English – Page 625 – MIL Submissions Engine

September 30, 2025

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

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Martin Kear, Sessional Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

When Australia, France, Britain, Canada and a handful of other Western countries recognised a Palestinian state at the United Nations last week, one of their key stipulations was the wholesale reform of the Palestinian Authority (PA).

After decades of accusations of corruption and misrule, however, this will not be easy.

What is the Palestinian Authority?

The PA was established under the Oslo Accords, negotiated between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and signed with much fanfare in 1993.

Western governments touted the accords as the path to peace in the Middle East through a two-state solution. This would see a Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem alongside the existing Israeli state.

Under the accords, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza would be gradually given increased political autonomy under a newly established Palestinian Authority. The PA was tasked with administering these territories, with the power to raise taxes and hold elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council and presidency.

Crucially, Israel refused to allow the PA to exercise administrative responsibility over Palestinians in East Jerusalem. This was meant to occur after a five-year period when the so-called “final status” issues of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, borders, refugees and security arrangements were to be negotiated.

Since its inception in 1994, the PA has been controlled exclusively by Fatah, the largest Palestinian political faction. Fatah’s chairman, Mahmoud Abbas, has led the PA as president since 2005, even though he was only elected to a four-year term. Fatah has only had control over the West Bank since 2007, after Hamas won elections and took power in Gaza.

Over the past 30 years, Fatah has integrated itself so extensively into the fabric of Palestinian life that some Middle East experts argue it could not survive as a political entity without the power it wields through the PA.

However, Fatah and Abbas are deeply unpopular among Palestinians, who accuse them of systemic corruption, nepotism, clientelism and bureaucratic malfeasance.

Fatah’s diplomatic efforts have been similarly unpopular due to its inability to effectively counter Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem (known collectively as the Occupied Territories), which stymies any chance of Palestinian statehood.

This has created a legitimacy crisis for Fatah and Abbas. According to renowned Palestinian academic Khaled Hroub’s book about the founding of Hamas, many Palestinians will only consider a leader legitimate if they are willing to resist Israeli occupation and advance the cause of Palestinian statehood.

In a recent poll of Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza, for example, just 6% of respondents said they would vote for Abbas in a Palestinian election, compared to 41% who would support Marwan Barghouti, currently serving five life sentences in an Israeli jail. Fifteen percent said they would vote for any Hamas candidate.

Such is Abbas’s unpopularity that 85% of Palestinians surveyed want him to resign. The situation is no better for Fatah, which garnered just 18% support in the poll, compared to 29% for Hamas.

Differing expectations

There are two main reasons for this crisis. Both highlight the myriad intractable problems that Western governments face in pushing for a Palestinian state.

First, Palestinian expectations of the role of the PA are incompatible with the expectations of Israel and the international community.

For Palestinians, the PA is an umbrella institution meant to build the institutional capacity necessary for statehood, provide basic services to Palestinians, and continue resisting Israeli occupation.

For Israelis, the PA is expected to administer Palestinians under its occupation and provide the security to thwart any resistance.

To that end, Fatah received significant international funding when the PA was established to create security agencies to maintain law and order in the Occupied Territories. Later agreements between the PA and Israel centred on ensuring extensive “security cooperation” between the two sides.

Israel also demanded Fatah crush any resistance to its occupation before it would agree to negotiate further on Palestinian statehood. According to researcher Alaa Tartir, when Fatah first tried to reform its security services in 2007, Palestinians viewed this as being less about improving law and order and more about criminalising resistance.

For the international community, the PA is the notional Palestinian “government” and Fatah its preferred negotiating partner in the Middle East peace process purportedly aimed at advancing the two-state solution.

These conflicting expectations have adversely impacted the legitimacy of the PA and Fatah among Palestinians. They are largely seen as ineffective in their primary task of resisting Israeli occupation.

To maintain power in this environment, the PA has become increasingly authoritarian, cracking down on protests. Abbas’ decision in 2021 to postpone elections only further damaged his legitimacy.

Financial pressure

The PA has also been financially reliant on Israel’s continued occupation since its inception.

The Oslo Accords made Israel responsible for collecting taxes from Palestinians and then transferring the revenue to the PA monthly. Israel, however, has long been accused of arbitrarily diverting and withholding this tax revenue.

The PA is also the conduit for international aid to Palestinians. Neither the PA nor Fatah can survive without this aid. This has given the United States – the largest aid donor – significant sway over Palestinian politics, increasing the vulnerability of the PA and Fatah to financial coercion.

For example, in 2018–19, the first Trump administration cut off funding to Fatah’s security agencies and the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides health and education services and infrastructure improvements in the Occupied Territories.

Critics say Trump did this to pressure Fatah to restart negotiations with Israel as part of its Middle East peace plan, despite it being deeply unpopular among Palestinians.

Fatah’s legitimacy and financial problems worsened after Hamas came to power in Gaza. The surprise election result seriously weakened Fatah’s credibility and made it more reliant on Israel and international donors to remain in power.

Can the PA reform itself?

The problem for Fatah is that reforming the PA as per the West’s stipulations means adopting good governance, financial accountability, and free, fair and open elections. This would require Fatah to give up its institutional power. And this, in turn, threatens its viability and identity.

Then there is the issue of Fatah’s leadership. Abbas is nearly 90 years old. With no obvious successor, the PA would likely face significant internal turmoil until a new leader is selected or anointed by Western leaders.

Without a reformed PA free from Fatah’s unilateral control and outside vested interests, any meaningful advancement towards statehood is extremely unlikely.

But after decades of diplomatic intransigence and complicity by Western governments, it’s highly debatable whether genuine reform is even possible.

Martin Kear 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 Palestinian Authority is facing a legitimacy crisis. Can it be reformed to govern a Palestinian state? – https://theconversation.com/the-palestinian-authority-is-facing-a-legitimacy-crisis-can-it-be-reformed-to-govern-a-palestinian-state-263042

September 29, 2025

Moldova: pro-EU party wins majority in election dominated by Russian interference

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

Moldova’s ruling pro-European Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) won slightly more than 50% of the vote in parliamentary elections on September 28, achieving a slim overall majority. It garnered more than twice the number of votes of the main pro-Russian opposition party, Patriotic Bloc, which received just under 25% of the vote.

This result was by no means a foregone conclusion for Moldova. President Maia Sandu of PAS had warned repeatedly about the high stakes in an election that witnessed unprecedented interference by Russia. This included recruiting orthodox priests to sway voters towards supporting pro-Russian political parties.

The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, welcomed the result. She wrote on X: “You made your choice clear: Europe. Democracy. Freedom.”

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, echoed this sentiment. In a social media post, he said the “elections showed that Russia’s destabilising activity loses, while Moldova in Europe wins”.

Sandu’s party, as expected, did well in the diaspora vote. Almost 80% of these votes were cast in its favour. But it also beat the Patriotic Bloc convincingly in the vote in Moldova, with 44% compared with 28%. The party’s vote in absolute numbers also held steady in the Russian-controlled breakaway region of Transnistria, despite low voter turnout there.

Turnout in the elections was low in general, not just in Transnistria. Just over 52% of eligible voters went to the polling stations. This is slightly higher than in the three previous parliamentary elections in October 2019, March 2020 and July 2021. But it is below the turnout in the second round of the 2024 presidential election that gave Sandu a second term in office.

In one way or another, all of these elections were critical. And the fact that only around half of Moldova’s electorate cast a vote indicates a degree of resignation and frustration with the state of politics in the country.

The results of the September 28 elections, like those in the 2024 referendum on whether the country should pursue EU membership and in the 2024 presidential elections, also reflect the longstanding and – by most accounts – deepening polarisation in Moldova between the pro-European and pro-Russian camps.

The largest vote share went to parties that are either clearly pro-European or pro-Russian, with PAS and Patriotic Bloc gathering almost 75% of the total vote between them. This left little space for parties that, at least according to their election platforms, tried to attract voters favouring a balance between these two ends of the political spectrum in Moldova.

The fact that Sandu’s party achieved an overall – and only slightly reduced – majority indicates that its support base has held up well amid Russian election interference. Its support has also seemingly remained despite the serious economic problems Moldova has faced for many years, but especially since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

PAS finds itself in a slightly weaker position compared to after the 2021 parliamentary elections. However, achieving more than 50% of the vote – and probably gaining 55 seats in the 101-seat parliament – is a remarkable achievement for Sandu’s party in these circumstances.

It demonstrates the growth of support for the country’s European path among the voting population. A decade ago, in November 2014, pro-European parties gained a mere 44% of the total votes cast in Moldova’s parliamentary elections. And while they still had the edge over pro-Russian parties then, they were mired in scandals and far from united.

The outcome of the September 28 vote, as well as of the 2024 presidential elections, also demonstrates the limits of Russia’s influence campaigns. Russian plots to destabilise Moldova have a long history and were in evidence in the run-up to the elections.

Moscow reportedly trained dozens of Moldovans in destabilisation tactics in Serbia, while also spending millions of euros on vote buying and disinformation. Despite these efforts, Russia has not been able to turn Moldova into a country in which a majority of the population want to halt the turn towards Europe.

This is not to deny that many Moldovans rightly fear the consequences of Russia’s war against Ukraine and the dangers of it spilling over into Moldova via the Transnistrian region, where Russia still has a small contingent of troops and retains significant political influence. But rather than seeking to appease the aggressor, many Moldovans have indicated at the ballot box that they are willing to stand up to the Kremlin.

Strong EU support

The fact that Moldova weathered these storms is also due to the strong support the country has received from the EU. The leaders of France, Germany and Poland travelled to the Moldovan capital, Chișinău, at the end of August to demonstrate their support for Sandu. And the European Commission mobilised cybersecurity experts to assist Moldova in fighting Russia’s election interference campaign.

Beyond the specifics of election support, the EU has also made significant financial support available to Moldova – €1.2 billion (£1.1 billion) between 2021 and 2025 and €1.9 billion under its reform and growth facility between 2025 and 2027. This has helped both Moldova and Transnistria avert the worst of successive energy crises.

This support by the EU in the here and now, rather than the distant promise of a brighter future inside the bloc, has been a key factor in paving the way to Sandu’s victory in the parliamentary elections. Where Russia offers endless cycles of death and destruction in neighbouring Ukraine and threatens the integrity of Moldova’s democracy and economy, the EU has been willing to support the country and its people on their path to the European future that they have clearly chosen for themselves.

That pro-European forces in Moldovan society have prevailed in the face of an intense Russian interference campaign is an important signal well beyond Moldova. It will be noted with significant relief not only in Chișinău, but also in Kyiv, Brussels and other European capitals.

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

– ref. Moldova: pro-EU party wins majority in election dominated by Russian interference – https://theconversation.com/moldova-pro-eu-party-wins-majority-in-election-dominated-by-russian-interference-266179

September 29, 2025

Curve Lake’s day school history reveals Indigenous activism in the face of colonial schooling

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jackson Pind, Assistant Professor, Indigenous Methodologies, Chanie Wenjack School of Indigenous Studies, Trent University

Chief Elsie Knott, the first female chief of a First Nation in Canada, disliked the Indian Day School system from her own childhood experiences and wanted something better for the next generation.

As chief of what’s now called Curve Lake First Nation, 25 kilometres northeast of Peterborough, Ont., she bought a retired hearse. Knott used it to drive children from Curve Lake to the public school in Lakefield, Ont. That eventually became a community-run bus service that still operates to this day.

Image showing a wooden school desk with words students by day overtop. — ‘Students By Day: Colonialism and Resistance at the Curve Lake Day School,’ by Jackson Pind.
(Queen’s/McGill Press)

This was one of many powerful stories I encountered in researching my book Students by Day: Colonialism and Resistance at the Curve Lake Indian Day School.

This is the first Ontario book to focus on the history of an Indian Day School, an institution that shaped the lives of generations of Indigenous children but has received little attention compared to residential schools.

This book grew out of my doctoral research, but it was also built on years of working directly with Survivors, families and community leaders in Curve Lake First Nation.

The stories and archival records reveal not only the harms of day schooling, but also the persistence, creativity and resistance of a community determined to care for its children despite the colonial system imposed upon them.

Gaps about colonial schooling

Most Canadians have at least heard of residential schools, but far fewer know about day schools. Yet more Indigenous children attended day schools than residential schools.

These institutions operated in communities across the country, run by churches and funded by the federal government. They combined underfunded education with assimilationist policies designed to erase Indigenous languages, cultures and governance systems.

The federal settlement for day school Survivors was only finalized in 2019, over a decade after the residential school settlement.

Even today, there has been no formal apology from the churches involved, and no commission of inquiry dedicated to day schools. That gap in public understanding is what motivated me to write Students by Day.

Researching with Curve Lake

I grew up with ties to Curve Lake First Nation and began this project with the support of then-Chief Emily Whetung and council in 2020. With their guidance, I worked through roughly 10,000 archival files at Library and Archives Canada and paired that record with oral histories from Survivors who wanted their stories told.

Like many researchers during COVID-19, I adapted when in-person visits were no longer possible. But when I could return to Curve Lake, five Survivors came forward to share their stories. Their courage and generosity in speaking publicly about difficult experiences made this book possible.

The archives are full of letters from Curve Lake dating back to the 19th century, demanding better pay for teachers, requesting Indigenous teachers and even asking for their own school boards. Leaders actively worked within the constraints of the system to make schooling serve their people as best as possible.

Stories of resistance

What emerged from the research is not only a record of harm but also of resilience.

A letter written by an Indian agent in the 1920s complained:

“[O]ne of the chief holdbacks of the Chemong (Curve Lake School) is the determination of parents to stick to their own language, with a few expectations. They are quite jealous of it, and and will not favour the use of English by the children when at play.”

Parents constantly resisted the imposition of English-only language education and instead fostered the Ansihinaabeowin language outside of the school.

This kind of community-organized resistance complicates the narrative of Indigenous schooling as one of only trauma. While lasting harm did occur, there were also acts of agency, resilience and a vision to keep their culture into the future.

Reconciliation with Day School Survivors

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission called attention to inequities in education. While today, Curve Lake’s school for children has been locally operated since the early 1980s, funding formulas still leave First Nation schools grossly underfunded in comparison to their peers in the provincial education system.

The federal government has begun digitizing over six million Day School documents, with about 800,000 already accessible. These resources will be invaluable to communities seeking to recover their histories.

As part of the 2019 class-action settlement with Indian Day School Survivors, a $200 million legacy fund was created for healing, language revitalization, commemoration and truth telling.

However, there is still lots of work to be done across the country in examining the lasting impacts of these institutions within First Nation communities.

As Survivors remind us, reconciliation is not just about documents or apologies. It’s about action. Understanding the role of Indian Day Schools, listening to Survivors and addressing ongoing inequalities are all part of Canada’s unfinished work.

Jackson Pind receives funding from the Social Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Curve Lake’s day school history reveals Indigenous activism in the face of colonial schooling – https://theconversation.com/curve-lakes-day-school-history-reveals-indigenous-activism-in-the-face-of-colonial-schooling-265711

September 29, 2025

Trump administration is on track to cut 1 in 3 EPA staffers by the end of 2025, slashing agency’s ability to keep pollution out of air and water

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Elizabeth Blum, Professor of Environmental History, Troy University

Environmental Protection Agency staff and contractors are often involved in large cleanups of toxic waste, such as after the Los Angeles fires of early 2025. Mario Tama/Getty Images

As Congress faces a Sept. 30, 2025, deadline to fund the federal government, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin has put the EPA on the chopping block. But even before Congress decides about the administration’s recommendations to slash its staff, the EPA’s political leaders have made even more significant cuts to the agency’s workforce.

And a look at past efforts to cut EPA staff shows how rapidly those changes can affect Americans’ health and the environment.

Using publicly available government databases and a collection of in-depth interviews with current and former EPA employees, the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative, a group of volunteer academics that we are a part of, has begun to put some numbers behind what many have suspected. Zeldin’s cuts have diminished the EPA’s staffing levels, even before Congress has had a chance to weigh in, affecting the environment, public health and government transparency.

People hold signs saying 'There's no Planet B,' 'Save the U.S. EPA' and other messages. — EPA employees protest cuts to the agency.
Brett Phelps/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

How many people are being let go?

Precise numbers of staffing cuts are hard to pin down, but their historic scale in the first eight months of this administration is unmistakable. Released in May, Zeldin’s budget proposal for the fiscal year starting October 2025 proposed to cut 1,274 full-time-equivalent employee positions from a total of 14,130 in the year ending Sept. 30, 2025 – a 9% drop.

A July 18, 2025, press release from the EPA said the agency had already cut 23% of its personnel, terminating the employment of 3,707 of 16,155 employees. Using employees – the number of people – rather than full-time equivalents makes these numbers difficult to compare directly with EPA’s budget proposals.

Combining EPA data on staffing changes with conservative estimates of the pending cuts, the initiative has calculated that 25% of EPA staff are already out of the agency.

That calculation does not include other announced cuts, including a third round of deferred resignations taking effect at the end of September 2025 and December 2025. Those cuts may see the departure of similar numbers of full-time equivalents as in the past two rounds – approximately 500 and 1,500.

The agency has also reportedly planned to be cutting as much as two-thirds of research staff.

With those departure figures included, the initiative estimates that approximately 33% of staffers at the agency when Trump took office will be gone by the end of 2025. That would leave, at the start of 2026, an EPA staff numbering approximately 9,700 people, a level not seen since the last years of the Nixon and Ford administrations.

These cuts are deeper than past efforts to shrink the size of the agency. In his first term, Trump proposed eliminating 21.4% of staff at the EPA, though Congress made no significant changes to the agency’s staffing. The largest actual cut to EPA staffing was under President Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s: He advocated for a 17.3% drop in staffing, although Congress held the cuts to 10%.

Effects of past cuts

In the past, cuts to the EPA caused problems and were reversed – but it took years.

The staffing and budget cuts that came during the first two years of the Reagan administration generated problems with meeting the agency’s responsibilities.

For instance, rather than prosecute industry for polluting, Reagan’s EPA Administrator Anne Gorsuch told business leaders she would ignore their violations of environmental laws. Remaining staff were convinced that working on enforcement cases would be a “black mark” on their records.

Another top political appointee at Reagan’s EPA, Rita Lavelle, who headed the Superfund effort to clean up toxic sites, faced prison time for her official acts. She was convicted of perjury and obstructing a congressional investigation because she lied about her ties to a former employer who had polluted the Stringfellow Acid Pits, a Superfund site near Riverside, California.

A person holds a clear jar of liquid while sitting on the ground in an area covered by rocks and dirt. — A man holds a jar of contaminated water from the stream flowing out of the Stringfellow Acid Pits in California in February 1983.
Bill Nation/Sygma via Getty Images

In the wake of the scandal, Lavelle was fired and Gorsuch and more than a dozen other political appointees resigned.

In a later report on the issue, Congress accused Gorsuch, Lavelle and others of poor job performance, noting that after four years of Superfund work, “only six of the 546 … of the most hazardous sites in the Nation have been cleaned up.” The Stringfellow site, a focus of the investigation, was “threatening the health and safety of 500,000 people,” the report noted.

With anger over the scandals from both Americans and Congress, Reagan reversed course and spent the remaining six years of his presidency building the EPA back up in both staffing and budget. Staffing, for example, increased from a low of 10,481 full-time-equivalent employees in 1982 to 15,130 in 1989. Reagan’s EPA budget, which had fallen to US$4.1 billion in 1984, increased to $4.9 billion in 1989.

The existing Trump cuts, and those proposed – if enacted by Congress – would be deeper than Reagan’s, reducing the number of people doing important research on environmental harms and the health effects of dangerous chemicals; suing companies who pollute the environment; and overseeing the cleanup of toxic sites.

Elizabeth (Scout) Blum is affiliated with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative. She has received funding from EDGI.

Chris Sellers previously received funding from the National Science Foundation on a project that partly involved research into the EPA’s history.

– ref. Trump administration is on track to cut 1 in 3 EPA staffers by the end of 2025, slashing agency’s ability to keep pollution out of air and water – https://theconversation.com/trump-administration-is-on-track-to-cut-1-in-3-epa-staffers-by-the-end-of-2025-slashing-agencys-ability-to-keep-pollution-out-of-air-and-water-265249

September 29, 2025

Governments, universities and non-profits must work together to safeguard Canada’s lakes and rivers

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By David Barrett, Research Associate, Aquatic Science, Faculty of Science, University of Calgary

Recent reports of proposed federal government spending cuts to water monitoring and research strike a particularly ominous note for Canada’s Prairies.

The government is considering significant reductions to programs, specifically within the Canada Water Agency, that could severely impact the science and research capabilities of federal government scientists.

The federal government has a history of successfully applying water research in the Prairies through programs like the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, the Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices and the National Freshwater Science Agenda led by the Canada Water Agency.

However, federally led research initiatives may be at risk if funding is cut. This fiscal uncertainty comes at a particularly challenging time.

Semi-arid regions in Western Canada, such as the Prairies, are already facing changing mountain seasonal snowpack and ice conditions, increasing droughts and floods, and shifting growing seasons.

Uncertainties related to water availability and quality affect the livelihoods of many as well as the sustainability of ecosystems. They can also impact the agriculture industry that contributes more than $3 billion annually to Alberta’s GDP alone.

While sustained federal investment remains crucial, the path forward requires a nimbler, collaborative and applied research model. Universities, research and advocacy organizations and non-profit groups should work co-operatively and strategically to leverage their respective expertise and resources.

The Prairie reality: drought and deluge

a river flows through a green rocky area — The Milk River flows through Writing-on-Stone Provincial Park in southern Alberta in May 2024.
(David Barrett)

The hydroclimatic conditions in the Prairies have always been about extremes, and this variability is likely to increase with climate change.

Though a wet spring and early summer have helped address previous long-term drought conditions in southern Alberta, northern areas in the province such as Greenview and Grand Prairie have had to grapple with drought conditions.

This paradox of scarcity and surplus creates a massive management challenge. How do provinces store enough water from a brief, intense spring melt to last through a long, dry summer? How do farmers adapt their practices to this increased variability? Are the existing forecast models adequate to make informed decisions?

Answering these questions requires consistent, credible data and innovative research that could potentially be at risk with the proposed funding cuts. Without relevant and timely data, water managers, researchers and agricultural producers are flying blind.

In Alberta, the government has undertaken initiatives and investments such as large-scale irrigation expansion projects and broader community engagement to better prepare the province for future water availability risks. These initiatives rely on foundational work done under a suite of funding programs.

Diversifying research support

Facing the dual challenge of diminishing funding and increasing climate risks, the Prairies must build a more resilient research ecosystem by diversifying funding and expertise across three interconnected pillars.

Prairie universities are powerhouses of fundamental and policy-relevant research. Initiatives include the United Nations University Hub at the University of Calgary, the University of Saskatchewan’s Global Institute for Water Security and the Climate-Smart Agriculture and Food Systems Initiative at the University of Lethbridge.

These university-led initiatives play a key role in developing the scientific understanding to mitigate and adapt to a changing climate and develop new technologies and science-informed solutions.

Considering fiscal uncertainty, these institutions must increasingly pursue targeted, policy-driven, partnered research initiatives with governments and agricultural stakeholders, creating a more stable funding foundation for essential work that federal programs alone may no longer support.

Collaboration with universities can significantly leverage research funding and expertise while also helping bridge the prevalent gap between scientific research and policymaking.

Organizations like Results Driven Agricultural Research and farmer-led research and advocacy groups enable on-the-ground testing of lab-generated solutions. Their strength lies in working directly with farmers.

They also are nimble and adaptive, enabling them to respond to emerging priorities and identify emerging policy and research opportunities. This sector is critical for testing, evaluation and adoption.

Alberta Innovates operates on a similar mandate: to strengthen the pipeline from university labs to applied research hubs and ensure innovations make it to the field.

Organizations like Alberta’s Watershed Planning and Advisory Councils and farming Smarter Association are also critical to this three-pronged approach.

They engage directly with landowners, facilitate stewardship programs, undertake local water quality monitoring and act as trusted brokers between competing water users. Their grassroots nature makes them ideal partners for universities and governments seeking to apply research where it matters most.

The way forward

Relying on any single source of research funding for a resource as critical as water is a strategic vulnerability. By fostering a diversified and integrated model that leverages the distinct strengths of academia, applied agriculture and community stewardship, the Prairie provinces can build research resiliency.

By building a collaborative research network focused on the semi-arid regions of Western Canada, there is an opportunity to continue pursuing applied research objectives that answer emerging policy and management concerns.

This approach won’t replace the need for strong federal leadership and investment. But it can create a robust network capable of weathering fiscal and climatic storms. The Prairies must come together to protect our most critical resource — the water that defines our landscape, economy and future.

David Barrett is currently running as a councillor candidate in Calgary’s 2025 municipal election. He has previously received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Government of Alberta and the City of Calgary.

Frederick John Wrona receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the University of Calgary Svare Research Chair endowment and Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Juhi Huda works for the Simpson Centre for Food and Agricultural Policy at the University of Calgary which receives funding from the Government of Alberta and the Bank of Montreal.

– ref. Governments, universities and non-profits must work together to safeguard Canada’s lakes and rivers – https://theconversation.com/governments-universities-and-non-profits-must-work-together-to-safeguard-canadas-lakes-and-rivers-265368

September 29, 2025

RuPaul’s Drag Race: how mainstream drag is losing its political, activist and community focus

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chris Greenough, Professor of Social Sciences, Edge Hill University

As UK fans prepare to sit down for the seventh series of RuPaul’s Drag Race UK, it is worth asking what the competition format really offers drag. Since first airing in the US in 2009, Drag Race has grown into a global brand.

RuPaul has achieved global drag domination with 20 localised versions, bringing the total number of contestants worldwide to over 600. The series has brought drag unprecedented visibility. Yet across these platforms, the same issues of representation keep appearing.

My work with performer and researcher Mark Edward traces how drag has been used to fight censorship, challenge colonial law, mobilise against AIDS, critique apartheid and demand trans liberation.

It does seem like overt politics and activism are not seen as “sellable”. Mass appeal and commercial viability must be a concern when there is a whole series of linked product lines, tours, cosmetics, podcasts, merchandise, conventions and brand endorsements. The Conversation contacted the production company behind Ru Paul’s Drag Race, World of Wonder, for comment but it did not respond.

Yet beyond the show, drag performers continue to lead activist initiatives. Black and brown queens have drawn attention to systemic racism, while others have used drag for causes such as the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, drag nuns, who campaign for sexual health and HIV awareness. Or performers campaigning for environmental concerns and veganism.

Drag Race also represents, recognises and rewards certain kinds of drag over others. Across its franchises, queens (note, only queens and not kings) who embody a polished, high-femme aesthetic tend to flourish. Contestants who work outside these conventions, whether through performance art, body non-conformity or alternative drag, often struggle to be recognised.

Drag kings, assigned female at birth (AFAB) performers and trans and non-binary performers are absent or under-represented from the show’s casting and representation. Drag researcher Ami Pomerantz writes about the tokenism in the selection of fat performers on the show. While, political scientist Ash Kayte Stokoe discusses representations of ethnicity and prejudice against non-native speakers of English across the competitions.

Disabled performers are also largely absent. When they do appear, disability is often hidden, downplayed or framed as personal struggle. In the US series, Yvie Oddly waited until halfway through season 11 to reveal her hypermobility condition. Tamisha Iman (US season 13) competed with an ostomy bag following cancer treatment. In the UK, Ginny Lemon (UK season 2) explained their fibromyalgia prevented them from wearing heels, and later left the show.

But outside of the show, there are disabled performers such as Drag Syndrome the world’s first drag troupe featuring drag artists with Down’s syndrome.

Drag has been about transcending and parodying rigid gender structures and in the wider drag world there is more diversity to be found. For instance, The Boulet Brothers’ Dragula has presented itself as an alternative to such performances, celebrating horror and filth.

Drag theorist Nick Cherryman describes tranimal perfomers, those who use interpretive, animalistic, and post-modern expressions of drag to transcend the human-animal binary.

Drag has long been sustained by community. In 18th-century Britain, molly houses like Mother Clap’s in Holborn, London, gave gay men and gender-nonconforming people space to parody rituals, gossip and bond. They often called each other “mother” and “daughter” – a precursor to today’s drag families. A century later, New York’s ballroom scene created chosen families led by house mothers such as Pepper LaBeija, offering shelter to youth rejected elsewhere.

The competition format of Drag Race reorders these priorities. Performers in competition, weekly eliminations, cliffhanger edits and rivalries are formatted for television, not for community.

The problem is structural. Television formats demand tension, pacing and clear winners. What gets lost is drag’s ethos of kinship and solidarity.

The contrast is clear. On television, activism is transformed into digestible content, stripping drag of the radical force it historically carried. Off screen, it remains a daily practice of protest and survival for LGBTQ+ communities.

The impact of RuPaul’s Drag Race is undeniable. It has made certain forms of drag visible and popular. Yet, drag’s visibility should not be confused with representation. By privileging certain aesthetics and the dominance of queens, the competition format constrains as much as it celebrates.

As season seven of the UK franchise begins, viewers will once again enjoy the glamour and talent of British queens. But the bigger question lingers across the franchise: can drag on television hold onto its diversity and political edge?

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.

Chris Greenough 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. RuPaul’s Drag Race: how mainstream drag is losing its political, activist and community focus – https://theconversation.com/rupauls-drag-race-how-mainstream-drag-is-losing-its-political-activist-and-community-focus-266011

September 29, 2025

No more resets, reboots and reshuffles: brand experts on why Labour now needs a total overhaul

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Christopher Pich, Associate Professor in Marketing, University of Nottingham

Labour is holding its 2025 conference against a backdrop of Andy Burnham, mayor of Manchester, calling for “wholesale change”. Burnham is making a clear attempt to use the government’s record of scandal, u-turn and general identity crisis as fuel for his own leadership bid. But he is far from alone in attacking Keir Starmer’s Labour for lacking ideological clarity.

Starmer and his team have repeatedly tried to reset the party’s image, reframe its message, and reassure voters that Labour represents competence, stability and pragmatic change. These efforts have amounted to two of the three classic branding strategies: brand repair and brand reboot.

Labour has so far stopped short of the third and most consequential option: a full brand overhaul. But this is precisely what is now required. Surface-level resets and tactical communication tweaks cannot solve a deeper problem: voters remain unclear about Labour’s ideological core, its long-term vision, and its promise to UK voters.

Unless the party embraces a bold, comprehensive rebranding strategy – one that redefines who it is, what it stands for, and why it matters – Labour’s historic return to power risks becoming a short-lived chapter rather than the foundation of a durable political future.

In politics, as in business, repairing a brand involves rebuilding trust by returning to old positioning – in Labour’s case, competence and accountability – and apologising for past mistakes. This approach often involves messaging changes, policy tweaks or symbolic gestures.

Rebooting entails shifting the narrative, such as toward innovation, younger voters or new priorities, even if it risks alienating some traditional supporters.

Brand replacement (the overhaul option) means launching a fundamental rebrand with a new narrative, visual identity, messaging platform – and possibly leadership. This would be a radical reset aimed at shedding old baggage and redefining what the party stands for.

The resets and reboots to date

To be fair to Starmer, he hasn’t sat by idly in the face of this problem. He has attempted to recapture and rearticulate his political brand.

A reset strategy emerged in May, following the dismal results of England’s local elections and Labour’s defeat to Reform UK in the Runcorn byelection. The reset was designed to reassure voters that Starmer understood why people had turned away from the party at the polls. In an attempt to clarify his message, he vowed to go “further and faster” in delivering change.

However, it had little impact in reviving the fortunes of the Labour brand. Voters remained unconvinced the party could address deep-rooted societal issues.

This initial reset strategy, an attempt at a classic form of brand repair, failed for a simple reason: it was too superficial. Rather than articulating a bold new direction, the messaging focused narrowly on “delivery” and competence, without addressing deeper questions about identity or purpose.

Resetting the message does little if the audience no longer trusts the messenger. Voters weren’t rejecting Starmer for being unclear about logistics – they were rejecting a party that still hadn’t told them who it was and what it believed in.

Starmer had to bring forward the implementation of the second rebranding strategy in the wake of the downfall of the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner: a brand reboot in mid-September. Broader than the repair-reset strategy, this involved an attempt to clarify Labour’s message, communicating clear dividing lines with its political competitors including Reform and the Conservatives.

Starmer wanted to demonstrate he had the answers to the big issues of concern to the British public: immigration, welfare and the cost of living. This was supported by a cabinet reshuffle, which sought to demonstrate that the most effective ministers with the right personalities were in charge to “deliver, deliver, deliver”.

However, news of this reboot was quickly drowned out by fresh controversy around the now sacked UK-US Ambassador Peter Mandelson, who had been close friends with Jeffrey Epstein.

Go big or go home

In truth, neither of these previous efforts represented a real reset or reboot in the branding sense. Both were reactive attempts to contain crises and manage headlines. They were not proactive efforts to rebuild the party’s underlying narrative architecture.

A full overhaul would be risky, but may now be the only option left. And Labour has been here before. Between 1992 and 1997, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown implemented a major rebrand of Labour – and secured three election wins.

In business, a full brand overhaul is typically done when an organisation wants to fundamentally change how it is perceived, or reach out to an entirely different customer base. International brands to have taken this path include Airbnb, Burberry, Shell and Altria (formerly Phillip Morris), as well as Facebook, which shifted to being Meta, and Dunkin’ Donuts, which became simply Dunkin’.

Sometimes, a full brand overhaul strategy is adopted to respond to deep crises, to rebuild after failed resets, or to modernise. It must include both style and substance.

The risk is that a total overhaul can alienate parts of the existing customer base and create internal divisions. It can spark accusations of inauthenticity or opportunism.

But these risks can be mitigated if the brand overhaul is grounded in genuine substance, not just cosmetic changes. For Labour, that means linking it to real policy priorities, and communicating consistently and transparently about what the party stands for.

Labour keeps repainting the walls but the foundations are crumbling. A meaningful overhaul would begin with articulating a clear, values-driven vision for Britain that goes beyond technocratic “delivery” to offer a sense of purpose and direction.

It would involve aligning party messaging, policy and leadership around this vision, so that every communication reinforces the same story. And it would see leadership involving party members, communities and voters in the process – turning a top-down rebrand into a collaborative renewal. Done right, a bold reimagining of Labour’s identity could not only restore trust, but secure its place as the natural party of government for a generation.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. No more resets, reboots and reshuffles: brand experts on why Labour now needs a total overhaul – https://theconversation.com/no-more-resets-reboots-and-reshuffles-brand-experts-on-why-labour-now-needs-a-total-overhaul-266127

September 29, 2025

How can Europe fight back against incursions by drone aircraft?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matthew Powell, Teaching Fellow in Strategic and Air Power Studies, University of Portsmouth

An increasing number of drones have been spotted around Denmark’s airports in recent weeks. The most recent incidents around Aalborg and Billund airport caused considerable disruption followed as scheduled flights were prevented from landing or taking off.

These incidents follow several others, including at Copenhagen Airport. This is similar to the disruption that was experienced around London Gatwick airport in 2023, again causing widespread disruption.

In addition to drones being spotted around civilian airports, there have also been sightings around military airbases where the Danish F-16 and F-35 combat aircraft are based.

A civilian drone flights have been banned for a week in advance of a European Union summit in Copenhagen on October 1.

Given the widespread disruption that has been caused, questions are now being raised about what can be done to either suppress or destroy drones and prevent future attacks. There is also a risk to civilian aircraft from mid-air collisions with the drones and the potential for civilian deaths and injuries.

The Danish government has claimed that these most recent drone flights have been conducted by someone trying to spread fear among the Danish population. There have also been claims that they are part of wider Russian hybrid operations, which aims to disrupt Danish defence.

Suspicions of increased Russian activity has been fostered by an increasing number of incursions by drones into several other nations’ airspace This is something that has been strenuously denied by the Kremlin.

Lasers, bullets and missiles

Ukrainian forces have used fishing nets to try to catch Russian drones deployed against their positions. Some drones have even been engineered to fire nets in a bid to snag other drones.

Another way of reducing or removing this relatively new threat is to directly shoot down the drones that are around the airspace of airports and airbases. This could potentially be done with combat aircraft, but also with high-powered lasers. But this is not as straightforward as it sounds.

One of the biggest challenges in taking this action is that it usually requires new legislation to be passed by national parliaments. Even with emergency legislation this can take time, meaning that it is not the immediate response to the threat that is clearly necessary. Similar legislation to that being considered by the Danish parliament was passed in the UK in 2018.

But once legislation has been passed the challenges do not end. Given the relatively small size of the drones causing the disruption, they can often be very difficult to target through traditional military means. Even if drones can be targeted, an additional risk is then posed – when a drone is shot out of the sky, there is little control over its trajectory as it falls to earth.

Once destroyed, it could easily land on airport infrastructure, on civilian property or in a worst-case scenario on people, causing injury or death.

Decisions whether to target drones causing this disruption must therefore be taken after a great deal of thought and consideration,. But other methods are available and new technologies are being developed that may provide more effective solutions in the future.

Jamming technology

Instead of using so-called kinetic methods to physically destroy drones that are posing this problem, the use of jamming technology could be used to disrupt the communications link between the drone and the operator. As with kinetic attack, this response poses the challenge of what happens to the drone itself once the signal has been jammed and it falls out of the sky.

There are, however, several advantages to this approach. The first and most important advantage is that jamming can work for relatively long distances. This, disincentivises further attacks as, in theory at least, any drone being flown cannot get within sufficient range to cause the level of disruption that has been seen in Denmark.

In addition to this, the lack of physical destruction from kinetic engagement means that, in theory at least, the drone can be recovered and information about its operation and whether it is a civilian or military asset can be discovered.

But using jamming technology to prevent drones from flying around civilian airports and military airbases has its own drawbacks. Jamming technology, as it is currently exists, cannot be targeted against individual aircraft. This means that any other aircraft within the vicinity of the airport or airbase where jamming technology is being used is also vulnerable to disruption. Due to this, closure of airspace would still be required to remove the threat of the drone, but this should be for a vastly reduced amount of time than is currently required.

There are, however, potential future technologies that might be incorporated into the defence of civilian airports and military airspaces. One such technology is currently being developed by the Royal Navy and has been named DragonFire. This uses the power of a long-range laser to physically destroy a drone in the sky from distances of up to three miles.

A further technology that is being developed by the British army, is jamming technology that can be directed on to targets with greater precision than is currently available outside of the British military.

These new technologies will take time to be widely used in civilian applications. So the sort of disruption we’ve been seeing lately will probably continue in the near future.

Matthew Powell 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. How can Europe fight back against incursions by drone aircraft? – https://theconversation.com/how-can-europe-fight-back-against-incursions-by-drone-aircraft-266256

September 29, 2025

Port Talbot, one year on: steelworks closure shows why public is losing trust in net zero

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nicholas Beuret, Lecturer in Management and Ecological Sustainability, University of Essex

The rolling mills are still working, but the furnaces are long cold. Of the 4,000 people previously employed at the steel mill in Port Talbot, Wales, only half still work there. Despite union protests and local rallies, one year ago on September 30 2024, the plant’s last coal-burning blast furnace was shut down.

This ended more than a century of steelmaking in the UK’s biggest plant – one of the largest in Europe. The owner, Tata Steel, blamed high energy prices and competition from cheaper Chinese steel, claiming ongoing losses of around £1 million a day. It warned the plant would close entirely unless the UK government stepped in to help replace its ageing furnaces with lower-emissions electric arc furnaces.

Steel manufacture contributes around 7% of global climate emissions, and Port Talbot alone accounted for 1.5% of the UK total. Faced with the choice between the closure of the mill and supporting its transition to greener production, the government committed £500 million to this transition.

Tata Steel then announced 2,800 job losses – around one in ten jobs in the town of 35,000. Up to 9,500 more could be lost in the supply chain and broader sector.

This is not how successive governments have sold the transition to a net zero economy. Both Labour and the Conservatives promised net zero would create skilled, well-paid work that would not only make up for losses elsewhere, but generate economic growth and lower bills.

Some data suggests they were right: the UK’s net zero sector is growing far faster than the rest of the economy at 10% per year, and already supports close to 700,000 jobs.

However, polling shows only about one in five voters think the energy transition will create jobs in their area, while only one in three think the transition will have a positive impact on jobs anywhere in the UK.

So why does no one believe the politicians? And where are the jobs?

A series of betrayals

Partly this is about geography. Old centres of industry like Port Talbot are struggling to retain jobs, while net zero businesses tend to be far more dispersed nationally, with many in London and the south-east. As the transition progresses, industrial towns will feel even more abandoned.

The jobs themselves are also different. Many new net zero jobs are in installation, waste processing and other services, often for small businesses and with worse working conditions than those that predominate in heavy industry.

Even within heavy industry, low-carbon technologies tend to mean fewer jobs, as greener versions generally employ fewer workers. Electric furnaces need less labour than coal-burning furnaces, for instance. Facilities tend to be more automated, and supply chains are shorter.

And where there could be a pipeline from fossil fuel jobs to renewable industries, as in Scotland, most workers say there is far too little support from government and industry for them to make this change.

Political fallout

Reform has been quick to seize on the closure of Port Talbot, with its leader Nigel Farage declaring he’d open the furnaces again, despite this being physically impossible.

Reform more generally has declared net zero to be an expensive farce, one that costs jobs and drives up energy bills. Across a swathe of local councils where Reform has overall control, it has promised to cancelled net zero policies and renewable energy projects.

Though critics suggest Reform’s promises threaten billions in investment and upwards of 1 million jobs, the party’s claims are finding a welcome home among workers in industry, with unions warning that their members are increasingly drawn to Reform as they desert Labour.

The steel industry isn’t the only one undergoing job losses. From oil and gas facilities to fertiliser and car plants, heavy industry is shedding jobs under pressure from high energy costs, competition, and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As the transition continues, these losses are likely to mount.

The household budget myth

It is not just the “jobs gap” that generates the sense of betrayal among workers. Since the 2008 financial crisis, the myth that the UK government’s finances work in the same way as a household budget, thus justifying one of the most dramatic programs of government austerity seen among the world’s wealthier countries, has become a well-established common-sense framework.

And this mindset associated with austerity has also come to haunt the UK’s net zero transition.

Surveys repeatedly list local decline as among the main reasons why people are turning away from the major parties and towards Reform. And when the UK government hands hundreds of millions to companies like Nissan or Tata Steel, only for them to cut hundreds of jobs, this feeds a sense that money is flowing to corporations, not communities.

Reform has capitalised on this by contrasting supposed subsidies for solar farms with the closure of vital services in those same towns and regions. When combined with the steady flow of commentaries in the right-wing media declaring net zero a burden on the taxpayer and a waste of scarce government resources, the narrative that net zero is a “con”, taking money and jobs from the British public to give to big business, seems more credible.

The bitter irony here is that not only do most people in the UK, including most Reform supporters, still back taking action on climate change, but that climate change will hit deprived areas hardest. Yet without visible local benefits, warnings about future risks won’t cut through.

One year on from the Port Talbot closure, I believe it’s vital that the net zero transition comes to mean something more than broken promises and betrayed communities. Reform’s anti-net zero rhetoric is no panacea. Yet without a program to ensure a just transition, we risk this becoming hostage to such reactions – a transition to nowhere that anyone wants to go.

Nicholas Beuret 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. Port Talbot, one year on: steelworks closure shows why public is losing trust in net zero – https://theconversation.com/port-talbot-one-year-on-steelworks-closure-shows-why-public-is-losing-trust-in-net-zero-265906

September 29, 2025

The eye in the sky: what Denmark’s drone sightings tell us about power and fear down the years

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Kathrin Maurer, Professor , Department of Cultural and Linguistic Studies, University of Southern Denmark

All-seeing ‘eye in the sky’: drones make us uneasy because we don’t know who is controlling them. Piotr Piatrouski/Shutterstock

Red and blue lights blink in the Danish sky. Is it a plane, a satellite, or a drone hovering overhead? Over the past few weeks, more and more Danes have been scanning the skies for mysterious flying objects, caught between curiosity and unease as sightings across the country spark fresh concern.

Drones have been sighted over airports and military bases all over Denmark. Air traffic has been delayed, politicians have gathered for crisis meetings, and Nato has been called on to act.

We speak about drones in our coffee breaks, exchanging newly acquired expert knowledge about flight heights and battery power. We talk to our children about “hybrid warfare”. And many of us walk around with a strange and eerie feeling that something in the sky is watching us.

Although Russia’s role in the recent drone incidents remains unconfirmed, the sightings come against a backdrop of escalating tensions between the two countries, and just after Copenhagen announced it would acquire long-range precision weapons, drawing sharp threats from Moscow. Indeed, analysts have suggested the drone flyovers may form part of a wider Russian strategy to sow fear, test Nato’s defences, and erode Danish support for Ukraine.

That monstrous stare

As a professor of culture and technology, my research focuses on surveillance, drones and how we talk about war. In this sense, surveillance from above is a tale as old as time. Think of that godly “eye in the sky”, mentioned by the Old Egyptians and in the Bible. That celestial all-seeing entity with superhuman powers to decide whether you should live or die, much like the drone itself.

This connection is not only highlighted in popular culture, such as in the title of the 2015 film Eye in the Sky about military drone strikes, but also by the military industry itself.

There is, for example, a US military drone, Gorgon Stare, named after a monstrous figure from Greek mythology, most famously represented by the three sisters Stheno, Euryale and Medusa. The latter is known for turning anyone who looks at her into stone. The Gorgon Stare is equipped with many cameras and armed with Hellfire missiles.

Trailer for 2015 film, Eye in the Sky.

But it’s not only the assumed drone’s power of hypervision that gives us the creeps. It’s also precisely its opposite feature: its invisibility. Although we might see some dots and shadows in the sky, the drone pilot stays invisible. Who steers this Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)? Who controls it – or does it even control itself? It is deeply rooted in our human instincts that when we feel observed by an invisible force, we feel alarm and our nervous system enters defence mode.

In this context, another Greek myth comes to mind: Gyges. The Greek philosopher Plato wrote about the shepherd Gyges, who discovered a magical ring that could make him invisible. Armed with this new power, Gyges became king and ruler over the country. Drones operate in a similar way to Gyges’s strategy, as their pilots also remain hidden in the shadows.

Threatening sky

Humans tend to thrive on eye contact. But drones are not about seeing each other. When it comes to fighting, there is no duel anymore. Drones do not announce themselves. They disregard international treaties, break laws of war, and fly under the radar.

The drone flyovers in Denmark expose our vulnerabilities and erode the sanctity of our airspace. Many have been left wondering if we are prepared for this new type of warfare. Nevertheless, within all this hype about drones, we have to remember that aerial reconnaissance has been around for centuries. Think of kites, hot air balloons and spy planes.

A military command centre showing a man operating drones. — Who is controlling the drone in the sky above you?
Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock

It’s also important to point out that new technologies frequently spark public unease. The first cars were met with great anxiety and fear. Electricity was seen as something supernatural. These examples do not aim to normalise the high levels of drone activity we’ve seen over Denmark, or the feelings of fear and uncertainty these aerial vehicles have induced.

But by looking at how new technologies have been viewed historically, it opens up space for critical and nuanced dialogue about their societal implications and how we navigate their presence in our everyday lives.

The history of surveillance from above shows us that human unease with aerial reconnaissance is nothing new. But in today’s climate of geopolitical tension, drones are more than symbols of technological change – they are markers of the fragile balance between visibility, power, and trust. And right now, that balance feels more precarious than ever.

This article was commissioned with Videnskab.dk as part of a partnership between it and The Conversation.

Kathrin Maurer receives funding from DFF research grant project 2 “Drone Imaginaries and Communities” 2019-2022

– ref. The eye in the sky: what Denmark’s drone sightings tell us about power and fear down the years – https://theconversation.com/the-eye-in-the-sky-what-denmarks-drone-sightings-tell-us-about-power-and-fear-down-the-years-266296