The Conversation – Canada – Page 8

March 2, 2026

As Canada’s Mark Carney heads to Australia, how did he become the darling of the global anti-Trump movement?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Stewart Prest, Lecturer, Political Science, University of British Columbia

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is having a moment.

While every leader in the world has to grapple with the abrupt and arbitrary decision-making of United States President Donald Trump, few have had to do so with such high stakes as America’s neighbour and ostensible ally to the north.

With more than two-thirds of Canadian exports bound for the US, bilateral trade is a matter of economic life and death for Canada. Since his return to office in January 2025, Trump has made repeated references to Canada becoming America’s “51st state” in an effort to put economic and political pressure on its northern neighbour.

Despite this, Carney has met the challenge with rare candour.

In his recent speech at this year’s World Economic Forum in Switzerland, Carney gave the world a word for the transformations now underway, describing a “rupture” in the international rules-based order.

The speech was remarkable in its honesty on other fronts, as well. Effectively, Carney acknowledged what everyone knows, but no one in a position of power has previously admitted: even before Trump’s return to the White House for a second term, the US-led liberal international order was deeply unfair in its distribution of prosperity and security.

Carney’s pedigree

Why was Carney able to say what others would not, or could not, on such a high-profile stage?

In many ways, his background and present role give him unique credibility in the eyes of the wealthy and powerful who gather each year at Davos.

Born and raised in northern and western Canada, Carney’s academic and professional career played out on a larger stage. Following a PhD in economics at the University of Oxford in 1995, he pursued a career in finance and banking that took him to the heights of both the private and public financial world.

After more than a decade working at the American multinational investment bank Goldman Sachs, Carney entered Canadian public service, eventually becoming governor of the Bank of Canada in 2008 under Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He went on to become the first non-British head of the Bank of England, serving in that role from 2013-2020.

His governorships coincided with tumultuous times in both countries, spanning the sub-prime financial crisis, Brexit and the early days of the COVID pandemic. While not without criticism, Carney’s performance in both countries won significant acclaim, leading to other international leadership roles.

By early 2025, Carney threw his hat in the ring to replace Canada’s beleaguered Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who was trailing badly in public opinion polls. Carney won that race convincingly, and shortly after led the revived Liberals to a narrow but definitive victory over the Conservatives in a federal election in April 2025.

The party’s stunning come-from-behind victory was fuelled significantly by Trump’s 51st state talk and other forms of coercion.

Commanding respect

Carney has a remarkable CV by any measure. He has moved from the heights of academia to business, finance and finally, government. In politics, he’s been successful in both Liberal and Conservative political environments. That broad credibility ensured that when he spoke from the podium at Davos about a rupture in an already unequal global political system, his words would be taken seriously.

Carney’s role as prime minister of Canada has also played a role in making him the poster boy of a global anti-Trump movement. Since Trump’s return to office, Canada has been on the front lines of America’s movement away from long-held alliances towards a more mercurial, coercive and even predatory foreign policy.

Trump’s penchant for insulting Canadian leaders, threatening Canadian sovereignty and weakening the Canadian economy in the service of American interests makes Canada an important test case that other American partners can learn from.

Within Canada itself, Carney is popular, though his responses to Trump have not always been without criticism. Some have pointed to a recurring gap between rhetoric and action.

Carney’s swift move to endorse the recent US attacks on Iran fit this pattern, as well. Yet, such appeasement hasn’t been rewarded with reciprocity by the Trump administration.

Seeking partners

As Carney visits the Pacific Rim, including a stop Australia, there’s no question he’s put himself — and Canada — in the global spotlight for his handling of Trump.

His speech in Davos sketched out a vision of an alternate global order that Canada and other like-minded countries might collectively pursue as a defence against the chaotic and unstable world unleashed by Canada’s former friend and ally. However, that rhetoric is not yet reality.

Accordingly, on his visit to India, Japan and Australia, Carney is looking to find partners for that vision. He’s seeking opportunities to improve relations, expand trade and cooperate on issues of Pacific security.

The old world order is not coming back. What Carney achieves in his foray to the Pacific Rim may help determine what new order, if any, emerges in its place.

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

– ref. As Canada’s Mark Carney heads to Australia, how did he become the darling of the global anti-Trump movement? – https://theconversation.com/as-canadas-mark-carney-heads-to-australia-how-did-he-become-the-darling-of-the-global-anti-trump-movement-277039

March 2, 2026

Can the 2026 FIFA World Cup still be a force for global unity?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Paul R. Carr, Professeur/Professor (Université du Québec en Outaouais) & Titulaire/Chair, Chaire UNESCO en démocratie, citoyenneté mondiale et éducation transformatoire/ UNESCO Chair in Democracy, Global Citizenship and Transformative Education., Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO)

The FIFA Men’s World Cup will unfold across North America from June 11 to July 19, co-hosted by Canada, Mexico and the United States. This year’s event will be the largest ever, with some 48 countries represented.

The FIFA 2026 World Cup was awarded in 2018 and preparations have been ongoing ever since. However, the U.S. has significantly altered course since the election of Donald Trump in January 2025.

The international community is facing an onslaught of actions, threats and rhetoric from the U.S. government, which has led to chaos, confusion, instability and massive political, economic and sociocultural vulnerability.

As a result, calls have emerged to boycott the tournament, including from former FIFA president Sepp Blatter.

It’s clearly late in the game to consider adjusting, transferring, suspending or altering this thoroughly planned international event. The implications for changing the status of the FIFA 2026 tournament are numerous and far-reaching.

Why consider a boycott now?

A series of recent American actions raises serious questions about its suitability to host the FIFA World Cup at this time.

These include destabilizing allies, imposing tariffs without clear justification, launching a military attacking on Iran with Israel, attacking Venezuela and capturing its president, threatening to annex Greenland and Canada, eliminating USAID and putting millions of people at risk of disease, illness, famine and death and overseeing the violence inflicted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents that endangers citizens and residents.

In addition, the fair and equitable treatment of people seeking to visit the U.S. cannot be assured. People from many countries would effectively be barred from visiting the U.S. to attend the event because of current American policy.

There is a serious threat of people being detained, surveilled and persecuted. Racial profiling is a particular concern given how ICE has maneuvered in immigrant communities in the U.S.

Many are also concerned about violence within the U.S., which is disproportionately higher than in most western countries.

At the same time, the U.S. has withdrawn from numerous international organizations and agreements, the antithesis of co-operation on global issues, shutting down the potential for meaningful and necessary dialogue.

All these realities fly in the face of the spirit and solidarity of global sporting events like the World Cup that aim to cultivate peace and intercultural understanding.

FIFA’s record

Allegations of corruption and bribery within FIFA have persisted for years. They have been documented in a U.S. Department of Justice indictment and in FIFA’s own Garcia Report.

FIFA is sensitive to these complaints, and some reforms have been implemented to make the organization more transparent and credible, but many groups still argue the corruption is rampant.

Human rights have long been an issue at FIFA events. The 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar prompted concerns related to LGBTQ+ rights, with many players wearing the “One Love” armband in protest. It also raised concerns over the rights of workers and migrants, who were exploited and faced discrimination.

There are also environmental concerns related to the carbon footprint of such a large event. However, the counter-claim of the event fostering global solidarity is an equally strong justification for it.

FIFA is lathered in capitalist trappings, and there is a great deal of profit to be made for a small number of people. The 2026 World Cup is expected to bring in more than US$10 billion for the organization.

It is unclear how local taxpayers and citizens benefit economically from holding the World Cup, especially given that they underwrite many of the costs through their taxes.

Similarly, the marketing, television and dissemination rights present a lucrative landscape, yet that funding does little to fight poverty, hunger and unacceptable living conditions for many.

Do boycotts work?

There is some debate about the effectiveness of boycotting. The boycotts of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow, following the invasion of Afghanistan, and of the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles, led by the Soviet bloc in retaliation, did not produce substantive political change.

Some questioned the enormity of eliminating the potential for intercultural and diplomatic interaction.

By contrast, the sporting boycott of apartheid-era South Africa from 1964 to 1992 did help contribute to significant change in the country.

The ongoing Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement against Israel — although not supported by the U.S. and many other countries — has had varying success, but the very fact that it exists and is supported by many is politically significant.

The costs of boycotting now

Altering or boycotting the tournament at this stage would inevitably punish national teams and athletes for political considerations beyond their reach. The FIFA event could generate goodwill, promote global understanding and bring people together, especially in relation to nations from the Global South that are often portrayed negatively.

Some argue a boycott would affect players and fans more than FIFA itself. The economic repercussions of a boycott would also be substantial. Yet the very notion of a boycott is that it does, and should, affect and influence attitudes, behaviours and actions.

Others have suggested alternative avenues for change, including through organized protests and social movement mobilization.

Other alternative proposals for enacting change include targeted boycotts against certain sponsors, institutions and sectors. Some activists may wish to target a policy, such as the assault on migrants in the U.S. or corruption within FIFA.

A force for the global public good?

Boycotts are complicated and have been more commonly related to the Olympic Games than the World Cup. However, citizens and activists alike seek opportunities to develop a more just and equitable world.

In 2021, there were also great concerns regarding human rights violations. Interestingly, while a Statista survey of 4,201 respondents across 120 countries found that most respondents believed their country should boycott the 2022 World cup in Qatar, very few soccer fans were willing to boycott it themselves.

But FIFA isn’t a political party; it’s a business and sports organization. Although considered favourable, it does not need the population to approve its decisions, and sponsors are at risk of being targeted and tarnished if public sentiment turns sharply against the event.

Will the FIFA World Cup provide the opportunity for the U.S. to address problems of racism, gender discrimination, the mantra to annex other countries, ICE overreach and denigration against migrants? Or will such issues be simply swept under the carpet?

The tournament could offer a platform to engage with the world through diplomacy grounded in sovereignty, human rights and mutual benefit. A tri-national hosting arrangement with Canada and Mexico may yet foster cross-border co-operation, even amid strained relations.

The current U.S. political climate does not provide an encouraging model to move the FIFA World Cup toward peace and solidarity currently, but the world is in desperate need for it to do so.

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. Can the 2026 FIFA World Cup still be a force for global unity? – https://theconversation.com/can-the-2026-fifa-world-cup-still-be-a-force-for-global-unity-276502

March 2, 2026

NASA announces a big shake-up of the Artemis Moon program

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Gordon Osinski, Professor in Earth and Planetary Science, Western University

Illustration of Artemis astronauts on the moon. (NASA)

As we wait for the historic Artemis II mission — with Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen on board — NASA has announced major changes to the Artemis program.

The next mission, Artemis III, will now no longer land humans on the surface of the moon, but will instead feature a series of technology tests in Low Earth orbit. Artemis IV will then be the first human landing on the moon, sometime in 2028.

I am a professor, an explorer and a planetary geologist. I am a member of the Artemis III Science Team and have been supporting NASA in developing geology training for Artemis astronauts.

My research involves investigating Apollo samples and lunar meteorites to better understand the geology of the moon.

Why the changes?

While it’s not impacted by last week’s NASA announcement, recent delays to the Artemis II mission are a symptom of the challenges that have faced the entire Artemis program for years.

Following an initial setback due to a liquid hydrogen leak encountered during a wet dress rehearsal on Feb. 3, further issues for Artemis II arose during the second wet dress rehearsal from Feb. 19 to 20. As a result, the earliest launch date is now April 1.

This would make it over three years since the first Artemis mission. Such long gaps between missions limit the ability to refine systems quickly and mean that the same issues (for example, fuel leaks) keep recurring. With the loss of more than 4,000 employees — approximately 20 per cent of its workforce — in 2025, NASA is also dealing with significant workforce challenges, causing further strain to the Artemis program.

These challenges appear to have been recognized by NASA’s new administrator, Jared Isaacman, who wrote in a recent social media post that “the days of NASA launching Moon rockets every 3 years are over.”

A big part of the plan involves standardizing the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket “upper stage” — this is the part of the rocket that propels the spacecraft from Low Earth orbit toward the moon.

A reinvigorated Artemis program

There have been lots of news stories circulating since NASA’s announcement about the shake-up of the Artemis program, many of them referring to the “cancellation” of the Artemis III mission. This is not a fair or accurate representation of the new plans. Many people, including myself, think the new plans are not only more realistic, but also exciting in their own right.

It’s true that Artemis III will now not be the first human landing on the moon since Apollo 17 in 1972. Instead, the mission will launch the Orion crew capsule with astronauts on board into Low Earth orbit, where they will conduct in-space testing of critical technologies, including life support, propulsion and communications systems.

While in orbit, it’s also hoped that Orion will rendezvous and dock with one, or both, of the commercially developed lunar landers built by the companies SpaceX and Blue Origin. This makes sense as the original Artemis plan went from Artemis II straight to the surface without testing out these critical aspects of the mission.

A spacesuit — The Artemis spacesuit prototype, the AxEMU, developed by Axiom Space.
(KBR/Axiom Space)

The crew may also test the new spacesuits designed by Axiom Space, which is important because these suits haven’t yet been worn for an actual space mission.

This new plan, therefore, actually reduces the risks and increases the likelihood of a successful human mission to the surface of the moon in 2028 — Artemis IV instead of Artemis III.

The most exciting, and surprising, part of the recent announcement was that NASA will try for not just one, but two moon landings in 2028, and then a mission every year thereafter. Suddenly, this is becoming much more like the Apollo program, which launched 11 crewed missions in four years.

What about the Lunar Gateway?

There was a notable absence in last week’s announcement — a mention of the Lunar Gateway. This is the small space station that will orbit the moon as part of the Artemis program.

In the original plans, the second lunar landing, Artemis IV, was meant to go to the surface of the moon via the Lunar Gateway.

Lunar Gateway is very important to Canada because it will be home to Canadarm3. As the name might suggest, Canadarm3 is Canada’s next-generation robotic arm and is a $2-billion contribution to the Artemis program.

It builds on Canada’s robotics heritage from Canadarm and Canadarm2, but is far more advanced, featuring artificial intelligence — which is necessary due to the distance it will operate from Earth. As NASA works out the plans for the second and subsequent lunar surface missions, I hope for the sake of the Canadian space program that the Lunar Gateway with its Canadarm3 will still be in the mix.

Gordon Osinski founded the company Interplanetary Exploration Odyssey Inc. He receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Space Agency.

– ref. NASA announces a big shake-up of the Artemis Moon program – https://theconversation.com/nasa-announces-a-big-shake-up-of-the-artemis-moon-program-275025

March 2, 2026

What Bad Bunny meant when he said ‘Canadá’ — and why we’re still talking about it

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Rodrigo Narro Pérez, Assistant Professor, School of Earth, Environment and Society, Faculty of Science, McMaster University

Weeks later, a single word from the Super Bowl half-time show continues to reverberate across social media: “Canadá.”

As Puerto Rican artist Bad Bunny named countries across the Americas at the end of the show, he included Canada as an unexpected reference. This timely invocation made visible what is so often overlooked.

More than one million Latin American people live in Canada, according to Statistics Canada, and for those communities, “Canadá” does not register as novelty. It names a known reality in a country where Spanish is now the most spoken non-official language.

Against this backdrop, Bad Bunny’s halftime performance has lingered as a deliberate cultural and historical intervention that centred Puerto Rico with intention while also gesturing toward a wider hemispheric story of the Americas and their entangled histories. What unfolded was not merely entertainment but an anticolonial re-mapping of the Americas.

From the transformation of the football field into sugarcane fields to Bad Bunny’s unapologetic insistence of performing only in Spanish, the performance centred Black, Latin American and Caribbean cultures in a space often framed as the apex of popular culture in the United States.

But this was not just Spanish in the abstract. It was the distinct Puerto Rican Creolized Spanish that is legible across much of the Latin American Caribbean and its diasporas.

And, given the criticism the performance has drawn both before and after the event, it’s worth underscoring that this took place within a space long shaped by uneven representation.

Latin America lives in Canada

As Latin American scholars working and living within diasporas in Canada, that moment reflected questions our students bring and the histories they carry with them.

At McMaster University, our work in Latin American and Latinx studies begins from the premise that Canada is part of the Americas. Through interdisciplinary teaching and research, we bring together students from across the university — some with personal ties to Latin America and the Caribbean, others encountering these histories for the first time — to think hemispherically, with particular attention to Blackness, Indigeneity, migration and the ongoing, persistent and evolving impacts of colonial rule.

And despite the rapid growth of Latin American and Latinx communities in cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Hamilton, scholarship examining their experiences remains limited, with tangible consequences. Latinx students in Toronto, for example, face some of the lowest high-school graduation rates among major demographic groups.

Our research underscores that these lives are not peripheral to the hemisphere, but central to it.

Celebration as a practice against erasure

When Bad Bunny said “Canadá,” he reminded Canadians that they exist within a story they so often imagine unfolding somewhere else.

For many Latin American, Latinx and Caribbean communities in Canada, that moment affirmed a lived experience. For others, it offered an invitation: to recognize that joy can function as resistance, that culture carries memory and that music can be a way of sharing history.

Scholars of popular culture have long noted that Bad Bunny’s work consistently centres Puerto Rico, not only as a place but as a political reality. This melding of lineage and geopolitics is significant, situating the half-time show as a continuation of a tradition in which culture becomes a vehicle for collective hope.

Music historian and multimedia artist Katelina Eccleston, also known as La Gata, argues that music and dance in Black Latin American and Afro-diasporic traditions are never merely esthetic. On an episode of Reggaetón con la Gata, she framed movement as a site of reclamation of the body, space and autonomy.

When dance is stripped of its histories and recast as apolitical entertainment, the social and material conditions that produced those rhythms are rendered invisible.

Consumption without reckoning

At the same time Canadians enthusiastically consume Latin American culture. Music fills playlists, restaurants flourish and millions travel annually to destinations like Mexico, Cuba and the Dominican Republic.

What is often missing, however, is a deeper engagement with the histories of colonialism, displacement, racialization and resistance that shaped these cultures and the lives of the people who carry them.

Bad Bunny’s naming of “Canadá” highlights that Canada is not adjacent to the Americas — it is part of it. It also serves as a reminder that Latin American and Latinx people are not newcomers to be acknowledged only through immigration statistics. They are already active participants in shaping the cultural, linguistic and political lives of this country.

As educators, we see this dissonance daily. Students are eager to learn about the region in ways that move beyond stereotypes and surface-level, performative multiculturalism. They want to see how histories of empire and extraction connect to contemporary migration, climate vulnerability and racial inequities, and they want language, culture and politics to be taught together, not siloed.

In a moment when Canada’s relationship with the U.S. is uncertain, it’s important to remember that Latin America is not only a place Canadians visit for some sunshine. It’s a region with which Canada shares economic ties, political responsibilities and a future.

The Super Bowl half-time show may seem to have been an unlikely site for this reckoning. But culture often arrives where policy lags behind.

In naming “Canadá,” Bad Bunny reminded Canadians that Latin American and Latinx lives are already here, already shaping the country, already demanding to be seen as people with history, presence and possibility.

– ref. What Bad Bunny meant when he said ‘Canadá’ — and why we’re still talking about it – https://theconversation.com/what-bad-bunny-meant-when-he-said-canada-and-why-were-still-talking-about-it-277148

March 2, 2026

Good-quality child care? What parents should consider, and how it can be assessed

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michal Perlman, Professor of Applied Psychology and Human Development, University of Toronto

Children’s experiences during early years form the foundation for their development.

For many children in Canada and across the globe, these early experiences include substantial exposure to early learning and child care. And government investments in early learning and care in Canada and elsewhere has increased dramatically.

Research has shown that exposure to high-quality early learning and care is associated with positive outcomes for children — and these associations are strongest for children from families with fewer resources, including lower incomes.

But what exactly is high-quality early learning and child care? As I have examined in my research with a number of colleagues, quality is multi-dimensional, encompassing both structural features (like educator/child ratios and the group size) and also what children experience.

The latter includes the quality of interactions between children and their educators. Robust evidence demonstrates that the quality of educator-child interactions is a stronger predictor of developmental and learning outcomes compared to other aspects of quality.

Yet despite decades of investment and reform, national and international evidence consistently indicates that, in many cases, the quality of these interactions in early learning and care settings is average at best.

Monitoring, improving child-care quality

An important mechanism for improving quality, increasing accountability and providing evidence for planning in early learning and child care: quality ratings and improvement systems (QRISs or quality ratings for short).

These ratings and improvement systems are structured around ongoing — commonly annual — measurements of program quality, including systematic assessments of educator-child interactions.

QRISs generally involve evaluations by external assessors that are conducted in early childhood education and child-care settings. Results from these assessments:

• Inform the development of targeted quality improvement plans for the learning and care setting and for individual educators.

• Can be publicly available to help parents decide where to send their children (although posting scores is not required).

• Can inform how quality improvement and system expansion dollars are allocated.

Young children seen in a garden with an adult speaking with them. — It’s important that planning in early learning and child care is informed by evidence.
(Allison Shelley/The Verbatim Agency/EDUimages), CC BY-NC

Important features

For quality ratings and improvement systems to work, they need to have a few important features. For starters, they need to capture key aspects of quality. This means measuring what matters most, not merely what is most readily captured.

Most states in the United States operate quality ratings and improvement systems that involve visiting assessors who observe environments, including hard-to-capture qualities of educator/child interactions.

In Canada, the City of Toronto has operated such a system for years, as have several other Ontario municipalities. Prince Edward Island is in the process of implementing one.

In the face of substantial government spending on early learning and child care and the potential impact on children served by these programs, the cost of implementing quality ratings and improvement systems and their related assessments is small.

Given the high-stakes nature of assessments, they must be:

Valid: This means they’ve been tested to ensure they capture what they are intended to.
Reliable: Different assessors can consistently apply the standards they set across contexts and time periods.

Using valid and reliable measures is needed for the assessments to be fair. But developing such measures requires specific methodological and statistical expertise. Fortunately, several existing and efficient measures are available to capture quality.

City of Toronto’s quality assessment

The City of Toronto developed the assessment for quality improvement (AQI) with help from my team and me at the University of Toronto.

The city’s quality ratings and improvement system is built around the AQI which includes a suite of measures designed to assess global classroom quality (including educator-child interaction) in infant, toddler and pre-school centre classrooms, as well as in-home child-care and outdoor environments.

Results track inequity in access to early learning and child-care programs as well as the quality of these programs, enabling evidence-informed quality improvement. For example, early learning and care practitioners might receive coaching or assistance working on goals that emerge from the assessment.

The City of Toronto also uses assessment for quality improvement scores to determine what organizations or services are eligible to provide care to children whose families receive a child-care subsidy. The scores are posted online so that parents and other stakeholders can use this information when choosing care for their children.

P.E.I. is conducting annual assessment of all early learning and child-care classrooms in the province, relying upon the same assessment for quality improvement tool.

Assessments of individual educators

Current quality ratings and improvement systems focus on observing aspects of caregiver-child interactions in classrooms, but don’t systematically consider individual educators’ work with children.

Research increasingly shows that educators in the same classroom interact with children differently. This raises concerns about inclusion, equity and whether all children in early learning and care settings experience high-quality interactions — and how these are guided and informed by relevant policy and professional education.

Findings about differences in how individual educators interact with children suggest policymakers should additionally use more specialized quality improvement measures that consider individual educators’ responsiveness. Use of such individualized assessment, when it comes with coaching and support, has been shown to improve the quality of educator interactions with children.

Ongoing quality assessments matter for knowing our public investments in early learning and child care are synonymous with stable high-quality experiences for children. They provide actionable, evidence-based information that can guide how resources are allocated.

Systems like these have been in place for decades in the U.S. There is growing momentum toward quality-assessment approaches in Canada that are both methodologically sound and capable of informing meaningful action. When these approaches are combined with tailored coaching and supports for improvement, they merit increasing attention and support.

Michal Perlman receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Lawson Foundation, McCain Foundation and others.

– ref. Good-quality child care? What parents should consider, and how it can be assessed – https://theconversation.com/good-quality-child-care-what-parents-should-consider-and-how-it-can-be-assessed-274370

March 2, 2026

U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran may succeed on a military basis, but at what cost?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

Israel and the United States have launched combat operations against Iran via Operation Epic Fury. The air campaign appears aimed at three targets: Iran’s military bases and command structure, its air defences and strategic missile sites and its leadership.

Early strikes were successful in killing Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei and several key members of the leadership.

The strikes themselves are likely to be successful from a strictly military standpoint. Israeli and American forces are quickly establishing air superiority over Iran and disabling Iran’s anti-air capabilities.

These attacks occur at a moment when Iran is weakened both domestically and internationally.

The Iranian regime is still recovering from the December and January protests that were the greatest challenge to the Iranian government since the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Internationally, key members of Iran’s “ring of fire,” like the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon, are in a vulnerable position. Furthermore, the domestic unrest have emboldened people around the world to challenge the Iranian regime’s legitimacy.

Nevertheless, the U.S. and Israel are unlikely to be successful in their stated goal of regime change. Historically, air power alone is insufficient. Furthermore, even if they succeed in regime change, they may create an even more volatile geopolitical situation.

Escalating tensions

The tensions between the U.S.-Israel and Iran are nothing new. Their foundations go back to the birth of the Islamic Republic.

There’s been a significant escalation of tensions, however, over the past few years. The Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack against Israeli citizens and Iran’s role in supporting Hamas and other paramilitary groups opposed to the Israeli state resulted in Israel launching extensive strikes against Iranian assets in the region.

These strikes culminated in last year’s Twelve Day War between Israel and Iran, with the U.S. playing an auxilliary role. American and Israeli strikes inflicted significant damage on Iranian infrastructure. But they didn’t achieve the American goal of eliminating Iran’s nuclear program, despite President Donald Trump’s claims to the contrary.

Iranian protests

Against this backdrop of rising tensions between Israel/the United States and Iran, the economic situation in Iran deteriorated, resulting in shopkeepers and merchants in Tehran going on strike. These protests served as a spark for what became the largest public demonstrations against the Iranian regime that it had encountered since the birth of the Islamic Republic.

This latest uprising by the Iranian people presented an opportunity for the U.S. and Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has never backed down from his goal of regime change in Iran. Trump actively encouraged the protesters to fight for regime change.

The protesters, however, needed material support that only the U.S. could provide. But with American military assets in the Caribbean challenging Venezuela, there were insufficient forces available.

The result was that the U.S. was not able to intervene, and the Iranian regime succeeded in quashing the protests. Total deaths from the government’s crackdown are estimated to be in the thousands.

The U.S., having missed its ideal opportunity for regime change due to its fixation on Venezuela earlier in the year, nevertheless went through with pursuing its goal on Feb. 28.

An uncertain end

The problem now faced by Israel and the U.S. s the stated goal of regime change and the long-term stability of Iran. Not only is regime change uncertain due to the limitations of a strictly air campaign, but it could also create a scenario where more radicalized forces come to power.

This comes from the fact that, while the Iranian regime is often equated with prominent figures like the Ayatollah, it operates as more than a system centred on a single individual.

Unlike other authoritarian countries where key individuals or families have power, Iran is a complex state with a complex governance structure. At its heart is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Far from merely a military unit or secret police, the IRGC is a vast institution integrated within the security, economy and governance of Iran.

This is where the difference between “regime change” and “regime building” comes to light. Removing key leaders may destabilize Iran and change who wields power, but that usually means power is then consolidated by people already in place. That’s not the citizens Iran, who Trump urged to rise up, but the vast infrastructure of the IRGC.

Conflict could spread

This outcome is more likely given the instability of Iran over the past few weeks. If the regime were stable, Iranian political and military leaders wouldn’t view the current attacks as posing a threat to their control. But under the current volatile domestic circumstances, these leaders are likely to respond more forcefully and broadly because they believe their own future — and lives — are at stake.

The IRGC isn’t likely to be a more conciliatory or ideologically permissive interlocutor. In fact, the opposite is probably true.

Faced with the threat of further American and Israeli attacks and nascent discontent at home, the IRGC may move quickly to further lock down its own power and respond aggressively. This power struggle could not only result in significant Iranian deaths, but cause the war to spread throughout Middle East.

– ref. U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran may succeed on a military basis, but at what cost? – https://theconversation.com/u-s-israeli-strikes-against-iran-may-succeed-on-a-military-basis-but-at-what-cost-277182

March 1, 2026

Strong opinions matter: Why some birds refuse to follow the flock

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lauren Guillette, Associate Professor & Canada Research Chair in Cognitive Ecology, Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, University of Alberta

We like to think that animals, including humans, follow the crowd. Think of a flock of pigeons taking off from the city square together or the recent frenzy over labubus. If most of the group does something, surely the individual will copy.

a zebra finch on a branch — Researchers found that finches with strong preferences largely ignored what the majority of a flock was doing.
(Unsplash/Robert Schwarz)

This process has given rise to human culture, from our diets and the tools we use to eat to language and art.

But what if it’s more complicated? What if the deciding factor isn’t just what the majority is doing, but how strongly you already feel about it?

That’s the question our team, the Animal Cognition Research Group in the Department of Psychology at the University of Alberta, set out to test in zebra finches. Zebra finches are small, highly social songbirds that breed in colonies in the Australian outback. In our laboratory, they build dome-shaped nests year-round using coloured string.

Sometimes obsessive colours preferences

Individual males, the nest builders in the species, show stable colour preferences. Some strongly prefer blue. Others lean yellow. Some are almost obsessive about it.

However, if a male who prefers one colour enters a population where most nests are built from another colour, will he conform? And more specifically, does the strength of his original preference matter?

To answer that, we ran a three-phase experiment. First, we measured each male’s colour preference by presenting him with blue and yellow strings and recording how long he interacted with each. This allowed us to calculate which colour he preferred and how strongly. A bird spending 95 per cent of his time with a blue string is very different from one splitting his time 60/40.

Next, we placed that male and his female partner into a population where four other pairs were incubating eggs in completed nests. These nests varied systematically. In some groups, all four nests matched the male’s preferred colour. In others, most, or all, contradicted it. The observer male could watch these nests and their occupants for several days. Finally, we returned him to his own cage, provided both colours of string and allowed him to build.

Here’s what we found

Males with weak initial preferences were more likely to conform. If most nests they observed were built from their non-preferred colour, they were more likely to switch and use that colour themselves. Males with strong initial preferences largely ignored the majority. They saw the same information. They had the same opportunity to copy, but they didn’t.

Interestingly, many birds did notice the social information. When the majority of the population used a focal male’s non-preferred colour, these males were more likely to first touch that colour when they began building. They paid attention. But noticing is not the same as changing.

In building his nest, what mattered most was the interaction between the social environment and the strength of the male’s original bias. This distinction, between acquiring social information and actually using it, is critical. Animals may observe what others are doing without necessarily acting on it. That gap may help explain why evidence for conformity in animals has been mixed.

In human psychology, we see something similar. People with strong pre-existing beliefs are less susceptible to social influence. Present the same evidence to two individuals with different prior convictions and you may get very different outcomes. The stronger the initial attitude, the more resistant it tends to be.

We found the same pattern in birds. The stronger the bias, the less likely the individual was to conform. Zebra finches are not forming political opinions about string colour. But the underlying mechanism is strikingly similar: strong preferences can act as filters, buffering individuals against social influence. That has important implications for how culture forms and persists.

Individual choices build culture

Conformity is one of the processes that stabilizes cultural traditions. If newcomers reliably adopt the majority behaviour, group patterns become entrenched. But if some individuals resist, because their personal biases are strong, traditions may spread more slowly or fail to take hold.

This suggests that individual variation is not just background noise. It may actively structure how information moves through a population.

Most animal conformity studies have focused on foraging. We examined nest construction, an ecologically important, fitness-relevant behaviour. Nest design influences reproductive success, so the balance between personal preference and social information likely carries real consequences.

Even in this high-stakes context, birds did not blindly follow the crowd. Some conformed. Some didn’t. And the difference depended, in part, on how strongly they felt to begin with.

One of the most powerful aspects of this project was seeing how a seemingly simple question — whether the birds would copy others — unfolded into something much more nuanced. We had to distinguish between seeing, learning and doing. And we had to account for bias strength, not just bias direction.

Culture emerges at the group level, but it is built from individual decisions. Each bird chooses which string to pick up and whether to add it to the nest. Sometimes, even when the entire room is blue, a yellow-loving bird sticks with yellow.

That tension, between the pull of the group and the pull of the self, turns out to be central to understanding how traditions form, persist and sometimes fail. And it may help us think about conformity in our own species, too.

Lauren Guillette receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada (NSERC RGPIN-2019-04733) and the Canada Research Chairs Program (CRCTIER2 00418).

Julia Self received funding from NSERC CSG-M 2023-2024.

Julia Lauren Self has received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Strong opinions matter: Why some birds refuse to follow the flock – https://theconversation.com/strong-opinions-matter-why-some-birds-refuse-to-follow-the-flock-275905

March 1, 2026

Mark Carney’s visit to India hits the reset button on the Canada–India relationship

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Saira Bano, Assistant Professor in Political Science, Thompson Rivers University

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit to India marks the most consequential step in years to rebuild Canada–India relations after the diplomatic rupture in 2023 over allegations linking Indian agents to the killing of a Canadian Sikh activist.

The visit signals a deliberate shift from crisis management to economic statecraft.

In Mumbai, Carney announced that Canada aims to conclude a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with India by the end of this year, with the goal of doubling two-way trade by 2030. The message was pragmatic: the two countries may not always agree, but engagement must continue.

From rupture to reset

Canada-India relations deteriorated sharply in September 2023, leading to diplomatic expulsions, reduced staffing and suspended trade negotiations. For much of the past two years, the relationship was defined by security tensions and mutual distrust.

The first signs of stabilization came at the 2025 G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alta., when Carney’s invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi signalled a diplomatic breakthrough. High commissioners were reinstated and ministerial channels reopened. Carney’s India visit suggests the reset is moving from symbolism to implementation.

The logic is clear. Canada’s heavy trade dependence on the United States has become riskier amid tariff threats and political volatility. Diversification is no longer aspirational; it’s strategic.

India, as one of the world’s fastest growing major economies and an increasingly central figure in global supply chains, offers scale and long-term opportunity.

Energy as the anchor

Energy emerged as the central pillar of Carney’s two-day visit. Canada and India have relaunched the Ministerial Energy Dialogue and are advancing discussions on uranium supply, conventional energy trade and clean energy co-operation.

India’s energy demand continues to rise as economic growth accelerates. It remains heavily import-dependent on crude oil and natural gas while also seeking to expand low-carbon baseload power. Canada, meanwhile, is looking to reduce its overwhelming reliance on the U.S. market.

With expanded export capacity through the Trans Mountain pipeline and growing LNG infrastructure, Canada is better positioned to reach Indo-Pacific markets than at any point in recent decades.

While Canada will not displace other suppliers, it can become part of India’s diversification portfolio. Long-term uranium agreements, in particular, would embed trust through decades of commercial interdependence. Nuclear co-operation offers durability that few other sectors can match.

Critical minerals, structural alignment

Beyond fuels, critical minerals represent a deeper strategic opportunity. Canada’s Critical Minerals Strategy aligns closely with India’s National Critical Minerals Mission in terms of lithium, nickel, cobalt, rare earth elements and downstream supply chains.

For Canada, the goal is not simply exporting raw resources, but building integrated value chains through processing partnerships, recycling and technology collaboration. For India, secure access to minerals is essential for electric vehicles, semiconductors, defence industrial supply chains and clean energy technologies, particularly as it seeks to reduce dependence on China-dominated processing networks.

Progress in critical minerals would move the relationship beyond symbolic diplomacy toward structural alignment.

Although CEPA negotiations have stalled in the past, both countries now face stronger incentives to revive them amid global trade turbulence and diversification pressures.

Progress on energy and minerals can help build domestic support for stability while wider trade talks continue.

Innovation, security

Carney’s visit also emphasized people-to-people and innovation ties. Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand launched a new Canada–India Talent and Innovation Strategy, including 13 new university partnerships spanning artificial intelligence, hydrogen research, digital agriculture and health sciences.

Education has long anchored Canada–India relations. Embedding research collaboration and talent mobility strengthens long term institutional linkages that outlast political cycles. Artificial intelligence co-operation, in particular, aligns Canada’s strengths in responsible AI governance with India’s scale in digital infrastructure and AI deployment.

Despite economic progress, however, security concerns between India and Canada remain unresolved. The diplomatic fallout of 2023 continues to affect trust.

During the visit, Anand faced repeated questions about foreign interference and transnational repression. She emphasized that public safety concerns must be addressed through direct engagement rather than disengagement.

Recent reports of ongoing threats and warnings to Sikh activists in Canada show that underlying tensions persist, even as both governments seek to prevent them from defining the entire relationship.

Ottawa’s tone appears more measured, but the conflicting narratives between the two countries remains evident.

The road ahead

Carney’s challenge is now therefore twofold: advance economic co-operation while preventing unresolved security disputes from derailing the broader reset of the Canada-India relationship.

Improved ties with India also align with Carney’s broader foreign policy vision, articulated in Davos, that middle powers must co-operate more closely in response to fractures in the global order.

India’s inclusion in a broader Indo-Pacific tour alongside Australia and Japan underscores that this engagement is part of a wider strategic recalibration.

Stabilizing relations with India is therefore not simply a bilateral exercise. It’s about positioning Canada more credibly in the Indo-Pacific region and strengthening co-ordination among democratic middle powers navigating geopolitical uncertainty.

The significance of Carney’s visit lies less in rhetoric and more in trajectory. By setting a target for a trade agreement, advancing energy and uranium co-operation, deepening critical minerals alignment and expanding academic partnerships, Ottawa is attempting to anchor the relationship in long-term interdependence.

The reset is not complete. Security tensions still cast a shadow. But the visit suggests that both governments are willing to compartmentalize disputes and focus on areas of shared economic and strategic interest.

Saira Bano 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. Mark Carney’s visit to India hits the reset button on the Canada–India relationship – https://theconversation.com/mark-carneys-visit-to-india-hits-the-reset-button-on-the-canada-india-relationship-277015

March 1, 2026

Actually, Doug Ford, basket-weaving is innovative and in-demand

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Victoria MacBeath, PhD Candidate, Art History, Concordia University

Salish Nlaka’pamux basket made of cedar or spruce root, cedar wood and hide. (McCord Museum)

The Ontario government recently announced massive cuts to Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) funding, decreasing the maximum funding from 85 per cent to 25 per cent.

Student response to this has been largely negative. Speaking to the media, Ontario Premier Doug Ford said that he received “thousands of calls” from students expressing concerns. Ford’s response: telling them to invest in education that leads to in-demand jobs.

At a February news conference responding to OSAP cuts, Ford relayed that he told frustrated students: “You’re picking basket-weaving courses, and there’s not too many baskets being sold out there.” He said, instead, students should invest in their future through their program decisions — insinuating that craft curriculums hold no value in the job market. Ford mentioned trades, STEM and health-care fields as ones that would provide post-graduation employment.

As a researcher that engages with scholars specialized in the history of craft practices in Canada, alongside teaching art history courses that highlight the social, political and economic importance of fibre arts, Ford’s response is troubling and unsurprising.

Basket-weavers push back

Ford’s rhetoric demonstrates a misunderstanding of Canada’s cultural sector, basket weaving and the purpose of higher education.

In response to Ford’s comments, basket-weavers and craft organizations across the country noted the lucrative nature of their practice alongside the widely applicable skills learned through craft education.

Basket-maker Spencer Lunham Jr., of the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation, for example, told CBC that he sells a couple hundred baskets per year for around $150 to $3,000 each.

The prosperity of Canada’s cultural sector is backed by data from the Canadian chamber of Commerce, whose business data lab reported in October 2025 that the arts and culture sector’s GDP has grown nearly eight per cent, outpacing an overall economic growth of four per cent. In addition, the sector supports “13 jobs for every million in output, which is more than oil and gas, manufacturing or agriculture.”

Ontario is one of the provinces to see the highest economic impact from the sector, according to the report.

Winner of Sobey Art Award

Ford’s emphasis on the uselessness of craft practices is also challenged by recent winners of the Sobey Art Award, one of the most prestigious art awards in the country.

Many of the recent winners incorporate craft or craft-like practices into their work. This includes the 2017 winner of the award, Ursula Johnson,
an artist from the Eskasoni First Nation, in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, who has an innovative basket-making practice. It seems that, at the very least, gallerists are buying baskets.

Johnson’s practice in particular highlights that — despite craft’s common framing as traditional, overly indulgent and frozen in time — basket-weaving is an innovative, adaptive and in-demand field.

As curator Heather Anderson argues in her 2021 writing on Johnson’s work: the artist utilizes weaving practices to highlight Canada’s ongoing role in colonization, and to question the contemporary museum’s implication in it.

Craft and technological innovation

A large wooden weaving loom. — Wooden Jacquard loom shown at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester, England.
(Wikimedia), CC BY

Craft practices have always been at the centre of technological innovation.

Some scholars contend that the inventor of the computer, Charles Babbage, was likely inspired by the Jacquard loom: a weaving machine whose invention had a profound impact on the industrial revolution in Europe.

Other writers, like journalist Brian Merchant, have recently argued that those opposed to artificial intelligence can take inspiration from the first rebellions against big tech: the 19th century Luddites who opposed the mass industrialization of weaving practices.

Illustration of a 19th century protest figure outdoors. — ‘The Leader of the Luddites,’ illustration, 1812.
(Wikimedia)

From AI to the clothes we wear, weaving has shaped the contemporary global economy.

While weaving can be lucrative, members of the Toronto Guild of Spinners and Weavers noted that basket-weaving courses do not emphasize their monetary value, but rather their educational value.

Purpose of learning

This is where Ford’s real misunderstanding of education is revealed: the purpose of learning is not simply to remember and regurgitate facts, it is to problem solve, to expand our horizons and to think critically. These skills can be developed in basket-weaving courses just as well as math courses.

Johnson, for example, says that her grandmother taught her that the maker does not manipulate the wood they use to weave, but instead the wood guides the maker. Basket weaving teaches us to listen, to collaborate and build from a strong foundation and work our way up.

TED talk with Ursula Johnson, an artist from the Eskasoni First Nation who tells the story of preserving Mi’kmaq culture through the art of basketry.

College admissions expert and counsellor Scott White, writing for Forbes Magazine, wrote in 2025 that “we need a system that prioritizes critical thinking, emotional intelligence and practical skills over rote memorization.”

He and many others who are invested in supporting young people and helping our systems change to support our society through turbulent times note that current education systems still reflects outdated ideas about the future of workers: of those in factories, rather than creative thinkers.

Pipeline to a job?

The Ford government’s approach to higher education seems to be the same — funding a system that put us on a pipeline to a job and where programs that demand critical and creative thinking are undervalued, and also, underfunded: Recent reports note that funding for Ontario’s post-secondary sector is low compared to support in other provinces.

Author Ursula K. Le Guin argued in 1986 that rather than a weapon for killing, the first human tool was likely a container: a basket or a woven net. She writes that the basket — and craft practices — are not supplemental to human survival: rather, they enable it.

Craft practices allow us to carry our culture, our belongings and our sustenance. If we focus only on the money-making schemes in society, then we lose a part of ourselves.

This is the real power of craft education: when we engage hands-on craft, we learn about our past and build problem-solving skills.

Victoria MacBeath receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for craft history research.

– ref. Actually, Doug Ford, basket-weaving is innovative and in-demand – https://theconversation.com/actually-doug-ford-basket-weaving-is-innovative-and-in-demand-276496

March 1, 2026

U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran may succeed on a military basis, but at what political cost?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

Early strikes were successful in killing Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei and several key members of the leadership.

These attacks occur at a moment when Iran is weakened both domestically and internationally.

The Iranian regime is still recovering from the December and January protests that were the greatest challenge to the Iranian government since the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Escalating tensions

The tensions between the U.S.-Israel and Iran are nothing new. Their foundations go back to the birth of the Islamic Republic.

Iranian protests

The protesters, however, needed material support that only the U.S. could provide. But with American military assets in the Caribbean challenging Venezuela, there were insufficient forces available.

The result was that the U.S. was not able to intervene, and the Iranian regime succeeded in quashing the protests. Total deaths from the government’s crackdown are estimated to be in the thousands.

The U.S., having missed its ideal opportunity for regime change due to its fixation on Venezuela earlier in the year, nevertheless went through with pursuing its goal on Feb. 28.

An uncertain end

This comes from the fact that, while the Iranian regime is often equated with prominent figures like the Ayatollah, it operates as more than a system centred on a single individual.

Conflict could spread

The IRGC isn’t likely to be a more conciliatory or ideologically permissive interlocutor. In fact, the opposite is probably true.

– ref. U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran may succeed on a military basis, but at what political cost? – https://theconversation.com/u-s-israeli-strikes-against-iran-may-succeed-on-a-military-basis-but-at-what-political-cost-277182