English – Page 9 – MIL Submissions Engine

February 2, 2026

The only remaining US-Russia nuclear treaty expires this week. Could a new arms race soon accelerate?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Tilman Ruff, Honorary Principal Fellow, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne

The New START treaty, the last remaining agreement constraining Russian and US nuclear weapons, is due to lapse on February 4.

There are no negotiations to extend the terms of the treaty, either. As US President Donald Trump said dismissively in a recent interview, “if it expires, it expires”.

The importance of the New START treaty is hard to overstate. As other nuclear treaties have been abrogated in recent years, this was the only deal left with notification, inspection, verification and treaty compliance mechanisms between Russia and the US. Between them, they possess 87% of the world’s nuclear weapons.

The demise of the treaty will bring a definitive and alarming end to nuclear restraint between the two powers. It may very well accelerate the global nuclear arms race, too.

What is New START?

The New START or Prague Treaty was signed by then-US President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart, Dimitri Medvedev, in Prague on April 8, 2010. It entered into force the following year.

It superseded a 2002 treaty that obligated Russia and the United States to reduce their operationally deployed, strategic nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 by the end of 2012.

The New START Treaty called for further reductions on long-range nuclear weapons and provided greater specificity about different types of launchers. The new limits were:

700 deployed intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (together with heavy bombers)
1,550 nuclear warheads deployed on those platforms, and
800 launchers (both deployed and non-deployed).

These reductions were achieved by February 5, 2018.

The treaty included mechanisms for compliance and verification, which have worked effectively. It provided for twice-yearly exchanges of data and ongoing mutual notification about the movement of strategic nuclear forces, which in practice occurred on a nearly daily basis.

Importantly, the treaty also mandated short-notice, on-site inspections of missiles, warheads and launchers covered by the treaty, providing valuable and stabilising insights into the other’s nuclear deployments.

Lastly, the treaty established a bilateral consultative commission and clear procedures to resolve questions or disputes.

Limitations of the deal

The treaty was criticised at the time for its modest reductions and the limited types of nuclear weapons it covered.

But the most enduring downside was the political price Obama paid to achieve ratification by the US Senate.

To secure sufficient Republican support, he agreed to a long-term program of renewal and modernisation of the entire US nuclear arsenal – in addition to the facilities and programs that produce and maintain nuclear weapons. The overall pricetag was estimated to reach well over US$2 trillion.

This has arguably done more harm by entrenching the United States’ possession of nuclear weapons and thwarting prospects for disarmament.

As the New START treaty was about to expire in 2021, Russia offered to extend it for another five years, as allowed under the terms. US President Donald Trump, however, refused to reciprocate.

After winning the 2020 US presidential election, Joe Biden did agree to extend the treaty on February 3, 2021, just two days before it would have expired. The treaty does not provide for any further extensions.

In February 2023, Russia suspended its implementation of key aspects of the treaty, including stockpile data exchange and on-site inspections. It did not formally withdraw, however, and committed to continue to abide by the treaty’s numerical limits on warheads, missiles and launchers.

What could happen next

With the imminent expiry of the treaty this year, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced in September 2025 that he was prepared to continue observing the numerical limits for one more year if the US acted similarly.

Besides an off-the-cuff comment by Trump – “it sounds like a good idea to me” – the US did not formally respond to the Russian offer.

Trump has further complicated matters by insisting that negotiations on any future nuclear arms control agreements include China. However, China has consistently refused this. There is also no precedent for such trilateral nuclear control or disarmament negotiations, which would no doubt be long and complex. Though growing, China’s arsenal is still less than 12% the size of the US arsenal and less than 11% the size of Russia’s.

The New START treaty now looks set to expire without any agreement to continue to observe its limits until a successor treaty is negotiated.

This means Russia and the US could increase their deployed warheads by 60% and 110%, respectively, within a matter of months. This is because both have the capacity to load a larger number of warheads on their missiles and bombers than they currently do. Both countries also have large numbers of warheads in reserve or slated for dismantlement, but still intact.

If they took these steps, both countries could effectively double their deployed strategic nuclear arsenals.

The end of the treaty’s verification, data exchanges, and compliance and notification processes would also lead to increased uncertainty and distrust. This, in turn, could lead to a further build-up of both countries’ already gargantuan military capabilities.

An ominous warning

The most unsettling part of this development: it means nuclear disarmament, and even more modest arms control, is now moribund.

No new negotiations for disarmament or even reducing nuclear risks are currently under way. None are scheduled to begin.

At a minimum, after New START expires this week, both Russia and the US should agree to stick to its limits until they negotiate further reductions.

And, 56 years after making a binding commitment in the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to achieve nuclear disarmament, both nations should work to implement a verifiable agreement among all nuclear-armed states to eliminate their arsenals.

But Russia, the US and and other nuclear-armed states are moving in the opposite direction.

Trump’s actions since taking office a second time – from bombing Iran to toppling Venezuela’s leader – show his general disdain for international law and treaties. They also affirm his desire to use any instrument of power to assert US (and his personal) interests and supremacy.

Putin, meanwhile, has used of a nuclear-capable intermediate-range ballistic missile to strike Ukraine, made repeated threats to use nuclear weapons against Kyiv and the West, and continued his unprecedented and profoundly dangerous weaponisation of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants.

These moves signal a more aggressive Russian stance that rides roughshod over the UN Charter, as well.

All of this bodes ill for preventing nuclear war and making progress on nuclear disarmament.

Tilman Ruff is affiliated with International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, the Medical Association for Prevention of War, Doctors for the Environment Australia and the Public Health Association of Australia.

– ref. The only remaining US-Russia nuclear treaty expires this week. Could a new arms race soon accelerate? – https://theconversation.com/the-only-remaining-us-russia-nuclear-treaty-expires-this-week-could-a-new-arms-race-soon-accelerate-269508

February 1, 2026

Pierre Poilievre aces leadership review: Why the Conservatives opted to stand by their man

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sam Routley, PhD Candidate, Political Science, Western University

With the support of almost 90 per cent of party delegates, Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative party leadership review results are clear and decisive.

These results not only demonstrate that the party continues to believe that he is their best option to win the next federal election, but that a large majority of Conservatives remain broadly united behind his leadership and message.

Post-election reflection

Poilievre entered the review following a period of assessment and recovery. As is typical after an election loss, this phase involved internal debate, intense media scrutiny and renewed attention to the leader’s perceived weaknesses.

Critics pointed to a familiar set of concerns: Poilievre’s attack-dog political style, his strained relationship with much of the national media and his perceived alignment with American populism, particularly Donald Trump.

His approach, they argued, had been designed for Justin Trudeau and was less effective against the former prime minister’s replacement, Mark Carney. Polling reinforced the sense of unease. While the Conservative Party continues to be seen as a better economic manager, Poilievre also lags behind Carney in personal popularity.

Organizational concerns also compounded these doubts. Controversies over nomination processes and strained relationships with other Conservative politicians, particularly Ontario Premier Doug Ford, raised questions about party management and coalition-building.

Within conservative intellectual circles, there has also been extensive ideological debate about tone, strategy and the party’s electoral ceiling.

Poilievre, after all, had to win an Alberta by-election after he lost his Ottawa seat in the federal election and has faced high-profile floor crossings over the past several months.

Yet this moment of reflection proved more cathartic than transformative. Much of the criticism levelled against Poilievre by Conservatives proved fleeting, an emotional response to loss rather than a durable movement to replace him. Instead, it reflected a familiar post-election pattern: disappointment amplified by punditry and frustration rather than a genuine collapse of confidence within the party.

Election results

How did Poilievre survive? Likely because the election results themselves were ambiguous. Although the Conservatives failed to form government, they were otherwise successful by many other measures.

They increased their vote share, expanded their support to new voter constituencies — especially young adults and recent immigrants — and demonstrated strength on core issues such as affordability, housing and cost of living. From the conservative perspective, this suggests incompletion — an inability to seal the final deal — rather than total rejection.

With the largest share of the popular vote for any Conservative party in Canada since 1988, the only thing that stood between the party and governing was a few percentage points.

This creates a powerful argument for continuity. Replacing Poilievre would have required the party to gamble that a new leader could quickly unify the coalition, define themselves nationally and outperform an already familiar figure in Carney — all without the benefit of incumbency or clear front-runner status.

Compounding this, of course, was the absence of a clear successor. No alternative candidate commanded widespread loyalty or offered an obviously superior electoral profile. In such circumstances, continuity becomes the least risky option.

The broader political and electoral context also matters. While Carney may be more personally popular than Poilievre, he governs on top of a coalition that is internally complex, undefined and potentially short-lived.

Carney’s electoral success depended heavily on the collapse of the NDP vote and the broader political disruption caused by Trump’s threats to annex Canada. With a new NDP leader, the New Democrats could recover and cut into Liberal margins.

Meanwhile, the government’s more mixed response to issues such as pipeline development, housing and the cost-of-living crisis could push enough voters toward the Conservatives by the next federal election campaign.

Young voters like Poilievre

All this said, however, Poilievre’s support cannot be explained solely by institutional inertia or a lack of alternative leadership candidates. His leadership has and continues to generate genuine enthusiasm among some voters — especially those who are young, recently immigrated or working in trades. This support is fuelled by economic frustration, declining living standards and the sense of a lost promise.

At a moment when centre-right parties elsewhere are struggling with internal upheaval and fragmentation, Poilievre’s Conservative Party has remained cohesive and even expanded by organizing around what former communications director Ben Woodfinden calls the “locked-out:” voters who feel shut out of prosperity amid weak growth and chronic productivity problems.

In this context, Poilievre’s orthodox centre-right agenda — cutting regulatory burdens, boosting competition and removing interprovincial trade barriers — continues to attract broad, cross-class support that transcends cultural and regional divides.

The success of this can be seen from the fact that, throughout his keynote address at the Conservative Party convention, Poilievre’s core message and policy proposals haven’t changed substantively.

But there has been a shift in style. Poilievre has begun to pair his combative style with a more personal, reflective and occasionally vulnerable public persona, an adjustment aimed at consolidating support while expanding appeal among undecided voters.

Finally, although Poilievre’s coalition wasn’t large enough to win the 2025 election, Canadian electoral history suggests that his prospects aren’t bleak. There’s a long history of decisive results or shifts playing out across two electoral successes, as coalitions are consolidated and expanded. Both John Diefenbaker and Stephen Harper, for example, endured defeats before securing durable governing mandates.

By endorsing Poilievre so decisively, Conservatives signalled their belief that he remains on an upward trajectory. The leadership review was less about absolution than affirmation: a collective judgment that the party is closer to power with Poilievre than without him.

Sam Routley 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. Pierre Poilievre aces leadership review: Why the Conservatives opted to stand by their man – https://theconversation.com/pierre-poilievre-aces-leadership-review-why-the-conservatives-opted-to-stand-by-their-man-274159

February 1, 2026

16 Oscar nods for ‘Sinners’ signals a broader appetite for imaginative Black cinema

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Cornel Grey, Assistant Professor in Department of Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies, Western University

When Sinners recently received a record-breaking 16 Oscar nominations, the response was overwhelmingly celebratory, but not uncomplicated.

The nominations capped a year in which the film had already defied expectations at the box office. An original horror film with no built-in franchise, Sinners broke multiple domestic and international records and earned more than US$300 million during its theatrical run.

Critics also responded strongly, praising Ryan Coogler’s direction and the film’s blend of spectacle and social commentary. Those reviews helped cement Sinners as both a commercial hit and a critical success.

Sinners doesn’t resolve longstanding debates about Black recognition or racial equity in Hollywood. However, its nominations arrive at a moment that suggests wider audience interest — and possible film industry openness — to Black films that are culturally specific, formally ambitious and uninterested in proving their importance through suffering alone.

Questions of popular success and excellence

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences — the group of just over 10,000 film industry professionals who vote on Oscar nominations and winners — has long grappled with how to balance popular success and its self-image as an arbiter of artistic excellence.

In the wake of declining viewership, the academy proposed a new category in 2018 for “Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film.”

The plan was met with significant backlash from commentators who were offended by the implication that commercially successful films couldn’t also be great art. The idea was shelved amid concerns that it would undermine the Oscars’ standards instead of bridging the gap between popular taste and critical recognition.

Sinners is not a traditional prestige drama designed for the awards circuit. It is a piece of work that refuses easy classification, blending elements of horror, musical, Southern Gothic and Black folklore into a form that balances excess and control.

As director Ryan Coogler has said, the film resists categorical conventions, dubbing it “genre-fluid.”

‘Sinners’ official trailer.

Directorial innovation

Coogler’s directorial innovation is central to the cultural significance of the film’s nominations.

Historically, the Oscars have rewarded Black films that conform to a narrow range of familiar narratives. Stories centred on racial trauma, historical injustice, moral redemption or social pathology have been far more likely to receive acknowledgement than films that foreground pleasure and fantasy.

Best Picture winners like 12 Years a Slave and Green Book, along with heavily awarded films such as Precious and The Help, illustrate this pattern, as does Halle Berry’s Best Actress win for Monster’s Ball, a performance structured around sexualized suffering and endurance.

Acclaimed Black films that don’t focus on trauma or suffering have been long overlooked by the academy.

Movies like Do the Right Thing, Eve’s Bayou, Girls Trip and Sorry to Bother You received strong critical and cultural support, but were largely ignored during Oscar voting.

Rather than critiquing those films or performances, this pattern points to how Hollywood taste — reflecting racialized assumptions and values — shapes what kinds of Black stories are recognized as important and deserving of reward.

Black creative achievement and possibility

Sinners does something different. It bends and unsettles the frames that tell audiences how to read a film. Vampires, music, violence, sex and history are woven together in a way that invites audiences in, without stopping to explain or defend each choice.

The film draws on familiar genre esthetics that white audiences recognize (like horror, spectacle, supernatural myth) but it refuses to translate its cultural references or soften its Black specificity.

Viewers unfamiliar with Black Southern folklore, diasporic spiritual traditions or the film’s musical and historical cues may miss things. The film does not slow down to catch them up.

Award bodies’ reception

The film’s success also raises questions about how awards bodies respond when Black creative experimentation gains critical acclaim.

A recent example comes from the Recording Academy. After Beyoncé won Best Country Album in 2025, the Grammys split the category into “traditional” and “contemporary” — a change that expanded recognition while also reintroducing distinctions.

The move echoed earlier controversies around genre-labelling, including debates over the now-retired “urban” category. It also underscored how recognition can be followed by new forms of sorting rather than lasting structural change.

Wider shift in Black creative possibility

The risk is that Sinners is celebrated as a one-off, rather than understood as part of a wider shift in Black creative possibility.

Some conservative responses have framed Sinners less as an artistic achievement and more as an example of cultural overreach, reading its genre play and historical remixing as ideological provocation rather than creative labour.

Alongside this, the film’s record-breaking nominations are likely to be interpreted by some viewers or critics as further evidence of a so-called “woke era” in awards culture, a framing that tends to downplay the craft, ambition and substance of works featuring Black talent.

These reactions reveal ongoing anxieties over who gets to reshape tradition, and how recognition by industry powerbrokers is interpreted when it is attached to Black cultural production.

Reputational weight, star power

Sinners could take these creative risks in part because of the reputational weight behind it.

Coogler’s track record of commercially successful films, combined with the star power of Michael B. Jordan and their history of delivering profitable collaborations, created a level of confidence among funding studios that is rarely extended to Black filmmakers more broadly.

The uneven distribution of that creative latitude and resourcing remains visible across the industry, where many Black directors continue to face funding barriers for innovative or less conventional projects.

Challenging esthetic norms

The academy recently introduced representation and inclusion standards for Best Picture eligibility that require films to meet benchmarks for on-screen representation, creative leadership, industry access or audience outreach to be considered for nomination.

These measures are aimed at expanding opportunities for underrepresented groups, yet they focus on who appears in and works on films rather than on how films innovate or challenge esthetic norms.

As a result, longstanding assumptions about genre bias and what counts as quality cinema are largely unexamined, even as the rules change around how films qualify for consideration.

Works that trust audiences

The recognition of Sinners by the academy points to a widening space for Black films rooted in lived experience, place and history. Similar dynamics are visible elsewhere.

Recent global successes like K-Pop Demon Hunters show that viewers are drawn to genre-blended, culturally grounded stories that stimulate the imagination rather than explain themselves away. These works trust audiences to enter unfamiliar worlds without constant translation.

Sinners belongs to this moment. Its record-breaking nominations expand the range of Black cinema visible at the highest levels of recognition and quietly signal greater room for formal experimentation. The film treats Black creativity as something that can include visual excess, genre experimentation and narrative openness, and still be recognized as artistically rigorous work.

Cornel Grey 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. 16 Oscar nods for ‘Sinners’ signals a broader appetite for imaginative Black cinema – https://theconversation.com/16-oscar-nods-for-sinners-signals-a-broader-appetite-for-imaginative-black-cinema-274191

February 1, 2026

Black women’s health-care experiences remain marked by structural racism — here’s how institutions should move forward

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Elizabeth Kusi Appiah, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta

Racism has long disrupted relationships, deepened social divisions and hindered collective action on global challenges. While modern societies strive to be just and advocate against social injustices, many still turn away from engaging in conversations surrounding racism, health inequities and racial tensions.

Yet these issues significantly impact health — including the care Black people receive and their health outcomes. Research shows that racism has many long-term effects on health, and is linked to both poorer mental and physical health overall.

Black History Month is an opportunity to reflect critically on the impact of racism in health care and how to address it. As researchers focused on Black women’s acute and critical care experiences, our recent review draws lessons from studies on Black women’s health-care experiences in high-income countries to propose an approach for addressing racism.

The review included 10 studies conducted in the United States between 1987 and 2024. We found that Black women’s experiences in health care continue to be marked by reports of structural racism, microaggressions and persistent mistrust of the care system and care providers. Such experiences reduced the chances for shared decision-making, early detection of health issues, adherence to treatments, pain management and person-centred care.

We revealed that the enduring legacy of racism in medicine contributes to suboptimal communication and poor-quality care for Black women. Some of the women did not receive appropriate followup for diagnostic tests or see a specialist because their physician dismissed their concerns. Most of the women felt invisible because their providers disregarded their concerns. As a result, they felt discouraged from seeking care.

For instance, in one of the studies included in our review, a woman described her experiences of arriving at the emergency department for care. She said:

“As a Black woman I was told that it was a female problem, instead of my heart….The head doctor took a look at me and said, she doesn’t have a heart problem, this is absolutely no heart problem, it’s some kind of female problem. It was in my head.”

Another described feeling dismissed by doctors due to the way she described her pain, stating:

“I called it a wrecking ball pain. That’s what I was experiencing … Then my doctor, who likes to joke about everything, would say ‘Oh! Here’s the lady with the wrecking ball disease.’”

This left the patient feeling like a medical novelty — rather than being seen as a person worthy of respect and care.

Our discussions also identified how some Black adult patients responded to racial tensions and unjust conditions in their care.

When feeling disregarded by clinicians, some people purposefully limited what they shared. Others changed how they spoke to clinicians to fit white-dominated medical culture. Some even disengaged from the care decision-making process entirely — while others chose to advocate for themselves.

Further, if the physician appeared dismissive or disrespectful, some people ignored their medical advice as they felt the doctor didn’t have their best interests at heart. Others became hyper-vigilant against injustices and were likely to interpret subsequent care encounters based on past experiences.

Impact of racism on health care work

Health-care staff are compassionate people who want to provide the best care for patients. But they may not always be sure how to avoid getting it wrong.

Research indicates that nurses worry about getting it wrong and coming across as disrespectful when caring for people from different cultural backgrounds. Likewise, many nurses fear being labelled as racist, as they say it implies they’re a terrible person. Yet many are unwilling to accept personal responsibility for their actions — or inactions — if such a label is given to them.

There’s also a lack of clarity among nurses regarding what constitutes racist practices. This causes them anxiety. Some find it upsetting to think that their actions have been perceived as racist when that wasn’t their intention. Others are hesitant to express their genuine opinions on issues of this nature due to the fear of being called racist.

A separate study on nurse-patient relationships found that racism hinders nurses’ ability to meet a patient’s care needs and threatens patients’ and nurses’ dignity in the care system. Racism from patients also increases nurses’ stress and causes emotional trauma.

Racism in health-care settings continues to have a detrimental effect on the care patients are receiving. It’s clear institutions need to do more to ensure patients aren’t being harmed when receiving care.

Inclusive and nurturing communities

We believe that building inclusive and nurturing communities that counter racism and celebrate our interdependence is how we can move forward and address racism in health care.

Inclusive and nurturing communities equip people to have difficult conversations about race — whether that’s in health care, the classroom, universities, workplaces and neighbourhoods.

This type of community teaches people the importance of listening and engaging authentically and open-mindedly, and of learning about racism through the experiences of others. It doesn’t see people who engage in racist practices as inherently racist — but as people who need more support in recognizing and addressing racism.

In such spaces, every person bears a social responsibility to combat racism in their own ways — whether by fostering conversations about racism in their homes, workplaces or shared community spaces.

We’re hoping to conduct research investigating how such spaces can be built — and how this framework can be used in health-care settings to address the racism patients experience there.

We’re all part of the bigger picture. When we create safe and brave spaces for thinking, analyzing and talking about racial tensions, we’re inviting everyone to authentically participate in problem-solving.

Research shows trust is essential in building strong and productive human relations. So in order to build inclusive and nurturing communities, we need to invest time and effort into restoring the broken trust of racialized communities through accountability, transparency, consistency and genuine efforts to address systemic racism.

Elizabeth Kusi Appiah is affiliated with the GROWW national mentorship program.

Elisavet Papathanasoglou receives funding from Women & Children health Research Institute (WHCRI).

– ref. Black women’s health-care experiences remain marked by structural racism — here’s how institutions should move forward – https://theconversation.com/black-womens-health-care-experiences-remain-marked-by-structural-racism-heres-how-institutions-should-move-forward-250337

February 1, 2026

‘Sinners’’ 16 Oscar nods signals a broader appetite for imaginative Black cinema

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Cornel Grey, Assistant Professor in Department of Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies, Western University

When Sinners recently received a record-breaking 16 Oscar nominations, the response was overwhelmingly celebratory, but not uncomplicated.

Questions of popular success and excellence

In the wake of declining viewership, the academy proposed a new category in 2018 for “Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film.”

As director Ryan Coogler has said, the film resists categorical conventions, dubbing it “genre-fluid.”

‘Sinners’ official trailer.

Directorial innovation

Coogler’s directorial innovation is central to the cultural significance of the film’s nominations.

Acclaimed Black films that don’t focus on trauma or suffering have been long overlooked by the academy.

Movies like Do the Right Thing, Eve’s Bayou, Girls Trip and Sorry to Bother You received strong critical and cultural support, but were largely ignored during Oscar voting.

Black creative achievement and possibility

Viewers unfamiliar with Black Southern folklore, diasporic spiritual traditions or the film’s musical and historical cues may miss things. The film does not slow down to catch them up.

Award bodies’ reception

The film’s success also raises questions about how awards bodies respond when Black creative experimentation gains critical acclaim.

Wider shift in Black creative possibility

The risk is that Sinners is celebrated as a one-off, rather than understood as part of a wider shift in Black creative possibility.

These reactions reveal ongoing anxieties over who gets to reshape tradition, and how recognition by industry powerbrokers is interpreted when it is attached to Black cultural production.

Reputational weight, star power

Sinners could take these creative risks in part because of the reputational weight behind it.

Challenging esthetic norms

These measures are aimed at expanding opportunities for underrepresented groups, yet they focus on who appears in and works on films rather than on how films innovate or challenge esthetic norms.

As a result, longstanding assumptions about genre bias and what counts as quality cinema are largely unexamined, even as the rules change around how films qualify for consideration.

Works that trust audiences

The recognition of Sinners by the academy points to a widening space for Black films rooted in lived experience, place and history. Similar dynamics are visible elsewhere.

– ref. ‘Sinners’’ 16 Oscar nods signals a broader appetite for imaginative Black cinema – https://theconversation.com/sinners-16-oscar-nods-signals-a-broader-appetite-for-imaginative-black-cinema-274191

February 1, 2026

Epiaceratherium itjilik: The rhino that lived in the Arctic

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Danielle Fraser, Adjunct Research Professor, Department of Biology, Carleton University

Paleontologists at the Canadian Museum of Nature have recently been studying the skeletal remains of a rhinoceros. This might not sound remarkable at first, but what makes these remains fascinating is that they were found Devon Island in the Canadian Arctic.

Today, mammals inhabit nearly every corner of the Earth. In Asia, Europe and North America, mammals arrived via three routes, one over the Bering Strait and two over the North Atlantic.

The Bering Land Bridge is the best known, having enabled the arrival of humans in North America approximately 20,000 years ago and shaped the population genetics of animals such as bears, lions and horses.

Less well known are the two routes that traversed the North Atlantic, one from the Scandinavian Peninsula over Svalbard and Greenland, and another from Scotland over Iceland to Greenland and the Canadian Arctic.

However, it has typically been thought that land animals could not have crossed the North Atlantic by the Early Eocene, a period around 50 million years ago when the Earth’s climate was warmer.

However, the Arctic rhino’s remains provide tantalizing evidence that land mammals were able to traverse the North Atlantic using frozen land bridges much more recently than the Early Eocene.

A rhinoceros in the Arctic

Danielle Fraser explains her team’s research on the Arctic rhinoceros. (Canadian Museum of Nature)

The new species of rhinoceros was discovered from a nearly complete specimen collected from the Haughton Formation of Devon Island in Nunavut — lake sediments formed in an asteroid impact crater that likely date to the Early Miocene, around 23 million years ago.

The sediments of the Haughton Formation preserve plants, mammals and birds, among others. The majority of the rhinoceros was collected in the 1980s by paleontologist Mary Dawson and her team, with additional collections by paleontologists Natalia Rybczynski, Marisa Gilbert and their team in the 2010s.

The rhinoceros lacked a horn, which is common among extinct rhinos. It is remarkable, however, in possessing features of much more ancient forms, like teeth of forms many millions of years older. It also has a fifth toe on the forefoot, which is rare among rhinoceroses.

Anatomical comparison and evolutionary analysis suggest the specimen belongs to an existing genus, Epiaceratherium, found only in Europe and western Asia. In naming the new species, the team consulted with Jarloo Kiguktak, an elder from the nearest Indigenous community to the Haughton Crater, Aujuittuq (Grise Fiord). Together, they named it Epiaceratherium itjilik. Itjilik is an Inuktitut word meaning frost or frosty, an homage to the Arctic setting where the specimen was found.

Most surprisingly, the team’s evolutionary analysis placed E. itjilik closest to the European species of Epiaceratherium. This indicates that its ancestors likely crossed from Europe to North America via the North Atlantic at some point during the late Eocene period around 33-38 million years ago.

Bio-geographic analyses further revealed a surprisingly high number of rhinoceros crossings over the North Atlantic directly between Europe and North America, some in the last 20 million years. While a finding of such a recent crossing via the North Atlantic has often been considered unlikely, emerging geological evidence tells a different story.

How did rhinos get to the Arctic?

Today, land animals are impeded from crossing between Europe and North America by several deep, wide waterways. The Faroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland are separated by the Faroe-Bank Channel, Faroe Shetland Channel and the Denmark Strait. Between the Scandinavian Peninsula, Svalbard and Greenland are the Barents Sea and Fram Strait. It is believed that land animals could traverse at least one of these areas only up until the Early Eocene about 50 million years ago.

Recent studies, however, are starting to paint a more complex picture of North Atlantic geological change. Estimates for the timing of formation of the various channels that now break up North Atlantic land masses are highly variable.

Mathematical modelling suggests a highland connected Svalbard to northern Europe as recently as the 2.7 million years ago. An array of new data also suggest the Fram Strait was shallow and narrow until the Early Miocene, around 23 million years ago. The Faroe-Shetland channel may have opened between 50 and 34 million years ago, while the Iceland-Faroe Channel and Denmark Strait were submerged later, 34 to 10 million years ago.

This suggests that rhinoceroses could have walked on land for at least part of their journey across the North Atlantic. They could possibly have swum the relatively short distances between land masses but the team hypothesized that seasonal sea ice may also have facilitated their movement.

Seasonal ice

More than 47 million years ago, the Arctic Ocean and surrounding regions were ice-free all year. Ocean cores collected from the Arctic Ocean — samples of mud, sand and organic material drilled from the seafloor — contain evidence of ice-rafted debris during the Middle Eocene, approximately 47 to 38 million years ago. This indicates the presence of seasonal ice.

Another ocean core collected between Greenland and Svalbard also contains ice-rafted debris originating from across the Arctic dating from between 48 to 26 million years ago. What is emerging, therefore, is the possibility that land animals crossed the North Atlantic by a combination of routes formed over land and seasonal ice.

Vertebrate fossils from the islands that once comprised the North Atlantic land bridges are extremely rare. Given that much of the land bridges are now submerged, direct evidence for how animals spread across the North Atlantic may be lost.

Bio-geographic studies like the one conducted by the team at the Canadian Museum of Nature highlight how discoveries in the Arctic are reshaping what we know about mammal evolution. These insights further our understanding of how animals moved across our planet.

Danielle Fraser received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC
RGPIN-2018-05305). Natalia Rybczynski, who co-authored the study mentioned in this article, received funding from the W. Garfield Weston Foundation. Mary Dawson, a co-author on the study, received funding for field work from National Geographic.

– ref. Epiaceratherium itjilik: The rhino that lived in the Arctic – https://theconversation.com/epiaceratherium-itjilik-the-rhino-that-lived-in-the-arctic-269484

February 1, 2026

Frustration in hetero relationships has a long history — that’s why today’s crisis looks so familiar

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Meaghan Furlano, PhD Student, Sociology, Western University

“Many women tell me they want to have a man in their life, but they are no longer willing to be the only person giving in the relationship. They don’t want to be with a man who needs to be taken care of. In that case, it’s easier and more pleasant to be without a man.”

These words speak eerily to the current moment. Yet their date of publication? 1984.

You’ll find them in psychotherapist and acclaimed author Marjorie Hansen Shaevitz’s The Superwoman Syndrome, one of the earliest books to grapple with the superwoman myth — the idea that women can effortlessly balance work and family responsibilities in workplaces not designed to support them. And that any evidence of struggle is interpreted as a personal failing rather than a systemic one.

Despite its articulation of the burdens women face in the formal economy, its solutions to what is now called the the “second shift” involve telling women to make lists and prioritize their responsibilities. These, of course, are hardly the strategies that will move the needle in improving women’s daily lives.

Similar frustrations appear in another influential work from the same period. In a report written by feminist Shere Hite, published in 1987, most American women described feeling frustrated with their relationships.

Ninety-eight per cent reported wanting more verbal closeness with the men they loved: more sharing of thoughts, feelings and plans, and more reciprocal curiosity. Eighty-three per cent reported being the ones to initiate deep conversations with their partners, and 63 per cent reported being met with “great resistance” when trying to get their partner to talk about their feelings.

Though these findings were released decades ago, their relevance raises questions about how much has really changed for women.

The media-fuelled illusion of novelty

Both Hite’s report and Shaevitz’s book were published long before the term “heteropessimism” or the decentring men trend came into vogue. They came out long before any of us were considering where we fell on the “is having a boyfriend embarrassing?” debate. (My take? No relationship status should be slotted hierarchically above or below another).

Yet these publications capture the mood of contemporary heterosexual culture to a tee: women continue to be doing the most emotional, cognitive and unpaid housework and child-care labour, and women continue to be sick and tired of doing it.

News outlets today report on the “great divide” between men and women, particularly among younger generations. They discuss how women are turning to voluntary celibacy and/or rejecting heterosexual dating outright. They frame these trends and attitudes as out of the norm: for the first time, women are opening up about how they feel. But the truth is, these trends are normative and historically patterned.

It seems that women’s frustration — with the unpaid labour they are culturally expected to perform, with the men who won’t share in it, and with the social institutions that fail to support its redistribution — is the heartbeat of history. But it doesn’t need to be so.

Frustration keeps reproducing itself

Unlike what “tradwife” influencers will have you believe, working women are, on average, less depressed and have higher rates of self-esteem than stay-at-home mothers. Yet working mothers still face anxieties and role conflicts.

Where does this anxiety come from? Is it because women are “naturally” suited to the home and therefore ill-equipped for work in the formal economy, as tradwife influencers suggest? Or is it something else?

Looking at the problem from a sociological lens, it’s clear that anxiety results from the structures of paid work (which have not changed, despite women and the demographic composition of the workforce changing) and the distressing (and at times violent) contours of contemporary heterosexual culture, in which men continue to free-ride off women’s unpaid labour.

Anxieties also pervade as many governments fail to mandate paid parental and care leave, workplaces fail to offer family-friendly policies, and the ideology of individualism, in contrast to collectivism and communal care, remains dominant. Above all, anxiety is rife because cultural beliefs about gender, parenthood and work have remained stubbornly resistant to change.

Every few years, a flurry of news articles and social media posts lament women’s unpaid work and individual men are tasked with becoming equal helpers in the home. While individuals have their part to play in facilitating this cultural transformation, sociologists like myself are interested, too, in the role that social institutions, such as work, media and government, play in structuring individual lives.

Why hasn’t change happened yet?

We set ourselves up for failure when we hold individual men responsible but fail to provide them with cultural frameworks of masculinity that laud men’s contributions to housework and child care, and when we fail to vote for (or don’t have the option of voting for) governments that will introduce paid parental leave, regulate corporations to enhance worker power and fund community-building initiatives.

To be sure, frameworks and representations of caring masculinities do exist, but they’re not often shown in mainstream media. This is why the representation of communicative and consensual masculinities that reject male domination in television shows like Ted Lasso, Shrinking and Heated Rivalry matters. They demonstrate to men alternative modes of being, living and relating to others in our world today.

Representation matters, but so does concrete political transformations.

For too long, work and family have been treated as separate domains. Perhaps the solution lies in their convergence: a radical reimagining of how work and parenthood ought to look.

Potential strategies include disrupting gendered occupational segregation, raising the wages of feminized work, decreasing hours of paid work and building a normative definition of masculinity centred around care.

Otherwise, we’re bound to keep having the same conversations, year after year, decade after decade — like we have been.

Meaghan Furlano 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. Frustration in hetero relationships has a long history — that’s why today’s crisis looks so familiar – https://theconversation.com/frustration-in-hetero-relationships-has-a-long-history-thats-why-todays-crisis-looks-so-familiar-274486

February 1, 2026

Freetown’s property tax is designed to plug funding gap: how Sierra Leone’s capital went about it

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Astrid R.N. Haas, Research associate at African Centre for Cities, University of Cape Town

Property taxes remain one of the most underperforming sources of revenue for urban development across Africa. One reason is that they are often opposed by the economic elites and large property owners. Freetown, the economic and administrative hub of Sierra Leone, has successfully implemented a property tax regime aimed at raising revenue the city needs for its development.

Freetown is where 15% of the country’s population lives, out of a total population of nearly 9 million. The city accounts for 30% of Sierra Leone’s economic output as measured by gross domestic product (GDP). GDP in 2024 was nearly US$7 billion.

Urban economist Astrid R.N. Haas asked Manja Kargbo, who leads the Mayor’s Delivery Unit in the Freetown City Council, how Freetown pulled it off.

Can you walk us through the process Freetown went through to design and implement its property tax reform, from the initial idea to where you are today, including why you decided to focus on property tax reform?

Freetown’s property tax reform began in September 2019 with a recognition that the city’s revenue base was severely underutilised, and property tax offered a sustainable, locally controlled source of funding. Freetown could not rely on central government transfers to finance core urban services. In recent years these grants to the city have continued to fall.

Therefore, the reform was designed to increase the city’s own source revenue by improving fairness, transparency and compliance while modernising outdated property identification, valuation, billing and enforcement systems.

The reform process included:

Creation of a digital platform, (Moptax), to manage assessments, billing and payments.
A comprehensive valuation cycle supported by satellite imagery, field discovery and digital mapping.
Development of standard operating procedures for each stage of the tax cycle, from the identification of a new property within the city’s boundaries to enforcement.
Strategic engagement with stakeholders, including councillors, community leaders and taxpayers, to build trust and understanding.
A phased rollout of the new property tax system, starting with pilot testing, training of council staff and continuous feedback loops.

The reform has now reached a point where the city has institutionalised many of these processes, with the Freetown City Council administration taking the lead and the reform team providing technical support.

Property tax is often referred to as the “tax people love to hate”. How did you attain the necessary buy-in and a sense of fairness around Freetown’s new system?

Stakeholder engagement was central to the reform’s success.

Key strategies included:

digital town hall meetings across 31 wards to explain the reform and gather feedback
radio, posters, WhatsApp and community meetings to demystify the tax
transparent communication about how revenues would be reinvested locally, including a commitment to allocate 20% of ward-level revenue to community projects
engagement with councillors and the Communications Committee to ensure political buy-in and local ownership
a help desk and appeals process to address taxpayer concerns and ensure fairness.

Digital tools have been central to your reform. How did you ensure that technology worked for the city rather than the other way around?

Technology was designed to serve the reform, not drive it, reflecting lessons drawn from earlier property tax reforms in Sierra Leone and comparable cities where technology-led approaches had underperformed in the absence of political buy-in, administrative capacity and public trust.

We ensured this by:

building Moptax around the city’s operating cycles, so that digital processes aligned with operational needs
training Freetown City Council staff through a “train the trainer” model, ensuring local capacity to manage and adapt the system
using satellite imagery and GIS (Geographic Information System) mapping to improve accuracy, but validating data through fieldwork and appeals
creating dashboards and audit trails that supported transparency and accountability
ensuring that all digital tools were backed by policy decisions, council resolutions and community feedback.

What were some of the most unexpected challenges your team faced along the way, and how did you adapt?

Some of the key challenges included:

resistance to change from internal departments. This was addressed through structured training and leadership engagement.
bank reconciliation with property tax payments issues. This required deep dives with finance teams and meetings with bank representatives to resolve.
data tampering by enumerators and audit capacity gaps. This led to the creation of an internal audit framework and training for the audit department.
limited internet and technological infrastructure, such as sufficient data storgage capacity. This was mitigated by cloud hosting and procurement of equipment like MiFi devices and power banks.
repeated outreach efforts began to lose their effectiveness and residents became disengaged. The city then shifted towards multimedia and community-led messaging.

What advice would you give to other African cities that want to embark on property tax reform but feel daunted by where to start?

Start with clarity of purpose and build from the ground up:

Map your processes before digitising them. Technology should follow strategy.
Engage stakeholders early and often – reform is as much about trust as it is about systems.
Invest in training and documentation to build institutional memory.
Pilot, learn and adapt – don’t wait for perfection before starting.
Use data to drive decisions, but always validate it with field realities.
Celebrate small wins to build momentum and confidence.

Astrid R.N. Haas 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. Freetown’s property tax is designed to plug funding gap: how Sierra Leone’s capital went about it – https://theconversation.com/freetowns-property-tax-is-designed-to-plug-funding-gap-how-sierra-leones-capital-went-about-it-268781

February 1, 2026

Should private sector executives sit on the boards of non-profits? There are risks and benefits

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Ron Soonieus, Director in Residence, INSEAD

Serving on a non-profit board can be deeply fulfilling and beneficial to the cause – but only if you’re fully committed and prepared for the role.

It must be flattering to be offered a seat on the board of a non-profit organisation (NPO). After all, the non-profit sector has long valued for-profit executives for their business acumen, result-orientation and decision-making abilities.

Along with their expertise in areas such as finance, legal, human resources, marketing and management, the ability of for-profit executives to translate broad strategic goals into actionable decisions can help non-profit boards navigate complexity and ambiguity with greater confidence. They also often bring extensive networks that can open doors – be it for partnerships, fundraising or advocacy – which can significantly enhance an NPO’s ability to achieve its mission.

The appeal to serve on the board of an NPO may be an emotional one: service and meaning. As a bridge between the government, society and the business sector, NPOs play a vital role in addressing market and government failures. They advocate for accountability, counterbalance profit-driven motives, mediate between stakeholders, complement government services and even foster social innovation.

At the same time, non-profits have reached a transformation moment. As public donations shrink – a trend now accelerating with recent shifts in aid policies by the United States and Europe – non-profits must take a proactive approach by refining their priorities, strengthening operational resilience and preparing for future shocks.

But to achieve these, NPOs need strong leadership and effective governance. This is where the board comes in.

In an ideal world, the relationship can be mutually beneficial. But executives without prior board experience may struggle to transition from an “action-oriented” mindset to one of board oversight and, as a result, sometimes slip into micromanagement and undermine the delineation of roles between governance and management. Also, there is the question of fit.

Before embarking on the journey as a non-profit board member, it is critical for both the executive and NPO to assess their readiness and alignment. We’ve developed a set of questions to consider, drawing from our work in this field, as well as the insights gained from non-profit board members, executives, governance practitioners and academic experts whom we meet at Governance and Leadership Community of Practice meetings we’ve been organising regularly.

Assessing your motivation, capacity and commitment

Do I share a genuine passion for the non-profit’s mission and values? Would I feel fulfilled contributing to this cause, even if it didn’t yield professional benefits?

Do I have the time and energy to commit to this role? Am I truly prepared to attend meetings, participate in committees and provide support beyond the boardroom when required?

Can I balance this commitment with my professional and personal responsibilities? What impact might this role have on my other obligations? Can I really commit to the task, especially when it requires additional commitment in times of crisis?

Am I honest to myself and the organisation about my real motivation? Is it to give back, support a cause I’m passionate about, expand my network, for professional development, or a mix?

Evaluating your expertise

Can my skills and experience contribute to the non-profit’s success? Are there specific areas, such as strategy, fundraising or financial oversight, where I can add value?

Do I have a full appreciation of the specific complexities and challenges of non-profit governance? Am I prepared to navigate the differences between for-profit and non-profit operations, such as stakeholder dynamics, funding models and mission-driven objectives?

Understanding the role

Am I clear about the expectations and responsibilities of a board member in this organisation? Have I reviewed the organisation’s bylaws, financial status and strategic priorities to understand the role fully?

Do I understand (or am I willing to learn) the oversight role of a trustee or director? Can I maintain a strategic, supervisory perspective without micromanaging the management team?

Am I comfortable asking tough questions and holding the organisation accountable? Will I speak up when necessary to ensure transparency, ethical behaviour and good governance?

How can I align my expectations with the non-profit’s operating realities? Non-profits often lack the resources and support that for-profit organisations possess. Faced with a different operational reality, it can be challenging to understand whether what is being delivered is all that can be expected or if there is room to push for more.

Evaluating risks

Am I prepared to associate my personal reputation with this NPO? Have I researched the NPO’s reputation, leadership, financial health, bylaws and legal compliance, and am I willing to accept any potential risks that could impact my professional ambition?

Are there potential conflicts of interest? Could my professional role or personal interests lead to ethical challenges or perceived biases?

Am I prepared to use my network repeatedly? Engaging your network can be one of the most powerful ways to support a non-profit, whether for fundraising, partnerships or advocacy. However, you should consider whether you’re ready to tap your network repeatedly as the organisation’s needs arise.

Committing to learn and engage

Am I open to learning and adapting to the non-profit sector? Am I willing to invest time in understanding the mission, community and operational nuances of the non-profit world?

Can I work collaboratively with diverse stakeholders? Am I prepared to engage with and learn from individuals from varying professional, cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds?

Put mission at the core

Serving on a non-profit board can be rewarding, both personally and professionally. However, this role requires more than experience – it also demands knowledge of the NPO sector, self-awareness, intentionality and a genuine commitment to the organisation’s mission. A for-profit executive’s skills and experience can help shape the strategic direction and success, but only if approached with the focus, time and humility the role demands.

For non-profits, the inclusion of for-profit executives brings valuable expertise, networks and decision-making capabilities that can elevate their professionalism and impact. Yet, non-profits should not overestimate their added value and must ensure their boards are balanced, with diverse skills and perspectives that complement the organisation’s needs.

A final reflection for the passionate executive: If you truly care about the mission, periodically ask yourself (as well as your fellow board members and management): “Am I the best fit to help advance it?” Reflect on whether you are bringing your fullest value or if stepping aside might better serve the organisation and its purpose.

Ultimately, by prioritising the mission, both non-profits and for-profit executives can forge partnerships that build stronger, more effective organisations that drive meaningful and lasting change. Keeping the mission at the core ensures every decision contributes to lasting impact.

Caelesta Braun is affiliated with the Dutch Council for Public Administration

Agota Szabo and Ron Soonieus 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. Should private sector executives sit on the boards of non-profits? There are risks and benefits – https://theconversation.com/should-private-sector-executives-sit-on-the-boards-of-non-profits-there-are-risks-and-benefits-261011

February 1, 2026

Why Trump’s new pick for Fed chair hit gold and silver markets – for good reasons

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Henry Maher, Lecturer in Politics, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

After months of speculation, US President Donald Trump confirmed he will be nominating Kevin Warsh as the next chair of the US Federal Reserve. The appointment has been closely watched in the context of Trump’s ongoing conflict with the Fed and its current chairman Jerome Powell.

The immediate reaction to the announcement was a significant crash in gold and silver markets. After months of record highs and stretched valuations, spot prices for gold and silver dropped 9% and 28% respectively after the announcement. The US stock market also fell, with major indexes all reporting modest losses.

However, in the context of concerns over Trump’s interference with the Fed, the market crash can ironically be understood as an early vote of confidence in Warsh’s independence and suitability for the role.

Understanding why requires the context of Trump’s ongoing conflict with the Federal Reserve, and the importance of central bank independence to our current global financial system.

Trump’s war with the Fed

The last year has seen Trump in an unprecedented conflict with the Federal Reserve.

Trump appointed current Chairman Jerome Powell back in 2017. However, the relationship quickly soured when Powell did not cut interest rates as quickly as Trump wanted. In characteristically colourful language, Trump has since called Powell a “clown” with “some real mental problems”, adding “I’d love to fire his ass”.

The war of words descended into legal threats. Trump’s Justice Department announced an investigation into Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook over alleged fraud in historical mortgage documents. Then last month, in a shocking escalation the Justice Department opened a criminal investigation into Powell relating to overspending in renovations of the Federal Reserve offices.

Both sets of allegations are widely viewed as baseless. However, Trump has tried to use the investigation as grounds to fire Cook. The case is currently before the Supreme Court.

Powell has hit back strongly at Trump, saying the legal threats were

a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President.

Powell received support from 14 international central bank chiefs, who noted “the independence of central banks is a cornerstone of price, financial and economic stability”.

Historically, presidential interference with the Fed was a major cause of the stagflation crisis in the 1970s. More recently, both Argentina and Turkey have experienced significant financial crises caused by interference with central bank independence.

Who is Kevin Warsh?

Kevin Warsh is a former banker and Federal Reserve governor, who previously served as economic advisor to both President George W Bush and President Trump.

Originally Trump seemed likely to favour the current director of Trump’s National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett, for the job. However, Hassett was widely viewed as being too influenced by Trump, intensifying fears about Fed independence.

Warsh appears more independent and brings a reputation as an inflation “hawk”.

What is an inflation hawk?

The Federal Reserve is responsible for setting US interest rates. Put simply, lower interest rates can increase economic growth and employment, but risk creating inflation. Higher interest rates can control inflation, but at the cost of higher unemployment and lower growth.

Getting the balance right is the central role of the Federal Reserve. Central bank independence is essential to ensure this delicate task is guided by the best evidence and long-term needs of the economy, rather than the short-term political goals.

An inflation “hawk” refers to a central banker who prioritises fighting inflation, compared to a “dove” who prioritises growth and jobs.

From Warsh’s previous time at the Federal Reserve, he established a strong reputation as an inflation hawk. Even in the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2008, Warsh was more worried about inflation than jobs.

Given Trump’s past conflict with Powell around cutting interest rates, Warsh might seem a curious choice of candidate.

More recently though, Warsh has moderated his views, echoing Trump’s criticism of the Fed and demands for lower interest rates. Whether this support will continue, or if his hawkish tendencies return leading to future conflict with Trump, remains to be seen.

The market reaction

The crash in gold and silver, and decline in stock markets, suggests investors view interest rate cuts as less likely under Warsh than alternative candidates.

Gold and silver prices typically rise in response to instability or fears of inflation.

The previous record highs were driven by many factors, including global instability, concerns over Fed independence, and a speculative bubble.

That Warsh’s appointment has triggered a market correction in precious metals means investors expect lower inflation, and greater financial stability. The US dollar trading higher also supports this view.

The credibility of the Fed is at stake

The past month has seen much discussion of the changing world order. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney recently decried the end of the international rules-based order and called for a break from “American hegemony”.

The global dominance of the US dollar is a crucial plank of US economic hegemony. Though Trump clearly remains sceptical of central bank independence, his appointment of Warsh suggests he recognises the importance of retaining the credibility of the US currency and Federal Reserve.

Whether that recognition can continue to temper Trump’s instinct to interfere with the setting of interest rates remains to be seen.

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

– ref. Why Trump’s new pick for Fed chair hit gold and silver markets – for good reasons – https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-new-pick-for-fed-chair-hit-gold-and-silver-markets-for-good-reasons-273233