-term ceasefire and stability. But those possibilities are unclear in the interim. Trump’s sketch talked only about “the convening of experts with experience in constructing modern Middle East cities” to consider plans “attracting investments and creating jobs”.




Read more:
Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza is deeply flawed but it may be the best offer Hamas can expect


Are these governments out of step with public sentiment in their countries?

Arab and Muslim governments have been manoeuvring between Israel, the US and Palestine for many years. They have also been walking a tightrope between external relationships and their publics.

Chide Israel too strongly and risk the loss of the “normalisation” project, with its economic and political benefits. Appear weak in the face of the Netanyahu government, and risk discontent and a loss of legitimacy with their constituents.

Those calculations have fed into the sketch. For the first time, there is a specific clause that Gazans should not be displaced for the development of Trump’s envisioned “Riviera of the Middle East” or for the vision of Netanyahu’s hard-right ministers of long-term Israeli occupation.

Arab and Muslim officials recently highlighted the danger of those Israeli ministers – and possibly Netanyahu – declaring annexation of the West Bank in response to the march of countries recognising a Palestinian state. The Trump administration responded by telling their Israeli allies that annexation was a red line which could not be crossed.




Read more:
The UK, France, Canada and Australia have recognised Palestine – what does that mean? Expert Q&A


Does the two-state solution remain a red line for the Arab states?

Historically, Arab States have not necessarily put a priority on a two-state resolution. It was the US that propelled the Oslo process, which was supposed to bring about Palestinian self-determination in the form of a Palestinian state, all the way to failure at the Camp David summit in 2000.

Then, in 2002, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia made a proposal for all Arab states to recognise Israel in exchange for its complete withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territories. However, it was the US that again led publicly for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement until another failure in 2009 during the Obama administration.

There has also arguably been more emphasis in recent years among some Arab states on “normalisation” rather than the two-state solution. But Israel’s campaign in Gaza, combined with the Trump administration’s fervent backing of the Netanyahu government, may have altered this.

Arab states have to evaluate if they are going to ride the international wave towards an emphasis on recognition of Palestine as a state. Alongside France, Saudi Arabia led a forum in New York in September on a two-state outcome.

Trump wants more states to normalise relations with Israel, naming Syria, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia as candidates. How likely is this?

This one is easy. The Netanyahu government’s military approach towards Hamas, rather than an emphasis on political and economic measures to isolate the group, has put normalisation beyond the acceptable for Middle Eastern states.

As long as Israel is killing, starving, displacing and dehumanising Gaza’s civilians, the UAE and Bahrain will be cautious about their recognition of Israel in 2020. Any talk of expanding that recognition with other states – despite the bluster of Trump and Netanyahu – is a wish at best.

More likely, it is deceptive politics as Netanyahu banks on Hamas accepting the ultimatum – or having the pretext of a Hamas rejection for even more intense Israeli military operations in Gaza and an occupation for the foreseeable future.

The Conversation

Scott Lucas 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. Where does the Arab and Muslim world stand on Trump’s Gaza peace plan? Expert Q&A – https://theconversation.com/where-does-the-arab-and-muslim-world-stand-on-trumps-gaza-peace-plan-expert-qanda-266393