Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Parker, Lecturer in Politics, University of Glasgow

Scottish politics has a dual nature. It is significantly distinct from politics in the rest of the United Kingdom, with its own dynamics, parties and leaders. But it can still be affected by events down south. And for the Scottish sections of the UK parties – the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Labour and Reform UK – negative perceptions of their UK leaderships can have consequences for their Scottish wings.

---

Read more:
How much longer can Keir Starmer survive?

---

This is the situation Anas Sarwar, leader of the Scottish Labour party, finds himself in. In recent weeks the UK government has been engulfed in a scandal surrounding former Labour peer, MP, minister and (most recently) ambassador Peter Mandelson and his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

This has led to his resignation from the House of Lords and the Labour party, the launch of a police investigation and an intense backlash that has put Prime Minister Keir Starmer under pressure. Sarwar has entered the foray in dramatic fashion, summoning the media to a press conference in Glasgow where he called on Starmer to resign.

Why did Sarwar publicly turn on Starmer?

Sarwar’s primary motivation is that his party is struggling badly ahead of May’s crucial Scottish parliamentary elections. The most recent polling shows the governing Scottish National Party (SNP) in a reduced first place, and Labour fighting the radical right Reform UK party for second.

While historically Scotland’s dominant party, Labour lost power to the SNP in 2007 and was then reduced to third place in 2016. But it made a striking comeback in 2024 when Sarwar’s party won the UK general election in Scotland, capitalising on voters’ perception of declining public services under the SNP.

However, following the installation of a Labour government at the UK level, the party’s ratings rapidly declined. Sarwar is concerned that the fallout from the Mandleson scandal will lead to even further losses of support in the polls.

While Starmer’s cabinet has rushed to defend him, Sarwar is, so far, the most high-profile Labour figure to call for Starmer’s resignation. What is especially interesting is that Sarwar has specifically framed his call in Scottish terms, speaking of his loyalty to Scotland and alleging that Starmer’s actions have been detrimental to his party’s prospects in May. He stated that Starmer must go if Scotland is going to avoid another decade of SNP rule.

Was he right to do it?

Sarwar is right that UK Labour’s unpopularity since it took office has damaged the standing of its devolved wings. He also presumably feels very angry his chances of taking power have been ended by this. But the choice to blame Scottish Labour’s failings on Starmer obscures Sarwar’s own responsibility for Labour’s poor standing.

While Starmer is undoubtedly highly unpopular in Scotland, Sarwar has spent the time since the general election steadfastly failing to differentiate himself from the prime minister – despite suggestions during in the 2024 campaign Scottish Labour MPs would serve as an autonomous group at Westminster and pursue an independent line.

This failure is important as it means Sarwar’s Scottish party has been severely discredited by UK Labour’s failings and can no longer serve as the receptacle of anti-SNP protest voting as it did in the general election. Continuing criticism of the SNP’s record now rings much hollower when voters can look at a very similar party in Westminster they don’t perceive as doing any better or even as worse.

What’s behind this row?

Ultimately, this is linked to broader underlying issues in Scottish Labour around the party’s continuing inability to come to terms with its loss of status as the country’s dominant political force and adapt to the politics of the devolution era. The party has consistently failed to take into account how Holyrood-centric Scottish politics has become or the need for policy and messaging differentiation between Scotland and the UK. This is something that Welsh Labour realised in the 2000s.

The return of a new majority of Labour MPs in Scotland should have been viewed as the next step towards the campaign to win the 2026 elections in Scotland. Instead it seems to have renewed the party’s Westminster-centrism.

Scottish MPs in Westminster have toed the party line, including on policies which are highly unpopular north of the border. This has been exacerbated by frequent campaign misfires, such as the printing and distribution of leaflets with fake quotes endorsing Sarwar and a bizarre series of adverts centred on Sarwar’s life.

Such a personality-centred campaign makes little sense when the party is no longer running neck and neck with the SNP but struggling for second place. Arguably, setting out a strong vision of what Scottish Labour wants Scotland to look like – other than merely a place without the SNP in charge – would leave the party in a much stronger place.

Sarwar’s move will likely not harm his party’s prospects in May, but the move to a more assertive Scottish leadership is very late in the game and much more will be needed for a true turnaround in Scottish Labour’s fortunes.

Jonathan Parker 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. Anas Sarwar: why did the leader of Scottish Labour call for Keir Starmer’s resignation – and has the move backfired? – https://theconversation.com/anas-sarwar-why-did-the-leader-of-scottish-labour-call-for-keir-starmers-resignation-and-has-the-move-backfired-275504

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Martin Farr, Senior Lecturer in Contemporary British History, Newcastle University

When they disintegrate, governments often do so slowly, then quickly. Despite dragooned public statements of support from the cabinet, the government of Keir Starmer gives every appearance of entering that second phase.

In the wake of the scandal surrounding former Washington ambassador Peter Mandelson and his ties to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Starmer lost his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, who had championed Mandelson for the role. Then the PM lost his press secretary, Tim Allan.

Then, in a live press conference, he lost the leader of the Scottish Labour party, Anas Sarwar. Eighteen months ago, Starmer could not have been closer to Sarwar. Now he has cut his national leader adrift and called for Starmer to resign.

Sarwar is not in Westminster. Sarwar has to fight an election in Scotland in May, and Starmer and the Westminster Labour government has been a liability for Scottish Labour for over a year. Sarwar had to act to have any chance of mounting a challenge against the governing Scottish National Party in those elections.

Sarwar’s actions may be be the most impactful, owing to the political momentum he has now so dramatically accelerated. But McSweeney’s resignation is the more significant development. The last line of defence for a prime minister is their chief of staff, and Sweeney was much more than that.

Party leaders and prime ministers have come not to be able to live without them, but so often are forced to. The chief of staff is part human, part metaphor: a conduit, a pressure valve, a lightning rod.

When forced out, their principal rarely lasts long, albeit as much for the related erosion of their authority as prime minister as in what that chief of staff may personally have provided. But McSweeney, a brilliant electoral tactician and party organiser with no experience of government, was also in the wrong job. And Starmer put him there.

The Mandelson scandal

Much of what is taking place is what takes place when governments are old, or infirm, but much is also new, or at least new in effect. To write a rudimentary historical political equation: Marconi plus Profumo equals Mandelson.

The 1912 Marconi scandal revolved around shady share dealing on the part of those around the chancellor of the exchequer, David Lloyd George. The 1963 Profumo affair involved the minister for war sharing his bed with a woman who also shared hers with the Russian naval attache – and in the year of the Cuban missile crisis.

---

Read more:
The fall of Peter Mandelson and the many questions the UK government must now answer

---

Marconi remains the most serious financial scandal in modern British politics, though Lloyd George survived. John Profumo resigned, but for lying to MPs. No secrets were divulged, but the political establishment was discredited, and the lives of young women were ruined. The Mandelson scandal combines both, and to greater effect. And is still ongoing.

The effect of Epstein continues to corrode. Endless news channel recycling of footage of Starmer and Mandelson roaring with tactile laughter as they approach the cameras at the UK embassy in Washington DC only a year ago has become a visual backdrop to the crisis. The king is now routinely heckled in public over Epstein.

The end of the line?

The history of chiefs of staff is a short one. The first chief, indicative of the move to an increasingly presidential premiership, was Jonathan Powell, who served without personal controversy throughout Tony Blair’s decade as prime minister. Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy provided the political smarts for (another politically dysfunctional) prime minister, Theresa May. They accepted responsibility for the disastrous 2017 general election, but only delayed May’s defenestration.

Harold Wilson had his “kitchen cabinet”, including Marcia Williams, Joe Haines and Gerald Kaufman, who damaged the prime minister by osmosis. Margaret Thatcher was too strong a leader to need one, though she had advisers she relied on.

This is potentially much more damaging for Starmer than for any of his predecessors. It is, almost as much if not more so, McSweeney’s government as it is Starmer’s, and Starmer himself is as much McSweeney’s creation as much as he is his own man. It may have been significant that in his resignation statement McSweeney wrote: “I have always believed there are moments when you must accept your responsibility and step aside for the bigger cause.”

The McSweeney project, born in opposition, was to reclaim the Labour party from the Corbynite left, and present it as a competent and moderate alternative to a chaotic and dysfunctional period of Conservative government. Starmer, effectively, was recruited for this job by McSweeney for that purpose. To that extent the 2024 general election revealed the project to have been completely successful. Hundreds of Labour MPs owed their election to McSweeney. But then, what next?

Starmer, as with Tony Blair and David Cameron, became prime minister without any experience of government. Unlike Blair or Cameron, however, he also had no serious experience of politics: hence his need for, and appointment of, McSweeney.

For Starmer, the prime minister is the monarch’s first minister, first lord of the treasury, head of government, minister for civil service; the country’s representative internationally. He has never fully appreciated that the prime minister is also a politician. If they are not, they will soon be found out.

Political skills are not sufficient, but they are necessary. Ted Heath did not have them either, but he at least knew about governing. Starmer was found out some time ago and now a concatenation of circumstance – Mandelson, Allan, Sarwar, the looming byelection in Gorton and Denton (a formally safe seat that Labour looks set to lose), the May elections in Scotland and Wales and in English councils – has provided the moment.

McSweeney’s departure has probably clarified Starmer’s fate – he has never been weaker. But there is still no obvious alternative. This may provide Starmer with the time during which he hopes personnel changes may help provide a reset.

If this is the end for Starmer, a serious and damaging pattern in British politics and public life will have been reinforced. Since David Cameron stepped down in 2016, no prime minister has lasted more than about three years. The impatience and intolerance of voters with the political classes has increased, and will only increase further.

Starmer’s was always a dual leadership, and then premiership, held with someone who effectively saved him the trouble of thinking. He is now on his own.

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

– ref. How much longer can Keir Starmer survive? – https://theconversation.com/how-much-longer-can-keir-starmer-survive-275488

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Parker, Lecturer in Politics, University of Glasgow

Scottish politics has a dual nature. It is significantly distinct from politics in the rest of the United Kingdom, with its own dynamics, parties and leaders. But it can still be affected by events down south. And for the Scottish sections of the UK parties – the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Labour and Reform UK – negative perceptions of their UK leaderships can have consequences for their Scottish wings.

---

Read more:
Keir Starmer on the ropes as Scottish party leader calls for his resignation

---

This is the situation Anas Sarwar, leader of the Scottish Labour party, finds himself in. In recent weeks the UK government has been engulfed in a scandal surrounding former Labour peer, MP, minister and (most recently) ambassador Peter Mandelson and his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

This has led to his resignation from the House of Lords and the Labour party, the launch of a police investigation and an intense backlash that has put Prime Minister Keir Starmer under pressure. Sarwar has entered the foray in dramatic fashion, summoning the media to a press conference in Glasgow where he called on Starmer to resign.

Why did Sarwar publicly turn on Starmer?

Sarwar’s primary motivation is that his party is struggling badly ahead of May’s crucial Scottish parliamentary elections. The most recent polling shows the governing Scottish National Party (SNP) in a reduced first place, and Labour fighting the radical right Reform UK party for second.

While historically Scotland’s dominant party, Labour lost power to the SNP in 2007 and was then reduced to third place in 2016. But it made a striking comeback in 2024 when Sarwar’s party won the UK general election in Scotland, capitalising on voters’ perception of declining public services under the SNP.

However, following the installation of a Labour government at the UK level, the party’s ratings rapidly declined. Sarwar is concerned that the fallout from the Mandleson scandal will lead to even further losses of support in the polls.

While Starmer’s cabinet has rushed to defend him, Sarwar is, so far, the most high-profile Labour figure to call for Starmer’s resignation. What is especially interesting is that Sarwar has specifically framed his call in Scottish terms, speaking of his loyalty to Scotland and alleging that Starmer’s actions have been detrimental to his party’s prospects in May. He stated that Starmer must go if Scotland is going to avoid another decade of SNP rule.

Was he right to do it?

Sarwar is right that UK Labour’s unpopularity since it took office has damaged the standing of its devolved wings. He also presumably feels very angry his chances of taking power have been ended by this. But the choice to blame Scottish Labour’s failings on Starmer obscures Sarwar’s own responsibility for Labour’s poor standing.

While Starmer is undoubtedly highly unpopular in Scotland, Sarwar has spent the time since the general election steadfastly failing to differentiate himself from the prime minister – despite suggestions during in the 2024 campaign Scottish Labour MPs would serve as an autonomous group at Westminster and pursue an independent line.

This failure is important as it means Sarwar’s Scottish party has been severely discredited by UK Labour’s failings and can no longer serve as the receptacle of anti-SNP protest voting as it did in the general election. Continuing criticism of the SNP’s record now rings much hollower when voters can look at a very similar party in Westminster they don’t perceive as doing any better or even as worse.

What’s behind this row?

Ultimately, this is linked to broader underlying issues in Scottish Labour around the party’s continuing inability to come to terms with its loss of status as the country’s dominant political force and adapt to the politics of the devolution era. The party has consistently failed to take into account how Holyrood-centric Scottish politics has become or the need for policy and messaging differentiation between Scotland and the UK. This is something that Welsh Labour realised in the 2000s.

The return of a new majority of Labour MPs in Scotland should have been viewed as the next step towards the campaign to win the 2026 elections in Scotland. Instead it seems to have renewed the party’s Westminster-centrism.

Scottish MPs in Westminster have toed the party line, including on policies which are highly unpopular north of the border. This has been exacerbated by frequent campaign misfires, such as the printing and distribution of leaflets with fake quotes endorsing Sarwar and a bizarre series of adverts centred on Sarwar’s life.

Such a personality-centred campaign makes little sense when the party is no longer running neck and neck with the SNP but struggling for second place. Arguably, setting out a strong vision of what Scottish Labour wants Scotland to look like – other than merely a place without the SNP in charge – would leave the party in a much stronger place.

Sarwar’s move will likely not harm his party’s prospects in May, but the move to a more assertive Scottish leadership is very late in the game and much more will be needed for a true turnaround in Scottish Labour’s fortunes.

Jonathan Parker 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. Anas Sarwar: why did the leader of Scottish Labour call for Kier Starmer’s resignation – and has the move backfired? – https://theconversation.com/anas-sarwar-why-did-the-leader-of-scottish-labour-call-for-kier-starmers-resignation-and-has-the-move-backfired-275504

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gerald Mako, Research Affiliate, University of Cambridge

In April 2007, the Baltic nation of Estonia woke up to one of the world’s first major cyber-attacks on civil society carried out by a state. A series of massive “distributed denial of service” assaults – floods of fake traffic from networked computers – targeted government websites, banks, media outlets and online services for weeks, slowing or shutting them down.

These cyber-attacks followed Estonia’s decision to relocate a Soviet-era war memorial and war graves from the centre of the capital city, Tallinn, to a military cemetery.

Amplified by false reports in Russian media, this sparked nights of protest and rioting among Russian-speakers in Tallinn – and cyber chaos throughout the country. Though the cyber-attack was never officially sanctioned by the Kremlin, the “faceless perpetrators” were later shown to have Russian connections.

Estonia has since transformed itself, in part through voluntary initiatives such as the Cyber Defence Unit (a network of private-sector IT experts), into a leader in this field. It is home to Nato’s Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, and ranks fifth in the International Telecommunication Union’s global cybersecurity index – alongside the UK.

But in many ways, Estonia is far ahead of Britain in its cybersecurity planning. A 2025 government review found that nearly one-third of the UK’s public sector IT systems were “critically vulnerable” due to historical underinvestment – with some aspects of the police and NHS at particular risk.

International cyber-attacks on the UK increased by 50% last year. “Nationally significant” incidents rose from 89 to 204 – including, in September 2025, a major ransomware attack on Jaguar Land Rover that halted production for a month, causing losses of around £1.9 billion.

Amid these threats, the UK government recently launched its Cyber Action Plan and held the first ever cross-party international security briefing – co-chaired by the National Cyber Security Centre’s CEO, Richard Horne.

So can this more preemptive approach staunch the flow of cyber-attacks on the UK? In my experience of advising European and Asian governments on cybersecurity matters, the problem is that nothing is ever urgent – until everything is.

Cyber-attacks could shatter public trust

A key worry for British ministers is that an attack on government systems could shatter public trust. Imagine welfare benefits going unpaid, tax returns being ignored and health records frozen amid a major ransomware crisis.

The new plan prioritises central government digital services including tax, benefits, health records and identity verification. Pledging £210 million in additional funding, it promises to address the difficulty of attracting highly paid private-sector engineers, analysts and penetration (“pen”) testers to the public sector. Defence companies, specialist security firms and big tech typically pay 30-50% higher salaries.

While establishing a Government Cyber Unit is welcome, its phased rollout to 2029 feels too leisurely amid the level of threats the UK (and other countries) now face. Groups linked to Russia and China in particular are dramatically increasing the volume and sophistication of cyber-attacks. They combine state resources with criminal ecosystems to exploit the vulnerabilities of years of IT under-investment much faster than most cyber-defences can adapt.

Rapid developments in AI technology are also making the threat more severe – for example, through highly personalised phishing attacks and use of deepfakes. Defenders are struggling to keep up with the scale and constantly changing nature of these threats.

Who leads the way on cyber-defence?

The US is in a league of its own when it comes to cyber-defence. The federal government alone spends an annual US$25 billion (£18 billion) on defending its IT systems, compared with the UK’s £2-2.6 billion.

Australia’s budget – A$6.2 billion (£3.2 billion) – also exceeds the UK’s, despite its much smaller population. It enforces strict rules such as 12-hour critical incident reporting and, most importantly, has prioritised investing in new technologies.

Countries that are ahead of the cybersecurity curve show the same ingredients work: mandatory rapid reporting of incidents, serious investment in AI-powered monitoring, real-time sharing of information between government and private sectors, and strong international partnerships.

What came as a shock to Estonia in 2007 has been hitting European institutions and infrastructure for years now. Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine four years ago, it has woven cyber operations much more closely into its hybrid warfare playbook. In 2022, there were more than 650 documented attacks by pro-Russian groups, of which only 5% targeted Ukraine – the rest focused on Nato and other EU countries.

In contrast, China has tended to prioritise stealthy, long-term espionage, including the UK Ministry of Defence payroll breach in 2024. Iran has focused on aggressive disruption, and North Korea on seizing funds through cyber heists – the most successful of which stole US$1.5 billion in cryptocurrency by hacking into the Bybit crypto exchange.

To keep pace, the UK needs to lean harder into its alliances, including with Nato and the EU. It should insist on compulsory AI-threat training across government and key industries, and show more willingness to expose attackers publicly. A timely but measured response should at least raise the risk (and cost) of the next cyber-attack for its state-sponsored perpetrators.

Gerald Mako 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. Which countries are best-placed to resist state-supported cyber-attacks? A government advisor explains – https://theconversation.com/which-countries-are-best-placed-to-resist-state-supported-cyber-attacks-a-government-advisor-explains-275447

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ifedapo Francis Awolowo, Senior Lecturer in Accounting, Sheffield Hallam University

Across the UK, Black students remain significantly underrepresented in doctoral programmes. This is despite years of widening participation policies and a growing awareness that the pathways into a PhD are often far harder to navigate for some groups than others.

My research with colleagues shows that a different approach is possible: one that draws on long-standing African philosophies of community, character and collective care.

In 2021, I and colleagues launched the Accomplished Study Programme in Research Excellence (Aspire), an initiative led by Sheffield Hallam University in partnership with Manchester Metropolitan University and higher education charity Advance HE. The programme emerged from a national funding competition aimed at widening access and participation for Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups in postgraduate research.

Aspire provides personalised, culturally grounded mentorship that combines academic development and wellbeing support. The programme works with Black students in their final year of undergraduate and master’s degrees, as well as graduates who may have left university long ago, helping them find their way into doctoral study.

Aspire takes inspiration from two African philosophies. One is ubuntu, a concept from Southern Africa meaning: “I am because we are.” It emphasises community, mutual support and shared humanity.

The other is omoluabi, a Yoruba principle of “good character”. It values integrity, humility, respect and responsibility towards others.

These ideas may be centuries old, but they offer a powerful framework for modern mentorship. Students told us that mentoring based on these values felt different: more personal, more understanding and more connected to who they are. It gave them permission to see themselves not as outsiders in academia, but as people whose experiences and identities belong there.

Each participant is paired with a Black academic mentor who offers personalised guidance and support throughout the six month duration of the programme. Instead of presenting the doctoral process as a rigid checklist, mentors helps students understand the unwritten expectations of academia.

This includes how to approach potential supervisors, how funding works and how to build a research profile. The programme builds confidence and opens up the possibility of a PhD for people who may never have imagined doctoral study as an option for them.

The programme, and the research my colleagues and I have published on its methodology, offer the clearest evidence yet that culturally grounded mentorship is not simply beneficial; it is transformative.

Many students begin thinking about doctoral study years before they apply. But for Black students, this journey is often shaped by additional pressures. These include limited access to academic role models, navigating structural inequalities, and the experience of feeling out of place in academic spaces. Standard university support, such as one-off career talks or short mentoring schemes, rarely addresses these deeper issues.

Feeling seen and heard

A key element of the programme is the Talk About Race Forum, a structured but open discussion space where students can reflect on their experiences of university life. For many, this was the first time they could speak honestly about the challenges such as racial microaggressions or the fear of “not being good enough”.

These conversations were not counselling sessions, nor were they complaints forums. Instead, they became places of validation. Students heard others articulate struggles similar to their own. This helped them realise that these challenges were not personal failings but often the result of broader inequalities. Mentors and peers provided reassurance and practical advice rooted in lived experience.

This sense of recognition was central to students’ growth. Many described gaining a stronger sense of who they were academically, and beginning to picture themselves in doctoral settings they once assumed were “not for people like me”.

One of the strongest findings from the research is that culturally informed mentorship can create measurable impact.

Across three cohorts, the programme has supported 59 Black students. Of these, 15 scholars have progressed into fully funded PhD programmes in different UK universities. This 25% progression rate far exceeds typical sector patterns for Black students. These achievements stem not only from academic guidance but also from the emotional support students received and the reassurance that they belonged, that their ideas mattered, and that doctoral study was within reach.

A model for the future

Universities often call for increased diversity in postgraduate research. However, many rely on surface-level initiatives that do little to address structural barriers. The Aspire approach suggests a realistic alternative.

It is about adopting principles that make mentorship meaningful. This includes seeing students as whole people, not problems to be “fixed”. The programme values cultural knowledge and lived experience and invests time in building trust. It provides personalised guidance rather than one-size-fits-all workshops.

For institutions, the benefits extend beyond individual student success. A more diverse doctoral community enriches research, expands perspectives and strengthens the university’s connection to the society it serves.

The under-representation of Black students in UK doctoral programmes is often seen as a long-standing, stubborn inequality. But our findings show it is neither mysterious nor impossible to address. When mentorship is rooted in compassion, culture and community, it becomes a powerful tool for change.

Culturally grounded approaches like ubuntu and omoluabi do more than help students navigate an unfamiliar system. They reshape students’ sense of possibility. They also challenge universities to rethink the kinds of support that truly foster inclusion.

Ifedapo Francis Awolowo receives funding from Office for Students and Research England

– ref. How African principles of community are helping Black students in the UK into PhD study – https://theconversation.com/how-african-principles-of-community-are-helping-black-students-in-the-uk-into-phd-study-271357

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Aimee Grant, Associate Professor in Public Health and Wellcome Trust Career Development Fellow, Swansea University

When people talk about autism, they often think about a child who is different and may be distressed by their surroundings. Or if the conversation moves beyond childhood, the focus might be about an autistic adult with analytical superpowers, such as The Good Doctor or Patience, who still has difficulty with their surroundings and fitting in with colleagues.

People rarely mention autistic joy. However, a 2024 study found that most autistic people often experience joy, with one participant in that study noting: “Lining things up is fun because it’s pleasurable. It’s odd that [non-autistic people] don’t understand it. Sorting/organising is one of the deepest pleasures in life, as intense/as sought after as delicious food.”

Autism is a neurodevelopmental difference. Autistic people are often, incorrectly, viewed as lacking in empathy. This may be because autistic people often have more muted facial expressions.

Autistic people like myself may also struggle to recognise our own emotions, a concept known as alexithymia. However, this doesn’t mean that we don’t feel intense joy.

It is often claimed that autistic people lack emotions. However, autistic people can feel emotions intensely, including for other people, animals and even inanimate objects. This can be linked to high rates of involvement in social justice work.

Sensory processes

The majority of autistic people have sensory processing differences, compared to non-autistic people. This includes finding many of the spaces of modern living painfully loud, bright and overly populated.

This can be intensely overwhelming and distressing, especially when it is not in the person’s control to alter the environment. These sensory challenges are well documented. For autistic people who are hyper-sensitive to the sensory world around them, this can increase anxiety.

Also, one of the diagnostic criteria for autism is doing the same thing over and over, referred to as “repetitive behaviours”. One form of this is what autistic people call stimming.

When stimming, an autistic person is creating joyous sensory input for themselves. This can be moving their body or hands in a particular way, touching something soothing, using their voice or consuming the same audio or video content over and over again.

Each autistic person will have their own unique stims, which are both joy inducing and reassuring.

Stimming is vital for autistic people’s mental wellbeing, but all too often autistic children are encouraged to stop and many autistic adults feel too self-conscious to stim openly.

However, some autistic advocates are now showing their joyful stimming on social media, to try to reduce the stigma.

Communication

Autistic people use clear and direct communication, and typically understand other people’s language literally. This can make understanding non-autistic communication confusing, and can lead to bullying and exclusion by non-autistic peers.

However, when autistic people speak to each other, these misunderstandings disappear. But more than that, autistic people can find delight in “info dumping”.

Info dumping is the process of sharing, often a large amount of, information about a topic they really like. It is usually reserved for a person they feel safe with.

Unlike a neurotypical chat, info dumping often doesn’t look like a conversation. It may involve long monologues, accompanied by a response that is not particularly on topic, where the second person also “info dumps”. It has been described as a neurodivergent love language.

Unsurprisingly, autistic people may form strong attachments to a single best friend or close group of friends, with autistic boys in particular having a different friendship pattern to non-autistic people.

Hyperfocus

Autistic people are more likely than non-autistic people to hyperfocus on things. This is known as monotropism, where the brain is thinking in depth about one thing at a time. By comparison, non-monotropic people may think about several things at the same time, but achieve less depth of thought.

It can be really enjoyable being in a state of hyperfocus, or a “flow state”, for both autistic and non-autistic people. However, it can also lead to overwork and work-family conflict.

What does it all mean?

You may be wondering, how is autistic joy different from other neurotypical forms of happiness? The straight answer is we don’t currently know, as the research hasn’t been done yet. Although I suspect that autistic people get increased joy from sensory activities that they enjoy compared to non-autistic people.

Drawing on my own experience as an autistic person, I get enormous joy from looking at trees. Seeing particular trees gives me the warm feeling I get when I see a friend. It may be that for me, seeing trees gives me a dose of oxytocin. This may also be true for autistic people in general when they encounter objects that they have a strong positive attachment to, although it hasn’t been tested yet.

When thinking about autism, and autistic people, it is important to not only focus on the difficulties. Autistic people have a great capacity for joy, but need spaces that feel safe enough to be their authentic, joyful selves.

Aimee Grant receives funding from The Wellcome Trust and UKRI.

– ref. Autistic people seem to feel joy differently – here’s what it can tell us about neurodivergence – https://theconversation.com/autistic-people-seem-to-feel-joy-differently-heres-what-it-can-tell-us-about-neurodivergence-273403

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Meg Kobza, Visiting Fellow, School of History, Classics and Archaeology, Newcastle University

Countless love stories throughout the ages hinge on the idea of love at first sight. Immediate, unwavering infatuation the moment eyes meet. Two people finding each other across a crowded, glittering ballroom or perhaps bumping into each other accidentally. But what if your true love is hidden behind a disguise? And flees before you have a chance to learn their name?

Such is the challenge facing Benedict Bridgerton (Luke Thompson) in the most recent season of Bridgerton. The first episode of season four centres around a truly spectacular masquerade ball at Bridgerton House and sets up a re-imagining of the Cinderella story, with Regency flare.

Sparkling in silver from head to toe, servant Sophie Baek (Yerin Ha) manages to sneak into the lavish elite entertainment unnoticed. It is there she finds herself in the company of Benedict, one of the most sought-after bachelors in London and a notorious rake. Sparks fly as their gazes lock and the world fades away into a night of enchantment until the resounding chimes of the midnight hour cause Sophie to flee, leaving Benedict with no more than a fast farewell and sole silver glove.

Even without the concealment of a mask, Prince Charming had a hard enough time finding Cinderella – so what chance would mere mortals have had at finding missed connections, let alone true love at the masquerade?

In the case of real Regency woman Elizabeth Chudleigh, it was more like lust at first sight. Chudleigh, whose clandestine marriage was falling apart before her eyes, was an ageing maid of honour in the court of the Princess of Wales. One whisper of her despair, about her marriage or her age, would endanger her post in court, for, as attendants to the princess, maids of honour were expected to be young, unmarried ladies of repute.

As Chudleigh biographer Catherine Ostler explains, she needed to do something to grab the attention of eligible elite bachelors and the masquerade was the perfect place to do so. The masquerade offered the fashionable elite an exclusive space where they could flaunt their status, wealth, and taste through character, comic, or fancy dress.

Wearing a bold and breathtaking costume that exposed her breasts – or at the very least gave the illusion of nudity – Chudleigh took an enormous risk when she arrived at the King’s Theatre in 1749. Disguised as the mythical character Iphigenia, this daring decision boldly put Chudleigh’s sexuality, charms and body on display for all to see.

The author and politician Horace Walpole, who witnessed the dress, recalled in his correspondence that she was “so naked that you would have taken her for Andromeda”.

Luckily for Chudleigh, she became an overnight sensation and managed to catch the eye of one of the most powerful men in the country: His Royal Majesty, King George II. The king was besotted. Walpole himself saw George II fall head over heels, writing “our gracious Monarch has a mind to believe himself in love” with Chudleigh, which was most clearly made evident when he kissed her in front of his advisors.

Depictions of Chudleigh’s scandalous dress, or rather, undress, appeared in print shop windows across the country while reports of the risque costume circulated through correspondence and newspapers, such as the General Advertiser, across the country. Chudleigh herself appeared regularly at the king’s side. Though her position as mistress to His Majesty was relatively short-lived, lasting no more than a few years, her gamble at the masquerade not only aided her in climbing the social ladder and expanding her social circles, it inextricably linked her to the masquerade and transformed her from a maid of honour into a cultural phenomenon.

Smitten at first sight

James Hamilton, the sixth duke of Hamilton, had not imagined he would find himself utterly and completely intoxicated at the evening’s masquerade from anything other than copious amounts of wine, as was his tendency. He was 28 and still unmarried, despite his wealth and not unattractive features.

As he moved among the domino cloaks, harlequins and fancy dresses he spotted her, the rumoured beauty from Ireland, Elizabeth Gunning. She was striking. He was smitten – and he must marry her.

The thought, though impulsive, was not uncharacteristic of Hamilton who was known to follow his fancies – not unlike Benedict Bridgerton. The duke could not keep Gunning from his thoughts. Their paths crossed two weeks later at Lord Chesterfield’s where Hamilton was distracted beyond repair, making “violent love [with his attentions] at one end of the room while he was playing at pharaoh (cards) at the other end”. He subsequently lost £1,000.

In early February their met once again at a masquerade. Hamilton could no longer restrain himself and proposed that evening. Dressed as a demure Quaker, the flattered, and likely overwhelmed, Gunning accepted. Without a dowry to her name, Gunning had to rely on beauty, behaviour and a little luck to break the barriers of rank and marry significantly above her station.

The pair married in secret at a chapel two nights later, on Valentine’s Day nonetheless, before Hamilton’s family could interfere in this inferior match. The clandestine union was sealed at midnight with a bed-curtain ring, for Hamilton had forgotten to bring the proper one. The marriage, though rushed, was a small sort of happily ever after for Gunning, now the Duchess of Hamilton, who became a fashionable leading lady of the Georgian elite.

Not all Regency encounters had fairy tale, or even fanciful endings. Newspapers occasionally advertised missed connections at masquerades with clues including costume descriptions, initials and conversation topics.

In 1778, one eager gentleman addressed his note in The Morning Post to “A Lady in a light blue dress, and mask of the same colour, who was at the Pantheon Masquerade, and danced two or three dances” with him. She claimed she knew the gentleman she was keeping company with, having seen “him almost every day walking in Bond-street, or St. James’s-street, but would not tell who she was”. He requests that she “send a line to Stewart’s Coffee-house, Broad-street, informing him where is to be met with, it will be the means of quieting an anxious mind”.

Unlike Bridgerton’s Cinderella story, it is impossible to know whether or not this real pair found each other beyond the walls of the ball. One thing is for certain, however. True love at first sight–or true lust–is not the stuff of fairytales alone, though it may be harder to find when its wearing a mask.

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Meg Kobza has a forthcoming book on the Georgian masquerade that will be published with Yale University Press in May 2026.

– ref. Bridgerton: three true tales of love at first sight at Regency masquerade balls – https://theconversation.com/bridgerton-three-true-tales-of-love-at-first-sight-at-regency-masquerade-balls-275143

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gerald Mako, Research Affiliate, University of Cambridge

In April 2007, the Baltic nation of Estonia woke up to one of the world’s first major cyber-attacks on civil society carried out by a state. A series of massive “distributed denial of service” assaults – floods of fake traffic from networked computers – targeted government websites, banks, media outlets and online services for weeks, slowing or shutting them down.

These cyber-attacks followed Estonia’s decision to relocate a Soviet-era war memorial and war graves from the centre of the capital city, Tallinn, to a military cemetery.

Amplified by false reports in Russian media, this sparked nights of protest and rioting among Russian-speakers in Tallinn – and cyber chaos throughout the country. Though the cyber-attack was never officially sanctioned by the Kremlin, the “faceless perpetrators” were later shown to have Russian connections.

Estonia has since transformed itself, in part through voluntary initiatives such as the Cyber Defence Unit (a network of private-sector IT experts), into a leader in this field. It is home to Nato’s Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, and ranks fifth in the International Telecommunication Union’s global cybersecurity index – alongside the UK.

But in many ways, Estonia is far ahead of Britain in its cybersecurity planning. A 2025 government review found that nearly one-third of the UK’s public sector IT systems were “critically vulnerable” due to historical underinvestment – with some aspects of the police and NHS at particular risk.

International cyber-attacks on the UK increased by 50% last year. “Nationally significant” incidents rose from 89 to 204 – including, in September 2025, a major ransomware attack on Jaguar Land Rover that halted production for a month, causing losses of around £1.9 billion.

Amid these threats, the UK government recently launched its Cyber Action Plan and held the first ever cross-party international security briefing – co-chaired by the National Cyber Security Centre’s CEO, Richard Horne.

So can this more preemptive approach staunch the flow of cyber-attacks on the UK? In my experience of advising European and Asian governments on cybersecurity matters, the problem is that nothing is ever urgent – until everything is.

Cyber-attacks could shatter public trust

A key worry for British ministers is that an attack on government systems could shatter public trust. Imagine welfare benefits going unpaid, tax returns being ignored and health records frozen amid a major ransomware crisis.

The new plan prioritises central government digital services including tax, benefits, health records and identity verification. Pledging £210 million in additional funding, it promises to address the difficulty of attracting highly paid private-sector engineers, analysts and penetration (“pen”) testers to the public sector. Defence companies, specialist security firms and big tech typically pay 30-50% higher salaries.

While establishing a Government Cyber Unit is welcome, its phased rollout to 2029 feels too leisurely amid the level of threats the UK (and other countries) now face. Groups linked to Russia and China in particular are dramatically increasing the volume and sophistication of cyber-attacks. They combine state resources with criminal ecosystems to exploit the vulnerabilities of years of IT under-investment much faster than most cyber-defences can adapt.

Rapid developments in AI technology are also making the threat more severe – for example, through highly personalised phishing attacks and use of deepfakes. Defenders are struggling to keep up with the scale and constantly changing nature of these threats.

Who leads the way on cyber-defence?

The US is in a league of its own when it comes to cyber-defence. The federal government alone spends an annual US$25 billion (£18 billion) on defending its IT systems, compared with the UK’s £2-2.6 billion.

Australia’s budget – A$6.2 billion (£3.2 billion) – also exceeds the UK’s, despite its much smaller population. It enforces strict rules such as 12-hour critical incident reporting and, most importantly, has prioritised investing in new technologies.

Countries that are ahead of the cybersecurity curve show the same ingredients work: mandatory rapid reporting of incidents, serious investment in AI-powered monitoring, real-time sharing of information between government and private sectors, and strong international partnerships.

What came as a shock to Estonia in 2007 has been hitting European institutions and infrastructure for years now. Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine four years ago, it has woven cyber operations much more closely into its hybrid warfare playbook. In 2022, there were more than 650 documented attacks by pro-Russian groups, of which only 5% targeted Ukraine – the rest focused on Nato and other EU countries.

In contrast, China has tended to prioritise stealthy, long-term espionage, including the UK Ministry of Defence payroll breach in 2024. Iran has focused on aggressive disruption, and North Korea on seizing funds through cyber heists – the most successful of which stole US$1.5 billion in cryptocurrency by hacking into the Bybit crypto exchange.

To keep pace, the UK needs to lean harder into its alliances, including with Nato and the EU. It should insist on compulsory AI-threat training across government and key industries, and show more willingness to expose attackers publicly. A timely but measured response should at least raise the risk (and cost) of the next cyber-attack for its state-sponsored perpetrators.

Gerald Mako 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. Which countries are best-placed to see off state-supported cyber-attacks? A government advisor explains – https://theconversation.com/which-countries-are-best-placed-to-see-off-state-supported-cyber-attacks-a-government-advisor-explains-275447

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ian Williams, Professor of Applied Environmental Science, University of Southampton

Pairing scientists with an artist-in-residence can cut through “ecofatigue” (feelings of overwhelm or exhaustion about environment issues that lead to apathy and inaction), spark emotion and change the way people deal with plastics.

My team and I recently published a study that demonstrated this is a low-cost and feasible way to tackle plastic waste in towns.

In a quiet gallery space in London, visitors paused before 13 luminous coastal scenes. Throwaway bottles bobbed in the surf; snack wrappers frayed into microplastic constellations. Many people left this exhibition determined to change their own habits.

These paintings were part of my team’s project called Trace-P (Transitioning to a circular economy for plastics with an artist-in-residence) which involves turning environmental evidence into compelling art, then measuring what the public do as a result.

Decades of leaflets, posters and worthy campaigns about plastic pollution haven’t shifted behaviour fast enough. Research (including our own previous work) shows that emotion, storytelling and “intergenerational influence” – ideas flowing from children to adults – can outperform dry facts alone. Throughout that previous project, 99% of audiences reported higher awareness, 70% intended to change how they dispose of electronic or e-waste and 65% planned to repair or reuse their belongings more. That success inspired us to test an art-led model for plastics.

The global context is stark. More than 400 million tonnes of plastic are produced each year. Only around 9% of that is mechanically recycled worldwide. A global plan to end plastic pollution by 2040 will require deep shifts in policy and markets to eliminate problematic items, scale reuse and design products that are suitable for recycling.

Art cannot deliver those reforms, but it can mobilise public demand for them.

Our plastics researchers collaborated with a professional artist, Susannah Pal. After interviews and laboratory visits, she produced a series of tragicomic (humorously sad) seascapes. In addition to running public exhibitions in London and Southampton, Pal held an online and in-person drawing workshop for the public.

Visitors learnt about the science of marine litter pathways, microplastics and consumption patterns through powerful imagery that intended to trigger emotion rather than through facts and data. We collected feedback from participants and gallery visitors via on-site in-person surveys, Post-it note “reaction walls” where people could scribble their comments and impressions of the artwork and social media posts by visitors.

Our paper, recently published in the Journal of Cleaner Production, calls this approach “com-art”. This combination of creative skills with scientific evidence can improve communication with the general public and lead to more positive action.

Viewers told us that the artworks educated them about sources and negative effects of plastic pollution. They also said that the art provoked emotions – from sadness to resolve – that helped the messages stick and encouraged them to cut personal plastic use or question throwaway lifestyles.

The feedstock problem

Europe’s plastics system is inching towards circularity via new policies and technologies such as deposit return schemes, but not nearly fast enough. In 2022, circular plastics accounted for 13.5% of new products. EU plastic recycling has essentially stalled, with plastic packaging recycling rates hovering around 40–42%.

Huge amounts of plastic waste are sent for incineration and valuable feedstock (the fossil fuel-based raw materials used to make plastic) is burned instead of being recycled or redirected back into manufacturing.

Public support for reuse, deposit return schemes and better sorting of contaminated waste is the missing multiplier.

Globally, governments are negotiating a treaty to end plastic pollution. To reach its proposed goals, citizens will need to accept refills, returnables and redesigned packaging. Art projects like ours can engage citizens with changes to everyday routines around plastic consumption and disposal.

---

Read more:
How Captain Planet cartoons shaped my awareness of the nature crisis

---

From inspiration to influence

Cities, schools and museums can start by making art part of their waste strategy. A local artist-in-residence, hosted by a council gallery, museum or library, costs little (a few thousand pounds) compared with large-scale infrastructure projects (that cost millions).

Art projects can help unlock more enthusiasm from citizens for deposit return schemes (refundable deposits for returning containers), reuse pilots or new recycling sorting rules. Artists can jointly create exhibitions with local schools to harness intergenerational influence. You can use short before- and after-project surveys to see what works.

Art interventions often deliver powerful but shortlived boosts in awareness and intent. By reinforcing moments – new shows, classroom projects, hands-on repair events – we can extend this awareness. It is also worth repeating art activities to reinforce messages.

Emotion opens the door to action, and convenient systems keep people walking through it. Exhibitions can be ideal opportunities to recruit residents to refill trials, deposit return collections or school “plastic-free lunch” weeks. These events can showcase possible next steps for people to take through QR codes and sign-ups to activities or maps of refill points, for example.

Plastics touch everything: health, climate, local jobs. Moving to a circular economy will take regulation, redesign and investment and public imagination. Our study shows that artists make the science more legible, memorable and motivating – and this can spark change in communities.

---

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 47,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

---

Ian Williams received funding from UK Research Councils to support this work. TRACE-P was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council’s Impact Acceleration Account (EPSRC IAA 2017-2020). IAAs are strategic awards provided to institutions to support knowledge exchange and impact from their EPSRC-funded research. Ian also acknowledges support from the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Sustainable Infrastructure Systems (EP/L01582X/1).

– ref. How scientists and artists can collaborate to cut through ‘ecofatigue’ and inspire positive action – https://theconversation.com/how-scientists-and-artists-can-collaborate-to-cut-through-ecofatigue-and-inspire-positive-action-274667

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rin Ushiyama, Lecturer in Sociology, Queen’s University Belfast

Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s conservative Liberal Democratic party (LDP) has secured the biggest election victory seen in Japan since the end of the second world war. In elections on February 8, it won 316 seats out of a total of 465 in the lower house of Japan’s parliament. The Japan Innovation party, its junior coalition partner, secured a further 36 seats.

Many had predicted an LDP win. Takaichi called the snap election in January to capitalise on her high approval ratings since becoming Japan’s first female prime minister months earlier. But few had anticipated the strength of her support, with the LDP emerging as the most popular party across all age groups.

The results are humiliating for the main opposition Centrist Reform Alliance, which was formed ahead of the election through a merger of the centre-left Constitutional Democratic party and the centrist Kōmeitō party. The alliance failed to make an impact. It won just 49 seats, down from a pre-election total of 172, prompting leadership duo Yoshihiko Noda and Tetsuo Saito to announce their resignation.

Backed by Japan’s largest trade union federation, Rengo, the centrist Democratic Party for the People added one seat to bring its total in the lower house to 28. The left-wing populist Reiwa Shinsengumi party only won a single seat, down from eight. And the Japanese Communist party lost four seats, reducing its total to four. Team Mirai, a new AI-focused party headed by computer scientist Takahiro Anno, won 11 seats.

The results confirm a shift to the right in Japanese public opinion, following the trend from upper house elections in 2025 in which the right-wing populist Sanseitō party won 14 seats. Sanseitō has been overshadowed by Takaichi’s success in this election. But it has added 13 seats, bringing its total in the lower house to 15. This makes it the third-largest opposition party in the chamber.

The election does not immediately alter Japan’s political landscape. The LDP has dominated Japanese politics for decades, having been the ruling party almost continuously since its formation in 1955. Yet the election is highly significant both for the LDP’s factional politics as well as policymaking.

The election victory marks the resurgence of the party’s right. Takaichi’s conservative allies, many of whom were embroiled in a corruption scandal, returned as MPs in this election. And the two-thirds majority will allow the LDP to pass bills in the lower house that have been rejected by the upper house.

It will also now be possible to trigger referendums for constitutional reform, which figures on the right of the LDP have long campaigned for. This reform will include recognising the Japan Self-Defense Forces as a permanent military through a revision of article nine, the pacifist clause in Japan’s constitution. A referendum on this is now a realistic possibility.

Meanwhile, Takaichi’s emphasis on preserving traditional values means that progressive issues such as same-sex marriage are off the table for the foreseeable future. And her party has announced plans for “anti-spy” surveillance laws and a revision of the principles of nuclear non-proliferation. It has also promised greater regulation around foreigners in response to hardening public attitudes against migration and excessive tourism.

Challenges ahead

While Takaichi’s control of the legislature is rock solid, there are challenges ahead. Takaichi’s aggressive fiscal policy includes increased defence spending and freezing the consumption tax on food and drink. The stock market has welcomed Takaichi’s victory, but there is a risk of a bond sell-off if Japan’s currently high levels of debt become unsustainable.

Geopolitics also remains a source of uncertainty. In her January meeting with the South Korean president, Lee Jae Myung, Takaichi emphasised strong cooperation between the two countries. But Japan’s relationship with another neighbour, China, has soured in recent months.

In November, Takaichi remarked that Japan may be forced to respond militarily in the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan. China responded by imposing trade restrictions on seafood imports from Japan, months after it partly lifted a previous ban issued in 2023. Prior to that ban, the Chinese market accounted for around one-fifth of Japanese seafood exports.

The Chinese government also advised its citizens against travel to Japan. This advice remains in place. Takaichi’s hawkish stance on defence is likely to be a source of tension in east Asian politics moving forward.

The so-called “history problem”, which refers to the unresolved disputes Japan has with neighbouring countries over its wartime actions in the 1930s and 1940s, may reemerge. Official visits to the controversial Yasukuni shrine where Japanese war dead including military leaders are honoured are a possible source of tension.

Takaichi visited Yasukuni when she was a government minister and, following the election, said she was working to “create an environment” that would enable her to visit as prime minister. Critics in China and South Korea see visits to the shrine as an endorsement of Japan’s imperialist past, and have reacted angrily to past official visits.

Her premiership also comes at a time when the future of the US-Japan alliance, the backbone of Japan’s national security, is increasingly uncertain. The interests of the US under Donald Trump have shifted towards dealing with threats closer to home, with the White House’s recent national security strategy demanding that traditional US allies assume greater responsibility for their own regions.

Takaichi’s political legacy is yet to be made. But through this election alone, she has already made history. Her premiership will undeniably leave a deep mark on Japanese society for years to come.

Rin Ushiyama was the recipient of a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship (2017-21) “The survival and reproduction of historical revisionism in Japanese public discourse: 1996-present.”

– ref. Japan’s ruling party secures historic election victory – but challenges lie ahead – https://theconversation.com/japans-ruling-party-secures-historic-election-victory-but-challenges-lie-ahead-275279